Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

First Annual Surveillance Report Bering Sea / Aleutian Islands Flatfish Fisheries: Alaska Plaice Flathead Sole Northern Rock Sole Yellowfin Sole Arrowtooth Flounder

Certificate Nos.: Alaska Plaice MML-F-047 Flathead Sole MML-F-050 Northern Rock Sole MML-F-051 Yellowfin Sole MML-F-052 Arrowtooth Flounder MML-F-048

Moody Marine Ltd.

Authors:

Jake Rice, Don Bowen, Susan Hanna, Paul Knapman

Moody Marine Ltd 815 – 99 Wyse Road Dartmouth Nova Scotia B3A 4S5 CANADA

Tel: (1) 902 422 4551 Fax: (1) 902 422 9780 Email: [email protected] Web Site: www.moodyint.com

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 1 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

Scope against which the surveillance is undertaken: MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing as applied to the Flatfish Trawl Fishery. Species: Yellowfin sole (Limanda aspera also known as Pleuronectes asper), flathead sole (Hippoglossoides elassodon), arrowtooth flounder (Atheresthes stomias), Alaska plaice (Pleuronectes quadrituberculatus) and northern rock sole (Lepidopsetta polyxystra also known as Pleuronectes bilineatus). Area: Bering Sea / Aleutian Islands (BSAI) Methods of capture: Trawl

Date of Surveillance Visit: 9-13th May 2011

Initial Certification Date: 22nd January 2010 Certificate No.: Alaska Plaice MML-F-047 Flathead Sole MML-F-050 Northern Rock Sole MML-F-051 Yellowfin Sole MML-F-052 Arrowtooth Flounder MML-F-048

Surveillance stage 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Surveillance team: Lead Auditor: Paul Knapman Team members: Jake Rice, Don Bowen, Susan Hanna

Company Name: Alaska Seafood Cooperative c/o Groundfish Forum Address: 4241 21st Ave West Suite 200 Seattle Washington, 98199

Contact 1 Jason Anderson

Tel No: +1 206-462-7682

E-mail address: [email protected]

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 2 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

2.0 RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This report contains the findings of the first surveillance audit in relation to the Alaska Seafood Cooperative (ASC) Flatfish Trawl Fishery in the Bering Sea / Aleutian Islands (BSAI). The surveillance audit was carried out in accordance with the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Fisheries Certification Methodology (FCM) Version 6 (1).

An announcement of the surveillance site visit was sent to recognised stakeholders on 14th April 2011 and published on the MSC website advising stakeholders that the audit site visit would take place the week of 9th May. (See appendix A).

The surveillance team – Jake Rice, Don Bowen, Susan Hanna and Paul Knapman - met with members of the client group and staff at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC) (National Marine Fisheries Service – NOAA Fisheries) between 10th and 12th May 2011. Information and evidence was gathered on the status of the stock, the performance of the fishery throughout the year, measures to meet the Conditions of Certification and changes in management.

The following section is set out as a table within which general information about the status of the stock and the fishery for this reporting period is provided along with the surveillance team’s observations, conclusions and recommendations on the current status of the fishery and the client’s progress toward meeting the Conditions of Certification.

The table includes the original assessment scoring guideposts and scoring commentary and the requirements of the original Condition alongside the heading ‘Activity assessed’. This identifies the areas in which the fishery was determined to perform below the level required by the MSC standard during the initial assessment, and the required actions to address these issues.

As required by the MSC certification methodology, ASC produced an Action Plan setting out the stages involved in addressing the Conditions raised. This is set out in the table alongside the heading ‘ASC Action Plan’.

According to the terms of the Action Plan, the client has provided information on the work undertaken to date, this is set out alongside ‘ASC Progress Report’.

This progress has been evaluated by the Moody Marine surveillance team (‘Observations’ and ‘Conclusion’) against: 1. the commitments made in the Action Plan; 2. the intent of the original Condition; and, 3. the original scoring indicator, guideposts and commentary.

The influence of any overall legislative and management changes in the fishery are also taken into consideration.

When the Condition has been judged to have been met, a re-evaluation of the scoring allocated to the relevant Performance Indicator(s) in the original MSC assessment will be included within the evaluation, and if the score is 80 or more, then the Condition is closed.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 3 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Comments Stock status Activity assessed Moody Marine asked ASC to prepare an update on the BSAI flatfish - Yellowfin sole (Limanda aspera also known as Pleuronectes asper), flathead sole (Hippoglossoides elassodon), arrowtooth flounder (Atheresthes stomias), Alaska plaice (Pleuronectes quadrituberculatus) and northern rock sole (Lepidopsetta polyxystra also known as Pleuronectes bilineatus) - stock status for 2010. The intent of this section is to bring background information up to date and so to allow subsequent condition information to be evaluated in light of the current situation.

Yellowfin sole The 2010 Eastern Bering Sea (EBS) bottom trawl survey biomass estimate increased 36% from the low estimate of 2009 but is more consistent with the levels estimated for 2006 – 2008. The stock assessment model indicates that yellowfin sole have slowly declined over the past twenty years, although they are still at a fairly high level (73% above BMSY), due to recruitment levels which are less than those which built the stock to high levels in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The time-series of survey age compositions indicate that only 5 of the past 20 year classes have been at or above the long term average. However, the 2003 year class appears to be as strong as any observed since 1983 and should contribute to the reservoir of female spawners in the near future. The 2010 catch of 119,000 mt represents the largest flatfish fishery in the world and the five-year average exploitation rate has been 4% for this stock (consistently less than the Acceptable Biological Catch).

New data for this year’s assessment include:  2009 fishery and survey age compositions  2010 trawl survey biomass point estimate and standard error  Estimates of the discarded and retained portions of the 2009 catch  Estimate of total catch through the end of 2010.

The current assessment model was modified in 2008 to accommodate the sex- specific aspects of the population dynamics of yellowfin sole. The model now allows for the input of sex-specific estimates of fishery and survey age composition and weight-at-age; provides sex-specific estimates of population numbers, fishing mortality, selectivity, fishery, and survey age composition; and allows for the estimation of sex-specific natural mortality and catchability. The model retains the utility to fit combined sex data inputs. New for 2010 is the inclusion of the estimates of time varying fishery selectivity, by sex.

The projected female spawning biomass estimate for 2011 is 587,000 mt. Based on the most recent time series of estimated female spawning biomass, the projected 2011 female spawning biomass estimate continues the generally monotonic decline in model estimates of spawning biomass exhibited since 1994. Above average recruitment from the 1995 and 1999 year-classes is expected to maintain the abundance of yellowfin sole at a level above B40% for the next several years. Projections suggest a stable female spawning biomass in the near future if the fishing mortality rate continues at the same level as the average of the past 5 years.

The North Pacific Fishery Management Council’s Science and Statistical Committee (SSC) has determined that reliable estimates of BMSY and the probability density function for FMSY exist for this stock. Accordingly, yellowfin sole qualify for management under tier 1; however, the Plan Team would like to see more explicit criteria established for making this determination. The estimate of BMSY from the

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 4 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

present assessment is 374,000 mt. The 1978-2003 spawner recruit data were used this year as the basis to determine the tier 1 harvest recommendation. This provided an FABC = Fharmonic mean of FMSY = 0.12. The current value of FOFL = FMSY is 0.13. The product of the harmonic mean of FMSY and the geometric mean of the 2011 biomass estimate produces the author- and Plan Team-recommended 2011 ABC of 239,000 mt and the corresponding product using the arithmetic mean produces the 2011 Over Fishing Level (OFL) of 262,000 mt. For 2011, the corresponding quantities are 242,000 mt and 266,000 mt, respectively.

Yellowfin sole is not being subjected to overfishing, is not overfished, and is not approaching an overfished condition. The assessment contains an ecosystem feature that represents catchability of the EBS shelf trawl survey as an exponential function of average annual bottom temperature.

Flathead sole Data on the flathead sole stock showed improved conditions compared to 2009. Bottom trawl survey estimates of total biomass for 2010 were 19% higher than for 2009. The 2007 year class is estimated to be above average, but it follows 3 years of poor recruitment. As a consequence, ABC for 2011 is only slightly (0.2%) higher than last year.

New data in this year’s assessment include the following:  2009 fishery catch data was updated and the 2010 catch through September 25, 2010 was added to the assessment.  Sex-specific size compositions from the 2010 fishery, based on observer data, were added to the assessment.  Fishery size compositions from 2009 were updated.  Estimated survey biomass and standard error from the 2010 EBS trawl survey were added to the assessment.  Sex-specific size compositions from the 2010 EBS trawl survey were added to the assessment.  Sex-specific age compositions from the 2009 EBS trawl survey were added to the assessment.  Mean bottom temperature from the 2010 EBS trawl survey was added to the assessment.

The preferred model is identical to that selected in last year’s assessment.

The assessment model indicates that spawning biomass has declined continuously from a high of 328,000 mt in 1997 to a minimum of 240,000 mt in 2009 and 2010. The projected 2011 and 2012 values are 241,000 mt and 237,000 mt, respectively. The 2001, 2003, and 2007 year classes are estimated to be above average, but recruitments from 1988-2007 on average have been much lower than recruitments from 1974-1987.

The SSC has determined that reliable estimates of B40%, F40%, and F35% exist for this stock, thereby qualifying flathead sole for management under tier 3. The current values of these reference points are B40%=134,000 mt, F40%=0.28, and F35%=0.34. Because projected spawning biomass for 2011 (241,000 mt) is above B40%, flathead sole is in sub-tier “a” of tier 3. The ABCs for 2011 and 2012 were set at the maximum permissible values under tier 3a, which are 69,300 mt and 68,300 mt, respectively. The 2011 and 2012 OFLs under tier 3a are 83,300 mt and 82,100 mt, respectively. Flathead sole is not being subjected to overfishing, is not overfished, and is not approaching an overfished condition.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 5 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Arrowtooth flounder 2010 was unique in that the Bering Sea shelf, slope and the Aleutian Islands were all surveyed in the same year. Since arrowtooth flounder are present in all these waters, a good update was available for arrowtooth flounder stock status. The combined survey estimates indicate that the stock is in an upward trend in all areas and the stock assessment model indicates that the resource has steadily increased from a low biomass in the late 1970s to a very high current biomass. Good recruitment from seven of the ten years from 1998-2007 combined with light exploitation should continue this trend.

Increasing interest in harvesting Kamchatka flounder has caused a concern about managing both species under a single ABC. Although Kamchatka flounder comprise only 7% of the composite Atheresthes biomass, there has been a disproportionate harvest in recent years whereby the potential exists to overharvest Kamchatka flounder under the present combined management. Beginning in 2011, Kamchatka was assessed separately from arrowtooth flounder and received an individual ABC and TAC.

New data for 2010 include:  Fishery catch and discards for 2009 and through 15 October 2010  2010 shelf, slope and Aleutian Islands surveys size composition and biomass point-estimates and standard errors.

The current model includes the Aleutian Islands, Bering Sea slope and Bering Sea shelf. The biomass is modeled with 76 percent of the stock on the shelf, 14 percent in the Aleutian Islands and 10 percent on the Bering Sea slope. Examination of Bering Sea shelf survey biomass estimates indicate that some of the annual variability seemed to positively co-vary with bottom water temperature. The 2010 stock assessment model resulted in a 2011 biomass projection of 1,120,000 mt. This is a small increase from the value of 1,100,000 mt projected in last year’s assessment for 2010. There is a long-term trend of increasing arrowtooth flounder biomass in the EBS. If the harvest rate remains close to the recent average, this trend is expected to continue for the next few years as strong recruitment was observed in the early part of this decade.

The SSC has determined that reliable estimates of B40%, F40%, and F35% exist for this stock, arrowtooth flounder was assessed for management under tier 3. The updated point estimates of B40%, F40%, and F35% from the present assessment are 280,000 mt, 0.23, and 0.29, respectively. Given that the projected 2011 spawning biomass of 806,000 mt exceeds B40%, the Team’s ABC and OFL recommendations for 2011 were calculated under sub-tier “a” of tier 3. The Team recommends setting FABC at the F40% (0.23) level, which is the maximum permissible level under tier 3a. Projected harvesting at the F40% level gives a 2011 ABC of 153,000 mt. The OFL fishing mortality rate under tier 3a is F35% (0.29), which translates to a 2011 OFL of 186,000 mt.

As there is little to no fishery for arrowtooth flounder, the model is mostly driven by the survey data. More female arrowtooth flounder are caught than males in the surveys, resulting in estimates of differential mortality for males and females. With fixed female M=0.2, the run with male M=0.35 provides a reasonable fit to all the data components and is consistent with observations of differences in sex ratios observed from trawl surveys. The maximum shelf survey selectivity for males occurs at 0.93 for age 8 fish. The base model includes Aleutian Islands data again

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 6 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

this year.

Arrowtooth flounder is a largely unexploited stock in the BSAI. Arrowtooth flounder will be managed on its own (i.e., as something other than a constituent stock of the former arrowtooth/Kamchatka complex) for the first time in 2011. Strictly speaking, therefore, there is no arrowtooth-only OFL against which annual catch of arrowtooth can be compared. However, given that arrowtooth accounted for the vast majority of the biomass in the arrowtooth/Kamchatka complex, it could be argued that the OFL for the complex should be viewed as a proxy for an arrowtooth- only OFL, in which case it would be concluded that arrowtooth Is not being subjected to overfishing. Arrowtooth flounder is not overfished and is not approaching an overfished condition.

Alaska plaice The Alaska plaice resource continues to be estimated at a high and stable level with very light exploitation. The 2010 survey biomass was 498,000 mt, a bit lower than the 2009 estimate but consistent with estimates from resource assessment surveys conducted since 1985. Of interest in 2010 is that the combined results of the EBS shelf survey and the northern Bering Sea survey indicate that 38% of the Alaska plaice biomass was found in the northern Bering Sea in 2010. The stock is expected to increase further in the near future due to the presence of a strong year class estimated from 2002. Exploitation occurs primarily as bycatch in the yellowfin sole fishery and has averaged only 1% from 1975-2010.

New data for 2010 included:  Updated 2010 survey catch  Fishery catch through 15 October 2010  2010 trawl survey biomass estimate and standard error  2010 length composition of survey catch  2009 survey age composition

Sex-specific natural mortality was included in the split-sex model developed last year. Natural mortality was re-estimated for each sex in this year’s assessment at a value of 0.13, replacing the previous literature-derived value of 0.25. This halving of the natural mortality rate from last year’s assessment lowered the current and historic estimates of total and female spawning biomass and recruitment.

Female spawning biomass decreased from 1985 to 1998, and has been relatively stable since then. Total biomass peaked in 1984, then decreased through 2001, and has increased steadily since. The increase in total biomass is expected to continue. The shelf survey biomass has been fairly steady since the mid-1980s.

Reliable estimates of B40%, F40%, and F35% exist for this stock, therefore qualifying it for management under tier 3a. The updated point estimates are B40% = 178,000 mt, F40% = 0.15, and F35% = 0.19. As a consequence of the reduced M used in the model, these values are now in the range expected for flatfishes. Given that the projected 2011 spawning biomass of 319,000 t exceeds B40%, the ABC and OFL recommendations for 2011 were calculated under sub-tier “a” of tier 3. Projected harvesting at the F40% level gives a 2011 ABC of 65,100 mt. The OFL was determined from the tier 3a formula, which gives a 2011 OFL of 79,100 mt. The estimated total biomass of Alaska plaice is now much lower than in the past because of the new estimates of natural mortality. The ABC is about one-third that of 2010. Model projections indicate that this species is neither overfished nor approaching an overfished condition. There is not a targeted fishery for this

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 7 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

species although ASC companies have been working hard to develop markets to help comply with retention requirements. As a result, in recent years, less plaice has been discarded.

Northern rock sole The northern rock sole stock is currently at a high and increasing level due to strong recruitment from the 2001, 2002 and 2003 year classes which are now beginning to contribute to the mature population biomass. The 2010 bottom trawl survey resulted in a biomass estimate of just over 2 million t, 34% higher than the 2009 point estimate. The northern rock sole harvest primarily comes from a high value roe fishery conducted in February and March which usually takes only a small portion of the ABC because it is constrained by prohibited species catch limits and market conditions.

The stock assessment model indicates that the stock declined in the late 1990s and early 2000s due to poor recruitment during the 1990s, but is now projected to increase in the near future due to the recently observed strong recruitment. It is currently estimated at twice the BMSY level.

New information for the 2010 analysis include:  2009 fishery age composition  2009 survey age composition  2010 trawl survey biomass point estimate and standard error  Updated fishery catch and discards for 2009  Fishery catch and discards through 26 September 2010.

The assessment model was modified last year to accommodate the sex-specific aspects of the population dynamics northern rock sole. The model now allows for the input of sex-specific estimates of fishery, survey age composition and weight-at- age; provides sex-specific estimates of population numbers, fishing mortality, selectivity, fishery and survey age composition; and allows for the estimation of sex- specific natural mortality and catchability. The model retains the utility to fit combined sex data inputs. The major change to the model for 2010 is the implementation of time-varying, sex-specific fishery selectivity.

The stock assessment model resulted in a 2011 age-2+ biomass estimate of 1,870,000 mt. This was an increase in the biomass estimate compared to the 2011 estimate of 1,580,000 mt obtained in last year’s assessment. The rock sole stock is expected to remain stable or increase due to good recruitment from the 2000- 2005 year classes.

The SSC has determined that northern rock sole qualifies as a tier 1 stock. In past years, one difficulty with applying the tier 1 formulae to rock sole is that the harmonic and arithmetic means of the FMSY distribution are extremely close, resulting in little buffer between recommendations of ABC and OFL. This closeness results from estimates of FMSY that are highly certain. The use of a time-varying fishery selectivity increased the buffer between ABC and OFL from 1.4 percent in 2009 to 9.6 percent in 2010. The tier 1 2011 ABC harvest recommendation is 224,000 mt (FABC = 0.13) and a 2010 OFL of 248,000 mt (FOFL = FMSY = 0.15). Because of the implementation of the time-varying fishery selectivity this year there was a 24,000 mt difference between the ABC and OFL levels, an increase of 20,000 mt over the difference estimated in the 2009 assessment. Northern rock sole is not being subjected to overfishing, is not overfished, and is not approaching an overfished condition. The exploitation rate is about 0.03.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 8 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Observations Yellowfin sole The 2010 assessment of eastern Bering sea yellowfin sole by NMFS staff included results of the 2010 bottom trawl survey and fisheries catch data, and detailed catch sampling data from 2009. The assessment projects the female spawning biomass in 2011 to be approximately 587 kmt, which is well above the conservation benchmarks for this stock, and above the estimated Bmsy, of 374 kmt. Recent average exploitation rate of this stock is estimated to be less than 5% of fishable biomass and not increasing, compared to an estimated Fmsy of approximately 0.13. The assessment estimated the 2010 spawning biomass to continue the gradual decline in SSB occurring over the past several years. This decline is attributed to the aging of several above average year classes from the second half of the 1990s, and not to fishery removals or recruitment impaired by a reduced spawning biomass. At recent exploitation rates the assessment projects the SSB to stabilize in the near future as the effects of the very strong year-classes pass through the population. The recommended ABC for 2011 was 239 kmt, consistent with the harvest control rule. However, as has been the case for several years, it is not expected that the ABC will be taken, because effort in this mixed-species fishery is strongly influenced by catches of other demersal species, and exploitation rate is expected to remain around 4-5% of mature biomass.

Flathead Sole The 2010 assessment of eastern Bering sea flathead sole by NMFS staff incorporated results of the 2010 bottom trawl survey and 2010 fisheries catch data, and detailed catch sampling data from 2009 augmented by additional biological sampling of catches up until September 2010. The assessment model indicates that spawning biomass has declined continuously from a high of 328,000 mt in 1997 to a minimum of 240,000 mt in 2009 and 2010. The projected 2011 and 2012 SSB values are 241,000 mt and 237,000 mt, respectively, still well above the reference benchmark of B40%. Exploitation rate is estimated to remain well below Fmsy. The 2001, 2003, and 2007 year classes are estimated to be above average, but recruitments from 1988-2007 on average have been much lower than recruitments from 1974-1987. The recommended ABC for 2011 was 83,300 t consistent with the harvest control rule. However, as has been the case for several years, it is not expected that the ABC will be taken, because effort in this mixed-species fishery is strongly influenced by catches of other demersal species, and exploitation rate is expected to remain below Fmsy.

Arrowtooth Flounder Assessment of the status of arrowtooth flounder is strongly influenced by survey results, since there is almost no directly fishery for this species. Survey coverage in 2010 was atypically comprehensive, and results indicate that the stock is increasing in all parts of the EBS. Current biomass is the highest ever estimated for this stock, and is projected to increase due to both good recruitment from year classes produced in the late 1990s and through the 2000s and very light exploitation due to poor markets for arrowtooth flounder. The 2010 stock assessment model resulted in a 2011 biomass projection of 1,120,000 mt, the highest ever observed, and at current exploitation rates is projected to increase. The estimated ABC for this stock in 2011 is 153,000 mt. However this is a mixture of arrowtooth flounder and the morphologically similar Kamchatka flounder. Kamchatka flounder is estimated to comprise approximately 15% of the total biomass of the complex, but is geographically concentrated in the west and southern portion of the total EBS. It is more acceptable to markets, and consequently of greater interest to harvesters and processors. Therefore it has been subjected to a separate evaluation against the MSC P1 standards by the surveillance team, and on completion the results will be

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 9 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

presented separately to the client and the MSC.

Alaska Plaice The 2010 assessment of eastern Bering sea Alaska plaice by NMFS staff included results of the 2010 bottom trawl survey and 2010 fisheries catch data up until mid- fall, and detailed catch sampling data from 2009. The assessment model indicates that spawning biomass remains high and stable with a 2011 estimate of 319,000 mt. Changes to the assessment model in recent years mean male and female biomasses are estimated separately, and natural mortality is now considered almost half the previously assumed value, thus resulting in changed absolute values of stock biomass and management benchmarks, but not the perceptions of relative stock status and trends. With Alaska plaice taken primary as bycatches in fisheries directed at other flatfish, exploitation remains around 1% of fishable biomass, far below estimates consistent with the target F35% of 0.19. The recommended ABC for 2011 was 65,100 t consistent with the harvest control rule. However, as has been the case for several years, it is not expected that the ABC will be taken, because there is no directed fishery and much of what is taken is as a result of bycatch in the yellowfin sole fishery. ASC companies have been working hard to develop markets for plaice to help comply with retention requirements. As a result, in recent years, less plaice has been discarded.

Northern Rock Sole The 2010 assessment of eastern Bering Sea northern rock sole by NMFS staff included catch results of the 2010 bottom trawl survey and 2010 fisheries, and catch sampling data from the survey and fishery in 2009. The assessment model indicates that spawning biomass remains high and is increasing due to maturation of several strong year classes from the early 2000s. The 2011 estimate for 2011 is 319,000 mt. Changes to the assessment model in recent years allow computations to track male and female biomasses separately or combined, so the effects of the directed roe fishery can be evaluated more precisely. With only a portion of the ABC taken each year in the roe fishery, due to bycatches of prohibited species and limited markets, exploitation remains around 3% of fishable biomass, far below estimates consistent with the target FABC = 0.13. The recommended ABC for 2011 was 244 kmt, consistent with the harvest control rule. However, as has been the case for several years, it is not expected that the ABC will be taken.

Conclusions Yellowfin sole, flathead sole, arrowtooth flounder, Alaska plaice and northern rock sole stocks are not currently overfished nor at risk of being overfished in the near future.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 10 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Comments Activity assessed Performance Indicator 1.3.1.2 (for BSAI Alaska plaice, flathead sole, northern rock sole, yellowfin sole, arrowtooth flounder). Does information indicate any changes in structure that would alter reproductive capacity?

Scoring Guidepost 100 Data strongly indicate a robust age, sex and genetic structure in the stock, such as would maintain reproductive capacity.

Scoring Guidepost 80 Evidence exists that the fishery has not caused changes in stock structure that would affect recruitment. Or potentially adverse changes in structure are clearly identified and effective remedial measures are in place.

Scoring Guidepost 60 Changes in stock structure have been detected but there is no evidence of negative effect on recruitment of the stock. Or potentially adverse changes in structure are identified and remedial measures are in the process of implementation over defined timeframes.

Score 75

Scoring Rationale (BSAI flathead sole, arrowtooth, Alaska plaice) Baseline and subsequent routine stock structure analyses have not been conducted for these species that would permit structural change to be observed.

Any changes in growth within part or all of the area may affect reproductive capacity, however, no temporal change in growth has been reported to date. Also, although seasonal selectivities are fitted, they are treated as constant over the period of the assessment model suggesting a fairly stable size/age structure in terms of proportions at age.

While biomass and recruitment trends are positive, the stock-recruitment relationship is not well defined (low contrasts in data).

The score would have been higher if there was an evaluation to show that the fishery had no harmful effects on stock structure in relation to reproductive capacity.

Scoring Rationale (BSAI northern rock sole, yellowfin sole) Baseline and subsequent routine stock structure analyses have not been conducted for these species that would permit structural change to be observed.

Any changes in growth within part or all of the area may affect reproductive capacity; however, no temporal change in growth has been reported to date. Also, although seasonal selectivities are fitted, they are treated as constant over the period of the assessment model suggesting a fairly stable size/age structure in terms of proportions at age.

The stock-recruitment estimate was considered to be adequate for a Tier 1 a assessment (see text)

The score would have been higher if there was an evaluation to show that the fishery

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 11 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

had no harmful effects on stock structure in relation to reproductive capacity.

Condition 1 for BSAI flathead sole, arrowtooth, Alaska plaice, northern rock sole, yellowfin sole. The client is required to provide evidence of the affect of the fishery on stock structure and whether this has had an adverse affect on recruitment. It is required that this part of the Condition is met by the second annual surveillance audit. If the evidence suggests recruitment has been adversely affected remedial measures must be implemented by year four of the certification.

In order to achieve this outcome it is recommended that the client: a) Evaluates the evidence of change in the stock structure in relation to reproductive capacity and relate this to the activities of the fishery. b) If there is evidence of a potentially damaging change in stock structure caused or assumed to be caused by the fishery, appropriate remedial measures should be defined and implemented by year four of the certification.

ASC Action Plan We have engaged in extensive discussions with stock assessment scientists at the AFSC and they have agreed to evaluate the stock structure of the Bering Sea flatfish species proposed for certification in relation to reproductive capacity and then relate this to the activities of the fishery. Their approach for this analysis is as follows: Using existing data and within the timeline specified in the above Condition, AFSC will examine several indices of reproductive capacity for the Bering Sea flatfish stocks proposed for certification. These are: 1) Fishery selectivity and age-at- first-capture to examine the fraction of the stock that has an opportunity to spawn before being harvested; 2) The relative degree to which fishing takes place on spawning fish for each flatfish target fishery; 3) Where data are available, age composition of stocks to evaluate the percentage of each stock that is comprised of fish of 20+ years; and 4) The degree to which the exploitation rate of each flatfish species is estimated to be over or under the F 50% (a fishing rate that is generally accepted to be conservative for North Pacific sub-Arctic fishes). ASC and AFSC expect that these indices will provide much of the necessary information to meet the Condition. For stocks where examination of these indices may not be conclusive, NMFS has agreed to consider implementing special projects for gonad collections for reproductive studies. Recognizing that this is an ambitious undertaking, NMFS prefers to prioritize flatfish species of the highest commercial and management interest (i.e. where exploitation rates are also likely to be the highest). NMFS will also consider a system of rotating collections to cover the other species during the five year time frame. In this manner, we agree with NMFS that it is reasonable to complete studies on the highest priority species and make significant progress on the other species.

ASC Progress Situation: Unfortunately we do not have any annual gonadal sampling for maturity Report condition as is apparently available for Pacific cod. However, several available indices of spawning stock condition suggest that the fishery is not having a negative effect on reproductive capacity of Bering Sea or Gulf of Alaska flatfish. The points below outline the rationale to support this. The GOA rock sole will have the same arguments as the others (fishery selectivity vs age at maturity, light exploitation, etc.) but without the age structured component to discuss.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 12 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Points to consider:  With the exception of rocksole and to a much lesser extent flathead, fishing does not target spawning stock in BS and GOA. So for all species except rock sole and flathead, there is a temporal and/or spatial difference between fishing and spawning locations.

 Fishery selectivity appears to allow fish to spawn at least once before they are at the size of first capture.

 Fishing has been at F50% or less for the past 15 years, a conservative harvest rate for North Pacific sub-arctic flatfish species. This harvest level could be expected to maintain the pool of female spawning biomass at high levels.

 For Bering Sea flatfish where age-specific catch data are available, we can say that there has not been a “fish-down” effect on the age composition of the stock with fishing (decrease in the population mean age). The 20+ age group of the population in the flatfish population in the Bering Sea is large and has increased as a function of recruitment success and has not declined due to the level of fishing mortality presently imposed on the stock.

Annual gonad collections to look at the question of effects of the fishery on reproductive capacity more directly

Gonads have been collected and analyzed for some Bering Sea flatfish species in the past but some of these data are now approximately 20 years old (yellowfin sole). To collect more recent data, AFSC would normally do this as a special project. Fishery observers on flatfish vessels would be requested to collect gonads randomly from flatfish of a given species with a target of approximately 250 gonads per species to obtain histological estimates of maturity, or 1,000 specimens (per species) could be anatomically scanned at sea to discern if changes in the maturity at age are evident to warrant a histological study.

Given the number of species under consideration for MSC certification, it would take several years to get sufficient data to look some or all of the species of interest. If AFSC were going to undertake these collections, it would likely prefer to prioritize flatfish species of the highest commercial interest (e.g. yellowfin sole, rock sole) because these are the stocks where fishing exploitation rates are typically higher and therefore potential for fishery effects on spawning stocks are greatest.

For species such as Alaska plaice where fishery exploitation rates are very low, it may be better to consider a cooperative approach to the collections where NMFS provides sampling and handling instructions and flatfish fishermen or processing plant personnel (or even field biologists hired by industry) perform the collections. Potential for industry collection projects to be successful would probably be highest if flatfish could be frozen in the round on CP vessels and shipped to the AFSC. This would simplify the handling and allow the industry to focus on the random sampling aspects of the project. Observations The surveillance and audit team was provided by NMFS staff with information on how age composition of the Alaska plaice, yellowfin sole and arrowtooth flounder stocks has changed over time. Over this period the proportion of fish in the oldest ages has declined. Such declines are consistent with the expected effects of a higher total mortality due to adding fishing mortality to existing natural mortality, so that an excessive narrow interpretation of the Condition could never be met, given that any

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 13 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

fishing mortality in addition to natural mortality will have some effect on age composition of the spawning biomass, and consequently on potential reproductive output. However, if it can be demonstrated that numbers of spawners has not been seriously reduced by the fishery (where “seriously takes into account the life history of the species of concern), and that fecundity of the remaining spawners is documented to be adequate for producing the historically observed range of year classes under the environmental conditions considered typical for the stock, then the Condition can considered to be met.

Based on the figures provided, in all cases most of the reductions in proportion of stock at age occur in the older ages, and are not large in the ages during or immediately after onset of maturation. This is consistent with natural population dynamics processes, with numbers at age normally declining with age even in unexploited populations (taking into account variability in year-class strengths over time). Thus the information provided to the team documents that large numbers of spawners remain in all the stocks, with only the very oldest spawners showing marked decreases in representation in the population. Studies of a number of species have found that older spawners actually have greater reproductive value per spawner or per kg, due to several possible mechanisms (depending on the species) related to behaviour and physiology. Thus a skewing of the spawning biomass towards younger spawners could have impacts on recruitment, even if numbers of spawners remains adequate. The team received an update of histological sampling of ovaries that is in place at present, and plans for analyses of these samples to get estimates of age-specific fecundities for the main flatfish species – yellowfin sole, Alaska plaice and arrowtooth. This sampling is concentrated in the EBS, and is being conducted in conjunction with commercial fishing operations to ensure that samples are available during the peak spawning period for these species. Such sampling will also allow updated documentation of the age-specific maturation of BSAI stocks as well as the age specific fecundity of mature females. Conclusion The review team is satisfied that this plan will allow the Condition to be closed for BSAI flatfish in 2012, if the planned analyses are completed and the results support adequate age-specific productivity of the ages currently well represented in the mature biomass. Progress is considered to be on target with respect to this Condition.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 14 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Comments

Activity assessed Performance Indicator: 2.1.3.2 for BSAI flathead sole, arrowtooth, Alaska plaice, northern rock sole, yellowfin sole. Is any gear lost during fishing operations and can ‘ghost fishing’ occur?

Scoring Guidepost 100 There is detailed knowledge of the type, quantity and location of gear types lost during fishing operations. The impact of gear loss on habitat, target and non-target species has been well estimated or recorded.

The effect of gear loss on target and non-target species has been measured and shown to have negligible effects on habitats, ecosystems or species of concern.

Scoring Guidepost 80 There is knowledge of the type, quantity and location of gear lost during fishing operations. Estimates can be made on the extent of adverse effects, including ‘ghost fishing’.

Estimates made show that losses do not cause unacceptable impacts on the ecosystem.

Scoring Guidepost 60 Some recording of gear losses takes place and an assessment can be made of ecosystem impacts, including possible ‘ghost fishing’

Score 75

Scoring Rationale Although lost gear may be noted in vessel logbooks, there appears to be no formal recording or collating of when and where trawl gear is lost. However, given the high cost of trawl gear, every attempt is made to grapple and retrieve lost gear. Impacts of lost trawl gear are likely to be minimal in terms of ghost fishing. The amount of gear lost is likely to be small but cannot be quantified. Overall although little information is available, the relationship between typical levels of lost trawl gear in trawl fisheries and the very low impact of lost trawl gear strongly suggests that there will be no measurable effects from gear loss.

Condition 2 BSAI flathead sole, arrowtooth, Alaska plaice, northern rock sole, yellowfin sole. The client is required to quantify and identify the location of lost trawl fishing gear and assess the extent of adverse effects, including “ghost fishing”. If significant adverse effects are identified identify ways of reducing gear loss and must be described and a program to monitor improving performance implemented. It is required that this Condition is met by the second annual surveillance audit.

It is recommended that in order to achieve this Condition the client develops a standard lost gear reporting and recording scheme so that the potential impact of lost gear can be better evaluated.

ASC Action Plan The client will work with fishing companies and fishing associations involved with BSAI flatfish to initiate a program to record trawl gear loss in the BSAI flatfish fisheries. Information on this program will be provided to the certifier within the

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 15 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

first 12 months of certification. Some information on gear loss may be grouped so that confidentiality of sensitive location information cannot be traced to individual vessels. ASC will also, in conjunction with flatfish fishing companies and fishing associations, implement a program to record trawl gear loss in the BSAI flatfish fisheries within the second year of certification. Given the overlap in trawl fisheries targeting flatfish and cod for some sectors of the Bering Sea trawl fleet, the program developed for flatfish will be designed to work cooperatively with the one being developed for the Bering Sea trawl cod fishery which is also responding to the same certification Condition.

ASC Progress A survey of trawl gear lost during flatfish and cod fishing was administered to trawl Report catcher processor participants in January 2011. The survey also requested information about trawl gear that was recovered, and will inform an analysis of the extent that “ghost fishing” trawl gear results in adverse impacts. A similar survey is expected to be administered to the trawl catcher vessel fleet in the coming months. The results of each of these surveys will be analyzed and provided to the assessment team during the second annual audit.

Observations During the audit, the team was informed that a survey of trawl gear lost during flatfish and Pacific cod fishing was administered to trawl catcher-processor participants in January 2011. The survey also requested information about trawl gear that was lost, but was recovered, and will inform an analysis of the extent that “ghost fishing” trawl gear results in adverse impacts. A copy of the survey, slightly modified from one developed to assess gear loss in the pollock trawl fishery, was attached to the client’s submission.

According to the client, catcher vessels do not harvest flatfish in the BSAI, rather to a limited extent, catcher vessels in the Bering Sea have participated in flatfish fishing through mothership operations that have offered markets to catcher vessels. This has only occurred sporadically and not in recent years. Therefore, the client recommended that it would not be useful to track down this limited set of Bering Sea catcher vessels for purposes of the survey.

The assessment team agreed with this conclusion as the last known year that catcher vessels targeted flatfish in the Bering Sea was 2009.

The results of each of the surveys will be analyzed and provided to the assessment team in time for the second annual audit.

Conclusion Progress toward providing the information required to satisfy this Condition is on target and it is expected that this Condition will be closed out in accordance with the agreed timeline.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 16 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Comments

Activity assessed Performance Indicator 2.2.1.2 (BSAI flathead sole, arrowtooth, Alaska plaice, northern rock sole, yellowfin sole.) Are interactions of the fishery with such species adequately determined?

Scoring Guidepost 100 Reliable quantitative estimates are made of the interactions of all populations directly related to the fishery, and qualitative information is available on indirect impacts. Incidental mortalities are recorded and reported.

Scoring Guidepost 80 Adequate quantitative estimates are made of the effects of interactions directly related to the fishery.

Scoring Guidepost 60 The main interactions directly related to the fishery are known.

Score 75

Scoring Rationale Because of separation of feeding areas and the fishery, interactions between the fishery and the threatened Steller’s eider is considered to be negligible.

On average 3.35 Steller sea lions are taken in the flatfish fisheries per year (NOAA 2007).

Adequate quantitative estimates are made of the effects of interactions directly related to the fishery with mammals & the short-tailed albatross. Disturbance competition and by-catch are also understood for mammals, and exclusion zones around breeding sites and haulout sites exist based on foraging and disturbance studies.

The inter-actions of seabirds and the trawl fishery have been reasonably well studied and documented (e.g. Zador et al. 2008). There have also been a number of ad hoc studies by, for example, Melvin et al. on various Alaskan fisheries that provide considerable information about seabird by-catch and mitigation.

Much effort has been directed at understanding the interactions of seabirds with other fisheries, notably the long-line fisheries, in the region but bird strikes in gears and vessels by species are incompletely recorded (PSEIS). The interactions of the trawl fisheries with seabirds needs better quantitative definition, especially in the extent of the net sonde (third) cable in causing injury and mortality.

Condition 3 for BSAI flathead sole, arrowtooth, Alaska plaice, northern rock sole, yellowfin sole. The client is required to provide adequate quantitative estimates of the effects of the fishery on seabirds by the first annual surveillance audit.

It is recommended that in order to achieve this Condition the client reviews the state of knowledge of both the impacts of the fishery on seabirds and the adequacy of both current and future approaches to mitigation needs to bring together the large but fragmented literature and associated data. Such a review could also specifically

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 17 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

assess (i) the desirability or need for additional data; and (ii) the impact of the ‘third wire’ in species specific seabird mortality.

ASC Action Plan Based on information from the NPFMC and NOAA/NMFS website and discussions with Ed Melvin of Washington Sea Grant, a leading researcher on both longline and trawl fisheries seabird impact, ASC believes that the current flatfish trawl fisheries in the Bering Sea may already meet this Condition. Data on seabird bycatch has been collected to the species level or species group level in the Alaska trawl fisheries since 1993. Gulls, alcids and some other species are lumped, because in the case of gulls, particularly juveniles, specific species ID's are difficult even for experts. It is our understanding that shearwaters are collected by species, but are not broken out by species in the SAFE reports - this is also true of alcids - few are caught so they are lumped. The “unidentified” category results largely from sampling at night when a dark bird is taken in less than prime condition - difficult to tell a fulmar from a shearwater, but observers should always be able to tell an albatross from either of these. It is important to get the albatross ID's correct, since they are the species most vulnerable to impacts from fishing.

ASC will provide the terms of reference specified within the first 6 months as directed, and begin a review of the current and “in publication” literature on the impacts of the Bering Sea flatfish trawl fishery on seabird mortality. If the certifier decides that there are any significant gaps or insufficient information on impacts to specific species, ASC will work with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to see if additional information can be gathered. The current estimated sea bird interactions and mortalities from the sea bird experts at NMFS AFSC along with information on the current state of knowledge regarding effects of trawl fisheries in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands can be found at:

http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/refm/reem/doc/Seabird%20bycatch%20tables%201993- 2004_13April2006.pdf - (Tables 7 and 8 and Figures 10-13 for historical data on trawl seabird mortalities through 2004. http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/refm/reem/doc/Alaska_2006seabirdbycatch.pdf - (Tables 4-6 for estimated sea bird mortalities in trawl fisheries in 2006). ASC Progress The following report was provided by John Gauvin, Fishery Science Project Director Report for the Alaska Seafood Cooperative. Additionally, email communication with Shannon Fitzgeral (AFSC seabird expert) indicates that he will be finishing several other seabird reports. These will be available the summer of 2011, and will provide annual seabird bycatch estimates through 2009 and possibly 2010. Additionally, AFSC will be working on a paper exploring unobserved seabird mortality.

Condition 3 requires the client to furnish quantitative estimates of the effects of interactions directly related to the flatfish trawl fisheries in the fishery management areas applicable to the certification. Additionally it is recommended that the client review the state of knowledge on effects of the flatfish fisheries on seabirds as well as applicability of mitigation measures for reducing impacts. Finally, the Condition specifically recommends the client consider the desirability or need for additional data and effects of “third wire” (net sonde) devices on seabird mortality on a species-specific basis. This includes a suggestion that the utility of existing or new approaches to mitigation for third wire effects be examined.

Estimates of seabird mortalities from Alaska flatfish fisheries are available from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). While this information was not referenced in the MSC assessments done for the certified flatfish species, the tables

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 18 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

below provide data from the Alaska Fisheries Science Center’s (AFSC) 2006 report on seabird bycatch in federal groundfish fisheries (report available at http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/refm/reem/doc/Alaska_2006seabirdbycatch.pdf). The first table below reports total estimated seabird mortalities for seabirds caught in trawl nets (see comments below) by management region and the second table details seabird catches in flatfish fisheries based on catch data excerpted from the same NMFS report (Table5).

Data excerpted from Table 4 of above referenced NMFS report to Estimate seabird mortalities in federal waters trawl fisheries in 2006 by region (units are numbers of animals and 95% confidence intervals in parenthesis) Aleutian Gulf of Seabird species Islands Bering Sea Alaska Total Short-tailed Albatross 0 0 0 0 Laysan Albatross 0 2 (1-34) 0 2 (1-34) Black-footed Albatross 0 0 0 0 Unidentified Albatross 2 (1-119) 0 0 2 (1-119) 417 (245- 425 (247- Northern Fulmar 8 (2-226) 711) 0 733 147 (34- Shearwaters 127 (25-646) 20 (12-35) 0 633) Unidentified Procellarids 0 2 (1-5) 0 2 (1-5) 199 (39- 199 (39- Gull species 0 1,013) 0 1,013) Alcid species 0 3 (1-12) 0 3 (1-12) Other species 0 0 0 0 2,092 (411- 2,092 (411- Unidentified species 0 10,645) 0 10,645) 2,735 (722- Total 137 (28-670) 10,365) 0 0 Source: "Annual Seabird Bycatch Estimates for 2006, Alaska Fishery Science Center Coordinated Studies"; Table 4. Available from AFSC (http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/refm/reem/doc/Alaska_2006seabirdbycatch.pdf)

Estimated seabird mortalities in federal waters fisheries in 2006 for the flatfish target fisheries based on data excerpted from Table 5 of above referenced report Seabird species Estimated mortality 2006 95% confidence interval Short-tailed Albatross 0 Laysan Albatross 0 Black-footed Albatross 0 Unidentified Albatross 0 Northern Fulmar 3 1-194 Shearwaters 0 Unidentified Procellarids 0 Gull species 199 39-1013 Alcid species 0 Other species 0 Unidentified species Total 202 40-1024

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 19 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Source: "Annual Seabird Bycatch Estimates for 2006, Alaska Fishery Science Center Coordinated Studies, Table 5" Available from AFSC (http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/refm/reem/doc/Alaska_2006seabirdbycatch.pdf)

We recognize that the AFSC report includes only seabird mortality as estimated from observer sampling of catches (e.g. not including any mortality from third wire and trawl warp strikes unless the affected seabirds end up in the net). Based on our knowledge of differences in fishing methods and trawl gear used by between different types of trawl vessels, we believe that seabird catches as estimated from observer data are useful for evaluating the effects of flatfish fishing on seabirds. This is because unlike pollock trawls used in Alaska which rely on very large meshes in the mouth of the trawl (e.g. 10 to 30 meter openings), flatfish fisheries deploy nets that have meshes throughout the net that are likely to retain seabirds caught incidentally. Likewise, we explain below that third wire and warp strikes are likely to be less of an issue for most flatfish fisheries due to the generally steeper angle of entry to the water of the trawl warps and third wire cable for non-pelagic trawls used for flatfish in Alaska. This means that the entry point is often closer to the prop wash at the vessel stern where bird activity is lower relative to areas further astern. This issue and some preliminary evidence for lower cable interactions are discussed below.

The seabird mortality estimates in the above tables are based on seabirds caught in nets or otherwise ending up in vessel catch holding tanks at the stern of the vessel as estimated by observer sampling. The above reference Alaska Fishery Science Center report details the issues surrounding seabird mortality estimation from observer sampling so this discussion focuses mainly on the specifics of flatfish fisheries in the context of the relevance of the data to flatfish seabird interactions. The first table is not specific to flatfish fisheries but is provided mainly to show that seabird catches occur in trawl fisheries conducted in all federal waters management regions off Alaska although no seabirds were found in observer samples in the Gulf of Alaska in 2006. The second table provides data for flatfish fisheries only (not broken out by region). Here it is apparent that flatfish fisheries do catch seabirds based on 2006 data, but gulls and fulmars are the only recorded takes. This is of relevance because conservation concerns have been raised for albatross species, particularly short-tailed albatross interactions with fishing gear in Alaska.

In flatfish fisheries, seabirds can be caught in nets in several ways. Because seabirds are attracted to fish dangling from or spilling out of or flatfish nets, seabirds are sometimes caught while they are attempting to get this food source. Capture occurs from animals becoming pinned in the meshes, as well as pulled into the net mouth during gear setting and, to a greater extent, net retrieval. Seabirds can also end up in the catch if they attempt to grab fish stuck in meshes or being emptied into tanks, and are therefore counted in observer samples. Finally, at times seabirds can also become pinned under the codend as the catch is being brought up the stern ramp, and can be drug into the stern tank as well. Some seabirds survive falling into the tank without apparent injury and fly out or are released by crew.

Animals counted in observer samples are dead or injured to the extent that the observer determines that they should be retained. All catch needs to be made available to observer sampling, and nothing can be removed on deck without permission from fishery observers who must be provided an opportunity to sample or otherwise record the catch before it is released or discarded.

Given that seabirds are occasionally caught or pulled into the catch during flatfish

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 20 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

fishing, data reflecting the number of annual mortalities by seabird species is likely to be meaningful as an indicator of seabird interactions even not all interactions and mortalities are recorded. Data compiled by the Alaska Fishery Science Center in the table above were “expanded up” in a statistical sense to the scale of the whole fishery by expanding the number of seabirds collected in observer samples to the entire haul, then expanding those data to all catch by area and fishery target. Methods for the statistical expansions and calculations of confidence intervals are described in the Alaska Fishery Science Center report cited above. The high fraction of hauls sampled by observers, especially in the BS/AI flatfish fishery, likely increases the accuracy of the seabird mortality estimates.

In addition to the above data, two studies focusing on the interactions between seabirds and Alaska trawl fisheries have been published since the flatfish MSC assessment team drafted their report. The specific flatfish fishery information from those reports is summarized below and references to those reports are provided.

In an extensive 2007 report prepared by researchers at Washington Sea Grant published (“Alaska Trawl Fisheries: Potential Interactions with North Pacific Albatrosses”) Dietrich and Melvin evaluated the relative potential for different trawl fisheries to interact with albatrosses. This assessment was based on the seasonality of fisheries, fishing location, degree of fishing effort in areas thought to encompass the highest albatross density, and other information included in several in situ pilot studies focusing on seabird interactions with Alaska trawl fisheries. Key information from that report relevant to flatfish fisheries is as follows:

 Cable distance from flatfish vessels’ sterns to the water entry points is generally less than 30 feet (page 33);  Third wire usage in flatfish fisheries is low relative to other trawl fisheries in Alaska (page 33 and Tables 5 and 6) (Alaska Seafood Cooperative comment: this was true at that time but currently it is believed at all active flatfish vessels use third wire or wireless systems and wireless systems use both hull-mounted and paravane deployed receivers);  Spatial and temporal overlap with albatross was moderate to minimal for the time period (2004-2005) covered in the study (page 36, Table 9);  Authors based their conclusions in part on an earlier pilot study (McElderry et al.2004) where camera placements in 2002 observed third wire interactions on catcher processors (CP) and catcher vessels (CV). Dietrich and Melvin relied on the McElderry 2004 study to characterize sea bird interactions with third wire equipment on flatfish vessels. The McElderry et al. study concluded that seabird numbers attending CVs were low during the 2002 filedwork. In effect, seabirds were absent when vessels were towing. Additionally, seabird attendance around flatfish CP vessels was high (defined as continuously present), but CP third-wire collision rates were low (0.01 birds per hour); entanglements on trawl vessels occurred at a low rate (0.04/hour); and no albatrosses were seen in the course of the 2002 study.  Dietrich and Melvin also cite data from a 2004 collaborative study between Washington Sea Grant and the Pollock Conservation Cooperative wherein interactions between seabirds and pollock CP vessels were found to be much higher than those found in McElderry et al. (e.g. rates of 45 to 66 strikes per hour for trawl warps and third wire cables on pollock vessels). Dietrich and Melvin do not feel the results of the two studies are comparable due to differences in timing of the fieldwork.

One additional study of interactions between seabird and Alaska flatfish fishing

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 21 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

vessels is available. In 2009, a research collaboration between NOAA’s Resource Ecology and Ecosystem Management (REFM) and the North Pacific Fisheries Foundation (NPFF) examined seabird interactions with a “paravane” device used to receive wireless signals from the net sounder (used to monitor trawl door spread, net shape, and catch rate information). Like third wire devices, a paravane system involves a cable offboard hung aft of the vessel where seabird interactions could occur. The paravane differs from a third wire system in that it suspends a “lead fish” containing an acoustic receiver from a crane. The receiver picks up the signals from approximately 20 meters depth instead of a hull mounted receiver, which is another approach to wireless acoustic systems.

Questions surrounding paravane usage and seabird interactions have existed for some time, and the research objectives of the REFM/NPFF project were intended to learn more about workings of a paravane system in the context of seabird interactions. For the study, trained seabird observers monitored interactions. The monitoring focused first on the unmodified paravane cable, and then on several approaches to mitigation for seabird interactions. Preliminary findings summarized below were published in REFM’s Quarterly Research report (July-Sept. 2009 page 3 available at: http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/Quarterly/jas2009/divrptsREFM3.htm). Another write-up of the project can be found in the journal of the Pacific Seabird Group http://www.pacificseabirdgroup.org/publications/PacificSeabirds/VOL_36_2.pdf and a conference presentation poster authored by Mr. Shannon Fitzgerald, a seabird expert in the REFM Division.

The paravane research was conducted in the Bering Sea arrowtooth flounder target fishery in 2009. Like the McElderry et al. pilot study, the cable was observed to be relatively close to the vessel stern, and clearly in the vessel’s prop wash.

Photo from NPFF/REFM field research cruise in 2009 to evaluate seabird interactions with paravane. Note that the paravane cable enters water just aft of vessel stern. Photo used with permission from NPFF.

Field biologists completed a total of 20 15-minute observation sessions of the control and experimental paravane deployments (with and without mitigation). Interaction rates varied from 0 to 138 birds per session for all sessions combined (control and experimental). No mortalities or seabird injuries were observed. Nearly all interactions were by Northern Fulmars, and were with the paravane cable itself rather than the various lines supporting or controlling the paravane boom. Black-footed Albatross (Phoebastria nigripes) were in attendance around the ship but did not approach the vessel closely and were not seen to interact with the paravane

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 22 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

gear.

Summary of available information, identification of important gaps in information, and plan for obtaining needed information on seabird interactions with particular focus on interactions with third wire devices

While most of the species specific information on seabird interactions and mortality is based on catch information from extrapolated observer sampling, we believe that catch information is relevant to the flatfish fishery and therefore is useful for gauging the relative degree of interactions over time. For this reason, we feel monitoring future catch trends is a reasonable indicator of whether changes in the flatfish fishery result in changed overall seabird interaction rates (e.g. Amendment 80 cooperatives are expected to affect fishing behaviour by creating incentives for lower bycatch of prohibited species such as halibut and lower discards). We would expect that changes in fishing behaviour, location, and seasonality would be picked up in future analyses of seabird catches.

In our view, preliminary evidence from the two pilot studies described above and our own experience in the fishery indicates that strike rates and mortalities from third wire or similar (paravane) systems are relatively low compared to other Alaska trawl fisheries. This makes intuitive sense because, although the third wire and paravane cable is not specifically different from those used on other trawl vessels in Alaska, the cable point of entry distance for most non-pelagic trawling is likely closer to the vessel and the prop wash area than for pollock fishing where the amount of scope on the cable would be expected to be many times greater. Likewise, based on the Washington Sea Grant study cited above, the spatial overlap of flatfish fisheries with albatross appears low relative to other trawl fisheries.

Based on the available information, flatfish fisheries are not a major source of seabird mortality from either the net or third wire cable. Additionally, NMFS seabird catch estimates for flatfish fisheries as well as the fieldwork described above suggests that flatfish fishery interactions, to the extent they occur, are mostly with northern fulmar. To our knowledge, there are no conservation concerns at this time for northern fulmar and it is not a species that falls into the “protected, endangered, threatened” (PET) category.

Some may argue that the effects of fisheries on seabirds are such an important issue that it would be unwise to conclude that Alaska flatfish fisheries are not a problem for seabirds without more conclusive data. The counter argument is that preliminary data are reasonably suggestive that flatfish fisheries are not a major source of seabird mortality. Resources for evaluating conservation concerns are inherently limited, both in the private sector and for fishery managers and scientists. In this context, while more research could be devoted to seabird interactions, this would take away from work in progress on benthic habitat and bycatch of groundfish and crab species which are likely to be more pressing issues than seabirds for the flatfish fisheries off Alaska.

According to Mr. Shannon Fitzgerald of the Alaska Fishery Science Center’s REFM division some additional information relevant to seabird interactions with flatfish fisheries is expected to be available in the coming year. This is expected to include an update of the seabird catch estimations, which would update the 2006 data described above. Additionally, that work is also expected to discuss the issue of how well seabird catch estimations reflect mortality from other sources of mortality on a fishery-specific basis. REFM’s soon-to-be updated catch information will also help evaluate whether changes in fishing practices since the start of the Amendment

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 23 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

80 fishing cooperative system is associated with a change in seabird catch rates.

If REFM’s future research concludes that catch information is not a meaningful indicator of seabird effects of the flatfish fishery, then we will consider how to address these deficiencies. At this point, however, we do not think the available information suggests that seabird mortalities from flatfish fishing are necessarily a concern or a priority in a “protected, endangered, threatened” species context.

Observations During the audit the team was heard updates on mitigation research and current efforts to document seabird bycatch from flatfish and other fisheries in the BSAI from Dr. Ed Melvin and Mr. Shannon Fitzgerald, respectively. Those presentations and the client’s written submission clarified the difficulties associated with the identification of seabird bycatch at sea and confirmed, nevertheless, that observers would always be in a position to separate albatross from other species. Although the team acknowledged that seabird bycatch has been quantified for many years, they noted that that published data are now dated (most recent estimated are from 2006). The team was informed that data from 2007 to 2010 was being loaded into the NMFS catch accounting database and that this undertaking has taken somewhat longer than anticipated. Currently, NMFS is comparing overlapping years of data with the old database to determine if the use of the new database provided a consistent time series. Data through 2010 should be available later this summer. We also heard that more information about the extent of the net sonde (third) cable in causing injury and mortality and other unobserved mortality will be forthcoming based on the analysis of existing data.

However, in the case of flatfish gear, both third wire interactions and unobserved mortality are thought, by the client, to be of less concern, because unlike pollock trawls used in Alaska which rely on very large meshes in the mouth of the trawl, flatfish fisheries deploy nets that have meshes throughout the net that are likely to retain seabirds caught incidentally. Third wire and warp strikes are likely to be less of an issue for most flatfish fisheries due to the generally steeper angle of entry to the water of the trawl warps and third wire cable for non-pelagic trawls used for flatfish in Alaska. This means that the entry point is often closer to the prop wash at the vessel stern where bird activity is lower relative to areas further astern. Conclusion The team considers that progress in obtaining current estimates of seabird bycatch is satisfactory and, given that more recent data than 2006 will shortly be available, were content to keep this Condition open until they received these new data and the client’s analysis of these data with respect to their estimated impact on the bycatch species.

Any complaints against the certified operation; recorded, reviewed and actioned The certified operation considered here is the following signatories to the ASC MSC certification programme:  Cascade Fishing Inc.  Fishermen’s Finest Inc.  Iquique LLC  Jubilee Fisheries Inc.  O’Hara Corporation  Ocean Peace Inc.  United States Seafoods LLC  Fishing Company of Alaska

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 24 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

There were no reported incidents of any complaints against the ASC member companies relating to the scope of MSC certification.

Any relevant changes to legislation or regulation Modified trawl sweeps In 2006, industry began working with Dr Craig Rose and other scientists from the Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC) to modify groundfish trawls to reduce their effects on the benthic habitat. During testing in 2006 and 2007, elevating devices were added to trawl sweeps to raise the sweeps off the bottom, and reduce effects on sessile seafloor animals and unconsolidated substrates. For most Bering Sea flatfish trawls, trawl sweeps are long (up to 1500 ft), and sweep 90% of the area between the trawl doors. By adding 10-inch bobbins, or disks, every 90 feet to the trawl sweeps, trawl sweeps are raised above the substrate allowing animals to pass underneath.

In field testing, these modifications resulted in a 90 percent decrease in the area contacted by trawl gear, and have reduced effects on sea whips and crabs while not substantially reducing flatfish catch. One of the findings from the research is that roughly ninety percent of seawhips that are in the pathway of the modified sweeps are still upright and undamaged. Likewise, C. opilio and C. bairdi mortality from the modified sweeps was reduced to zero.

Beginning in 2011, all directed flatfish fishing in the Bering Sea is required to be conducted with this modified trawl gear. The analysis prepared for this action can be found at: http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc/analyses/TrawlMod509.pdf

Nunivak/Kuskokwim closure In August 2008, a final rule implemented the Nunivak Island, Etolin Strait, and Kuskokwim Bay Habitat Conservation Area. The Council consulted with a workgroup of fishing industry and subsistence resources users to identify bottom habitat supporting subsistence marine resources for protection. These resources include marine mammals, fish, and seabirds harvested by subsistence users from coastal and interior Alaska. Based on the results of the workgroup, the Council recommended, and the Secretary proposes, prohibiting non-pelagic trawling in waters surrounding Nunivak Island and within Etolin Strait and Kuskokwim Bay. The northern and western edges of the area include waters with bottom habitat supporting subsistence resources and follow latitude and longitude lines to facilitate enforcement of the non-pelagic trawl closure. The southern boundary of the area is based on negotiations between the fishing industry and subsistence marine resource users. The boundaries of the closure area ensure access to important flatfish fishing locations while providing protection of important bottom habitat supporting subsistence marine resources. This closure covers 9,777 nm2. The Nunivak Island, Etolin Strait, and Kuskokwim Bay Habitat Conservation Area is depicted in the following figure: http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/rr/figures/fig21.pdf

Any relevant changes to management regime Changes to Kamchatka Arrowtooth management Increasing interest in harvesting Kamchatka flounder has caused a concern about managing both species under a single ABC. Although Kamchatka flounder comprise only 7% of the composite Atheresthes biomass, there has been a disproportionate harvest in recent years whereby the potential exists to overharvest Kamchatka flounder under the present combined management. Beginning in 2011, Kamchatka was assessed separately from arrowtooth flounder and received an individual ABC and TAC. This change in management, creates several issues which will need to be addressed within the MSC scheme requirements, in order to be clear about the status of existing product in the supply chain, and the ongoing certification status of arrowtooth and Kamchatka flounder in BSAI and GOA, and the ability to have one or both species MSC certified and/or labelled from product that is caught in 2011 and onward. The assessment team are in the process of reviewing this and will be providing a report to the client and the MSC as an addendum to the surveillance report.

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 25 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Cooperative management for the BSAI flatfish catcher processor fleet On September 14, 2007, the NMFS published a final rule implementing Amendment 80 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area (BSAI). Amendment 80 provides specific groundfish and prohibited species catch (PSC) allocations to the non- American Fisheries Act (AFA) trawl catcher processor sector and allows the formation of cooperatives. Each year, cooperatives are allocated yellowfin sole, northern rock sole, flathead sole, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch, and Atka mackerel. PSC allocations include halibut and various crab species.

Amendment 80 ended the race for fish in the catcher processor flatfish fishery, and allowed vessels to slow operations, and move away from high bycatch areas. The flatfish fishery has largely become a mixed species fishery, except when yellowfin sole schools concentrate at certain times of year. Vessel captains work to maximize high allocation species, while avoiding limiting species such as Pacific cod. Since implementation of Amendment 80, the fleet has not been limited by PSC allocations, and flatfish fishing has been extended to a year-round activity. A detailed description of the Amendment 80 program can be found at the following link: http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/sustainablefisheries/amds/80/program_overview.pdf

Sector allocations and the formation of cooperatives were intended to assist compliance with the Groundfish Retention Standard (GRS) program, a bycatch reduction program that also applies to this fleet. The GRS program requires non-AFA trawl catcher processors to incrementally increase groundfish retention over several years to 85% in 2011. The analysis prepared for the GRS program can be found at: http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/analyses/amd/eaamd79.pdf

Northern Bering Sea Research Area (NBSRA) The AFSC, at the request of the Council, is developing a scientific research plan for the NBSRA to study the effects of bottom trawling on the benthic community. The NBSRA was established by the Council, became effective in 2008, and is currently closed to bottom trawl fishing. The primary goals of the plan would be to use the research area to investigate the effects of bottom trawling on bottom habitat, and provide information to help with developing future protection measures in the NBSRA for crab, marine mammals, endangered species, and the subsistence needs of western Alaska communities. More information can be found at: http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc/current_issues/ecosystem/NBSRA.htm

Overall Conclusions The overall management of the fishery continues to at least the level as during the full assessment.

ASC and/or NMFS have taken action toward addressing the Conditions of Certification raised during the MSC certification assessment and all Conditions are presently expected to be closed out within the agreed timescales.

Progress on the Condition related to PI 2.2.1.2 for the trawl fishery was considered to be satisfactory but the team would like to see more recent bycatch data related to seabirds and the clients analysis of these data with respect to their estimated impact on each species.Therefore the Condition remains open.

MSC Certification should therefore continue and surveillance audits continue to the same schedule.

Information Sources: Meetings  Monday 9th May was left open to stakeholders to meet and/or speak via conference call to the assessment team. No stakeholders met with or submitted information to the assessment team.  Tuesday 10th May an all day meeting was held at the Alaska Fisheries Science Centre. The

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 26 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

meeting was attended by the surveillance team and, in the course of the day, the following people participated in the meeting: Steve Barbeaux, Pat Livingston, Jason Anderson, Ed Richardson, Sandra Lowe, Ingrid Spies, Anne Hollowed, Mark Wilkins, Bob Lauth, Thom Wilderbuer, Buck Stockhausen, Jim Browning, Jim Ianelli, Stephanie Zador, Craig Rose, Paul Spencer, Doug DeMaster.  Wednesday 11th May an all day meeting was held at the Alaska Fisheries Science Centre. The meeting was attended by the surveillance team and, in the course of the day the following people participated in the meeting: Jim Ianelli, Stephanie Zador, Mark Wilkins, Martin Dorn, Grant Thompson (by phone and webex), Tersea A’mar, Tom Wilderbruer, Buck Stockhausen, Sarah Gaichas, Ingrid Spies, Sandra Lowe, Jim Browning, Jason Anderson, Ed Richardson.  Thursday 12th May an all day meeting was held at the Alaska Fisheries Science Centre. The meeting was attended by the surveillance team and, in the course of the day the following people participated in the meeting: Jim Ianelli, Tom Gelatt, Ed Melvin, Doug DeMaster, Anne Hollowed, Ingrid Spies, Sandra Lowe, Jim Browning, Jason Anderson, Ed Richardson, Shannon Fitzgerald.

NB. The site visit combined the flatfish, pollock and Pacific cod fisheries, in the BSAI and GOA hence, the meetings included specialists that cover all three fisheries and their associated species as well as other components of the BSAI and GOA ecosystem.

Reports etc Abookire, A.A. 2006. Reproductive biology, spawning season, and growth of female rex sole (/Glyptocephalus zachirus/) in the Gulf of Alaska. Fish. Bull. 104: 350-359.

Alaska Seafood Cooperative (ASC), 2011. First Annual Audit Report, Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska MSC-certified Flatfish Fisheries, Alaska Seafood Cooperative, c/o Groundfish Forum, 4241 21st Ave West, Suite 200, Seattle, Washington, 98199

Alaska Seafood Cooperative (ASC), 2011. Gear loss survey of Bering Sea flatfish and cod captains in the Amendment 80 Sector as part of the information needs of the Marine Stewardship Council certification of those fisheries. Alaska Seafood Cooperative, c/o Groundfish Forum, 4241 21st Ave West, Suite 200, Seattle, Washington, 98199

Alaska Fisheries Science Centre , North Pacific Groundfish Stock Assessments, Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Reports for Yellowfin sole, flathead sole, arrowtooth flounder, Alaska plaice, northern rock sole and Kamchatka flounder http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/refm/stocks/2009_assessments.htm

Melvin, E., Dietrich, K.S., Fitzgerald, S. Cardoso, T., 2011. Reducing seabird strikes with trawl cables in the Pollock catcher-processor fleet in the eastern Bering Sea. Polar Biol. (2011) 34:215-226

Stark, J.W. 2002. Maturation, spawning and growth of rock soles off Kodiak Island in the Gulf of Alaska. Journal of Fish Biology.

Stark, J.W. 2004. A comparison of the maturation and growth of female flathead sole in the central Gulf of Alaska and south-eastern Bering Sea. J. Fish Biol. 64:876–889. 2007.

Stark, J.W. 2008. Age-and length-at-maturity of female arrowtooth flounder (Atheresthes stomias) in the Gulf of Alaska. Fishery Bulletin, 2008.

Wilderbuer,T. Ianelli, J and TenBrink, K. 2011. Research Proposal. Developing maturity schedules for data-poor commercially important flatfishes (Arrowtooth flounder Atheresthes stomias, Kamchatka flounder A. evermanni, Alaska plaice Pleuronectes quadrituberculatus, Greenland turbot Reinhardtius hippoglossoides, and yellowfin sole Limanda aspera) in the eastern Bering

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 27 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

Sea and Aleutian Islands. Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle Washington.

Wilderbuer, T. & Gauvin, J. Special Project - Yellowfin Sole Cooperative Maturity Collection Protocol.

Zador, S. and S. Gaichas. (eds.). 2010. “Ecosystem Considerations for 2011.” Appendix C. Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Report for the Groundfish Resources of the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands Region. North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 West 4th Avenue, Suite 306, Anchorage, Alaska.

Standards and Guidelines used:

1. MSC Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing 2. MSC Fishery Certification Methodology Version 6. September 2006 3. TAB Directives - all

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 28 of 29 Moody Marine Ltd. BSAI Flatfish Fishery: Surveillance Report 1 2011

APPENDIX A

FCS 03 v1 Rev 00 Page 29 of 29