Marine Stewardship Council fisheries assessments
UCSL United Certification Systems Limited Office 003, Pamelva Court, 1 Anastasi Shoukri Street, 3035, Limassol, Cyprus Mobile phone: +7-960-242-4845 Email: [email protected] KZB-herring Western Bering Sea andWebsite: East https://ucsl.eu/ Kamchatka Pacific cod bottom longline
Photo provided by Client from website: https://norebo.ru (© NOREBO Holding JSC, 2019) Announcement Comment Draft Report
Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) UCSL United Certification Systems Limited
Assessment team Dr. Geir Hønneland, Dr. Giuseppe Scarcella, Mr. Tim Huntington
Fishery client KZB-herring JSC (Russian Federation)
Assessment type Initial Assessment
Date April 2021
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 1 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Contents Contents ...... 3 Table of Tables...... 5 Table of Figures ...... 7 2 Glossary ...... 8 List of symbols and reference points ...... 9 3 Executive summary ...... 10 4 Report details ...... 13 4.1 Authorship and peer review details ...... 13 4.2 Version details ...... 14 5 Unit(s) of Assessment and Unit(s) of Certification and results overview ...... 15 5.1 Unit(s) of Assessment and Unit(s) of Certification ...... 15 5.1.1 Unit(s) of Certification ...... 15 5.1.2 Unit(s) of Assessment ...... 16 5.2 Assessment results overview ...... 18 5.2.1 Determination, formal conclusion and agreement ...... 18 5.2.2 Principle level scores ...... 18 5.2.3 Summary of conditions ...... 18 5.2.4 Recommendations...... 19 6 Traceability and eligibility ...... 20 6.1 Eligibility date ...... 20 6.2 Traceability within the fishery ...... 20 6.3 Eligibility to enter further chains of custody ...... 21 7 Scoring ...... 23 7.1 Summary of Performance Indicator level scores ...... 23 7.2 Principle 1 ...... 24 7.2.1 Principle 1 background ...... 24 7.2.2 Catch profiles ...... 43 7.2.3 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data ...... 43 7.2.4 Principle 1 Performance Indicator scores and rationales ...... 44 PI 1.1.1 – Stock status – Pacific cod ...... 44 PI 1.1.2 – Stock rebuilding ...... 47 PI 1.2.1 – Harvest strategy ...... 48 PI 1.2.2 – Harvest control rules and tools ...... 51 PI 1.2.3 – Information and monitoring ...... 53 PI 1.2.4 – Assessment of stock status ...... 55 7.2.5 Principle 1 references ...... 57 7.3 Principle 2 ...... 58 7.3.1 Principle 2 background ...... 58 7.3.2 Catch composition and related MSC components ...... 61 7.3.3 Target species ...... 62 7.3.4 Primary Species ...... 62
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 2 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.3.5 Secondary Species...... 73 7.3.6 Endangered, Threatened and Protected Species ...... 75 7.3.7 Habitats ...... 81 7.3.8 Data collected by independent observers at the fishing vessels ...... 85 7.3.9 Cumulative impacts ...... 87 7.3.10 Principle 2 Performance Indicator scores and rationales ...... 88 PI 2.1.1 – Primary species outcome ...... 88 PI 2.1.2 – Primary species management strategy ...... 94 PI 2.1.3 – Primary species information ...... 97 PI 2.2.1 – Secondary species outcome ...... 101 PI 2.2.2 – Secondary species management strategy ...... 105 PI 2.2.3 – Secondary species information ...... 110 PI 2.3.1 – ETP species outcome ...... 114 PI 2.3.2 – ETP species management strategy ...... 116 PI 2.3.3 – ETP species information ...... 119 PI 2.4.1 – Habitats outcome...... 121 PI 2.4.2 – Habitats management strategy ...... 123 PI 2.4.3 – Habitats information ...... 126 PI 2.5.1 – Ecosystem outcome ...... 128 PI 2.5.2 – Ecosystem management strategy ...... 129 PI 2.5.3 – Ecosystem information ...... 131 7.3.11 Principle 2 references ...... 134 7.4 Principle 3 ...... 142 7.4.1 Principle 3 background ...... 142 7.4.2 Principle 3 Performance Indicator scores and rationales ...... 149 PI 3.1.1 – Legal and/or customary framework ...... 149 PI 3.1.2 – Consultation, roles and responsibilities ...... 153 PI 3.1.3 – Long term objectives ...... 156 PI 3.2.1 – Fishery-specific objectives ...... 158 PI 3.2.2 – Decision-making processes ...... 160 PI 3.2.3 – Compliance and enforcement ...... 164 PI 3.2.4 – Monitoring and management performance evaluation ...... 167 7.4.3 Principle 3 references ...... 169 8 Appendices ...... 170 8.1 Assessment information ...... 170 8.1.1 Small-scale fisheries...... 170 8.2 Evaluation processes and techniques ...... 171 8.2.1 Site visits ...... 171 8.2.2 Stakeholder participation ...... 171 8.2.3 Evaluation techniques ...... 171 8.3 Peer Review reports ...... 172 8.4 Stakeholder input ...... 173
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 3 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
8.5 Conditions – delete if not applicable ...... 174 8.5.1 Summary of conditions closed under previous certificate ...... 174 8.5.2 Open Conditions at reassessment announcement – delete if not applicable ...... 174 8.5.3 Conditions – delete if not applicable...... 175 8.6 Client Action Plan ...... 177 8.7 Surveillance ...... 178 8.8 Risk-Based Framework outputs – delete if not applicable ...... 179 8.8.1 Consequence Analysis (CA) ...... 179 8.8.2 Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) ...... 180 8.8.3 Consequence Spatial Analysis (CSA) ...... 182 8.8.4 Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA) ...... 183 8.9 Harmonised fishery assessments – delete if not applicable ...... 184 8.10 Objection Procedure – delete if not applicable ...... 186 8.11 UoA company and vessel list ...... 187 9 Corporate branding ...... 188 10 Template information and copyright ...... 189
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 4 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table of Tables Table 1 – Fisheries program documents versions ...... 14 Table 2 – Unit(s) of Certification (UoC) ...... 15 Table 3 – Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA) ...... 16 Table 4 – Principle level scores ...... 18 Table 5 – Summary of conditions...... 19 Table 6 – Traceability information ...... 20 Table 7 – Draft Performance Indicator scores (at ACDR)...... 23 Table 8 – Pacific cod catches by active and passive fishing gears in the Western Bering Sea zone, 2001-2014. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 38 Table 9 – Proportion of Pacific cod catch by active and passive fishing gears in the Chukotskaya zone, 2007-2014. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 39 Table 10 – Pacific cod catch and TAC (mt) in Western Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones, 2012–2018 (according to Information System ‘Rybolovstvo’). (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 39 Table 11 – Pacific cod catch and TAC (mt) in Karaginskaya subzone, 2008–2017 (according to Information System ‘Rybolovstvo’) (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 40 Table 12 – Proportion of catch by active and passive fishing gears in the Karaginskaya subzone, 2001-2014. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 40 Table 13 – Proportion of catch by active and passive fishing gears in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, 2001-2014 (mt). (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 41 Table 14 – Pacific cod catch and TAC (mt) in Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, 2008–2017 (according to Information System ‘Rybolovstvo’). (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 42 Table 15 – Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data – Western Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones* ...... 43 Table 16 – Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data – Karaginskaya subzone ...... 43 Table 17 – Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data – Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone ...... 43 Table 18 – Scoring elements...... 61 Table 19 – Primary main species allocation by zone / subzone...... 62 Table 20 – Amount of Pacific herring used as a bait by Client companies (mt)...... 63 Table 21 – The TAC of Pacific herring in the Russian Far East for 2013-2019 (thousand t). Source: TINRO, 2019. ... 63 Table 22 – Estimation of pollock biomass (million t) in the Bering Sea. Source: Based on surveys of the TINRO-Center and AFSC in 2005-2017...... 65 Table 23 – TAC, catch and catch/TAC of pollock in the West Bering Sea zone (2003-2017)...... 66 Table 24 – Giant grenadier stock estimates (FSB, thousand t) in the West Bering Sea (2008-2017). Source: Lajus et al, 2020. Based on the model of surplus production using the DepF method...... 67 Table 25 – Primary minor species allocation by zone / subzone...... 68 Table 26 – Catch and TAC values of Greenland halibut (2009–2017). Source: Maznikova et al., 2018. Data from the Federal Fisheries Agency...... 69 Table 27 – Secondary main species allocation by zone / subzone...... 73 Table 28 – Secondary minor species allocation by zone / subzone...... 74 Table 29 – List species classified as ETP in this assessment*...... 76 Table 30 – Bottom fauna of the Bering Sea...... 83 Table 31 – Client vessel working areas and times and fishing depth (2014–2017)...... 87 Table 32 – The number of longline sets analysed by LFA vessel observers in each fishing area in 2014–2017...... 87 Table 33 – PI 2.1.1 Scoring calculations...... 92 Table 34 – PI 2.1.3 scoring calculation...... 99
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 5 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 35 – PI 2.2.2 Scoring calculations...... 108 Table 36 – PI 2.2.3 Scoring calculation...... 112 Table 37 – Sanctions prescribed in Russian law for different types of fishery-related offences (source: pre-assessment report)...... 146 Table 38 – Inspections carried out by the FSB in the UoA fishery during 2015–2019 (source: pre-assessment report)...... 147 Table 39 – Fines given in the UoA fishery during 2015–2019 (source: pre-assessment report)...... 148 Table 41 – Small-scale fisheries ...... 170 Table 42 – Open Condition X (use existing numbering) ...... 174 Table 43 – Condition 1 ...... 175 Table 44 – Fishery surveillance program ...... 178 Table 45 – Timing of surveillance audit ...... 178 Table 46 – Surveillance level justification ...... 178 Table 47 – CA scoring template ...... 179 Table 48 – PSA productivity and susceptibility attributes and scores...... 180 Table 49 – Species grouped by similar taxonomies (if FCP v2.2 Annex PF4.1.5 is used)...... 181 Table 50 – CSA rationale table for PI 2.4.1 Habitats ...... 182 Table 51 – SICA scoring template for PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem ...... 183 Table 52 – List overlapping fisheries (to be determined) ...... 184 Table 53 – Overlapping fisheries ...... 185 Table 54 – Scoring differences ...... 185 Table 55 – Rationale for scoring differences ...... 185 Table 56 – Vessel’s list of KZB-herring JSC (chartered from YAMSY JSC) in UoA. (Source of data: ttps://norebo.ru) ...... 187
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 6 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table of Figures Figure 1 – The range of Pacific cod in the North Pacific. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 24 Figure 2 – Distribution of Pacific cod spawning grounds in the northwestern part of its range, and confirmed (or known) offshore spawning grounds. Numbers referred to in figure: 1 – Navarin area, 2 – Shirshov underwater ridge, 3 – Olyutorsky Bay, 4 – Karaginsky Bay, 5 – Kamchatsky Bay, 6 – Commander Isl., 7 – Kronotsky Bay, 8 – Utashud, 9 –2-nd Kuril Strait, 10 – Onekotan Isl., 11 – western Kamchatka, 12 – Iona Island; areas where spawning of inshore Pacific cod is possible, but not confirmed so far: 13 – south Chukotka, 14-15 – Navarin-Olyutor, 16 –Litke Strait, 17 – Ust-Kamchatsky, 18 – Kronotsky Bay, 19 – Shipunsky Cape, 20 – Avachinsky Bay, 21 – Alaid Isl., 22 –Shelikhov Bay (northern Sea of Okhotsk), 23 – Taui Bay (Source: Savin, 2016)...... 26 Figure 3 – Map showing location of the four Fisheries Management Areas in the UoAs where the fishery occur. Fisheries Management Areas are shaded. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019)...... 27 Figure 4 – Principal scheme of harvest control rule accepted in the Russian Federation (after Babayan, 2000)...... 30 Figure 5 – Dynamics of Pacific cod total biomass in 1965-2005 and abundance of fish aged 2 years in the western Bering Sea. (Source: Antonov, 2011)...... 30 Figure 6 – Dynamics of Pacific cod biomass in the north-western Bering Sea (West Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones) and its catch per day rates, 1999-2017. (Source: TINRO, 2018)...... 31 Figure 7 – Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fishery. The rule of regulation of the cod fishery in the northwestern part of the Bering Sea (West Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zone), estimates for in 2013- 2019 and forecast for 2020. (Source: TINRO, 2019)...... 32 Figure 8 – Dynamics of Pacific cod total biomass in 1979-2011 and abundance of generation of 1975-2007 in Karaginskaya subzone (Source: Antonov, 2013)...... 33 Figure 9 – Total biomass of Pacific cod stock in Karaginskaya subzone in 2000-2017. (Source: TINRO, 2018)...... 33 Figure 10 – Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fisheries in Karaginskaya subzone (Source: TINRO, 2018)...... 34 Figure 11 – Biomass of cod in the Karaginskaya subzone in 1980-2019, 1 – based on the modelling (with prognosis up to 2022), 2 – based on the trawl catches. (Source: TINRO, 2019)...... 34 Figure 12 – Dynamics of Pacific cod total biomass in 1979-2011 and abundance of generation of 1975-2007 in Petropavlovsk-Komandorskaya subzone (Source: Antonov, 2013)...... 35 Figure 13 – Dynamics of Pacific cod biomass in the Petropavlovsk-Komandorskaya subzone in 2000-2019 according to the model estimates. SSB – Spawning Stock Biomass, TSB – total stock biomass, Bmsy - stock biomass corresponding to maximal sustainable catch, Blim minimum biomass of a stock allowing for fishery (Source: Kalugin, Ilyin, 2018)...... 36 Figure 14 – Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fisheries in Petropavlovsk-Komandorskaya subzone (TINRO, 2018).36 Figure 15 – The dynamics of the biomass of spawning stock (SSB) of cod from the Petropavlovsk-Komandorskaya subzone and the percentile bootstrap distribution of its estimates. (Source: TINRO, 2019)...... 37 Figure 16 – Catch dynamics of Pacific cod in the Western Bering Sea zone, 1968-2011 (Source: Antonov, 2013). .... 38 Figure 17 – Catch dynamics of Pacific cod in the Petropavlovsk-Komandorskaya subzone, 1972-2011 (Source: Antonov, 2013)...... 41 Figure 18 – The Alaskan Stream, Kamchatka Current, Bering Slope Current (BSC) and Aleutian North Slope Current (ANSC) of the Being Sea. Source: http://publications.iodp.org/preliminary_report/323/323_f2.htm...... 58 Figure 19 – Map of Kamchatka, Alaska and the Bering Sea. Source: https://www.britannica.com/place/Bering-Sea. . 60 Figure 20 – Greenland halibut TACs, landings and TAC/landing ratio (%) (2005-2014). Source: Information System 'Rybolovstvo'...... 68 Figure 21 – Bathymetric distribution of Greenland halibut catches in 2009–2017 by depth (m). Source: Maznikova et al., 2018...... 69 Figure 22 – Scheme of streamers usage at the longline vessel...... 80 Figure 23 – Bottom fauna of the Bering Sea. Source: Filatova & Neyman, 1963...... 81 Figure 24 – The distribution of the communities of the dredge macrobenthos in the western part of the Bering Sea. Source: Chukotskiy, Anadyrskiy and Koryakskiy districts – survey in 2012, Olyutorskiy Gulf – survey in 2017. .... 83 Figure 25 – Distribution of bottom biota in the north-western part of the Bering Sea (61.01) from 2012 trawl survey: I - Chukotskaya zone, II - Gulf of Anadyr district, III - Koryakskiy district (Nadtochiy et al., 2017b)...... 85
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 7 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
2 Glossary CABs Conformity Assessment Bodies CFMC Center of System for Monitoring of Fisheries and Communication, FGBU (Federal State Budgetary Institution) CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CPUE Catches Per Unit Effort DVR Daily Vessel (catch) Report EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ETP Endangered, Threatened and Protected species EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FCR v2.1 Fishery Certification Requirements Version 2.1 FFA Federal Fisheries Agency (or in Russian – Rosrybolovstvo) FGIS Mercury Mercury, Federal State Infomational System FPZ Fishery Protection Zone FSB Federal Security Service of Russian Federation GLM Generalised Linear Model HCR Harvest Control Rule ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature KamchatNIRO Kamchatka branch of VNIRO (former – Kamchatka Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography) kt Thousand tons MCS Monitoring Control and Surveillance MLS Minimum Landing Sizes MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSE Management Strategy Evaluation mt Metric tons NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations PA Precautionary approach PIs Performance Indicators PRI Point of Recruitment Impairment RBF Risk-Based Framework RC Recommended (or possible) Catch RF Russian Federation SGs Scoring Guideposts SNBR State Nature Biosphere Reserve SNR State Nature Reserve
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 8 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
SPNAs Specially protected natural areas TAC Total Allowable Catch TBD To be determinated UCSL United Certification Systems Limited, CAB UoA Unit of Assessment UoC Unit of Certification VME Vulnerable Marine Ecosystem VMS Vessel Monitoring System VNIRO All-Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries &Oceanography, FGBNU (Federal State Budgetary Research Institution)
List of symbols and reference points
Blim Minimum biomass below which recruitment is expected to be impaired or the stock dynamics are unknown.
BMSY Biomass corresponding to the maximum sustainable yield (biological reference point); the peak value on a domed yield-per-recruit curve.
Bpa Precautionary biomass below which spawning stock biomass (SSB) should
not be allowed to fall to safeguard it against falling to Blim.
Btrigger Value of spawning stock biomass (SSB) that triggers a specific management action. F Instantaneous rate of fishing mortality.
Flim Fishing mortality rate that is expected to be associated with stock ‘collapse’ if maintained over a longer time (precautionary reference point).
FMSY F giving maximum sustainable yield (biological reference point).
Fpa Precautionary buffer to avoid that true fishing mortality is at Flim when the
perceived fishing mortality is at Fpa. K Carrying Capacity MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 9 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
3 Executive summary
Draft determination to be completed at Public Comment Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the executive summary:
- Date and location of site visit. - The main strengths and weaknesses of the client’s operation. - From Public Comment Draft Report reporting stage only - the draft determination / determination reached with supporting justification.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section(s) 7.12, 7.18, 7.21
This report is the Announcement Comment Draft Report (ACDR) which provides details of the MSC assessment process for KZB-herring JSC Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific cod bottom longline. The ACDR was published in April 2021. A review of information presented by the client has been reviewed and evaluated by the assessment team – at the ACDR stage this does not represent a final scoring outcome or a certification decision. The provisional scoring presented in this report has not been reviewed by stakeholders, peer reviewers or the client – these steps will all take place from here onwards. Stakeholders are encouraged to review the scoring presented in this assessment and use the Stakeholder Input Form to provide evidence to the team of where changes to scoring are necessary. Any stakeholder comments received will be published ahead of the site visit. Currently, this has not been scheduled, but is anticipated to be off-site in line with the current MSC Derogation for COVID-191. Arrangements will be made for stakeholders to meet with the assessment team virtually if meetings cannot be held onsite. The Target Eligibility Date for this assessment is the date of publication of the Public Comment Draft Report (PCDR) version of the assessment report. The assessment team for this fishery assessment comprised of Dr. Geir Hønneland (Team Leader and Principle 3 specialist), Dr. Giuseppe Scarcella (Principle 1 specialist) and Mr. Tim Huntington (Principle 2 specialist).
Client fishery strengths Principle 1: The stocks are not overfished with high biomass. There is an effective management system with clear HCRs and TAC. Data collection and provision of scientific advice are routinely carried out.
Principle 2: This is a selective fishery with limited discard rates. There is long-term use of seabird catch prevention systems, e.g. streamers. There is no know shark finning in the fishery. The fishery has low impact on ETPs, VMEs and other habitats.
Principle 3:
1 https://www.msc.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/for-business/program-documents/chain-of-custody-supporting- documents/msc-covid-19-guidance-for-cabs---fisheries.pdf
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 10 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
The fishery operates within a well-established management system with appropriate legislation, institutional basis, consultation mechanisms and decision-making procedures.
Client fishery weaknesses Principle 1: No particular weaknesses are observed for Principle 1.
Principle 2: There is limited fleet-specific data on primary species catches (rather than landings). There is limited information on seabird interaction rates. Poor information on some minor secondary species, although sufficient to avoid the use of the RBF. Limited information on how unwanted finfish catch is minimised.
Principle 3: No particular weaknesses have been identified for Principle 3.
It is noted that information for all three Principles will be reviewed and verified throughout the assessment process, including during the site visit.
Summary of further information to be sought / clarified:
Principle 1: Updated outputs of stock assessment models will be requested during the site visit; Information about the degree of connectivity and self-recruitment and considerations when scoring the stock outcome and harvest strategy components of a unit stock for different forms of metapopulations will be requested (see Table G2 of MSC Fisheries Standard v2.0); More information about the potential UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock are needed; More information about the UoA removals will be requested during the site visit. Principle 2: Further information on client fleet seabird catch mitigation measures, bycatch recording; More information on Pacific sleeper shark stock assessment, discards and alternative measures to reduce mortality, as well as sufficient information to conduct a productivity - susceptibility analysis; UoC specific data on interactions / mortality rates form ETP interactions for the client fleet; UoC specific data on interactions / mortality rates from ETP interactions for the client fleet. Also confirmation that all LFA requirements are applicable to the client fleet; UoC specific data on interactions / mortality rates from ETP interactions for the client fleet. Also confirmation that all LFA requirements are applicable to the client fleet; UoC specific data on interactions / mortality rates from ETP interactions for the client fleet. Also confirmation that all LFA requirements are applicable to the client fleet; Update on VME definition / identification in Russian waters; Spatial location of UoC activity, observer data on any benthic bycatch e.g. entangled hard / soft corals; evidence of rate of loss of longline hooks / branch lines; Spatial mapping of UoC fishing effort.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 11 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Principle 3: More information is sought on whether functions and roles are understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction; whether management authorities explain how stakeholder input is used or not used; and whether the authorities actively facilitate stakeholder engagement; More information is sought on the number of inspections and infringements, confirmed by the enforcement authorities.
Determination On completion of the initial review of information and scoring, the assessment team conclude that no PI is likely to score below 60 nor weighted average score for any of the three principles to score below 80. Based on the ACDR provisional scoring this fishery is likely to pass the assessment against the MSC standard criteria, however, this is subject to client, peer and stakeholder review.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 12 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
4 Report details 4.1 Authorship and peer review details Peer reviewer information to be completed at Public Comment Draft Report stage
The assessment of the KZB-herring JSC Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific cod bottom longline fishery was conducted by the following Team from UCSL United Certification Systems Limited:
Principle 1 Lead: Dr. Giuseppe Scarcella Dr. Giuseppe Scarcella is an experienced fishery scientist and population analyst and modeller, with wide knowledge and experience in the assessment of demersal stocks. He holds a first degree in Marine Biology and Oceanography (110/110) from the Unversità Politecnica delle Marche, and a Ph.D. in marine Ecology and Biology from the same university, based on a thesis "Age and growth of two rockfish in the Adriatic Sea". After his degree he was offered a job as project scientist in several research programs about the structure and composition of fish assemblage in artificial reefs, off-shore platform and other artificial habitats in the Italian Research Council – Institute of Marine Science of Ancona (CNR-ISMAR, now CNR-IRBIM). During the years of employment at CNR-ISMAR he has gained experience in benthic ecology, statistical analyses of fish assemblage evolution in artificial habitats, fisheries ecology and impacts of fishing activities, stock assessment, otolith analysis, population dynamic and fisheries management. During the same years he attended courses of uni- multivariate statistics and stock assessment. He is also actively participating in the scientific advice process of FAO GFCM in the Mediterranean Sea. At the moment he is member of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries for the European Commission (STECF). He is author and co-author of more than 50 scientific paper peer reviewed journals and more than 150 national and international technical reports, most of them focused on the evolution of fish assemblages in artificial habitats and stock assessment of demersal species. For some years now, Dr Scarcella has been working in fisheries certification applying the MSC standard for sustainable fisheries, currently concentrating on Principle 1 of the Standard. Furthermore, Dr Scarcella holds the credential as Fishery team leader (MSC v2.0) and he completed the MSC procedure training 2.1. He also holds the credential as certifier of Responsible Fisheries Management (RFM). UCSL confirms that Dr. Giuseppe Scarcella meets the competency criteria for team members as specified in FCP v.2.2: - He holds a PhD in in marine Ecology and Biology and more than 3 years research experience in fisheries; - He has participated in more than 2 MSC fishery assessments in the last 5 years; - He has more than 3 years experience of applying relevant stock assessment techniques; more than 3 years experience working with the biology and population dynamics different marine species; - He has passed the Traceability and RBF training modules; It is also confirmed that Dr. Guiseppe Scarcella has no conflicts of interest in relation to the fishery under assessment. A full C.V. is available on request.
Principle 2 Lead: Tim Huntington Tim Huntington is a director of Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd. specialising in the sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture. He holds an MSc in Applied Fish Biology and a BSc (Hons) in Biological Sciences. He has over 35 years of experience in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, including extensive experience in MCS full assessments (mainly as P2 and more latterly as P3), surveillance audits, pre-assessments and FIP action planning. His previous relevant work includes the pre-assessment of the Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline fisheries in West Bering Sea for the Russian Longline Fishing Association (LFA) in 2017 and more recently the Greenland halibut longline fishery scope extension in Greenland. He has also conducted a number of direct assignments for MSC and the MSC TAB. In addition to his MSC-related work, Tim has conducted numerous consultancy assignments for both public and prove sector clients in over 80 countries worldwide. Tim has passed MSC training and has no Conflict of Interest in relation to this fishery. Full C.V. available upon request.
Team Leader and Principle 3 Lead: Dr. Geir Hønneland Geir Hønneland holds a PhD in political science from the University of Oslo and an LL.M. in the Law of the Sea from the University of Tromsø, and has studied international fisheries management (with main emphasis on enforcement and compliance issues), international environmental politics and international politics in Polar regions. He was affiliated with the Fridtjof Nansen Institute in Oslo for more than 20 years, as PhD student and research fellow (1996- 2006), research director (2006-2014) and director (2015-2019). Among his fisheries-related books is Making Fishery
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 13 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Agreements Work (Edward Elgar, 2012; China Ocean Press, 2016). Before embarking on an academic career, he worked five years for the Norwegian Coast Guard, where he was trained and certified as a fisheries inspector. Geir has been involved in MSC assessments since 2009 and has acted as P3 expert in more than 50 full assessments and re-assessments, as well as a number of pre-assessments and surveillance audits. His experience from full assessments includes a large number of demersal, pelagic and reduction fisheries in the Northeast Atlantic, North Pacific and Southern Ocean, including crustaceans, as well as inland, bivalve and enhanced salmon fisheries. In the Northeast Atlantic, he has covered the international management regimes in the Barents Sea, Norwegian Sea, North Sea, Skagerrak, Kattegat and the Baltic Sea, and the national management regimes in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Faroe Islands, Greenland, Finland, Russia, Poland, the UK, the Netherlands and Germany, as well as the EU level. Geir is qualified as an MSC Team Leader (Fisheries Standard v2.0, Fisheries Certification Process v2.2) and Chain of Custody Auditor (v2.0) and has also passed the ISO 19011-2018 course as Lead Auditor – Management Systems Auditing. UCSL confirms that Geir meets the Team Leader competency requirements (Table PC2, MSC 2020a), and contributes towards the Audit Team meeting the Fishery Team competency requirements (Table PC3, MSC 2020a). It is also confirmed that Dr. Hønneland has no conflicts of interest in relation to the fishery under assessment. A full C.V. is available on request.
Use of the Risk-Based Framework (RBF): Mr. Tim Huntington and Dr. Giuseppe Scarcella have been fully trained in the use of the MSC’s Risk Based Framework (RBF). Peer reviewer information to be completed at Public Comment Draft Report stage. Peer Reviewer 1: Peer Reviewer 2:
4.2 Version details Table 1 – Fisheries program documents versions
Document Version number
MSC Fisheries Certification Process Version 2.2
MSC Fisheries Standard Version 2.01
MSC General Certification Requirements Version 2.4.1
MSC Reporting Template Version 1.2
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 14 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
5 Unit(s) of Assessment and Unit(s) of Certification and results overview 5.1 Unit(s) of Assessment and Unit(s) of Certification 5.1.1 Unit(s) of Certification
If there are changes to the proposed Unit(s) of Certification (UoC), the CAB shall include in the report a justification. Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.5
Table 2 – Unit(s) of Certification (UoC)
UoC X Description
Species Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus)
In FAO Code Subareas: 61.01 – West Bering Sea zone; 61.02 – East Kamchatka zone Stock (including 61.02.1 – Karaginskaya and 61.02.2 – Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzones)
Fishing gear type(s) Bottom (demersal) longline. Vessel type – middle tonnage vessels with special equipment and, if relevant, vessel of bottom hooking longline. type(s)
The client group is represented by the KZB-herring JSC. The company and its vessels that are operated by the KZB-herring JSC Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific cod Client group bottom longline client group (correct at the time of drafting the ACDR) are detailed in Section 8.11 of this report. If required, an up-to-date list will be available from UCSL United Certification Systems Limited upon request. Northwest Pacific (within FAO Major Fishing Area - 61): West Bering Sea zone (61.01); Geographical area East Kamchatka zone (61.02) including – Karaginskaya (61.02.1) and Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya (61.02.2) subzones; in EEZ of Russian Federation.
UoC X Description
Species
Stock
Fishing gear type(s) and, if relevant, vessel type(s)
Client group
Geographical area
UoC X Description
Species
Stock
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 15 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Fishing gear type(s) and, if relevant, vessel type(s)
Client group
Geographical area
5.1.2 Unit(s) of Assessment
The CAB shall include in the report a statement of the CAB’s determination that the fishery is within scope of the MSC Fisheries Standard. For geographical area, the CAB should refer to G7.5.6. Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Sections 7.4 and 7.5
A single Unit of Assessment (UoA) is described and assessed KZB-herring JSC Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific cod bottom longline, as presented in Table 3, below.
Table 3 – Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA)
UoA 1 Description
Species Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus)
In FAO Code Subareas: 61.01 – West Bering Sea zone; 61.02 – East Kamchatka zone Stock (including 61.02.1 – Karaginskaya and 61.02.2 – Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzones)
Fishing gear type(s) Bottom (demersal) longline. Vessel type – middle tonnage vessels with special equipment and, if relevant, vessel of bottom hooking longline. type(s)
The client group is represented by the KZB-herring JSC. The company and its vessels that are operated by the KZB-herring JSC Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific cod Client group bottom longline client group (correct at the time of drafting the ACDR) are detailed in Section 8.11 of this report. If required, an up-to-date list will be available from UCSL United Certification Systems Limited upon request. Potential Russian fishing enterprises have legal quotas for harvesting of Pacific cod in the West Bering Sea zone (61.01); East Kamchatka zone (61.02) including – Karaginskaya Other eligible fishers (61.02.1) and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya (61.02.2) subzones; in EEZ of Russian Federation, and catch its on their own or contracted vessels with using bottom longline as a fishing gear.
Northwest Pacific (within FAO Major Fishing Area - 61): West Bering Sea zone (61.01); Geographical area East Kamchatka zone (61.02) including – Karaginskaya (61.02.1) and Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya (61.02.2) subzones; in EEZ of Russian Federation
UCSL United Certification Systems Limited as the Conformity Assessment Body confirms that KZB-herring JSC Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific cod bottom longline is in scope for MSC assessment through meeting the following scope requirements: The fishery does not target amphibians, reptiles, birds or mammals (7.4.2.1, MSC 2020a); The fishery does not use poisons or explosives (7.4.2.2, MSC 2020a); The fishery is not conducted under a controversial unilateral exemption to an international agreement (7.4.2.3, MSC 2020a);
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 16 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
The client or client group does not include an entity that has been successfully prosecuted for a forced or child labour violation in the last 2 years (7.4.2.4, MSC 2020a); The client or client group does not include an entity that has been convicted for a violation in law with respect to shark finning (7.4.2.10, MSC 2020a); There is a mechanism for resolving disputes, and disputes do not overwhelm the fishery (7.4.2.11, MSC 2020a).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 17 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
5.2 Assessment results overview 5.2.1 Determination, formal conclusion and agreement To be drafted at Public Comment Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report a formal statement as to the certification determination recommendation reached by the assessment team on whether the fishery should be certified.
The CAB shall include in the report a formal statement as to the certification action taken by the CAB’s official decision-maker in response to the determination recommendation.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2, 7.20.3.h and Section 7.21
5.2.2 Principle level scores To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report the scores for each of the three MSC principles in the table below.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.17
Table 4 – Principle level scores
Principle UoA 1 UoA 2 UoA 3 UoA 4
Principle 1 – Target species
Principle 2 – Ecosystem impacts
Principle 3 – Management system
5.2.3 Summary of conditions To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report a table summarising conditions raised in this assessment. Details of the conditions shall be provided in the appendices. If no conditions are required, the CAB shall include in the report a statement confirming this.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.18
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 18 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 5 – Summary of conditions
Carried Related to Condition Performance Exceptional over from previous Condition Deadline number Indicator (PI) circumstances? previous condition? certificate?
Yes / No / Yes / No Yes / No / NA NA
Yes / No / Yes / No Yes / No / NA NA
Yes / No / Yes / No Yes / No / NA NA
5.2.4 Recommendations To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
If the CAB or assessment team wishes to include any recommendations to the client or notes for future assessments, these may be included in this section.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 19 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
6 Traceability and eligibility 6.1 Eligibility date It is anticipated that the eligibility date would be set as the publication date of the Public Comment Draft Report (PCDR) version of the assessment report. This would be confirmed at the publication of the PCDR, if desired by the client and if product harvested after the eligibility date and sold or stored as under-assessment fish can be handled in conformity with the MSC requirements as detailed in 7.8 (MSC 2020a). 6.2 Traceability within the fishery There is a multistage control system in the Russian system for fisheries management. The first stage is inspections conducted by Coast Guard vessels in the region of catching. Inspectors check catch permits, number of and construction (technical parameters) of traps, production ratios, quantity of production etc. The second stage is conducted in port. If a vessel goes to port it is obliged to send out preliminary information 72 hours before landing and more detailed information 24 hours before landing, where the status of the information about catch permits, quantity of production, quantity of fish caught (in green weight) is checked. All unloading procedures are made under the control of Border Control (FSB) authorities. (See Section 7.4.1 for further information about the Russian enforcement system.) Thus, the risk of non-certified gear used within the fishery and a possibility of vessels from the UoA fishing outside the UoA or in different geographical areas are close to zero. All vessels are equipped with VMS, which sends information about the vessel’s coordinates on a continuous basis to the State CFMS. All logistic procedures (including moving products from catching vessel to transport vessel with transhipment in the sea) in the Russian Exclusive Economic Zone must be fulfilled in the presence of a Border Control (FSB) inspector who checks the catch permits, production ratios, quantity of production and so on. In addition, the vessel will have to fulfil all above-mentioned procedures. There are strict internal procedures on board the vessels (required by Russian law) and a sophisticated system of enforcement measures at sea and on land to ensure that these requirements are complied with. Therefore, the risk of substitution of mixing certified (target species) and non-certified (by-catch species) catch is minimal. All planned trans-shipments have to be reported in advance to Russian enforcement authorities, so that they have the possibility to check the operations physically. Logbooks are kept on both catch and transport vessels for one year; then they are kept by the fishing company for three more years. Separate written documentation is also issued for the transaction. Catching vessels may tranship products to transport vessel at sea, upon which transport vessels will land the products in Russian and/or foreign port (but transport vessels will deliver cargo via Russian port as all marine living resources caught in the Russian EEZ or on the Russian continental shelf have to be taken to Russian port before being exported). Also, the catching vessel may land products in Russian port directly. Catching vessels have on board only products caught and processed by themselves. There are two points of ownership change for the products (that is points from which subsequent Chain of Custody should start): transport vessel or port.
Table 6 – Traceability information
Factor Description Will the fishery use gears that are not part of the UoC? It never occurs - the fishery is highly specialized, there is If yes, please describe: no gear other than longline. The vessels are subjected to If this may occur on the same trip, on the inspection of FSB. The type of gear can be traced in same vessels, or during the same season; product labels and other documents. How any risks are mitigated. It never occurs – the location of the vessels is controlled via satellite VMS systems, and the captain of the vessel submits daily reports to the Center for the Monitoring of Will vessels in the UoC also fish outside the UoC Fisheries and Communications (CMFC). Also, the geographic area? position of vessels is available in real-time via AIS. At the
sea, the vessels are inspected by FSB without If yes, please describe: notifications. The captain is responsible for the content If this may occur on the same trip; provided in electronic report, it is based on the How any risks are mitigated. information of technological and fishing logbooks stored at the ship. All transhipments and loadings are controlled by governmental bodies.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 20 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
KZB – herring (In Russian: KZB-sel`d) JSC works simultaneously with certified and non-certified products. Do the fishery client members ever handle certified and When developing its own quotas, within the framework of non-certified products during any of the activities covered compliance with the terms of the contract, the enterprise by the fishery certificate? This refers to both at-sea also develops quotas of third-party organizations, activities and on-land activities. carrying out fishing using its own vessels. The risk of mixing between UOC and other areas is minimal due to Transport the ban on moving between subzones with the product on Board and accurate product labelling. Storage Each vessel identifies its own catch, so the risks of Processing mixing the catches of the client and non-client fleets are Landing also minimal. Auction During storage, transportation, unloading and sale, all certified products are stored separately from non-certified If yes, please describe how any risks are mitigated. products (mixing is strictly prohibited). The division of products must be reflected in the accompanying documents (cargo bills of lading, quality certificates). Regularly-overloads occur at sea and in ports. In case of overloading from the ship to the transshipment’ vessel, any possible risks are eliminated by observing the following criteria: - a contract is concluded for each reloading; - mandatory availability of the cargo bill of lading and quality certificate; - all products are Packed in own-made containers protected from unauthorized access (individual for each Does transhipment occur within the fishery? type of product);
- all containers are marked (color marking contains If yes, please describe: information about the manufacturer, the manufacturer's If transhipment takes place at-sea, in ship). port, or both; Transshipment at sea is controlled by the Federal If the transhipment vessel may handle security service (FSB) and employees of the company, in product from outside the UoC; ports - by the FSB and customs. How any risks are mitigated. Thus, the risks of substitution are quite low. Traceability for fishing ends after loading. CoC processes are currently expected to be implemented to eliminate the potential for mixing customer and non-customer fleet catches. Although chartered transport vessels involved in landing are not required to be certified in accordance with the CoC standard, since ownership is not transferred, subsequent COC certification may require certification of these vessels as well. Are there any other risks of mixing or substitution between certified and non-certified fish? No, such risks were not identified.
If yes, please describe how any risks are mitigated.
6.3 Eligibility to enter further chains of custody To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report a determination of whether the seafood product will be eligible to enter certified chains of custody, and whether the seafood product is eligible to be sold as MSC certified or carry the MSC ecolabel.
The CAB shall include in the report a list of parties, or category of parties, eligible to use the fishery certificate, and sell product as MSC certified.
The CAB shall include in the report the point of intended change of ownership of product, a list of eligible landing points, and the point from which subsequent Chain of Custody certification is required.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 21 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
If the CAB makes a negative determination under FCP v2.2 Section 7.9, the CAB shall state that fish and fish products from the fishery are not eligible to be sold as MSC certified or carry the MSC ecolabel. If the client group includes other entities such as agents, unloaders, or other parties involved with landing or sale of certified fish, this needs to be clearly stated in the report including the point from which Chain of Custody is required.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.9
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 22 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7 Scoring 7.1 Summary of Performance Indicator level scores
The following draft performance indicator scores are provided (Table 7). These scores may change as the Assessment Team receives and responds to new information provided through the assessment process, and as later versions of the assessment report are produced.
Table 7 – Draft Performance Indicator scores (at ACDR).
Principle Component Performance Indicator (PI) Score 1.1.1 Stock status ≥ 80 Outcome 1.1.2 Stock rebuilding N/A 1.2.1 Harvest strategy ≥ 80 1 1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools ≥ 80 Management 1.2.3 Information & monitoring ≥ 80 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status ≥ 80 2.1.1 Outcome ≥ 80 Primary species 2.1.2 Management ≥ 80 2.1.3 Information 60-79 2.2.1 Outcome ≥ 80 Secondary species 2.2.2 Management ≥ 80 2.2.3 Information 60-79 2.3.1 Outcome ≥ 80 60-792 ETP species 2.3.2 Management ≥ 80 2.3.3 Information ≥ 80 2.4.1 Outcome ≥ 80 Habitats 2.4.2 Management ≥ 80 2.4.3 Information ≥ 80 2.5.1 Outcome ≥ 80 Ecosystem 2.5.2 Management ≥ 80 2.5.3 Information ≥ 80 3.1.1 Legal & customary framework ≥ 80 Governance and 3.1.2 Consultation, roles & responsibilities policy ≥ 80 3.1.3 Long term objectives ≥ 80 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives ≥ 80 3 3.2.2 Decision making processes ≥ 80 Fishery specific management 3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement ≥ 80 system Monitoring & management performance 3.2.4 evaluation ≥ 80
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 23 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.2 Principle 1 7.2.1 Principle 1 background 7.2.1.1 Pacific cod biology Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus Tilesius, 1810) is a bottom-pelagic species, and by the nature of its range, it is predominantly a boreal Pacific species. It is distributed in the northern part of the Pacific Ocean from the Bering Strait to the south along the American coast to Oregon (Yaquina Bay) and along the Asian side almost everywhere in the Sea of Okhotsk and the Sea of Japan, as well as in the Yellow Sea. In the waters of Kamchatka, several distinct aggregations of cod are found - in the Western Bering Sea, Karaginskaya subzone, Eastern Kamchatka and Western Kamchatka (Figure 1).
Figure 1 – The range of Pacific cod in the North Pacific. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019).
The distribution in the West Bering Sea ranges from a few meters in the coastal part of the sea to depths of 500–600 m, however, its occurrence decreases sharply deeper than 250–300 m. Usually, fishing stocks are located on the middle and lower shelf and in the upper part of the continental slope, in the summer between isobaths 30–100, in winter 100–300 m. As a rule, cod is found at temperatures from minus 0.5 to 3.6 ° С, but its densest accumulations are usually confined to isotherms of 1–2.5 ° С. In winter, cod forms clusters in the Navarinsky region at depths of 170– 410 m. The largest concentrations of cod are located south – southwest of Cape Navarin at depths of 180–250 m (in the zone of access to the shelf of deep waters of Pacific origin), where bottom temperatures are not exceed 2.1–2.5 ° С. Beginning of feeding migrations of cod in shallow shelf waters occurs in May – June. Specific dates are associated with the thermal mass of water. In the southern regions, already in mid-May, the water at the shelf warm up to positive temperatures and cod appears in catches at depths less than 100 m. At higher latitudes, the process of water heating proceeds more slowly, and accordingly it lingers for a bit longer at wintering and cod places. So, in the Anadyr- Navarinsky district, it begins to go into shallow water only in early June. In the summer, the groups of highest densitites are located on various shelf sections in the depth range from 50 to 150 m. In the northwestern part of the sea, they are found in the area of Cape Navarin and in the Anadyr Bay. In Karaginskaya subzone, cod spawns on the continental slope of the Karaginsky and Olyutorsky Bays, as well as on the shelf outside the ice distribution boundary in February-April. The main biomass of cod in the winter-spring period is also concentrated in this area. After spawning, which usually ends in April and passes in the lower shelf and upper parts of the continental slope, cod moves in shallow water. The allocation of large shoals during the feeding period in
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 24 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR certain parts of the shelf is associated both with the distribution features and with the concentration of mass foraging objects — pollock, sand lance, cold-water prawn, etc. In summer, the fish is predominantly concentrated in the bays of the southwestern part of the Bering Sea, while larger individuals are mainly found on the offshore areas of the shelf. In June, the main aggregations of cod are located at depths from 70 to 110 m. As the shelf water warm up, the cod concentrates in a narrow depth range of 70–90 m, and from July to August, the main accumulations shift to isobaths of 90–105 m. The densest clusters are formed by cod of 40-60 cm long. In the western part of the sea, it is found in Olyutorsky Bay, off the Karaginsky Island, in the Korf Bay. Large individuals longer than 85 cm are rarely found at the shelf during summer. In the Western Kamchatka, after spawning in February-March, cod moves in northward direction along the relatively narrow shallow areas of the southeast coast of Kamchatka. At the end of May, is reaches the Avacha Bay. In July, the main concentrations of cod are recorded in the central, and in August-September - in the northern part of the bay. Along with migration to the north, cod moves to the southern part of the Northern Kuril Islands - Shumshu and Paramushir islands. During summer, cod is staying at shallower depths than in winter. Changes in the catch values for trawling in the latitudinal direction have the same tendency as in winter: they are higher in the northern regions than in the southern ones. The life cycle of different stocks of cod is identical. It is characterized by seasonal bathymetric migrations. One-time spawning occurs in March-April, with the peak spawning shifting to a later date in northward direction. So, if spawning peaks occur in southwestern and southeastern Kamchatka in March, in the northwestern part of the Bering Sea it occurs in April. The presence of local spawning grounds is not a characteristic of species; in winter, individuals in the pre-spawning state are mixed and found in almost all areas at depths of 150–350 m. The roe of the species is laid at the bottom and it is very sticky. The incubation period varies from 10 to 20 days, depending on the bottom temperature and the habitat. The optimal conditions of incubation of cod eggs correspond to a temperature of 3-5 ° C. The larval period is not studied well. Apparently, cod larvae can be considered as benthic stage, since they are practically absent in vertical ichthyoplankton fishing. Freshly hatched cod larvae have a body length of 3.27–3.80 mm, with an average size of 3.6 mm. For some time, juveniles live in bottom horizons directly in the area of spawning grounds. When it grows to 20 mm, it gradually shifts to the coastal zone, and then, growing to 40–80 mm, it moves into deeper layers of water. The first yearlings of 5–8 cm long are found in small-mesh fishing gears starting from August. Maturation in males occurs in the 3rd year of life with a length of 35-40 cm, in females maturation occurs in the 4th year with a length of 45-50 cm. Mass maturation of males occurs at the age of 5-6 years (55-65 cm), and of females - in 6-7 years (60-65 cm). As it is shown for Pacific cod of the Western Kamchatka, absolute fecundity varies from 0.591 to 3.346 million eggs, with average value around 1.854 million. Relative fecundity ranges from 276–661 eggs per 1 g of body weight, average - 462 eggs. The amount of eggs produced is directly dependent on length, weight and age of the female. Off the southwestern coast of Kamchatka, 95% of the total amount of eggs is produced by 5–8-year-old females.
7.2.1.2 Stock structure The results of long-term studies of the population structure of Pacific cod in the UoA indicate that in the area under consideration three stock components can be identified: East Kamchatka, Karagin and Anadyr-Navarin. At the same time, the latter population is separated from the East Bering Sea population. Each of them includes populations that have their own spawning and feeding grounds within each fishing management area (TINRO, 2018). There might be some exchange by genetic materials between above-mentioned stocks due to active migrations of some fish but degree of such exchange is unknown and likely not significant due to the existence of physical and oceanographic barriers between three above-mentioned stocks. The Pacific cod stock of the western Bering Sea is separated from the stock of the Karaginskaya subzone by the deep underwater Shirshov Ridge, while the stock of the Karaginskaya subzone is separated from the stock of the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone by the deep Kamchatsky Strait (TINRO, 2018). It is believed (Poltev, 2007), based on the permanent locations of commercial aggregations within the whole year, that there are almost no Pacific cod migrations between western and eastern Kamchatka through the Kuril Islands Straits. According to recent studies (Stroganov, 2013) it is shown that Pacific cod populations in the Bering Sea, Sea of Okhotsk, and coastal Canada exhibit a high degree of similarity, despite significant geographic dissociation. Pacific cod reproduction centers in the western Bering Sea are observed in many places (Figure 2). In the western Bering Sea, Pacific cod spawning occurs on the outer shelf south of the Navarin Cape, as well as off the northern part of Shirshov underwater ridge – near Olyutorsky Cape (Savin, 2016). In the eastern part of the Bering Sea, spawning occurs near the Unimak Strait, as well as in several areas off the Aleutian Islands and off the coast of Alaska (Neidetcher et al., 2014).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 25 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 2 – Distribution of Pacific cod spawning grounds in the northwestern part of its range, and confirmed (or known) offshore spawning grounds. Numbers referred to in figure: 1 – Navarin area, 2 – Shirshov underwater ridge, 3 – Olyutorsky Bay, 4 – Karaginsky Bay, 5 – Kamchatsky Bay, 6 – Commander Isl., 7 – Kronotsky Bay, 8 – Utashud, 9 – 2-nd Kuril Strait, 10 – Onekotan Isl., 11 – western Kamchatka, 12 – Iona Island; areas where spawning of inshore Pacific cod is possible, but not confirmed so far: 13 – south Chukotka, 14-15 – Navarin-Olyutor, 16 – Litke Strait, 17 – Ust-Kamchatsky, 18 – Kronotsky Bay, 19 – Shipunsky Cape, 20 – Avachinsky Bay, 21 – Alaid Isl., 22 – Shelikhov Bay (northern Sea of Okhotsk), 23 – Taui Bay (Source: Savin, 2016).
There are no natural boundaries between the western and eastern Bering Sea Pacific cod populations. According to Stepanenko (1995), for wintering and spawning, Pacific cod from the western Bering Sea are able to migrate to eastern part of this sea and return to the western Bering Sea in spring for feeding. However, some authors (e.g. Buryakova et al., 2010) expressed some doubts regarding above conclusions and showed that exchange between western and eastern Bering Sea Pacific cod is not significant. Nevertheless, some exchange between Pacific cod populations of the western and eastern Bering sea still exists (or existed in the past), which probably explains a certain genetic similarity of individuals inhabiting in the Asian and American coastal areas in the northern part of the species range. Thus, summarizing results of all previous research of population structure of Pacific cod, it might be concluded that in the area under the assessment (Figure 2), there are three separate stock components. One of them occupies the area from Olyutorsky Cape to Bering Strait and covers two management units, namely West Bering Sea zone (61.01) and Chukotskaya zone (67.01). A second and third stocks inhabit two fishery subzones (i.e. management units), namely Karaginskaya (61.02.1) and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya (61.02.2) (Figure 3).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 26 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 3 – Map showing location of the four Fisheries Management Areas in the UoAs where the fishery occur. Fisheries Management Areas are shaded. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019).
7.2.1.3 Stock assessment process and Harvest Control Rules The organization of stock assessment process in the Russian Federation was considerably revised in 2015 by Order No. 104 from 06.02.2015 of the Federal Fisheries Agency of the Russian Federation (FFA, 2015). This Order has three main elements: Sequence and timing of TACs development and its correction, Requirements to the procedure of evaluation of stock size and TAC, Requirements to contents of the materials that substantiate TACs & corrections.
Order 104 requires that the stock assessment process in the Russian Federation should proceed under following way: 1.1 Annually, local research institutes prepare materials that substantiate TACs before February 1 of the year preceding to fishing year. 1.2 Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography – VNIRO (head research organization) considers materials prepared by local institutes before February 20, sent comments back to these institutes so that they return revised version of the materials before February 25. 1.3 VNIRO establishes inter-institutional working groups for development of coordinated position before February 25. 1.4 VNIRO considers coordinated TAC estimations at VNIRO Scientific Council before February 27. 1.5 VNIRO considers TAC estimations at enlarged meeting of the Scientific Council before March 5. 1.6 VNIRO prepares aggregate materials that substantiate TACs, sends them to Industry Council on Commercial Forecasting at the Federal Fisheries Agency within 10 days. 1.7 Fishery Council considers these materials before March 20. 1.8 VNIRO forwards materials substantiating TACs to local institutes within 3 days after Industry Council meeting for maintenance of public hearings. Based on the results of public hearings, local institutes provide copies of protocols to VNIRO and Federal Fisheries Agency before May 1. 1.9 VNIRO prepares aggregate materials and provides them to Federal Fisheries Agency for presentation to State Ecological Expertise. Based on the structure and quality of available information, 3 levels of information support for the substantiation of the forecast of TAC are distinguished: I level. Available information provides a comprehensive analytical assessment of stock status and TAC using structured models of exploited stock. Minimum requirements for the composition of
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 27 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
information at this level: historical series of age composition, catches, catches per unit of fishing effort, rate of weight growth, rate of maturation, as well as the average natural mortality rate over years and age groups. II level. Available information provides a limited analytical assessment of stock status and TAC using production models of operating stock. Minimum requirements for the composition of information at this level: historical series of catches and catches per unit of fishing effort. III level. The insufficient completeness and / or quality of the available information precludes the use of operating stock models. The rationale for TAC is based on empirical, trending, indicator, and other approximate methods used in the event of a lack of information. The informational support of the TAC forecast justification for the Pacific Cod is assessed as corresponding to the highest level - Level I. Stocks of Pacific cod in the Western Bering Sea zone is assessed by the models of the TISVPA (Triple Instantaneous Separable VPA) group (Babayan et al., 2018). The short description of the model is given below: Model TISVPA Version 2006.1 Model Type A separable model is applied to one or two periods. A separable model captures the entire analysis period. It is possible to include a third, generation-dependent factor. Selectivity The selectivity coefficient for an older age group is equal to the previous one. Coefficients The selectivity factors for age groups are normalized by the sum per unit. For the plus group, the same fishing mortality is accepted as for the previous age group. If generation factors are included in the model, then s (a, y) = s (a) g (cohort). s (a, y) can be normalized for each year by the sum of 1 - a submodel of the “intra-annual redistribution of effort” or not — a submodel of the “increase (decrease) of the selectivity coefficient”. The g-factor matrix is normalized to mean = 1. Catch Can be estimated or taken equal to one. Catch coefficients are estimated Coefficients analytically as the exponents of the average logarithmic residuals between abundance estimates obtained from catches and surveys. Plus group A plus group is not modeled, but its abundance is calculated from catches under the assumption that fishing mortality is equal for the plus group and the older group. Spawning stock Can be considered absolute or relative indices. In the second case, the biomass proportionality coefficient is calculated analytically as an exponent of the surveys (SSB) average logarithmic remainder between SSB estimates obtained from data on the age composition of catches and on surveys. Data of (terminal Can be used. + 1) year Target function The objective function is the weighted sum of the components. For data on the age composition of catches, the corresponding components may be: - the sum of the squares of the residues in the logs of the catches (SS); - median of the distribution of the squares of residues in the logarithms of catches (MDN); - absolute median deviation (AMD). For SSB estimates for surveys, the sum of the squared residuals between the logarithms of SSB estimates for surveys and for the model. For surveys with an age structure - SS, MDN or AMD for the logarithms of N (a, y) or for the age proportions of the stock (not weighted or weighted). Uncertainty To estimate the uncertainty, a parametric conditional bootstrap was applied assessment with respect to the age composition of catches (assuming that the data are distributed lognormally, the variance is estimated in the base model run) along with noisy additional information (assuming that the data errors are lognormally distributed, the variance value is set by the user). Other aspects Three error models can be used for data on the age composition of catches: - errors are related to data on the age composition of catches. This is a purely separable model ("version with control catches"); - errors are attributed to a separable model of fishing mortality. This is consistent with the usual VPA, but a separable model is used to estimate the terminal values of fishing mortality (“version with managing catches”); - Errors are attributed to both sources (“mixed version”). For each age group and year, fishing mortality is estimated using the cohort equations (in the Pope approximation). The final estimate is the weighted average between the two estimates, the weights are set by the user or inversely proportional to the square of the remainder at each point. With respect to restrictions on residuals in the age composition of
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 28 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
catches, four options are possible: 1 - zero amounts of residuals are achieved for all years and ages between estimates of fishing mortality from cohort equations and according to a separable model (“unbiased separation”); 2 - as in option 1, but the deviations are weighted by age estimates of selectivity; 3 - as in option 1, but relative to the logarithmic residues in the age composition of catches (unbiased estimates of abundance are achieved); 4 - no restriction on displacement. In option 2, the cohort sums of residuals are also equal to zero. In options 1, 2, and 3, if not the entire age range was used to estimate g-factors, the above conditions in the sense of bias may not be fulfilled exactly for s (a, y), but they will still be fulfilled for estimates independent of factors s (a).
The main source of information for the stock assessment comes from research surveys and observations onboard commercial fishing vessels. Research surveys are conducted irregularly but frequently enough to monitor stock condition. TINRO-Center in western Bering Sea (including Chukotskaya and West Bering Sea zones) recently conducted research surveys in 2001, 2002, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2017. KamchatNIRO conducted recent research surveys off East Kamchatka (including Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzones) in 2002, 2003, 2005-2008, 2012-2014, and 2016. A variety of biological information is obtained during both research surveys and observations onboard commercial fishing vessels, including data on spatial and vertical distributions, catch per unit efforts (CPUE), size, sex and diet composition. Otoliths are sampled for further age determinations in lab and recalculating to age composition. Gonads are also sampled infrequently to estimate fecundity. Most of the data obtained are used for TAC evaluation, both via direct estimations based on results of research survey or via modelling (simulations). Recently, Russian scientists collected tissue samples for genetic studies of the population structure, and otoliths for shape analysis for the same purpose. The Pacific cod stock for the period 1999-2017 is assessed by the “Synthesis” method, which algorithm is realized in a computer program ’Methods’ version 3.06 (developed in Kamchatka Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography - KamchatNIRO) and in the parameters of the cohort model after the adjustment. The instantaneous rate of natural mortality (IRNM) for age classes is preliminary calculated in the process of implementing the above programs using the method of Tyurin (1972). The obtained IRNM data have been amended to take into account the weighted average for age classes fully recruited to the fishery. Also, some parameters for the development of the Harvest Control Rule (HCR), such as Ftr and Btr are calculated in the COMBI 4.0 software, using fishery data for the period from 1980 to 2017. The value of the TAC is calculated using a cohort drawn procedure of Pope (1972), implemented by the software ’TAC v1.02’, developed by KamchatNIRO. For comparison with the simulation data, the results of direct estimates obtained during the bottom trawl surveys are used. For most of the regulated stocks targeted in the Russian Federation, harvest control rules (HCRs) are based on concept of Babayan (2000), as represented in Figure 4. This scheme allows for management of stocks depending on their condition and level of information available. There are three regimes of fisheries management:
Regime of depleted stock, when minimum harvest is possible within research surveys only. 0 < B ≤ Blim, Freci = 0.
Regime of recovering stock; Blim < Bi < Btr, Freci = [(Ftr – F0) x (Bi – Blim)] / (Btr – Blim) + F0).
Regime of constant intensity of fisheries. Bi > Btr, Freci = Ftr = const.
Biological reference points are subject to annual review based on new information. If this information leads to revision of biological reference points, a respective revision of stock size would be reflected in the TAC of the forthcoming year.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 29 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 4 – Principal scheme of harvest control rule accepted in the Russian Federation (after Babayan, 2000).
7.2.1.4 Stock status West Bering Sea & Chukotskaya zones - The state of Pacific cod stocks in the Western part of the Bering Sea is mainly determined by its biology, natural fluctuations of the abundance of generations, and the relatively short life cycle of the species against the background of a small number of year classes that make up the fishable biomass. Productive generations play a significant role in the dynamics of the stocks. During the period of 1965-2005, there were several decreases (1969-1974, 1979-1985, 1996-2004) and increases (1974-1979, 1984-1997, 2004-present) of Pacific cod biomass in the western Bering Sea (Antonov, 2011). The emergence in the early 1960s and early 1970s of two high-yielding generations caused a significant increase in total biomass, and the lack of highly abundant generations after early 1970s has reduced the biomass to a minimum (Figure 5). After a period of relatively stable or increasing stock size in the 1980s to late 1990s, there was a reduction in biomass due to the lack of high-yielding generations from 1995-1999. However, the stock in the Western Bering Sea subsequently increased following the advent of two large generations in 2003 and 2004. In 1999-2002, Pacific cod total biomass ranged from 63,430 to 110,580 mt, but from 2004-2012 it increased to between 314,380 and 653,750 mt, then from 2015 to 2017 there was a further significant increase, from 814,330 to 1,227,300 mt (Figure 6).
Figure 5 – Dynamics of Pacific cod total biomass in 1965-2005 and abundance of fish aged 2 years in the Western Bering Sea. (Source: Antonov, 2011).
The trends of changes in the size of SSB (spawning stock biomass) obtained using the software “Synthesis” method of cohort analysis are close to the estimates of stocks size obtained during research bottom trawl surveys. Thus, in
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 30 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
1999-2003 the SSB ranged 320,740 to 344,040 mt, by 2009 it had grown to 1,224,430 mt. There was then a decline to 793,070 mt by 2013, followed by a recent increase by 2017 to 2,079,480 mt.
Figure 6 – Dynamics of Pacific cod biomass in the north-western Bering Sea (West Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones) and its catch per day rates, 1999-2017. (Source: TINRO, 2018).
According to the precautionary approach, it is appropriate to underestimate the reference points for fishing mortality and to overestimate the threshold reference point for spawning stock biomass (Blim) by an error multiplied by the Student criterion (Babayan, 2000). Thus, the management guidelines for the Harvest Control Rule (HCR) are adjusted:
– target reference point for biomass Btr = BMSY = 1,123,210 mt;
– limit reference point for spawning stock biomass Blim = Bloss = 291,080 mt; 1.645 – precautionary estimate of the limit reference point for SSB Bpa = Blim × e s = 375,620 mt; -1 – limit reference point on fishing mortality Flim = FLoss = 0.588 year ; -1.645 -1 – precautionary estimate of the limit reference point for fishing mortality Fpa = Flim x e s = 0.540 year ; -1 – target reference point for fishing mortality Ftr = FMSY = 0.105 year ;
– the value of F0 was assumed to be zero. In above equations, 1.645 = value of the Student’s coefficient for the confidence level of 95% of the lognormal random variable; s = the uncertainty measure expressed in standard error units (sigma) obtained as a result of 1000 re- samples (bootstrap). According to HCR, the yield in 2019-2020 was below the precautionary and limiting level. The SSB value in 2021 is expected to be high – around 400 thousand tons at target reference point Ftr of 0.105, but, in combination with unpredictable climatic factor, it automatically led to the introduction of the precautionary approach. (Figure 7). Testing the management strategy was to assess the likelihood that, in the long term (10 years in advance), spawning stock biomass (SSB) would not fall below the biomass benchmark taking into account the precautionary approach (Bpa). In the framework of statistical simulation using the Monte Carlo method, this probability was estimated from 2000 iterations. The probability of overcoming Flim is negligible and amounts to less than 0.01 even with an annual catch of 500 thousand tons. A risk analysis shows that in the coming years SSB will not fall below both the biologically based limit for spawning biomass (Blim) and the corresponding precautionary parameter (Bpa).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 31 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 7 – Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fishery. The rule of regulation of the cod fishery in the northwestern part of the Bering Sea (West Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zone), estimates for in 2013-2019 and forecast for 2020. (Source: TINRO, 2019).
Karaginskaya subzone – Over time, there have been periodic fluctuations in the magnitude of the biomass of the commercial stock of Pacifc cod in Karaginskaya subzone, calculated using the VPA method (Figure 8). In the late 1990s, there was a marked decline of Pacific cod in Karaginskaya subzone, which can be explained by the lack of strong generations in the stock of Pacific cod in this area in the first half of that decade; almost all generations of Pacific cod in this period were small or medium-sized in number. The strong generation of 1997, 1999 and 2000 then caused a new rise of the abundance of Pacific cod in the mid-2000s, when biomass ranged from 81,000 to 209,000 mt, after which another decline occurred. In recent years, the fall in the stock size of Pacific cod in Karaginskaya subzone stopped due to the emergence of a number of generations, the abundance of which is close to the medium or high level (Antonov, 2013). Based on revised model estimates (Terentiev, Ilyin, 2018), in 2004-2009 there was a stabilization of stock size (Figure 9), and since 2011, there has been some increase of spawning stock biomass, which is associated with the numerous generation of 2008. According to the model estimates, at the beginning of 2017, the total biomass of Pacific cod amounted to 129,300 and spawning stock biomass is 53,800 t (TINRO, 2018).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 32 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 8 – Dynamics of Pacific cod total biomass in 1979-2011 and abundance of generation of 1975-2007 in Karaginskaya subzone (Source: Antonov, 2013).
Figure 9 – Total biomass of Pacific cod stock in Karaginskaya subzone in 2000-2017. (Source: TINRO, 2018).
Forecast for 2018-2019 is presented using model estimates. Bmsy – stock biomass corresponding to maximal sustainable yield, Blim - minimum biomass of a stock allowing for fishery (after Terentiev, Ilyin, 2018). The target and threshold reference points for the zonal Harvest Control Rule adopted the following: -1 target reference point for fishing mortality Ftr = 0.294 year , -1 limit reference point for fishing mortality Flim = 0.465 year ,
limit reference point for spawning stock biomass Blim = 29,500 tons,
target reference point for spawning stock biomass Btr = 52,650 tons, -1 the value of F0 was taken to be F0 = 0.1 × Ftr = 0.03 year . Following the methodology of medium-term forecasting in the framework of a precautionary approach to fisheries management, the Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fisheries in the Karaginskaya subzone was developed (Figure 10). In recent years, the stock is at the level of high productivity – much higher than Btr. Its exploitation rate, expressed in units of fishing mortality, is significantly lower than Ftr.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 33 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 10 – Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fisheries in Karaginskaya subzone (Source: TINRO, 2018).
Estimates of the cod stock of the Karaginskaya subzone obtained from trawl surveys and the “Synthesis” model are consistent. Subjected to the HCR, the cod stock with a 95% probability will not go beyond biologically based limits and will fluctuate at the level of the target reference point. Based on the results of model simulation, it is concluded that the management strategy is effective.
Figure 11 – Biomass of cod in the Karaginskaya subzone in 1980-2019, 1 – based on the modelling (with prognosis up to 2022), 2 – based on the trawl catches. (Source: TINRO, 2019).
Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone – The stock status of Pacific cod in Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone is largely determined by the peculiarities of its biology, in particularly with the change in the abundance of generations, which, along with a relatively short life cycle, can dramatically change the stock biomass. The
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 34 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR appearance of a number of strong generations in the late 1970s and early 1980s (Figure 12) caused a sharp increase of the commercial stock, and the absence of strong generations after 1986, respectively, reduced its abundance to minimum values (Antonov, 2013). In recent years, the commercial stock of Pacific cod in Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone has stabilized at the level of about 50-60 thousand tons (Antonov, 2013). Recently, there has been a trend of gradual increase of spawning stock biomass and total biomass to 56,000 and 128,000 tons in 2017 respectively (Figure 13). According to the forecast, a slight increasing trend will continue in the next two years, probably reaching over 140, 000 mt that remains lower than maximum historical biomass of mid-1980s but very similar to level of early 1980s – late 1980s.
Figure 12 – Dynamics of Pacific cod total biomass in 1979-2011 and abundance of generation of 1975-2007 in Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone. (Source: Antonov, 2013).
Biological reference points for Pacific cod of the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone were determined in 2013 and remain unchanged up to now. -1 target for fishing mortality, Fmed = 0.296 year , -1 limit reference point for the fishing mortality Flim was chosen at the level of F0.1; Flim = F0.1 = 0.437 year ,
target reference point for spawning stock biomass Btr = TSB (FMED) = 64,150 t,
limit reference point for total stock biomass Blim = 32,630 t, -1 the value of F0 was taken to be F0 = 0.1 × FMED = 0.030 year .
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 35 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 13 – Dynamics of Pacific cod biomass in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone in 2000-2019 according to the model estimates. SSB – Spawning Stock Biomass, TSB – total stock biomass, Bmsy – stock biomass corresponding to maximal sustainable catch, Blim – minimum biomass of a stock allowing for fishery. (Source: Kalugin, Ilyin, 2018).
Following the methodology of medium-term forecasting in the framework of a precautionary approach to fisheries management, the Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fishing in Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone was developed (Figure 14). In recent years, the stock is at the level of high productivity – much higher than Btr. Its exploitation, expressed in units of fishing mortality, is significantly below the Ftr with respect to the total biomass of the stock.
Figure 14 – Harvest Control Rule of Pacific cod fisheries in Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone. (Source: TINRO, 2018).
According to the results of updated model calculations, the estimated biomass of SSB stocks of the Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone at the beginning of 2019 was 65.2 thousand tons, while total biomass of cod made up to 108.6 thousand tons. Briefly characterizing the dynamics of stocks in 1990–2016, according to the results of model estimates, a long-term decrease in biomass of both total and spawning stocks from 1990 to the first half of the 2000s is noted (Figure 15). Then, after a short growth period, cod stocks stabilized at the target reference point. In the framework of statistical simulation by the Monte Carlo method, this probability for falling of SSB below the boundary value Blim was estimated. With a fishing intensity of 10 years at the target level Ftr, the risk of overfishing for replenishment does not exceed the recommended level α = 0.1 - 0.2.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 36 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 15 – The dynamics of the biomass of spawning stock (SSB) of cod from the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone and the percentile bootstrap distribution of its estimates. (Source: TINRO, 2019).
7.2.1.4 Fishery management Western Bering Sea & Chukotskaya zones - The history of the exploitation of Pacific cod stocks in the Western Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones dates back to the 1930s, when TINRO expeditions discovered commercial aggregations in the Navarin area, with cod making up 86.3-93.2% of the catch available for bottom trawling. The performed studies allowed for a conclusion about the good prospective for fisheries in this region (Gordeev, 1949). The beginning of regular commercial exploitation of Pacific cod stocks of the Anadyr-Navarin area is considered to be 1968 (Figure 16). For 3 years (1969-1971), the fishery was based on the generation born in 1967. Dynamics of Pacific cod catch in this period was characterized by a sharp increase in catch from 8,800 to 91,600 tonn. From 1975 to 1981 there was a catastrophically sharp decline in stocks, and Pacific cod was fished as a by-catch in the walleye pollock fishery, and the annual catch did not exceed 1,000 tons. Thus, as a result of the emergence of weak generations and excessive intensity of fishing, there was almost a 100-fold decrease in catches. However, already since 1980, numerous generations have appeared, which led to a sharp increase in stock size. As a result, the catch began to increase and from 1978 to 1982 (i.e. within just 4 years) increased by 17 times. Later, Pacific cod catch in 1985-1986 stabilized at the level of 40-50 thousand tonnes, after which in 1987-1988 its decrease to 37,000 mt was again observed (Bulatov, Bogdanov, 2013).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 37 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 16 – Catch dynamics of Pacific cod in the Western Bering Sea zone, 1968-2011. (Source: Antonov, 2013).
During 1990-1992, the domestic catch of Pacific cod increased from 41,900 to 58,500 tons, but since 1992 there was a sharp decline in catches from 55,300 in 1993 to 17,725 tons in 2003 (Antonov, 2013). It should be noted that longline fishing for Pacific cod began in the Western Bering Sea zone in the late 1980s, first by foreign and then by Russian vessels. In the 1990s, activity with this type of fishing has increased due to the high efficiency, and the proportion of longline fishing reached 30% by the early 2010s (Bulatov, Bogdanov, 2013). In recent years, the proportion of longline cod fishing has increased further, reaching 46.1% of the total catch on the average in Western Bering Sea zone (Table ) and 88.6% in Chukotskaya zone (Table 9). It should be noted that trawl and Danish seine fishing is carried out in the summer and autumn period, while longlining is carried-out mainly in the spring and summer months. The current seasonality of the fisheries by different gear types allows for better and more efficient exploitation of stocks. Longline fishing is based on large individuals and is conducted mostly from March to July, while Danish seines and trawls catch smaller Pacific cod mainly during June-October (Datsky, Batanov, 2013).
Table 8 – Pacific cod catches by active and passive fishing gears in the Western Bering Sea zone, 2001-2014. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019). Longline Danish seine and Year Total catch, mt catch, mt trawl catches, mt 2001 6,300 7,000 13,300 2002 4,800 7,800 12,600 2003 7,100 11,800 18,900 2004 9,600 12,600 22,200 2005 6,200 8,700 14,900 2006 6,400 8,200 14,600 2007 5,100 8,600 13,700 2008 7,300 7,800 15,100 2009 5,100 6,500 11,600 2010 8,600 5,900 14,500 2011 10,100 5,300 15,400 2012 10,800 6,300 17,100 2013 12,900 8,100 21,000 2014 14,100 11,500 22,600 Average 7,000 8,200 15,200 Proportion, % 46,1 53,9 100,0
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 38 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 9 – Proportion of Pacific cod catch by active and passive fishing gears in the Chukotskaya zone, 2007-2014. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019). Longline Danish seine and Year Total catch, mt catch, mt trawl catches, mt 2007 204 0 204 2008 153 1 154 2009 1 0 1 2010 1,292 227 1,520 2011 2,722 217 2,938 2012 5,678 467 6,145 2013 5,284 679 5,963 2014 2,299 680 2,979 Average 2,204 284 2,488 Proportion, % 88,6 11,4 100,0
Currently, the TAC of Pacific cod for the Western Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones is combined, taking into account that this species is represented here by single stock. The TAC value is then distributed between two zones based on the current trend in catch values. The proportion of catches and TACs between these two zones is not constant (Table 10) with increasing trend of TAC in Chukotskaya zone from 17.5% of total TAC in 2012 to 24.8% in 2018. At the same time, both total TAC and catch during recent years increased considerably from 28,200 and 25,360 mt in 2012 to 80,000 and 61,450 mt respectively. The percentage of TAC taken in recent years varied from 69.2% in 2014 to 92.8% in 2017 in the western Bering Sea zone with an average 86.3% and from 22.6% in 2018 to 89.6% in 2017 in the Chukotskaya zone with an average 66.7%. The smaller catch in relation to TAC in Chukotskaya zone as compared to the Western Bering Sea zone is associated mostly with oceanological conditions off Chukotka in any particular year. Success of fishing in this zone depends largely on the amount of fish migrating here for feeding. Moreover, the Chukotskaya zone is characterized by unfavorable physical and oceanographic conditions during most of the year (increased ice cover, storms, strong currents, etc.) and by remoteness from main ports that can make fishing for Pacific cod very difficult.
Table 10 – Pacific cod catch and TAC (mt) in Western Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones, 2012–2018 (according to Information System ‘Rybolovstvo’). (Source: Marine Cert., 2019). Zone Parameter 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 TAC 21,200 25,600 36,900 25,300 27,400 36,200 66,000 88,000 Western Bering Sea Catch 19,150 20,390 25,550 23,350 25,010 33,590 58,280 87,910 % of TAC 90.3 79.6 69.2 92.3 91.3 92.8 88.3 99 TAC 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 6,100 7,400 14,000 12,000 Chukotskaya Catch 6,210 4,860 2,980 4,780 5,230 6,630 3,170 4,180 % of TAC 88.7 69.4 42.6 68.3 85.7 89.6 22.6 34.8
Karaginskaya subzone – The beginning of industrial fishery for Pacific cod using hook and line fishing from schooners off Karaginsky Island and Commander Islands was put in 1927-1929 (Sinyakov, 2003). Later, in the 1930s, TINRO expeditions showed the prospects of bottom trawl fishing in this area. Until the end of1950s, Pacific cod fishery was carried out from May to October using hook and line fishing gears, but during the second half of the 1950s there was a change of longline fishing to Danish seine, which is currently the main fishing gear. The historical maximum catch of the species in Karaginskaya subzone was observed in 1984, when 34,000 tons of Pacific cod was caught. Subsequently (2003) catch decreased to 6,800 tons (Bulatov, Bogdanov, 2013). In recent years, the Karaginskaya subzone has been an important area of Pacific cod fishing, where the annual catch has stabilized at the level of 13-19 thousand tonnes (Table 11). It should be noted that the average annual TAC utilization of this species in 2001-2014 reached 97%. With an average catch during 14 years in the amount of 13,600 tonnes, the proportion of longline fishing accounted for 31.6%, and that of Danish seine and trawls is 68.4% (Table 10), which is somewhat different from the Western Bering Sea zone. However, in 2013-2014, an increase of catches of Pacific cod by longliners occurred, resulting in close to 50% of the catch being taken by either longliners or mobile gears (Table ).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 39 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 11 – Pacific cod catch and TAC (mt) in Karaginskaya subzone, 2008–2017 (according to Information System ‘Rybolovstvo’) (Source: Marine Cert., 2019). Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Catch 17,900 13,600 19,200 16,100 17,000 15,400 12,600 15,500 15,300 17,000 18,400 18,400 TAC 19,000 17,300 19,900 18,100 18,200 19,200 19,700 17,500 17,000 17,000 18,800 18,900
Table 12 – Proportion of catch by active and passive fishing gears in the Karaginskaya subzone, 2001-2014. (Source: Marine Cert., 2019). Longline Danish seine and Year Total catch, mt catch, mt trawl catches, mt 2001 5,300 8,400 13,700 2002 3,600 6,300 9,900 2003 2,400 4,400 6,800 2004 2,900 10,800 13,700 2005 3,400 7,500 10,900 2006 3,300 5,800 9,100 2007 3,800 10,400 14,200 2008 5,200 12,700 17,900 2009 3,600 9,800 13,400 2010 5,900 13,300 19,200 2011 4,100 12,000 16,100 2012 3,200 13,800 17,000 2013 7,500 7,900 15,400 2014 6,500 6,100 12,600 Average 4,300 9,200 13,600 Proportion, % 31,6 68,4 100,0
Pacific cod fisheries in Karaginskaya subzone is conducted mainly by small and medium-size vessels equipped with Danish seines and longlines. Due to the difficult ice conditions, the main fishing season occurs from July-October. For 2018, the intensity of longline fishing was more uniform throughout the year than fishing with Danish seines and trawls, with peaks in catch occurring in May and October – November.
Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone – Commercial exploitation of Pacific cod stocks in the Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone with hook-and-line and longline fishing began in the 1920s. Available data on fishery statistics showed that for the period 1932-1954 the catch of longline fishing did not exceed 10,000 tons. In the second half of the 1950s, the development of fishing with Danish seines began, which turned out to be more mechanized and less expensive than the longline fishing. In the early 1970s, the level of 10,000 tons was exceeded for the first time, but in the mid-1970s there was a sharp decline in catch. A period of low level of Pacific cod stocks and catch was relatively short-lived. Abundant generation of Pacific cod provided a sharp increase in catch from 2,400 tons in 1979 to 74,500 tons in 1986 (Figure 17). Therefore, just during seven years, the annual catches have increased more than 30 times. After reaching the historical maximum of catches, there was a sharp decline caused by the reduction of stocks size (Bulatov, Bogdanov, 2013).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 40 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 17 – Catch dynamics of Pacific cod in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, 1972-2011. (Source: Antonov, 2013).
In contrast to the Karaginskaya subzone, where due to ice conditions the fishing period falls mainly on the summer- autumn period, the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone is dominated by winter fishing, which accounted for 79.2% of the annual catch in 2018. In this area, ice is less prevalent and is limited typically to landfast ice. The average proportion of summer harvest in the annual catch during 1981-1988 constitutes 20.8%. The largest catches of Pacific cod by Danish seines fall in the winter months, i.e. the period preceding the spawning season. Longline fishing is carried out actively almost year-round; the seasonal maximum is usually observed in summer, when there is a high feeding activity of Pacific cod (Bulatov, Bogdanov, 2013). Thus, in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone the Pacific cod fishery is mostly conducted by longlines and Danish seines, with proportion of the latter in total catch about 68% that is quite similar to that of the neighboring Karaginskaya subzone. The annual Pacific cod catch varied from 5,000 mt in 2006 to 15,000 mt in 2001 with an average annual value of 10,200 mt (Table ).
Table 13 – Proportion of catch by active and passive fishing gears in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, 2001-2014 (mt). (Source: Marine Cert., 2019). Danish seine and Year Longline catch, mt Total catch, mt trawl catches, mt 2001 6,600 8,400 15,000 2002 4,000 5,100 9,100 2003 5,300 5,300 10,600 2004 3,600 6,800 10,400 2005 2,600 6,400 9,000 2006 1,800 3,200 5,000 2007 2,700 3,700 6,400 2008 2,700 7,300 10,000 2009 1,500 7,200 8,700 2010 1,300 9,500 10,800 2011 4,200 8,400 12,600 2012 1,200 11,000 12,200 2013 3,000 7,800 10,800 2014 3,800 8,200 12,000 Average 3,200 7,000 10,200 Proportion, % 31,4 68,6 100,0
In contrast to the West-Bering Sea zone and the Karaginskaya subzone, Pacific cod stocks in the Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone are not fully exploited (Table ). On average, during the period 2001-2014, the TAC
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 41 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR utilization was only 57%. The minimum level of stock exploitation was observed in 2001 and 2009 (55-57%), the maximum - in 2008 and 2017 (91-95%). Table 14 – Pacific cod catch and TAC (mt) in Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, 2008–2017 (according to Information System ‘Rybolovstvo’). (Source: Marine Cert., 2019). Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Catch 10,000 9,100 10,800 12,300 12,200 10,800 12,000 12,300 12,800 13,100 11,400 14,100 TAC 11,000 15,800 15,000 15,100 15,300 15,300 15,700 14,400 15,100 13,800 13,200 15,000
The current condition of Pacific cod stocks within the UoA is characterized by relative stability, with total TAC value ca. 61,700-79,300 mt during 2011-2017. The dynamics of recent TACs for the same period showed continuous increasing in West Bering Sea zone and Chukotskaya zone (from 29,000 to 43,600 mt) and some decrease in Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone (15,1000-13,800 mt) and Karaginskaya subzone (18,100-17,000 mt). TAC development is implemented according to principles of precautionary and ecosystem approaches and concept of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) as required by Order 104 (FFA, 2015). TAC rationale is a multi-stage procedure that includes: 1) Analysis of available information on stock condition, biology, fisheries, and environment and conclusion regarding its completeness and reliability; 2) Characteristics of the current stock condition, fisheries and environment as compared with previous years; 3) Determination of long-period aim of stock exploitation and expression of this aim in biological terms; 4) Determination of target and limit reference points in terms of spawning or fishable biomass and fishing mortality; 5) Strategy for formalization of fisheries management as a harvest control rules; 6) Evaluation of TAC, taking into account information that was not used in calculations.
Based on the structure and quality of available information, there are three levels of information supporting the TAC rationale (1ST – highest, 3rd – lowest). According to the Order No. 104 (FFA, 2015), at the 1st level, the available information provides a comprehensive analytical assessment of the state of the stock and TAC using structured models of the exploited stock. Minimum requirements for the information at this level are historical series of age composition, catches, catches per unit of fishing effort, rate of weight growth, rate of maturation, as well as the average value of the natural mortality rate by year and age groups. At the 2nd level, available information provides a limited analytical assessment of the state of the stock and TAC using production models of the exploited stock. Minimum requirements at this level are historical series of catches and catches per unit of fishing effort (or fishing efforts). At the 3rd level, the lack of completeness and/or quality of available information precludes the use of models of exploited stock. The justification of TAC is based on empirical, trend, indicator and other approximate methods used in the case of limited information. In all three zones/subzones, the level of information support for stock assessment and TAC of Pacific cod corresponds to the 1st level (TINRO, 2018). Materials that substantiate Pacific cod TAC should include following sections: 1) Analysis of available information support, 2) Rationale for the choice of stock assessment methods, 3) Retrospective analysis of stock condition and fisheries; 4) Determination of biological reference points; 5) Rationale of harvest control rules; 6) Forecast of stock condition; 7) Rationale of recommended size of TAC; 8) Analysis and diagnostic of results obtained; 9) Evaluation of impact of fisheries to environment.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 42 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.2.2 Catch profiles Catch profiles are available in figures Figure 12 and Figure 13 and in Tables 8 Table .
7.2.3 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data
Table 15 – Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data – Western Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones*
TAC Year 2019 Amount 100, kt
UoA share of TAC Year 2019 Amount n, unit
UoA share of total TAC Year 2019 Amount n, unit
Year (most Total green weight catch by UoC 2019 Amount n, unit recent)
Year (second Total green weight catch by UoC 2018 Amount n, unit most recent)
*- Notice: Data for TAC and catch in 2020 to be added by the client within site visit.
Table 16 – Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data – Karaginskaya subzone
TAC Year 2019 Amount 18.9, kt
UoA share of TAC Year 2019 Amount n, unit
UoA share of total TAC Year 2019 Amount n, unit
Year (most Total green weight catch by UoC 2019 Amount n, unit recent)
Year (second Total green weight catch by UoC 2018 Amount n, unit most recent)
Table 17 – Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and catch data – Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone
TAC Year 2019 Amount 15, kt
UoA share of TAC Year 2019 Amount n, unit
UoA share of total TAC Year 2019 Amount n, unit
Year (most Total green weight catch by UoC 2019 Amount n, unit recent)
Year (second Total green weight catch by UoC 2018 Amount n, unit most recent)
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 43 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.2.4 Principle 1 Performance Indicator scores and rationales PI 1.1.1 – Stock status – Pacific cod PI 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Stock status relative to recruitment impairment Guide It is likely that the stock is It is highly likely that the There is a high degree of post above the point where stock is above the PRI. certainty that the stock is recruitment would be impaired above the PRI. (PRI). a Met? Western Bering Sea + Western Bering Sea + Western Bering Sea + Chukotskaya zones: Y Chukotskaya zones: Y Chukotskaya zones: Y Karaginskaya subzone: Y Karaginskaya subzone: Y Karaginskaya subzone: Y Petropavlovsko- Petropavlovsko- Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone: Y Komandorskaya subzone: Y Komandorskaya subzone: Y Rationale
According to current views (TINRO, 2018) on the population structure of Pacific cod in UoA, there are three major stock components. One of them occupies the area from Olyutorsky Cape to Bering Strait and lies within two zones, namely West Bering Sea zone (61.01) and Chukotskaya zone (67.01). A second stock component occupies the area between Kamchatsky Cape and Olyutorsky Cape and lays within the Karaginskaya (61.02.1) subzone. The third stock component occupies the area between Kamchatsky Cape and the tip of the Kamchatka Peninsula and lies within the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya (61.02.2) subzone. These stock components represent three scoring elements. Western Bering Sea + Chukotskaya zones – In the western Bering Sea, including Chukotskaya zone (67.01) and Western Bering Sea zone (61.01), the Pacific cod total biomass has consistently remained above Blim level during the 1999-2017 period. According to GSA2.2.3.1 of MSC Fisheries Standard (Annexes S) and Guidance v2.0, in the case where BMSY is analytically determined to be greater than 40%B0, and there is no analytical determination of the PRI, the default PRI should be ½BMSY. This case covers the situation of low productivity stocks, where higher default PRIs may be justified. In the present case BMSY is analytically determined as 1,123 kt but there is not estimate of B0. Therefore assuming a precautionary approach PRI is determined as ½BMSY (around 560 kt). During recent years, both research surveys and models demonstrate the increasing of total biomass, SSB and CPUE of Pacific cod in the western Bering Sea, such that the stock is now the highest in the time series (Figure 6). In addition the last estimate of SSB in 2019 (above 2500 kt) and the Monte Carlo method simulations show that the stock is above the PRI probably exceeding 95th percentile (criterion for high degree of certainty); SG60, SG80, and SG100 are met. Karaginskaya subzone – In Karaginskaya subzone (61.02.1) the Pacific cod total biomass has been consistently above the Blim level at least since the 2000. According to GSA2.2.3.1 of MSC Fisheries Standard (Annexes S) and Guidance v2.0, in the case where BMSY is analytically determined to be greater than 40%B0, and there is no analytical determination of the PRI, the default PRI should be ½BMSY. This case covers the situation of low productivity stocks, where higher default PRIs may be justified. In the present case BMSY is analitically determined as 52 kt but there is not estimate of B0. Therefore assuming a precautionary approach PRI is determined as ½BMSY (around 26 kt). During recent years, both research surveys and models demonstrate a rather stable level of Pacific cod total biomass in the Karaginskaya subzone, with the stock currently close to the highest point in the time series and the stock clearly able to produce strong year classes at this size (Figure 9). In addition the last estimate of 2019 SSB (around 150 kt) and a lower 95% CI of around 100 kt show that the stock is above the PRI with high degree of certainty and this scoring element meets SG 60, SG80 and SG100. Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone – In Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone (61.02.2), the Pacific cod total biomass has been consistently above the Blim level during the 2000-2017 period. According to GSA2.2.3.1 of MSC Fisheries Standard (Annexes S) and Guidance v2.0, in the case where BMSY is analytically determined to be greater than 40%B0, and there is no analytical determination of the PRI, the default PRI should be ½BMSY. This case covers the situation of low productivity stocks, where higher default PRIs may be justified. In the present case BMSY is analitically determined as 64 kt but there is not estimate of B0. Therefore assuming a precautionary approach PRI is determined as ½BMSY (around 32 kt). Recent simulations show that in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, Pacific cod total biomass and SSB are showing a stable trend (Figure 15). In addition the last estimate of 2019 SSB
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 44 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
(around 65 kt) and a lower 95% CI of around 40 kt show that the stock is above the PRI with high degree of certainty and this scoring element meets SG 60, SG80 and SG100.
Stock status in relation to achievement of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) Guide The stock is at or fluctuating There is a high degree of post around a level consistent with certainty that the stock has MSY. been fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY or has been above this level over b recent years. Met? Western Bering Sea + Western Bering Sea + Chukotskaya zones: Y Chukotskaya zones: N Karaginskaya subzone: Y Karaginskaya subzone: N Petropavlovsko- Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone: Y Komandorskaya subzone: N Rationale
Western Bering Sea + Chukotskaya zones – In the western Bering Sea, including Chukotskaya zone (67.01) and Western Bering Sea zone (61.01), the Pacific cod total biomass have consistently remained above Bmsy level since 2003. During recent years, both research surveys and models demonstrate increasing total biomass and CPUE of Pacific cod in the western Bering Sea, such that the stock is now the highest in the time series, and with the biomass consistently above Bmsy. The instantaneous estimate of stock size clearly exceeds 90% Bmsy, so this element scores SG80 (GSA 2.2.2). There is insufficient evidence that the stock has been at or above this level in recent years to meet SG100. Karaginskaya subzone – In the waters of the Karaginskaya subzone (61.02.1) the Pacific cod total biomass has been consistently above Bmsy levels at least since the 2000. During recent years, both research surveys and models demonstrate a rather stable level of Pacific cod total biomass in the Karaginskaya subzone, with the stock currently close to the highest point in the time series (Figure 11). The instantaneous estimate of stock size clearly exceeds 90% Bmsy, so this element scores SG80 (GSA 2.2.2). From a precautionary perspective this element has not been scored at SG100. Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone – In the waters of the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone (61.02.2), the Pacific cod total biomass has been consistently above the Bmsy level during the 2000-2017 period. Recent simulations show that in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, Pacific cod total biomass is showing an upward trend, with the stock now at the highest point in the time series. The instantaneous estimate of stock size clearly exceeds 90% Bmsy, so this element scores SG80 (GSA 2.2.2). From a precautionary perspective this element has not been scored at SG100.
References
TINRO, 2018, 2019.
Stock status relative to reference points Type of reference point Value of reference point Current stock status relative to reference point
Reference point PRI (1/2 BMSY). Western Bering Sea + Western Bering Sea + Chukotskaya zones: 560 kt Chukotskaya zones: 4.5 used in scoring stock relative to Karaginskaya subzone: 26 kt Karaginskaya subzone: 5.4 PRI (SIa) Petropavlovsko- Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone: 32 Komandorskaya subzone: 2.0 kt Reference point BMSY. Western Bering Sea + Western Bering Sea + used in scoring Chukotskaya zones: 1,123 kt Chukotskaya zones: 2.2 stock relative to Karaginskaya subzone: 52 kt Karaginskaya subzone: 2.7
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 45 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
MSY (SIb) Petropavlovsko- Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone: 64 Komandorskaya subzone: 1.0 kt
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80 More information sought
Information gap indicator Updated outputs of stock assessment models will be requested during the site visit as well as the degree of connectivity with neighbouring stocks.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 46 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 1.1.2 – Stock rebuilding PI 1.1.2 Where the stock is reduced, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a specified timeframe Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Rebuilding timeframes Guide A rebuilding timeframe is The shortest practicable specified for the stock that is rebuilding timeframe is post the shorter of 20 years or 2 specified which does not times its generation time. exceed one generation time a For cases where 2 for the stock. generations is less than 5
years, the rebuilding timeframe is up to 5 years. Met? NA NA
Rationale
Since the stock status (PI 1.1.1) does achieve >80 score, this PI is not scored.
Rebuilding evaluation Guide Monitoring is in place to There is evidence that the There is strong evidence that determine whether the rebuilding strategies are the rebuilding strategies are post rebuilding strategies are rebuilding stocks, or it is rebuilding stocks, or it is effective in rebuilding the likely based on simulation highly likely based on b stock within the specified modelling, exploitation rates simulation modelling, timeframe. or previous performance that exploitation rates or previous they will be able to rebuild the performance that they will be
stock within the specified able to rebuild the stock within timeframe. the specified timeframe. Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
Since the stock status (PI 1.1.1) does achieve >80 score, this PI is not scored.
References
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range NA
Information gap indicator -
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 47 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 1.2.1 – Harvest strategy PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Harvest strategy design Guide The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is expected to achieve stock responsive to the state of the responsive to the state of the post management objectives stock and the elements of the stock and is designed to a reflected in PI 1.1.1 SG80. harvest strategy work achieve stock management together towards achieving objectives reflected in PI 1.1.1 stock management objectives SG80. reflected in PI 1.1.1 SG80. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes All elements: Yes
Rationale
There are a number of input and output fishery management tools in the Pacific cod fishery. Input tools include a mesh size limit on bottom trawl fishery, prohibition of target fishery for Pacific cod in Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone at depths less than 200 m, and a minimum landing size 40 cm of standard length. Output controls include a TAC that was the first introduced for Pacific cod of the Far Eastern Basin of the USSR in early 1970s. At that time, the TAC was based on direct estimations that came from bottom trawl surveys. After 2015, in accordance with the Order 104 (FFA, 2015), the harvest strategy was significantly revised with new requirements that included analysis of available information on stock status, life history, fishing technologies and environment, and conclusion regarding its completeness and reliability as compared with previous years; determination of long-term goals of stock exploitation and expression of this goal in biological terms; determination of target and limit reference points in terms of spawning or commercial biomass and fishing mortality; strategy for formalization of fisheries management as a harvest control rules; evaluation of TAC, taking into account information that was not used in calculations. This harvest strategy is considered responsive to the status of the stock and is designed to achieve stock management objectives, i.e. with high degree of certainty allows to maintain the stocks above the PRI and fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY over recent years. Therefore, the fishery meets SG60, SG80 and SG100.
Harvest strategy evaluation Guide The harvest strategy is likely The harvest strategy may not The performance of the to work based on prior have been fully tested but harvest strategy has been post experience or plausible evidence exists that it is fully evaluated and evidence argument. achieving its objectives. exists to show that it is b achieving its objectives including being clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes All elements: No
Rationale
The harvest control rules for each Pacific cod stock component have been evaluated according to the generic scheme (Babayan, 2000) taking into account stock-specific characteristics (TINRO, 2018). However, extensive simulations using parameters matching the most recent estimates of Pacific cod stock parameters, and the western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka environmental conditions have not been performed. Nevertheless, the exploration of scenarios in the annual assessments (TINRO, 2018 and preceding ones) is considered adequate to document that harvest control rules are performed in a precautionary matter relative to target and limit reference points. This provides evidence that the harvest strategy meets the criteria of the SG60. In addition, the western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific components suffered a series of poor recruitments due to unfavorable environmental conditions (Antonov, 2011, 2013; TINRO, 2018). As the stock correspondingly declined, the harvest control rule to reduce exploitation rate was applied (reduction of TAC). It was successfully managed in place to reduce exploitation rate during this period in a way that the stock never reached a level where
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 48 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR recruitment would be likely to be impaired due to limited spawning biomass. Therefore, evidence demonstrates that the harvest strategy can maintain Pacific cod stocks above the limit reference point even when the stocks experiencing a series of years of moderate to poor recruitment, reaching the criteria of the SG80 level. However, the harvest strategy has not been able to maintain the stock at or fluctuating around the target level during such periods, as the stock has fallen below the target level for some years in the western Bering Sea and in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone. Therefore, this scoring issue cannot meet SG 100.
Harvest strategy monitoring Guide Monitoring is in place that is expected to determine c post whether the harvest strategy is working. Met? All elements: Yes
Rationale
At-sea monitoring of the offshore fleet is conducted by the observer program, which is considered to provide very reliable information. Moreover, the western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka monitoring surveys have good coverage of natural range of Pacific cod in the western Bering Sea and off East Kamchatka, providing fishery independent estimates of stock status. These surveys are conducted irregularly but frequently enough to adequately monitor the stock status. The annual data on catches and data from fisheries-independent surveys are combined in the assessment to provide annual time series of stock status. The trajectory of stock status and exploitation rate, measures by B and F provides sufficient feedback to evaluate whether the harvest control rules are effective. Therefore, this issue achieves SG60 (serving the purpose to ensure that the lowest threshold is passed).
Harvest strategy review Guide The harvest strategy is d periodically reviewed and post improved as necessary. Met? All elements: Yes
Rationale
Currently, harvest strategy development for Pacific cod is implemented according to principles of precautionary and ecosystem approaches and Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). The harvest strategy includes a combination of the licensing, gear limitations, catch monitoring, independent data collection and analysis, stock assessment, annual TAC setting and science review processes all together and therefore seems quite comprehensive. The harvest strategy is annually reviewed according to new information based on the data came from research surveys or observations onboard commercial fishing vessels that is subsequently used for analytical models. The newly obtained data can serve as a basis for adjusting the value of the TAC both downward and upward and modification of harvest strategy. The general performance of the harvest strategy is evaluated as part of the annual assessment process and subsequently is accompanied by further discussions at Far Eastern Fisheries Council and public hearing with participation of users with final review at State Ecological Expertise represented by academic experts conducted under the auspice of the Ministry for Natural Resources and Environment. In accordance with article 20 of the Federal law No. 52-FZ of 24.04.1995 "On the animal world" (entered into force 01.01.2019), materials justifying the volume (limits, quotas) of withdrawal of objects of the animal world are subject to mandatory State Environmental Expertise (SEE). The SEE itself is carried out in accordance with the Regulations on the procedure of the State Environmental Expertise (Russian Federation government decree No. 698 of June 11, 1996). Based on the SEE report, the comments made by the experts are discussed at a special meeting with the developers of the harvest strategy, who are given time for corrections. The SEE reviews corrected material for a second time, which is then submitted to the Federal Fisheries Agency. Public hearings are held in accordance with the Federal law No. 131-FZ of 06.10.2003 "On general principles of local self-government in the Russian Federation". So, the materials of harvest strategy are peer reviewed twice, which could involve adjustments for the TAC and improvement of harvest strategy and, thus scoring of this issue reaches SG100.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 49 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Shark finning Guide It is likely that shark finning is It is highly likely that shark There is a high degree of e not taking place. finning is not taking place. certainty that shark finning is post not taking place. Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
Scoring issue is not scored since Pacific cod is not a shark species.
Review of alternative measures Guide There has been a review of There is a regular review of There is a biennial review of the potential effectiveness the potential effectiveness the potential effectiveness post and practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- f related mortality of unwanted related mortality of unwanted related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock. catch of the target stock and catch of the target stock, and they are implemented as they are implemented, as
appropriate. appropriate. Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
According to fishing regulations, all Pacific cod caught as a target species must be completely utilized. The bulk (53.4%) of longline catches of Pacific cod in UoA is represented by fish sized 59-72 cm with mean total length 64.9 cm, while the proportion of undersized individuals (<40 cm SL equal to 43.4 cm TL) is negligible (Datsky, Batanov, 2013). Thus, currently there is no need in alternative measures and, therefore this PI is scored “Not relevant”. However, during the site visit more information about the potential UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock will be requested.
References
Datsky, Batanov, 2013. FFA, 2015.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought more information about the potential UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock are needed.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 50 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 1.2.2 – Harvest control rules and tools PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules (HCRs) in place Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
HCRs design and application Guide Generally understood HCRs Well defined HCRs are in The HCRs are expected to are in place or available that place that ensure that the keep the stock fluctuating post are expected to reduce the exploitation rate is reduced as at or above a target level exploitation rate as the point the PRI is approached, are consistent with MSY, or of recruitment impairment expected to keep the stock another more appropriate a (PRI) is approached. fluctuating around a target level taking into account the level consistent with (or ecological role of the stock, above) MSY, or for key LTL most of the time. species a level consistent with ecosystem needs. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes All elements: Yes
Rationale
Harvest control rules (HCRs) for Pacific cod, are developed based on concept of Babayan (2000) and depend on stock’s status and level of information available for stock assessment. Three regimes of fisheries management have been established: for depleted stocks (1), for recovering stocks (2) and for stocks fluctuating around or above target level (3). All these regimes require set up of biological reference points in terms of biomass and fishing mortality as follows: 0 < Bi ≤ Blim, Freci = 0; Blim < Bi < Btr, Freci = (Ftr – F0)(Bi – Blim) / (Btr – Blim) + F0); Bi > Btr, Freci = Ftr = const. Currently, all three stocks are managed according to regime 3. For all three Pacific cod stock components under consideration, specific HCRs are developed, including calculations of target reference points for biomass (Btr) and fishing mortality (Ftr), limit reference points for biomass (Blim) and fishing mortality (Flim) and precautionary estimates of the limit reference points for biomass (Bpa) and fishing mortality (Fpa). Thus, current HCRs for all Pacific cod stocks in UoA are well defined that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and are expected to keep the stocks fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY; therefore, this issue achieves SG60 and SG80. Since Pacific cod is a predatory fish its ecological role does not require special consideration when defining the HCRs. Thus, this issue is scored SG 100.
HCRs robustness to uncertainty Guide The HCRs are likely to be The HCRs take account of a robust to the main wide range of uncertainties post uncertainties. including the ecological role b of the stock, and there is evidence that the HCRs are robust to the main uncertainties. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: No
Rationale
The Harvest Control Rules for Pacific cod are subject to annual review and are designed to be very precautionary; they take into account uncertainty through being based on underestimating the reference points for fishing mortality and overestimating the threshold reference point for spawning stock biomass (Blim) by an error multiplied by the Student criterion (Babayan, 2000). The fishery therefore receives SG80. The evidence that the current harvest control
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 51 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR rule is effective and robust to the main uncertainties is the level of current fishing mortality (F) which is equal or less than Fmsy. At the same time, the assessment team is not aware about direct consideration of ecological role of Pacific cod while setting up HCRs as well as the degree of connectivity and self-recruitment and thus this issue cannot be scored at SG100.
HCRs evaluation Guide There is some evidence that Available evidence Evidence clearly shows tools used or available to indicates that the tools in use that the tools in use are post implement HCRs are are appropriate and effective effective in achieving the c appropriate and effective in in achieving the exploitation exploitation levels required controlling exploitation. levels required under the under the HCRs. HCRs.
Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes All elements: Yes
Rationale
The analysis of long-term data on Pacific cod biomass dynamics and fishing mortality (TINRO, 2018) shows that in the western Bering Sea fishing mortality (F) from 1998 to 2019 has been lower than or corresponds to the level of Ftr, and has been significantly lower than the levels of Flim and Fpa. In the Karaginskaya subzone, Pacific cod fishing mortality has been lower than or corresponds to the level of Ftr, and has been significantly lower than the levels of Flim and Fpa at least since 2005, and in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone since at least 2007. These HCRs have kept Pacific cod total biomass in the western Bering Sea above Blim level during the entire period of observations, and above Btr during 2016-2019. Pacific cod total biomass in the Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsko– Komandorskaya subzones was kept above Btr level during the whole above-mentioned period. No cases of exceeding the TAC in all zones/subzones have been reported. This evidence clearly show that the tools in use are effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the HCRs, and therefore this issue meets SG60, SG80 and SG100.
References
Babayan, 2000. TINRO, 2018.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 52 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 1.2.3 – Information and monitoring PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Range of information Guide Some relevant information Sufficient relevant A comprehensive range of related to stock structure, information related to stock information (on stock post stock productivity and fleet structure, stock productivity, structure, stock productivity, composition is available to fleet composition and other fleet composition, stock support the harvest strategy. data are available to support abundance, UoA removals the harvest strategy. and other information such as a environmental information),
including some that may not be directly related to the current harvest strategy, is available. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes All elements: Yes
Rationale
According to the new procedures under Order 104 (FFA, 2015), the level of information support for the TAC rationale for each stock is determined based on the structure and quality of available information (1ST – highest, 3rd – lowest). The analysis of available information testifies that information support for the Pacific cod TAC rationale for all the three stocks corresponds to the 1st level, i.e. available information allows for undertaking a comprehensive analytical assessment of stock status using structured models. The stock assessment procedure involves information on a historical series of age composition, catches, catches per unit of fishing effort, growth rate, maturation, as well as the average value of the natural mortality rate by year and age groups. It also involves fleet composition by gears (trawls, longlines, Danish seines and others). Thus, this issue meets criteria of SG60 and SG80. Monitoring of Pacific cod removals is conducted daily on the basis of daily vessel reports, which are accumulated by the Information System “Rybolovstvo” in the Federal Fisheries Agency. Environmental information related to UoA is regularly monitored. The wide range of biological information is sampled during research surveys and by observers onboard commercial vessels that may not be directly related to the current harvest strategy. These information include length measurements that are used for evaluation of length frequencies, otoliths and scales that are used for age determination and evaluation of age structure, ovaries that are used for fecundity estimations, stomachs that are used for trophic studies, tissues that are used for genetic population studies, frozen fish that are used for parasitological and technological research Such materials are collected on a regular basis and further used in various models that improve current harvest strategy. Thus, this issue also meets SG100.
Monitoring Guide Stock abundance and UoA Stock abundance and UoA All information required by removals are monitored and removals are regularly the harvest control rule is post at least one indicator is monitored at a level of monitored with high available and monitored with accuracy and coverage frequency and a high degree sufficient frequency to consistent with the harvest of certainty, and there is a b support the harvest control control rule, and one or good understanding of rule. more indicators are inherent uncertainties in the available and monitored with information [data] and the sufficient frequency to robustness of assessment support the harvest control and management to this rule. uncertainty. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes All elements: No
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 53 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Rationale
Pacific cod stocks abundance are monitored during research surveys which are conducted irregularly but frequently enough to detect changes in stock condition. The data on biology, catch rates and discards (also from the longline fishery, i.e. the UoA) are sampled annually by scientific observers onboard commercial fishing vessels with overall sufficient coverage and are subsequently used for stock assessment and verification of catch statistics. Monitoring of Pacific cod removals is conducted daily on the basis of fishing vessel reports, which are accumulated by the Information System “Rybolovstvo” in the Federal Fisheries Agency. Existence of such a scheme allows for scoring this issue at SG60 and SG80. Since research surveys are conducted on irregular basis and the coverage by observers in some periods or in some areas might be insufficient, the information (data) obtained from research surveys and observations is not demonstrably representative and may contain uncertainties (stock boundaries) that prevent the fishery scoring SG100.
Comprehensiveness of information Guide There is good information on c all other fishery removals post from the stock. Met? All elements: Yes
Rationale
There is comprehensive information on all other fishery removals from Pacific cod stocks. Data on daily catches of each fishing vessels independent on type, size, owner, fishing gear, etc. in the area under jurisdiction of Russia are reported to Federal Fisheries Agency and accumulated in Information System “Rybolovstvo” that is available under subscription and is used in stock assessment and fisheries regulation. Catch statistics used for stock assessment is verified based on reports of observers onboard commercial fishing vessels.
References
FFA, 2015.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought More information about the UoA removals will be requested duirng the site visit.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 54 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 1.2.4 – Assessment of stock status PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Appropriateness of assessment to stock under consideration Guide The assessment is The assessment takes into appropriate for the stock and account the major features a post for the harvest control rule. relevant to the biology of the species and the nature of the UoA. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes
Rationale
The procedure for stock assessment is clearly stated in the national legislation, with timelines and responsibilities of each party being defined. The assessment of the stock status for Pacific cod includes the empirical data, originating from the official daily fishery reports to FAR and independent observer data, and analytical modelling. SG80 is met. “Synthesis” model, along with other well-known models (XSA, TISVPA, etc., which have already passed testing and many years of testing within the framework of ICES and other scientific fisheries management organizations), since 2018 it has been recommended for assessing stocks of priority types of aquatic biological resources. The main features relevant to the biology of species and nature of the UoA are normally taken into account, SG100 is obtained.
Assessment approach Guide The assessment estimates The assessment estimates stock status relative to stock status relative to b post generic reference points reference points that are appropriate to the species appropriate to the stock and category. can be estimated. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes
Rationale
Biological reference points for Pacific cod in the western Bering Sea (western Bering Sea and Chukotskaya zones) and off eastern Kamchatka (Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzones) are established regularly in accordance with the current stock status and available information for stock assessment. They are subject to an annual review based on new information and to an external review in the State Ecological Expertise. If this information leads to revision of biological reference points, a respective revision of stock size would be reflected in the TAC of the forthcoming year. Thus this issue achieves SG60. Since the assessment estimates status of Pacific cod stocks relative to the reference points that are appropriate to the particular stock and can be estimated, SG80 is reached.
Uncertainty in the assessment Guide The assessment identifies The assessment takes The assessment takes into major sources of uncertainty. uncertainty into account. account uncertainty and is c post evaluating stock status relative to reference points in a probabilistic way. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes All elements: No
Rationale
The assessment of Pacific cod in the region takes into account uncertainty through undertaking separate assessments in all three zones/subzones (which accounts for stock structure as understood) and through detailed estimation of the main features of each Pacific cod stock components, including length at first maturity, fecundity, natural and fishing mortality, etc. Also the stock assessment methods employed are providing also confidence intervals of the biomass
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 55 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR outputs. Therefore, all elements are scored at SG80. However, none of the Pacific cod stocks outputs are available in probabilistic way and uncertinity related with the degree of connectivity with neighbouring stocks are not completely clear, thus this scoring issue does not receive SG 100.
Evaluation of assessment Guide The assessment has been tested and shown to be post robust. Alternative d hypotheses and assessment approaches have been rigorously explored. Met? All elements: Yes
Rationale
The assessment of Pacific cod stocks, development of harvest control rules and calculations of the amount of TAC were conducted with the use of various computer programs, namely “Synthesis” (Ilyin, 2009), COMBI 4.0 (Babayan et al., 2017), TISVPA (Vasiliev, 2005) developed by KamchatNIRO and VNIRO which allow for testing of alternative assumptions around stock structure, reference points, etc. (Babayan et al., 2018). Therefore, this issue meets SG100.
Peer review of assessment Guide The assessment of stock The assessment has been e status is subject to peer internally and externally post review. peer reviewed. Met? All elements: Yes All elements: Yes
Rationale
Stock assessments are peer reviewed. Procedure for stock assessment is clearly described in the Order 104 (FFA, 2015) where the timeline for each stage and responsibility of each participant are defined from initial preparation by local research institutes to aggregation of materials by VNIRO and provision them to Federal Fisheries Agency for presentation to State Ecological Expertise through discussion at Far Eastern Fisheries Council, public hearing and finally State Ecological Expertise represented by academic experts. Therefore, the stock assessment is subject to multiple peer reviews, both internal and external and thus this scoring issue meets the SG80 and SG100 criteria.
References
FFA, 2015.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought More information about the modelling approaches used to estimate stock status and reference points will be requested during the site visit.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 56 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.2.5 Principle 1 references Antonov N.P. 2011. Commercial fishes of Kamchatka: Biology, Stocks, Fisheries. Moscow: VNIRO Publishing. Antonov N.P. 2013. Pacific cod Gadus macrocephalus of waters near Kamchatka // Pacific cod of the Far Eastern waters of Russia (A.M. Orlov, ed.). Moscow: VNIRO Publishing. P. 133-151. Babayan V.K. 2000. Precautionary approach to assessment of total allowable catch (TAC). Analysis and practical recommendations. Moscow, VNIRO Publishing. Babayan V.K., Bobrylev A.Ye., Bulgakova T.I., Vasiliev D.A., Ilyin O.I., Kovalev Yu.A., Mikhailov A.I., Mikheev A.A., Petukhova N.G., Safaraliev I.A., Chetyrkin A.A., Sheremetyev A.D. 2018. Methodical recommendations for stock assessment of priority species of aquatic biological resources. VNIRO. 312 p. Bulatov O.A., Bogdanov G.A. 2013. Fisheries for Pacific cod in the Russian waters // Pacific cod of the far Eastern Russian waters (A.M. Orlov, ed.). Moscow: VNIRO Publishing, pp. 234-252. Buryakova M.E., Orlov A.M, Khodakov A.V., Savinykh V.F. 2010. Seasonal multi-year dynamics of Pacific cod distribution in the area adjacent to Russia and USA marine border // Trudy VNIRO. Vol. 149. P. 302-318. Datsky A.V., Batanov R.L. 2013. Pacific cod Gadus macrocephalus and its role in the fish community of the Olyutorsky-Navarin area of the Bering Sea in 1996-2005 // Pacific cod in the Far Eastern waters of Russia (A.M. Orlov, ed.). Moscow: VNIRO Publishing. pp. 189-212. FFA, 2015. Order No. 104 of the Federal Fisheries Agency of the Russian Federation from 06.02.2015. Ilyin O.I. 2009. Optimization problems in continuous models of exploited populations with age structure: abstract. PhD thesis in Phys-Math sciences // Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, 2009. 22 p. Gordeev V.D. 1949. Status and prospects of trawling in the far East // Izvestiya TINRO. Vol. 29. P. 3- 33. Kalugin A.I., Ilyin O.I. 2018. Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus). 61.02 - East Kamchatka zone. 61.02.1 Marine Cert. 2019. Western Bering Sea Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline. Public Certification Report – October 2019 Longline Fishery Association Assessment Team: Dmitry Lajus, Daria Safronova, Aleksei Orlov, Rob Blyth- Skyrme Neidetcher S.K., Hurst Th.P., Ciannelli L., Logerwel E.A. 2014. Spawning phenology and geography of Aleutian Islands and eastern Bering Sea Pacific cod ( Gadus macrocephalus). Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography Volume 109, November 2014, Pages 204-214 Poltev Y.N. 2007. Features of the spatial distribution of Pacific cod Gadus macrocephalus in the waters of the Eastern coast of the Northern Kuril Islands and the southern tip of Kamchatka // Voprosy Ikhtiologii. Vol. 47. No. 6. P. 769- 782. Savin A.B. 2016. Spawning of the Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus, Gadidae) in the northwestern part of the Pacific ocean // Izvestiya TINRO, Vol. 187. P. 48-71. Stepanenko M.A. 1995. Distribution, behaviour, and abundance of Pacific cod in the Bering Sea // Voprosy Ikhtiologii. Vol. 35. No. 1. P. 53-59. Stroganov A.N. On the formation of genetic diversity in populations of Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus Tilesius) (Gadidae) // Genetika. - 2013. - Т. 49. - № 11. - p. 1300-1305. [Строганов А.Н. О формировании генетического разнообразия в популяциях тихоокеанской трески (Gadus macrocephalus Tilesius) (Gadidae) // Генетика. - 2013. - Т. 49. Terentyev D.A. 2020. Report for YAMSy JSC, KZB-seld JSC as part of the provision of scientific research materials for preliminary assessment with the aim of further certification of bottom longline fishery for cod and halibut according to the MSC standard in the area of company fishing. // Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky: YAMSy. 210 p. Terentyev D.A., Ilyin O.I. 2018. Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus). 61.02.2 - Petropavlovsk- Komandorskaya subzone // Forecast of total allowable catch of aquatic organisms in the far Eastern fisheries basin for 2018. Vladivostok: TINRO-Center. P. 61-63. TINRO, 2018. Materials for certification of Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline fisheries in the Bering Sea according to MSC standards (report on research work under contract No. 77-18). Inventory number 28243. Vladivostok: TINRO-Center. TINRO, 2019. The status of fishing resources. Forecast of the total catch of the aquatic biological resources at the Far Eastern fishery basin on 2019 (Short version) // Compiled by: Boldyrev V.Z. et al. Vladivostok: TINRO Publishing. 448 p. (In Russian).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 57 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.3 Principle 2 7.3.1 Principle 2 background Overview of the aquatic ecosystem The following section is summarised from KamchatNIRO (2016) and TINRO (2018a). The area where this assessment takes place includes the Western Bering Sea and coastal areas of the Eastern Kamchatka. Water enters the Bering Sea through the passes of the Aleutian Islands and from the rivers of Siberia and Alaska. Water from the Alaska Coastal Current, a shelf current that originates in the Gulf of Alaska, enters the Bering Sea primarily through Unimak Pass and Samalga Pass. Water from the Alaskan Stream, a shelf-edge current that is a part of the North Pacific Subarctic gyre, enters the Bering Sea through a series of deep passes from Samalga Pass westward to Amchitka Pass and beyond. Water leaves the Bering Sea primarily through Bering Strait and through Kamchatka Strait. Flow through the Bering Strait is important for the northern shelf of the Bering Sea and for the Arctic Ocean but it has virtually no effect on circulation in the Bering Sea basin (Figure ).
Figure 18 – The Alaskan Stream, Kamchatka Current, Bering Slope Current (BSC) and Aleutian North Slope Current (ANSC) of the Being Sea. Source: http://publications.iodp.org/preliminary_report/323/323_f2.htm.
In comparison to the Eastern Bering Sea, the Western Bering Sea is a more active ecosystem at lower trophic levels, with higher primary and secondary production and higher production per unit area. The reasons for this difference are probably related to the narrower Western shelf having a larger percentage of its area associated with the high production area along the shelf break.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 58 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
The Pacific waters off the northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka are one of the most productive areas of the Russian Far East EEZ. However, the relative importance of fishes from this area in the total Russian Far East catch remains insignificant. Low catch is associated with rocky grounds that restricted bottom trawling in most of the area (Orlov & Ulchenko, 2012). Since 1986, annual research surveys in the Bering Sea have been carried out from the research vessels of the TINRO-Center. These surveys include not only monitoring of the status of main commercial species and other (non- commercial) common demersal and pelagic species, but also monitoring of climate-oceanological and hydrobiological conditions. For more than 30 years of research of the ecosystem of the Bering Sea, more than 30 pelagic and more than 20 bottom surveys were conducted during various seasons of the year; together, these surveys have allowed the dynamics of ecosystem components to be investigated in considerable detail. Information obtained before 2000 on the status of biological resources, including the composition, structure, productivity and dynamics of the pelagic and benthic communities of the Far Eastern seas, has been published in a number of papers (Shuntov, 2001; Dulepova, 2002). The monitoring carried out after 2000, supplemented the existing series of observations. The following standard set of research techniques was applied in the expeditions: bottom trawl and pelagic surveys for assessing the composition and biomass of nekton, bottom fish and macrobenthos; collection of biostatistical materials characterizing the state and size-age structure of populations of abundant species of fish and commercial invertebrates; collection of information on the composition and quantitative distribution of meso- and macroplankton; daily stations sampling, where round-the-clock collection of data on the feeding of bottom and pelagic fish species was conducted. Biological production of the main components of the ecosystem was calculated under laboratory conditions, based on data analysis. This information has allowed the seasonal and long term changes in structure and functioning of the ecosystem of the fishing areas to be monitored.
Oceanography of the fishing areas In terms of the geographical location, shoreline and continental shelf, the Bering Sea is like a lagoon, separated from the Pacific Ocean by the line of the Aleutian and Commander Islands. The Bering Sea connects with the Arctic Ocean by a shallow Bering Strait, which has a cross section of only 3.4 km2. Therefore, the inflow of Arctic waters in the Bering Sea is small (0.2 m3/s), which limits their influence on the hydrology of the sea. In addition to the geographical location and conditions of water exchange with the Pacific Ocean, the water circulation and distribution of the hydrological characteristics of the Bering Sea are also affected by the division of the sea into two almost equal parts — the south-western deep-water and north-eastern shallow water, as well as the position of the continental slope in the central part of the sea. The relief of the deep-water part is a plain with depths greater than 3,000 m, subdivided by the Shirshov and Bowers submarine ridges into the Commander, Aleutian and Bowers basins (Figure 19). Together with the continental slope of the central part of the sea, the submarine ridges largely determine the position of the main currents of the sea. The shallow north-eastern half of the sea is a flat plateau with a smooth slope of the bottom. Despite the summit position of this extensive shallow, it is cut off to some extent from the main circulations of the continental slope. This circumstance creates additional prerequisites for the formation of stagnant zones on the northern shelf. If we consider the ratio of areas with different depths, then a 10% of the area falls on the continental slope (200-2000 m), and 45% on the shallows and depressions each. For the bottom and near-bottom animals living on the continental slope, the complex relief of the bottom of this vertical sea zone is of a great importance, the most characteristic feature of which is the presence of a large number of submarine valleys, canyons, ridges, ledges and outcrops of bedrocks. In addition to the direct dependence of the distribution of hydrobionts on the bottom topography, the most important is its indirect effect through sedimentation and water dynamics. In particular, the complex topography of the continental and island slopes contributes significantly to the relatively stable hydrological regime of great depths, forming multidirectional movements of waters, as well as micro- and meso-circulations.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 59 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 19 – Map of Kamchatka, Alaska and the Bering Sea. Source: https://www.britannica.com/place/Bering-Sea.
The influx of large volumes of ocean waters into the Bering Sea is of particular importance in the formation of the flow- fields. The inflow of water from the ocean occurs through the Aleutian Straits and through the Middle Strait with the course of Attu. Under the influence of the central continental slope, crossing the sea from Cape Navarin to the eastern part of the Aleutian Ridge, the oceanic waters turn to the north-west and in the south-western part give rise to the East Kamchatka down current. The Navarin and West Alaska currents branch off from the main circulating system of the Bering Sea along the edges of its north-eastern shallow water area. Through the Bering Strait, their waters enter the Chukchi Sea. The middle part of the North Bering Sea shelf (between isobaths of 50 and 100 m) mainly consists of a series of stagnant zones caused by slow circular movement of water: anticyclonic on Matveevo-Lavrentyevskoe shallow water and cyclonic - to the east of the Pribilov Islands and in the western part of the Anadyr Gulf (Khen, 1988). Comments are merited for the hydrological situation on the continental slope. It is the most studied for the Bering Sea. With the passage of currents along the continental slope, a series of meanders and multidirectional vortices, especially characteristic for areas with complex bottom relief are formed and therefore the vertical and horizontal water boundaries are broken and become permeable to nutrients intake. The influence of all such formations on the increase of phytoplankton concentrations, as well as various hydrobionts (zooplankton, fish, birds) was repeatedly emphasized in different studies (Shuntov, 1972, 2001; Shuntov et al., 1993; Springer et al., 1996). Many researchers have indicated that, according to the richness of nutrients, the Bering Sea belongs to water bodies with a high level for the World Ocean of these concentrations (Mokievskaya, 1959; Ivanenkov, 1964; Hood, 1983). The main source of nutrients for the photic layer in the Bering Sea are intermediate and deep waters, in addition to the large rivers. As mentioned above, the vertical and horizontal distribution of nutrients is associated with gyres. For example, in cyclonic gyres with rising waters outside the Olyutorsky Bay and south-west of Cape Navarin there are spots with a very high content of silicon, phosphates and nitrates. In anticyclonic gyres, water is depleted of these elements and at the same time enriched with ammonium nitrogen, organic phosphorus and organic nitrogen, the accumulation of which is the result of the vital activity of organisms (Sapozhnikov & Naletova, 1995). The stratification of water in the warm season and the system of offshore fronts prevent the exchange of nutrients between shallow and deep-water areas; this is evidenced by differences in the concentrations of nitrates, ammonium and organic nitrogen (Verkhunov, 1995). Oceanographic conditions in the Pacific Ocean at the area off the south-eastern Kamchatka are very dynamic due to interaction of East Kamchatka current with Strait’s currents and bottom relief. As a result, three quasi-stationary anticyclonic eddies exist off the south-eastern Kamchatka, Paramushir Island coast and off the underwater plateau southeast of Onekotan Island (Orlov & Ulchenko, 2012). Changes in bottom salinity in this area are determined by the influence of the East Kamchatka Current and the waters brought by it, as well as by the complex dynamics of the water masses around the islands and in the straits, and by tidal phenomena (Ulchenko & Orlov, 2013). Features of the spatial distribution of the main commercial fish species from this area in connection with such oceanographic characteristics as current, temperature and salinity were considered by Kantakov (2000). The influence of eddies on the spatial distribution of some benthic fish species is analysed by Orlov (2003). In general, though, there is little information published on relationships between oceanological parameters, dynamics of seasonal distribution and
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 60 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR characteristics of the life cycle of bottom fish in Pacific waters of the Northern Kuril Islands and South-Eastern Kamchatka (Ulchenko & Orlov, 2013).
7.3.2 Catch composition and related MSC components According to MSC Fisheries Standard, Principle 2 species must be apportioned between primary, secondary and ETP species and scored in the relevant PIs. Primary species are those species that are in scope but not target (P1), for which management tools and measures are in place, intended to achieve stock management objectives reflected in either limit or target reference points (FCR v2.01 SA3.1.3.3), while secondary species are those that are not considered to be Principle 1 species, Principle 2 primary species or ETP species, or are out of scope for the MSC program (FCR v2.01 SA 3.1.4). A ‘main’ designation is attributed to species comprising more than 5% of the catch by weight (FCR v2.01 SA 3.4.2.1) or comprising more than 2% of the catch by weight where a species is considered to be ‘less resilient’ (FCR v2.01 SA 3.4.2.2), or if even small catch proportions may significantly impact the affected stock/population (FCR v2.0 SA 3.4.4). All other species not considered ‘main’ shall be considered ‘minor’ species (FCR v2.01 SA 3.4.5). The MSC also requires that bait species are considered against the P2 species performance indicators. The catch composition and attribution to the different MSC P1 and P2 components is contained in the table below (Table 18). The allocation is primarily based upon this fishery’s pre-assessment (Golovin, 2020), but has been harmonised with the catch composition from the LFA Pacific cod longline fishery in the same areas (Lajus et al, 2019).
Table 18 – Scoring elements.
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient P1 Pacific cod Main Main Main No Primary Pacific herring (bait) Main Main Main No Primary Pacific halibut Main Main Minor No Primary Aleutian skate Main Main n/a No Primary Alaska skate Main Minor Main No Primary Walleye pollock Main Minor Minor No Primary Giant grenadier Minor Main Minor No Primary Greenland halibut Minor Minor Minor No Primary Sablefish Minor n/a n/a No Primary Arrowtooth flounder Minor Minor n/a No Primary Kamchatka flounder Minor Minor n/a No Primary Northern rock sole Minor n/a n/a No Primary Flathead sole Minor Minor n/a No Primary White-blotched skate Minor Minor n/a No Primary Rock greenling n/a Minor Minor No Primary Short-raker rockfish Minor Minor n/a No
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Secondary Pacific sleeper shark Main Minor n/a Yes Secondary Fulmars Main Main Main No Secondary Slaty-backed gulls Main Main Main No Secondary Short-tailed shearwater Main Main Main No Secondary Spiny dogfish Minor n/a n/a No Secondary Yellow Irish lord Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Purple-grey sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Plain sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Great sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Soldatov’s eelpout Minor n/a n/a No
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 61 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Secondary Gilbert’s Irish lord n/a Minor Minor No ETP Steller sea lion n/a n/a n/a
ETP Northern fur seal n/a n/a n/a
ETP Short-tailed albatross n/a n/a n/a
ETP Red-legged kittiwake n/a n/a n/a
7.3.3 Target species Pacific cod Gadus macrocephalus The main discussion on this fishery’s target species, Pacific cod, is provided in preceding sections. This short addendum provides the background of Pacific cod as species component of the wider ecosystem in the assessment area, in particular its position in the trophic structure. The food spectrum of Pacific cod is very wide and includes about 100-150 species of invertebrates and fish. Age- related dynamics of nutrition is clearly expressed in this species. Juveniles of cod (fingerlings and yearlings), up to 20- 30 cm in size, feed mainly on mysids and amphipods, with an increase in the size of cod, they begin to feed on shrimps, then on crabs and squids. The largest cod eat fish: pollock in the Okhotsk and Bering seas and herring in Sakhalin waters (Chuchukalo, 2006). In the western part of the Bering Sea, the fish part of the diet is represented by species of the families Cottidae, Gadidae, Osmeridae, Pleuronectidae, Zoarcidae, Clupeidae, Ammodytidae, Salmonidae (Napazakov et al., 2001). In the Navarinsky district, feeding cod focus on aggregations of humpy shrimp and Pacific sand lance (Batanov et al., 1999). In general, crustaceans play a significant role in cod diet. So, for example, in the Olyutorsko Navarinskiy district in August-September 1996, the basis of the cod diet of 40–50 cm in size was made up of shrimps and juveniles of the snow crab Chionoecetes opilio. A significant part of the diet (38.8%) was represented by fishes - capelin, sand lance, and juveniles of Cottidae. For fish of 50–60 cm in size, various fish species also dominated in the diet (mainly pollock fry). Shrimps, hermit crabs and young snow crabs composed less than 40%. For cod with a size of 60-70 cm, the diet consisted mainly of pollock. A similar diet with a slight difference was noted in the Gulf of Anadyr, where, along with shrimps and pollock, a significant proportion (17-17.6%) was the proportion of hermit crabs (Kuznetsova, 1998). According to study conducted in 1999, in the Karaginsko-Olyutorskiy district cod up to 30 cm in size preferred shrimps, and the larger individuals, along with shrimps, consumed crabs (mainly snow crab), as well as fish. Comparing the composition and the volume of the diet of Pacific cod from different areas, it can be concluded that its feeding habits in the same seasons and years are very similar. The food spectrum (especially its fish component) is determined by the composition of the mass species of benthic communities. The intensity of nutrition is determined by the seasonal and age dynamics of nutrition, but has its own local differences, which is probably related to the physiology and characteristics of the life cycle in each specific habitat. In the western part of the Bering Sea, to date, it is difficult to estimate the seasonal dynamics of cod nutrition. With a certain degree of confidence one can only say that from July to August there is a drop in the intensity of feeding of large cod and a slight increase in the intensity of feeding is observed from September-October to November. In general, Pacific cod larger than 40 cm is a third-level consumer and feeding is focused on of second-order consumers (fish and decapod crustaceans). Nevertheless, the proportion of representatives of lower trophic levels (polychaetes, amphipods, spoon worms) is quite significant in the diet of juvenile cod. Pacific cod is a facultative predator with a high degree of food plasticity (Dulepova, 2002; Klovach et al., 1995; Borets, 1997; Napazakov, 2003).
7.3.4 Primary Species There are six primary main species (Table 19). Table 19 – Primary main species allocation by zone / subzone.
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Primary Pacific herring (bait) Main Main Main No Primary Pacific halibut Main Main Minor Primary Aleutian skate Main Main n/a No Primary Alaska skate Main Minor Main No Primary Walleye pollock Main Minor Minor No Primary Giant grenadier Minor Main Minor No
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 62 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Pacific herring (Clupea pallasii) Pacific herring is exclusively used by client companies as a bait species in longline fishing of Pacific cod. Herring is bought from other companies, which conduct fishing in the Northern Okhotskaya subzone of the Sea of Okhotsk zone. The amount of bait used in the fishery over the last five years is presented in the Table . Table 20 – Amount of Pacific herring used as a bait by Client companies (mt).
Vessel 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 names Alanett 227 180 226 246 302 Blanket 241 218 187 255 285 Gruper n/data 175 214 211 207 Kalam 237 168 281 307 348 Kalkan 234 239 210 270 278 Tarpon 51 157 229 279 288 Tyburon 208 173 232 265 266 Tomkod 71 114 244 271 324 Total 1,269 1,426 1,822 2,104 2,299
In the Russian Far East, herring is an important commercial species for specialised fisheries, and thus is subjected to stock assessment and allocation of TAC quotas. Pacific herring have numerous populations throughout the North Pacific Ocean and adjacent seas. It is considered as an LTL (low trophic level) species (Box SA1 FCR v.2.0). In the western North Pacific, Pacific herring is found throughout the Western Bering Sea to Kamchatka, in the Sea of Okhotsk, around Hokkaido, Japan, and south and west to the Yellow Sea. Based on morpho-biological characteristics, most of the researchers distinguish two independent stocks in the northern part of the Sea of Okhotsk, namely, the Okhotsk and Gizhiga–Kamchatka stocks. The Sea of Okhotsk stock, which lives in the waters of the north-western part of the sea, is the most numerous and commercially important (Semenova et al., 2014). The main fishing ground of Pacific herring is the northern Sea of Okhotsk, where it is fished by trawls mostly from October to April. Some insignificant amounts of herring are caught from May to June (spawning period). Herring abundance is very variable in both large and small geographic scales. The primary cause for such fluctuations is environmental change that affects herring growth and recruitment. In a long-term aspect, the abundance of fish is variable, the stocks are formed by changing productive and non-productive generations. At present, modern condition of the species stock of the Northern Okhotskaya subzone is reviewed as relatively stable. A noticeable increase in their biomass has been noted since the mid-1990s of the last century, when the commercial stock was recruited by rich year-class of Okhotsk herring (1988 and 1989 years of birth). Since then a series of abundant year-class have been noted, which allowed to significantly (compared to the end of the 1980s - the beginning of the 1990s) increase catches in the Sea of Okhotsk (Lajus et al., 2019). The latest calculation of commercial stock in 2019 was done by cohort analysis, in accordance with the concept of reproductive variability. The estimates were equal to 1.01 million t, which means that the stock has reduced by 14.4% in comparison with the previous year. The situation can be explained by complete elimination of highly productive generation formed in 2004, and significant reduction of generation formed in 2006, also, there are generations of 2011-2013, which are not very productive. If an amount of 90 thousand t, formed by 65,000 t of pre-spawning and 25,000 t of spawning fish, are reserved from the commercial stocks, then with the same yield in 2018 and 2019 the assigned TAC volume in 2020 reaches the level of 236 thousand t (TINRO, 2019). The values of total allowable catch for herring in Russian Far East for 2013-2019 are presented in Table .
Table 21 – The TAC of Pacific herring in the Russian Far East for 2013-2019 (thousand t). Source: TINRO, 2019. Zone/subzone 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Chukotskaya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Western Bering Sea 8.6 6.0 45.0 58.0 65.7 61.0 43.0 Karaginskaya 74.5 75.2 59.2 50.9 50.8 48.1 45.4 Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya 0.0 0.0 - - - 0.3 0.1 Southern Kuril ------0.2 Northern Okhotskaya 258.0 275.0 270.0 266.0 275.0 276.0 236.0
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 63 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Western Kamchatka 70.0 68.0 47.0 68.0 88.0 64.0 46.0 Eastern Sakhalin 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.6 1.0 1.9 3.8 Primorye 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 Western Sakhalin 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 Total: 411.9 425.0 422.0 444.7 480.9 451.8 375.0
Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) Pacific halibut is an important commercial species in this fishery. In the waters around Kamchatka Peninsula, halibut is evenly distributed at depths of 10 - 700 m. It occurs along the entire Pacific coast of Kamchatka, is widespread in the north-western part of the Bering Sea from the Kamchatka and Komandorsky Islands to the southwestern sections of the Anadyr Gulf. In addition, it is found in the open part of the Bering Sea along the border of the continental slope from Navarin Cape to the Gulf of Bristol. It is believed that Pacific halibut is a stenothermal fish — the optimum temperature for its habitat is 3–8° С. Feeding occurs in significant areas of the shelf and the upper slope of the entire range, dispersing at depths from 450 m to shallow water. Western Bering Sea: It is stated that the explicit Blim value is not used in calculations since the logistic HCR is used. The total stock biomass has been declining at least since 2000, and during the last 3 years it was below the target BMSY level. Still, the latest estimation of conservative HCR mode in JABBA showed, that the particular harvest MSY value of 1 thousand t is expected to allow the future restoration of stocks, and the TAC value is set slightly below this level. The default threshold of PRI equal to 50% of BMSY covering the low-productive species was not reached by declining stocks in recent years, and instantaneous estimate is the same. According to the other evaluations, Pacific halibut total biomass has been consistently above the Blim level during the 2000-2016 period (Lajus et al, 2019).The stocks are reported as being low-productive, and the recent decision of inclusion of Pacific halibut into the commonly managed quota for halibuts led to significant increase of catches in 2018 and overfishing. Karaginskaya: The implicit average MSY catch value from linear-piecewise HCR without optimization (1.047 thousand t) is between the extreme positions of this indicator and has minimal risks of violation of the catch and stock limits. According to the different calculations of the biologically based orienteers (Marine Stewardship Council, 2019), during 1999-2017 the stock biomass never fell below Blim. Although the selected linear partial HCR estimates the probability for biomass falling below Blim in the future as equal to zero, the assumption on the stock status cannot be expanded for the timescale of two species generations. Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya: The TAC level is based on the calculations performed using CurC method, proposing the preservation of stable catch volumes over the number of years, the obtained median catch value is equal to 0.138 thousand t. Pacific halibut total biomass has been consistently above the Blim level during the 2003- 2017 period (Lajus et al, 2019). According to the TAC values in 2018-2019 of 0.156-0.151 thousand t and fishing mortality of 13%, it is expected the stock biomass, compared with 2003-2017 period, would still be well above the Blim. It is not clear in what degree the selected regime of TAC establishing allows the stocks to maintain high productivity. It is stated that stock biomass of halibut in the subzone in 1996 - 2006 varied within 1.8-6.6 thousand t, with fishing mortality of 13-15% (Terentyev, 2020). Aleutian skate (Bathyraja aleutica) Aleutian skates are relatively numerous in the Western Bering Sea. The Aleutian Skate is a large deep-water skate, reaching a maximum size of 154 cm total length (TL) (Ebert, 2005). It inhabits the outer continental shelf and upper slope on muddy substrates (Ebert, 2003) and occurs at depths of 15 to 1,602 m (Sheiko and Fedorov, 2000; Ormseth and Matta, 2011). This fishery usually operates down to 600 – 800 m, i.e., within the upper part of species' bathymetric range (Ormseth and Matta, 2011). Surveys which report biomass estimates for the Aleutian Skate are varied depending on the jurisdiction with inconsistent time series between areas. The only bottom trawl surveys carried out in Russian waters were between 1977 and 1997, and estimated an average annual biomass estimate of 87,700 t, comprising of 27,800 t in the western Bering Sea, 5,100 t off the Kuril Islands and Kamchatka and 54,800 t in the Sea of Okhotsk, with no significant trend over time (Dolganov, 1999). A positive trend in catch per unit effort (CPUE) survey data was observed in the Pacific waters off the northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka between 1993 and 2000, however a slight decline in CPUE was detected in 2000 (Orlov et al., 2006). Demographic analyses, which take into account growth and reproductive rates, have been conducted on the species. Aleutian Skates in Alaska have a relatively high population growth rate when compared to other skates, with a finite population growth rate of 1.252 (Ebert et al., 2007). These results suggest that it is a relatively productive skate species and less vulnerable to population declines compared to B. trachura for example (Barnett et al. 2013). This analysis did not estimate population growth rates for the species in different regions (i.e. EBS or GOA), thus it is not possible to determine if the species has differences in vulnerability across its range.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 64 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Juveniles of all skate species are almost never found in the longline fisheries due to the large size of hooks used. Immature individuals up to 30–50 cm long are found in the longline fishery only in isolated areas and sporadically, making up less than 0.1% of the total amount. Alaska skate (Bathyraja parmifera) The Alaska Skate (Bathyraja parmifera) is distributed from Japan to the Gulf of Alaska and is generally found in relatively shallow waters (depths < 300 m). It is a medium-large species (maximum length 135 cm). With a maximum observed age of 20 and age at maturity between 7-10 years, it has a life history that is perhaps less vulnerable than other longer-lived skate species. However, its shallow depth distribution makes it more susceptible to fishing activity. In the Western Bering Sea, the Alaska skate stocks were stable across the years, being above the average interannual biomass level in 2012 and again in 2015 (Savin & Glebov, 2016). In waters of the western Bering Sea and the northern Sea of Okhotsk catches are unknown but fishing pressure is considered to be relatively low. Given the effective management that is undertaken throughout much of the range of this species, and that there is no evidence for population declines, the Alaska Skate is assessed by IUCN as being of Least Concern (Ormseth et al, 2015). Walleye pollock (Theragra сhalcogramma) The TAC for the walleye pollock fishery in the Bering Sea is around 400,000 t a year and it has been almost fully utilised over recent years (Table 22). Table 22 – Estimation of pollock biomass (million t) in the Bering Sea. Source: Based on surveys of the TINRO-Center and AFSC in 2005-2017.
In the Russian part of the Bering Sea, there are two walleye pollock populations in the Eastern and Western parts of the Bering Sea. The peculiarity of fisheries management of the East Bering Sea pollock is that it lives in the economic zones of two states - Russia and the United States. During the years of very high abundance, it spreads to the central part of the Bering Sea, outside the zones of Russia and the United States, where its commercial use is regulated by the six-party (Russia, USA, Japan, China, Republic of Korea, Poland) Convention (1993) on the preservation and management of pollock resources in the central part of the Bering Sea. Pollock abundance and biomass estimates are carried out using acoustic and bottom trawl surveys data, which are made in the north-western part of the Bering Sea by the TINRO-Center, in the eastern and north-western part of the sea - by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC). Expeditionary researches conducted in 2010-2017 almost in the entire range of the East Bering Sea pollock showed that its abundance and biomass was increasing up to 2014. In the past decade, most generations have been either numerous (2008 and 2012) or average in abundance (2006, 2009, 2011, 2013-2014). In the north-western part of the Bering Sea (waters of Russia), the pollock fishery is based on fish migrating to this region during the feeding period from the eastern part of the sea (USA zone). The distribution of pollock varies considerably depending on the total biomass of the population, the certain generations abundance, the abundance and distribution of forage zooplankton and oceanological conditions. For the entire feeding period, about 1.5 million t of pollock spread to the Russian part of the Bering Sea, when the mentioned above conditions are close to the average long-term.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 65 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
In 2017, according to the research surveys, the biomass and abundance of the East Bering Sea pollock were at an average level. The abundance of most generations in recent years (2009-2011, 2013-2014) is at an average level, the generation of 2012 is estimated above the average level, the abundance of generations in 2015-2016 - below average level. In the Russian part of the Bering Sea in 2017, the pollock biomass in the bottom layer was estimated at 1.36 million t (in 2015 - 1.12 million t), pollock from 2012–2014 generations dominated (28-45 cm length). In the eastern part of the Bering Sea in 2017, pollock biomass in the bottom layer, according to AFSC data, amounted to 4.81 million t, which is 2.1% less than in 2016; fish from the 2011-2012 generations dominated. Currently, fishing in the Russian part of the Bering Sea is regulated separately for two regions corresponding to two stock units: in the western part (Olyutorskiy, Karaginskiy bays and adjacent waters of the Koryak coast up to 174°E) and in the north-western part (east from 174°E to the dividing line of zones of Russia and USA). Since 2016, the target pollock fishery in the West Bering Sea zone to the west from 174°E is not performed. The target pollock fishery in the West Bering Sea zone east of 174°E is mainly conducted by multiple depth trawls in June-December in feeding aggregations and in a small volume in January-February during the pre-spawn migrations. The TAC for pollock in this fishing zone varied significantly interannually in accordance with the change of its resources (Table ). The maximum catch (542,400 t) in the region east of 174°E was recommended in 2007, after which it decreased until 2010 due to a decrease in resources. Starting from 2011 up to 2017, the pollock TAC in the Navarinskiy district gradually increased from 331,900 t to 475,500 t.
Table 23 – TAC, catch and catch/TAC of pollock in the West Bering Sea zone (2003-2017).
In summer, pollock spreads from the West Bering Sea zone in small quantities to the Chukotskaya zone (Zone 67.01). Unitl 2008, the pollock TAC in the Chukotskaya zone was not established; it was harvested in small amounts, mainly as by-catch. Thus, in 2005, the total catch amounted to only 1 t, and 857 t in 2007. In 2008, the catch increased to 2,600 t. However, as early as the following year, only 5 t were harvested. In 2011- 2017 the TAC for pollock in the Chukotskaya zone was set at 5,3006,500 t; at the same time, the catch/TAC did not exceed 88.8%, and on average over the specified period it was about 72%. Giant grenadier (Albatrossia pectoralis) Other than Pacific cod and Pacific halibut, the most commercially important and abundant species in the western Bering Sea is giant grenadier. Between 1980s and early 2000s, there were almost no fisheries for grenadiers or they were caught in insignificant amounts (annual catch was less than 500 t, that was less than 1% of the TAC). They are now a key bycatch species at trawl and longline fisheries for halibut, cod, and rockfishes on the lower shelf and upper slope (down to 600-700 m). Since the 2000s, vessels (mostly longliners) started to target grenadiers during the periods from several days to 1-2 months. Catch of grenadiers increased during recent 10 years and reached in some
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 66 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR years 10,000 t (in 2005 and 2010). The maximum catch was observed in 2012 (13,000 t). From 2013 grenadier catches started to decline due to a lower market price and demand. For more than 50 years, the TINRO-Center has collected a database and compiled long-term information on the characteristics of field biology, distribution, life cycle (in particular, on the features of size-mass, age and sex composition, growth rate, maturity, periods of mass spawning and fecundity, distribution features noted in bottom trawl surveys, fishing, and even observations, photographic and video materials from the underwater abyssal apparatus “Sever-2”). Based on the analysis of all these data, it was concluded that within the range of grenadiers (in different fishing zones/subzones), like for many deep-sea bottom and bottom-pelagic fish species, there are separate stock units (independent groups) (TINRO report, 2018b). Long-term experience of the domestic fishing fleet, in the recent past fishing for the long-fin grenadier Coryphaenoides longifilis from Macrouridae family, and from the beginning of the 2000s also fishing for giant grenadier, showed that the allocation of fishing zones and subzones most often is justified by bathymetric, oceanographic and other reasons (features of the bottom relief, coasts and passing large-scale and meso-scale currents). These natural “barriers” separate some groups of fish from others, that is, in each zone/subzone, the resources of deep-sea species are treated as separate stock units. Specifically for the West Bering Sea zone and the Karaginskaya subzone, this “barrier” is the Shirshov submarine ridge separating the Aleutian Basin of the West Bering Sea zone from the Commander Basin of the Karaginskaya subzone. Macro-and mezzo-circulation of the waters in these areas also affects the distribution patterns. The stock of the giant grenadier was estimated by direct accounting method based on the results of bottom trawl surveys, as well as based on observer data of monitoring on fishing vessels. Calculations were carried out using various modifications of the traditional method of “areas” and based on a spline approximation of the stock density implemented in the computer program “KartMaster v.4.1” with extrapolation over the entire area and bathymetric range of grenadier habitat. When determining the TAC, the natural mortality was calculated according to Tyurin (1972) with fishing mortality equal ½ of the natural. West Bering Sea zone: In 2017, for forecasting the TAC for giant grenadier in this zone, where the intensity of their fishery is quite high, based on the order of the Federal Fishery Agency №104 dated February 6, 2015, a surplus production model was applied using the DepF- (Depletion Corrected Fration) method, using the results of trawl surveys, observer information and field statistics. The dynamics of the giant grenadier commercial stock of the West Bering Sea zone, used to estimate the TAC, is shown in Table 2424.
Table 24 – Giant grenadier stock estimates (FSB, thousand t) in the West Bering Sea (2008-2017). Source: Lajus et al, 2020. Based on the model of surplus production using the DepF method.
Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Commercial stock for TAC calculation, 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 180 thousand t
Over the entire study period, the commercial stock (FSB) was at the average long-term level, making up not less than 200 thousand t. Only according to the results of the last conducted bottom trawl survey in 2017, the commercial stock (FSB) comprised a little bit smaller value of 180 thousand t. This reduction is probably caused by forcedly reduced survey extent in deeper water, where the main grenadier aggregations are located. However, in 2017, taking into account the precautionary approach, the recommended value of the TAC for Giant grenadier was reduced from 20 to 17.5 thousand t. Karaginskaya subzone: The Giant grenadier commercial stock of the Karaginskaya subzone, used to estimate the TAC, demonstrated no changes over the past decades. For the period 2008-2017, Giant grenadier commercial stock (FSB) of the Karaginskaya subzone was at the average long-term level, making up not less than 20,000 t. The accumulated materials make it possible to determine the value of the total and commercial stock, to estimate the TAC for Giant grenadier of the Karaginskaya subzone. But the characteristics of the structure and quality of information support for grenadiers of this subzone, where bottom trawl surveys are very rare, and the intensity of their fishing has been low until recently, reflect a lack of comprehensive information available. This limits the use of models of exploited stock. Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone: Giant grenadier commercial stock of the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, used to estimate the TAC, changed slightly over the past decades. The commercial stock (FSB) of the Giant grenadier from 2009 to 2018, based on the results of the surveys, taking into account the unexplored area at depths from 400 to 2,000 m, was estimated of at least 10,000 t. The available information makes it possible to determine long-term average value of the commercial stock, and to estimate the TAC for Giant grenadier of the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 67 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
There are nine primary minor species that have not already been covered above in Table 25.
Table 25 – Primary minor species allocation by zone / subzone.
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Primary Greenland halibut Minor Minor Minor No Primary Sablefish Minor n/a n/a No Primary Arrowtooth flounder Minor Minor n/a No Primary Kamchatka flounder Minor Minor n/a No Primary Northern rock sole Minor n/a n/a No Primary Flathead sole Minor Minor n/a No Primary White-blotched skate Minor Minor n/a No Primary Rock greenling n/a Minor Minor No Primary Short-raker rockfish Minor Minor n/a No
Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides matsuurae) There are considered to be three main sub-stocks in the Western Bering Sea, these being 1) in the south-eastern part of the Bering Sea, 2) in the central and in the north-western parts of the Bering Sea and 3) near Shirshov ridge. Over the 1998 – 2002 period the biomass of Greenland halibut declined but started to increase again in 2005. In 2008 in the north-western part of the Bering Sea the biomass of adults was estimated at 23,200 t, the highest value within the last decade. However, US scientists in the East Bering Sea warn of persistent low recruitment with a low and declining spawning biomass. The TAC for Greenland Halibut in Russian waters is now under 2,000 t per annum. Catches dropped in 2012 but have recovered since then (Figure 20).
Figure 20 – Greenland halibut TACs, landings and TAC/landing ratio (%) (2005-2014). Source: Information System 'Rybolovstvo'.
At present, the main harvest of Greenland halibut is carried out by longlines and bottom trawls (Maznikova et al., 2015). If in the West Bering Sea zone this is a fully developed and established process of catching a species, in the Karaginskaya subzone and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, in the absence of dense commercial aggregations, Greenland halibut is harvested only as by-catch in other types of fisheries (Novikov, 2004). Analysis of the spatial distribution of longline catches shows that the largest catch values are noted in the Olyutorsko- Navarinskiy district and on the Shirshov ridge, where the catch can reach up to 7.2 t per one longline fishing operation. Bathymetric distribution of catches regardless their volume in the West Bering Sea zone, Karaginskaya subzone and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone has similar picture. The main catch of all fishing gear (except for the Danish seines) is at 300–400 m isobaths (Figure ).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 68 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 21 – Bathymetric distribution of Greenland halibut catches in 2009–2017 by depth (m). Source: Maznikova et al., 2018. Note that catches at certain depths are presented in percentage of total Greenland halibut catches.
Since 2018a joint TAC of Pacific and Greenland halibuts has been introduced. In the West Bering Sea zone, the utilization of TAC for Greenland halibut in 2009–2017 ranged from 48–87%, with a long-term average annual value of 68%. In the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone and Karaginskaya subzone, due to the absence of commercial aggregations, the average TAC utilization is 40.7 and 47.8% of the established TAC volumes respectively. In 2017, the catch in the Karaginskaya subzone (in the form of 2% by-catch allowed by the Rules of Fisheries) amounted to 75.2% of the TAC which was 33 tonnes. In the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, the catch very nearly reached the recommended 30 t (98,7%, or 29.6 t) catch limit for the first time in 2016 (Maznikova et al., 2018). Catch and TAC values of Greenland halibut in 2009-2017 are shown in Table overleaf. Table 26 – Catch and TAC values of Greenland halibut (2009–2017). Source: Maznikova et al., 2018. Data from the Federal Fisheries Agency.
West Bering Sea Karaginskaya Year Parameter P-K subzone zone subzone 2009 TAC (t) 1,700 50 30 Catch (t) 843 12 11 Catch/TAC, % 49.6% 24.0% 36.7% 2010 TAC (t) 1,800 51 31 Catch (t) 1,308 16 18 Catch/TAC, % 72.7% 31.4% 58.1% 2011 TAC (t) 1,500 50 30 Catch (t) 939 17 17 Catch/TAC, % 62.6% 34.0% 56.7% 2012 TAC (t) 1,500 50 30 Catch (t) 724 15 10 Catch/TAC, % 48.3% 30.0% 33.3% 2013 TAC (t) 1,500 50 30 Catch (t) 888 10 3 Catch/TAC, % 59.2% 20.0% 10.0% 2014 TAC (t) 1,500 50 30 Catch (t) 1,284 25 11 Catch/TAC, % 85.6% 50.0% 36.7% 2015 TAC (t) 1,500 50 30 Catch (t) 1,210 23 16 Catch/TAC, % 80.7% 46.0% 53.3%
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 69 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
2016 TAC (t) 1,500 50 30 Catch (t) 1,227 33 30 Catch/TAC, % 81.8% 66.0% 100.0% 2017 TAC (t) 1,500 33 30 Catch (t) 1,150 25 15 Catch/TAC, % 76.7% 75.8% 50.7%
Sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria) Western Bering Sea zone. Specialised research on sablefish is not currently being conducted. In assessing stocks and possible yield for 2019, we have used data from bottom research trawl surveys carried out in July-August 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2015, as well as data from the Industry Monitoring System (OSM) "Fishery" for 2005-2017 (TINRO, 2019). There is no directed fishery for sablefish is not carried out and it is only caught as a by-catch, mainly in the black halibut fishery. In the period from 2003 to 2016, the annual catch of sablefish in the West Bering Sea zone varied significantly, with a well-marked downward trend from 32.6 to 1.7 tons, on average 11.8 tons. In 2017, the catch was 105.9 tons (105.9% of the recommended volume of catch). According to the data of the bottom research trawl surveys in 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2015 the biomass of sablefish in this area was, respectively, 1.30, 0.22, 0.98 and 0.36 thousand tons, that is, in recent years, there has been a tendency for the reduction of sablefish stock, which, obviously, was the reason for the decrease in its catch as a by- catch. It is also necessary to take into account the fact that survey surveys do not cover the area of the continental slope of the West Bering Sea zone between 170-172° N, where sablefish stock are concentrated [Kodolov, 1976]. According to the 2016 bottom survey and prospective biomass estimates in the Gulf of Alaska [Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 2016], there is a fluctuation in stocks with an estimate of the total biomass in 2016 – 215 thousand tons, in 2017 – 239, in 2018 – 249 thousand tons. In the West Bering Sea zone, taking into account the average long-term estimates in the Olyutorsko-Navarinsky region (0.71 thousand tons) and unexplored areas in the area of the Shirshov ridge, the biomass of sablefish can be about 900 tons. The increase in the catch of sablefish in 2017 indicates an increase in its number which is confirmed by the growth of stocks of this species in the Gulf of Alaska. The by-catch of sablefish in the Giant grenadier fishery in the West Bering Sea zone usually does not exceed 1.0%, and in 2017, this value was 0.7%. Therefore, the value of the possible yield for 2019 (RC - the recommended catch) of sablefish will amount to 0.135 thousand tons as by-catch only. Karaginskaya subzone. Specialised research on sablefish is not currently being conducted. For a long time, there is no biological information on sablefish in the Karaginskaya subzone. The catch data was taken from the Industry Monitoring System (OSM) "Fishery" (‘Rybolovstvo’). The level of information support can be assessed as very low. The main method of accounting for sablefish in the Karaginskaya subzone is based on integrated bottom trawl surveys. However, over the past 15 years, only 5 of them have been completed. In addition, in 2012-2014 and 2016- 2017 they were carried out only on the shelf and on a reduced grid of stations, and in 2016, for objective reasons, the timing of the survey was postponed to the summer period, so they do not give a complete picture of the state of sablefish stock. The lack of regular fishing and the fragmentation of biostatistical information determine the insufficient informational provision of the forecast of the state of resources and the possible withdrawal of sablefish, which makes it possible to judge the quantitative characteristics of this species only at the level of expert assessments. The intensity of the catch of sablefish in the Karaginskaya subzone is extremely low (it is caught exclusively as a by- catch in the fishery for redfish and halibuts). Currently, there is no information on the current stock of sablefish in the Karaginskaya subzone; during the last survey bottom trawl surveys, it was not found in catches. The recommended catch (RC) of sablefish in 2019 in the Karaginskaya subzone should be left at the level of previous years – 0.07 thousand tons as a by-catch when fishing for deep-sea species.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 70 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone. Specialised research on sablefish is not currently being conducted . The fishing intensity is extremely low, it is caught exclusively as a by-catch in the fishery for redfish and halibuts and other bottom fish. Any biological information on sablefish in this subzone has been missing for a long time. The catch data was taken from the Industry Monitoring System (OSM) “Fishery”. The main method of accounting for sablefish in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone is based on integrated bottom trawl surveys. Full bottom trawl surveys in this area were completed in 1984, 1999, 2002 and 2016. In 2010- 2014. as an alternative to bottom trawl surveys, Danish seine’s surveys have been conducted in the area. They were carried out only on the shelf, while sablefish lives above the continental slope. In addition, in 2011 experimental trap fishing of sablefish was carried out. In 2016-2017 KamchatNIRO resumed accounting work with a bottom trawl (own vessel - MRTK), but only on the shelf. Taking into account the lack of specialized sablefish fishing in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone, the noted tendency of a decrease in its stocks in recent years, it can be assumed that by the beginning of 2019 the amount of its stocks will not exceed 1.0 thousand tons. The recommended catch (RC) of sablefish in 2019 in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone should be left at the level of previous years - 0.33 thousand tons.
Arrowtooth flounder (Atheresthes stomias) This species is present in the sea of Okhotsk, in the waters of the Northern Kuril Islands and the eastern Kamchatka, Commander Islands, but it is more abundant in the western part of the Bering Sea. Here it was found in the eastern part of the Olyutorskiy Gulf, east of the Olyutorskiy cape, but mainly south-east of the Navarin cape, where the catches of this species often reached the commercial sizes. In the waters of the Pacific Ocean near the Northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka, arrowtooth flounder is present almost across the entire region. Areas near the Fourth Kuril Strait and north of the Cape Lopatka are characterized by the highest frequency of its occurrence. In the western part of the Bering Sea this species is caught sporadically near the submarine Shirshov ridge. In the waters of the Pacific Ocean near the Northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka arrowtooth flounder is founded at the entire length of the slope. The size composition of the arrowtooth flounder is different in the mentioned areas: fish from the waters of the Pacific Ocean near the Northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka were significantly smaller (average length – 39,27 cm) than in the western part of the Bering Sea (average length – 54.79 cm). In the waters of the USA arrowtooth flounder was much smaller, in the eastern part of the Bering Sea the smallest fish were caught (average length – 32.8 cm). Optimal temperature range is 1.5-5ºC (Datskiy et al., 2014). It is noted that there's a fact of abundance increase of the arrowtooth flounder in recent years in waters of the Northern Kuril Islands, where it can penetrate from the Pacific waters of the Aleutian Islands (Orlov, Mukhametov, 2001a, 2001b). Flounders of genus Atheresthes sp. were not dominant species, their average catches in 1996–2005 in terms of the entire Olyutorsko-Navarinskiy district did not exceed 250 kg/km2. At the same time since 2004 their relative biomass (especially of arrowtooth flounder) increased, and both species (Atheresthes stomias and Atheresthes evermanni) in total on average can already claim the status of dominant species (Datskiy et al., 2014). The arrowtooth flounder fishery is regulated by the recommended catch. Kamchatka flounder (Atheresthes evermanni) The Kamchatka flounder is distributed from the Shelikof Strait and the Aleutian Islands in Alaska, across the Bering Sea, to the Gulf of Anadyr, Kamchatka Peninsula and the seas of Okhotsk and Japan. In the waters of the Pacific Ocean near the Northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka this species is present almost everywhere. Kamchatka flounder reaches the greatest abundance in waters prone to the warm ocean waters, along the Koryak coast from the Olyutorskiy cape to Navarin cape, and also between Navarin Cape and the Bristol Bay (Datskiy et al., 2014). Optimal temperature range is 1-4ºC (Orlov & Mukhametov, 2001a). A market has developed for Kamchatka flounder and as such it is targeted by the commercial fishing industry. Catches have risen from 1,183 t in 2007 to 19,662 t in 2010 (prior to 2007 Kamchatka flounder was not differentiated from the arrowtooth flounder catch; it is estimated that around 10% of the arrowtooth flounder catch was Kamchatka flounder). Total biomass was estimated at 128,800 t in 2010 (Wilderbuer et al., 2010). Recently, by official data, the annual catches of flounders of genus Atheresthes sp. range between 80–146 t, which does not exceed 20% of the recommended catch (Antonov & Kuznetsova, 2013). Kamchatka flounder harvest is regulated by the recommended catch. Northern rock sole (Lepidopsetta polyxystra) The northern rock sole (Lepidopsetta polyxystra) is a demersal species that lives on sand, mud and gravel bottoms at depths of up to 700 m, though it is most commonly found between 19 and 246 metres. We note that the MSC
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 71 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR certified Gulf of Alaska flatfish fishery has certified Northern rock sole and Southern rock sole together as a single target stock, and that these species are not reported separately in commercial catch data. Flathead sole (Hippoglossoides elassodon) The flathead sole (Hippoglossoides elassodon) is a demersal fish that lives on soft, silty or muddy bottoms at depths of up to 1,050 metres. White-blotched skate (Bathyraja maculata) The white-blotched skate (Bathyraja maculata) is a species of skate from the western North Pacific Ocean and is found at depths of up to 1,000 m. Rock greenling (Hexagrammos lagocephalus) TAC is set fortwo greenlings together – genus Hexagrammos sp. and Pleurogrammus sp., but in fact only genus Pleurogrammus sp. is assessed, because there’s a lack of information on genus Hexagrammos sp. Although there is no special research performed for stock assessment of Hexagrammos sp., this is a mass species and any changes of its abundance are easy to identify. There are two members of the genus Pleurogrammus – the Atka mackerel Pleurogrammus monopterygius and the Arabesque greenling P. azonus, known also as Okhotsk atka mackerel. Able to live up to 14 years, the largest Atka mackerel recorded was 56.5 cm long, the heaviest recorded weight was 2.0 kg (Fadeev, 2005). Found exclusively in the northern Pacific, Atka mackerel are known from Cape Navarinin the Bering sea, and from Stalemate and Bowers Bank in the Aleutian chain to Icy Bay, Alaska. Atka mackerel migrate from shelves to coastal waters to spawn which occurs (in the Aleutians) from July to September. Their eggs adhere to crevices in the rocks, and incubate for 40–45 days. Males guard the clutches of eggs until they hatch. Atka mackerel feed on copepods and euphausiids. Rock greenling is very widespread in the North Pacific Ocean from the Yellow Sea in the south to the northern part of the Bering Sea, including the mainland coast of the Sea of Japan, the Sea of Okhotsk and the waters around the Japanese (to Hokkaido along the Pacific coast and the Sanin area along Japan Sea coast), Kuril and Commander Islands. In terms of abundance, this species is one of the dominant representatives of the family Hexagrammidae. However, information on this species is rather scant, singular publications are only available on the life history of the rock greenling from south-eastern Kamchatka and the northern Kuril Islands. Researches of the rock greenling from other parts of its range are few (Orlov & Zolotov, 2010). Rock greenling is selective in relation to preferred sediments and topography, choosing mainly highly dissected, rocky bottom areas for habitat (Zolotov, 1985), trawling on which is usually accompanied by gusts of fishing gear, and which, therefore, are considered unsuitable for trawling. Rock greenling is extremely eurybathic species, its range of seasonal vertical migrations covers depths from 1–2 m in summer, during spawning, to 665 m in winter. The spatial distribution is mosaic, the maximum concentrations are noted on the slope and shelf of Shumshu Island and the southern tip of Kamchatka. The maximum size of fish in catches was 58 cm and 2.63 kg; the sexual composition was characterized by the predominance of females in all size groups (79%). The food was based on cephalopods, small crustaceans - amphipods and isopods, as well as fish eggs and gastropods. With an increase in size, rock greenling shifts from feeding on small benthic organisms to larger mobile forms (Orlov & Zolotov, 2010). Although there is no special research performed for stock assessment of this species, this is a mass species and any changes of its abundance are easy to identify. Experts at the moment do not identify risks of population depletion. Short-raker rockfish (Sebastes borealis) TAC is set for 2 species of genus Sebastes spp. together without separation by species: Sebastes borealis and S. alutus. West Bering Sea zone: the stock is estimated using traditional methods, including the polygons method corresponding to each individual trawling (Dirichlet-Voronoi cells or Thiessen polygons) using the ArcView GIS 3.2a program (Borisovets & Nadtochiy, 2003), spline approximation method taking into account the study area and bathymetric range using the "KartMaster v.4.1" program, abundance and biomass of aquatic biological resources, the value of the stock and its forecast, and the assessment of the possible share of different species in catches. In the West Bering Sea zone, the main commercial species of rockfish are S. borealis and S. alutus. They are harvested mainly by bottom and allopelagic trawls as non-target species. The commercial stock of rockfish of the genus Sebastes spp. in the West Bering Sea zone is relatively stable and has varied in recent years from 3,000-5,000 t. Karaginskaya subzone: the main method of direct accounting of rockfish in the Karaginskaya subzone is bottom trawl surveys. The commercial stock of rockfish of genus Sebastes spp. in the Karaginskaya subzone is relatively stable and has varied in recent years from 400-600 t.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 72 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone: The main method of direct accounting of rockfish in the Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone is bottom trawl surveys. The commercial stock of rockfish of genus Sebastes spp. in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone is relatively stable and has varied in recent years from 3,900 to 4,100 t.
7.3.5 Secondary Species There is one in scope secondary main species and three out of scope main secondary species as follows in Table 27. Table 27 – Secondary main species allocation by zone / subzone.
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Secondary Pacific sleeper shark Main Minor n/a Yes Secondary Fulmars Main Main Main No Secondary Slaty-backed gulls Main Main Main No Secondary Short-tailed shearwater Main Main Main No
Pacific sleeper shark (Somniosus pacificus) It is reported that the Pacific sleeper shark is regulated by recommended catch within the joint group “sharks”, but in fact the recommended catch on sharks is given only to the Southern Kuril Islands, where it is absent, and in the volume of recommended catch for scientific researches only pelagic sharks blue shark Prionace glauca, shortfin mako shark Isurus oxyrinchus and salmon shark Lamna ditropis are included. Pacific sleeper shark is found in the North Pacific on continental shelf and slopes in Arctic and temperate waters between latitudes 70°N and 22°N, from the surface to 2,000 metres deep. Due to migrations from the upper parts of the continental slope, the abundance of Pacific sleeper shark on the shelf notedly increases (Datskiy et al., 2014). It is noted mainly in the Koryak region between 173° and 178° E (Orlov, 1999b; Glubokov, 2004), its biomass in some years in the north-western part of the Bering Sea can reach 87.8 thousand t (Glebov et al., 2003), and within the upper shelf - 4.5 thousand t (Datskiy & Andronov, 2007). Pacific sleeper shark is one of the most abundant and widely spread fishes in the northern Pacific. The abundance of this species increased dramatically during late 1990s to early 2000s in the most parts of the species’ range. The largest catches were registered in the western Bering Sea, as well as in the waters of the Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka. During the last decade of the 20th century, the number of catches increased, especially in the eastern Bering Sea. During subsequent decades, the spatial distribution of the species did not change substantially: the regions of the main concentrations of the fish remained the same, and the number of catches slightly increased in the Bering Sea and decreased off the northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka (Orlov, 2017). Pacific sleeper sharks compete with other predator fish and impoverish their forage base. Given that the Pacific sleeper shark is a main secondary species in the West Bering Sea and that there do not appear to be any recent stock assessments or empirical status estimates in this fishery zone, we would intend to use the risk-based framework for this species, conducting a Productivity – Susceptibility Analysis (PSA). We also note the IUCN Red List considers this species to be ‘data deficient’.
Fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis) The Northern fulmar is found breeding throughout the north Atlantic and north Pacific, ranging from Japan and the United Kingdom in the south, to the high Arctic in the north. Northern populations are migratory, travelling south as the sea freezes over. Its diet comprises of variable fish, squid and zooplankton (especially amphipods), and it also feeds on fish offal and carrion (e.g. whale blubber). Most of its food is obtained by surface seizing but it will also plunge (del Hoyo et al., 1992). IUCN consider this species to be of ‘least concern’, with a global population of about 20,000,000 birds and an overall ‘increasing’ population trend (Birdlife International, 2018a).
Slaty-backed gulls (Larus schistisagus) The slaty-backed gull breeds in North-East Siberia (Russia) from Cape Navarin south to the northern tip of North Korea, including the Commander Islands. Its diet varies year to year depending on availability, mainly consisting of fish and invertebrates (e.g. crabs, sea urchins). Prey is obtained by a varied of methods including plunge-diving and surface-plunging. The species has a large range and there are c. 10,000-1 million breeding pairs and > c. 1,000 individuals on migration in Russia (Brazil, 2009). IUCN consider this species to be of ‘least concern’ with no factors presently thought to pose a genuine threat to the species (Birdlife International, 2018b).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 73 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Short-tailed shearwater (Ardenna tenuirostris) This species breeds on Tasmania and off the coast of south Australia. It undergoes trans-equatorial migration, wintering north of Japan near the Aleutian Islands, with some moving north of the Bering Strait. Diet includes fish (particularly myctophids), crustaceans and squid (Weimerskirch and Cherel, 1998). Feeding occurs in flocks of up to 20,000 birds, and it has been seen associated with cetaceans. Brooke (2004) estimated the global population to number > c.23,000,000 individuals with >c.1,000 individuals on migration in Russia (Brazil, 2009). Although the population trend is increasing in North America, the global population is suspected to be in decline owing to ecosystem changes resulting from climate change (Brooke, 2004). IUCN consider this species to be of ‘least concern’ (Birdlife International, 2018c).
There are seven secondary minor species identified as follows in Table 28. Table 28 – Secondary minor species allocation by zone / subzone.
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Secondary Spiny dogfish Minor n/a n/a No Secondary Yellow Irish lord Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Purple-grey sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Plain sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Great sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Soldatov’s eelpout Minor n/a n/a No Secondary Gilbert’s Irish lord n/a Minor Minor No
Spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthas) Spiny dogfish is reviewed as a rare species in the UoA, it is discarded by the local fisheries. The official catch monitoring data is reviewed and is not showing catches of this fish. In the adjacent areas outside the UoA (Northeast Pacific) the abundance is reported to be high, and it is subjected to TAC allocation. Sculpins (Great sculpin Myoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus, Yellow Irish lord Hemilepidotus jordani, Gilbert's Irish lord Hemilepidotus gilberti, Purple-grey sculpin Gymnacanthus detrisus & Plain sculpin Myoxocephalus jaok) Recommended catch is established for the mass representatives of sculpins as a group. Population structure of the mass representatives of sculpins from Cottidae family in the western part of the Bering Sea: Myoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus, Hemilepidotus jordani and Hemilepidotus gilberti has not yet been studied. Great sculpin Myoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus is one of the largest sculpins: it reaches 91.5 cm Smith's length (FL) and 10.0 kg weight. The most of catches comprise individuals of 30–55 cm long and weight of 0.5–2.5 kg (Datskiy, 2017). In the north-western part of the Bering Sea, in the catches, the length of fish varies between 12–81 cm, age - 5–16 years, dominate mature individuals with FL 35–55 cm, weight - 0.1–8.7 kg, average values in different years range from 1.3 to 2.5 kg (Datskiy & Andronov, 2007; Fadeev, 2005). It was shown (Datskiy & Andronov, 2007) that in the north-western part of the Bering Sea (mainly in the north of the Gulf of Anadyr) large mature individuals are concentrated in shallow water, and the proportion of small fish increases with depth. In the Olyutorsko-Navarinskiy region with its narrow shelf, such distribution was not observed: in the coastal areas of the shelf, smaller fish was feeding, and mature individuals preferred greater depths. This is a relatively fast-growing species. By the age of 4 years, it reaches 25–33 cm FL. At the onset of maturity, linear growth slows down, and the mass growth, on the contrary, increases. Off the coast of Kamchatka, spawning of Myoxocephalus polyacanthocephalus occurs in the autumn-winter period at depths of 120–210 m at bottom temperatures of 0.8–1.9 ° C (Tokranov, 1986). Both species of genus Hemilepidotus sp. - yellow Irish lord H. jordani and Gilbert's Irish lord H. gilberti are also mass species. Both are quite large fish, although they are smaller in size than M. polyacanthocephalus. H. jordani reaches 62 cm FL, mass of 2.8 kg and 14 years old, H. gilberti - 40 cm FL, 0.9 kg and 11 years (Chereshnev et al., 2001; Fadeev, 2005; Kotlyar, 2006; Tokranov, 2014; Tuponogov & Snytko, 2014). These species in the catches not always could be clearly divided, for this reason, sculpins could be considered together, although this approach is not entirely correct, given the large size and catches of H. jordani (Datskiy, 2017). H. jordani matures on the 4th – 7th year of life with FL of 26–40 cm, and H. gilberti – on the 3–7th year with FL of 18–28 cm (Tokranov, 1986). Both species are relatively slow-growing species. The maximum amount of growth is observed in the first year of life. The annual increments in the length of Hemilepidotus jordani are at the age of 2–8 years and of H. gilberti - at the age of 2–5 years and they comprise 3–4 cm, and subsequently do not exceed 2 cm. The intensity of weight growth is greatest at 7–9 years of age in both species. They spawn in August – September at depths of 10–30 m at a bottom layer temperature of 5–10°C (Tokranov, 1986).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 74 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Due to the low level of information support for the forecast, it is currently not possible to justify the harvest control rules. As the fisheries removal from the population is negligible, the management system does not see a necessity to set up such rules.
West Bering Sea zone: taking into account the established fishing measures, the commercial stock of common species of Cottidae family in the period 2013-2017 is estimated at 103.8 thousand t. Karaginskaya subzone: the main method of direct accounting of sculpins in the Karaginskaya subzone is bottom trawl surveys. There is no reliable information about the current status of commercial stocks of sculpins in the specified area. However, considering the volumes of the survey catch, the spawning stock of sculpins is at least 36 thousand t. Fishing is carried out only as a by-catch. Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone: the main method of direct accounting of sculpins in the Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone is bottom trawl surveys. There is no reliable information about the current status of commercial stocks of sculpins in the specified area. However, considering the volumes of the survey catch, the spawning stock of sculpins is at least 70 thousand t. Fishing is carried out only as a by-catch. Soldatov’s eelpout (Lycodes soldatovi) The eelpout Lycodes soldatovi is found at depths of 153 to 1,005 m in the Sea of Okhotsk where it usually inhabits the depth range of 400 to 800. The mean and maximum abundance and the biomass of this species were 198.5 and 1037 individuals per km2 and 173.7 and 1275 kg/km2, respectively (Balanov et al., 2004). In view of the data on the distribution of young fish (up to 30 cm in total body length) and the reports on the absence of Lycodes larvae, (Balanov et al., 2004) developed a hypothesis that this species spawns predominantly in the waters off western Kamchatka and eastern Sakhalin at the depth range of 700 to 900 m. Large individuals (>50 cm) exhibit higher migratory activity and are more tolerant of environmental conditions. That is why they are encountered throughout the distribution area of this species, even in sub-zero temperature areas. Further information on this species is also to be found in Badaev (2015).
7.3.6 Endangered, Threatened and Protected Species STATUS The following section is summarised from a number of sources, including the KF TIG DVO RAN report (2017) and TINRO report (2018a). The MSC Fisheries Standard (FCR v2.0) defines Endangered, Threatened and Protected Species as follows: 1. Species that are recognised by national ETP legislation; 2. Species listed in the binding international agreements given below: a. Appendix 1 of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), unless it can be shown that the particular stock of the CITES listed species impacted by the UoA under assessment is not endangered. b. Binding agreements concluded under the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), including: i. Annex 1 of the Agreement on Conservation of Albatross and Petrels (ACAP); ii. Table 1 Column A of the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA); iii. Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas (ASCOBANS); iv. Annex 1, Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans of the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area (ACCOBAMS); v. Wadden Sea Seals Agreement; vi. Any other binding agreements that list relevant ETP species concluded under this Convention. 3. Species classified as ‘out-of scope’ (amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals) that are listed in the IUCN Red List as vulnerable (VU), endangered (EN) or critically endangered (CE). Russia has been a party to CITES since 1976. The Russian Red Book (https://cicon.ru/) is a state document established for documenting rare and endangered species of animals, plants and fungi, as well as some local subspecies that exist within the Russian Federation territory and its continental shelf and marine exclusive economic zone. This would be the source of species recognized by national legislation. Information about ETP species that could interact with the fishery is presented in Table 9, which gives a list of the main potential ETP species according to the Russian Red List, together with their current (March 2021) IUCN Red List status. Some, such as the Steller sea lion, are not in the eligible IUCN Red List status category but are in the Russian
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 75 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Red Book. Marine mammal species listed in Russian and international red data books are protected under the Fishing Rules Order 385 of 21 October 2013 as amended (Fishing rules, 2018). It is also prohibited to capture or hunt the pelagic species of marine mammal listed in red data books. IUCN Red List status of some species, such as fin whale. In the appendix of the “Code of Conduct and Policy of Corporate Social and Ecological Responsibility” of the LFA there is a list of protected species (sea birds and marine mammals), compiled on the basis of the Russian Red Book. According to the data provided by the LFA on the detailed information on interactions with birds and mammals in this longline fishery, particular emphasis should be given to the following four ETP species: Steller sea lion, northern fur seal, short-tailed albatross, red-legged kittiwake. These animals and birds were seen in nearby the fishing vessels.
Table 29 – List species classified as ETP in this assessment*.
Species IUCN Red Russian Red Book (Categories: 0 Extinct; 1 List status endangered; 2 reducing in number; 3, rare; 4 / trend status not defined; 5 recovered & recovering) Steller sea lion, Eumetopias jubatus NT ↑ Yes, Cat. 2 - decreasing number Northern fur seal, Callorhinus ursinus VU ↓ No Short-tailed Albatross, Phoebastria albatrus VU, ↑ Yes, Cat.1 - endangered Black-legged kittiwake, Rissa tridactyla VU, ↓ No Blue whale, Balaenoptera musculus EN ↑ Yes, Cat.1 – endangered Harbour seal, Phoca vitulina LC ? Yes, Cat.3 - rare Sea otter, Enhydra lutris EN ↓ Yes, Cat.5 – rehabilitating Humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae LC ↑ Yes, Cat.1 – endangered Fin whale, Balaenoptera physalus VU ↑ Yes, Cat.2 - decreasing number Bowhead whale, Balaena mysticetus LC ↑ Yes, Cat.3 – rare in Bering Sea North Pacific Right whale, Eubalaena japonica EN, ? Yes, Cat.1 – endangered Gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus EN ↑ Yes, Cat.5 – increasing (Chukchi-Californian) Sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus VU ? No Red-.legged kittiwake, Rissa brevirostris VU, ↓ Yes, Cat.3 – rare. * Sources: IUCN Red List (accessed 15 March 2021); Krasnaya Kniga Rossii 2017, www.cicon.ru.
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus) Steller sea lions are primarily found near the shore, where they haul out on rocks, to the outer continental shelf and slope where they feed. However, they also cross deep oceanic waters in some parts of their range. The Steller sea lion includes two recognized subspecies, the Western Steller sea lion and the Loughlin’s Steller sea lion. Western Steller sea lions experienced a dramatic and unexplained population decline of about 70% between the late 1970s and 1990s. The population reached its low point in approximately 2,000, and through 2015 has shown an overall annual increase of 1.8% per year in the USA. However, in the western Aleutian Islands sea lion population has continued to decline. Overall, the western subspecies had experienced a population reduction of approximately 50% during the last three generations and continues to meet IUCN criteria for being ‘endangered’. Fomin et al. (2016) state that Steller sea lions have declined by 99% in the western part of the Bering Sea. In contrast the Loughlin’s Steller sea lion population has increased steadily since 1979 and is projected to be 243% larger in 2015 than in 1985. That subspecies does not meet any of the criteria for IUCN threatened categories. The reasons for the large declines in Western Steller sea lion are unclear, but they have been the subject of intensive and ongoing investigations. Deliberate killing by fishermen, disease, incidental take by fisheries, and reduced food supply have been suggested as factors that may have contributed to the decline. In Russia, the major Steller sea lion rookeries were given protection under the Northern Fur Seal and Sea Otter Conservation Act in the late 1950s. They were listed as endangered in the Russian Red Data Book in 1994 and harvest was prohibited. These measures had a positive effect in the western portion of the range as the population increased around Sakhalin Island, the Kuril Islands, and in the northern Sea of Okhotsk. However, abundance along the eastern coast of Kamchatka and in the Commander Islands has not recovered for unknown reasons (Gelatt and Sweeney, 2016). Research of Burkanov et al. (2016) showed that there’s a large difference in pup and non-pup trends, and authors supposed that low natality is driving the decline. Altukhov et al. (2015) studied age specific survival rates of Steller Sea Lions at rookeries with divergent population trends in the Russian far East. It was shown that pup survival was higher where the populations were declining (Medny Island) or not recovering (Kozlov Cape) than in all Kuril Island rookeries. The highest adult survival was found
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 76 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR at Kozlov Cape, not in the Kuril Islands where the population is increasing, so researchers suggest that differences in birth rates might be an important driver of these divergent population trends. High pup survival on the Commander Islands and Kamchatka Coast may be a consequence of less frequent (e.g. biennial) reproduction there, which may permit females that skip birth years to invest more in their offspring, leading to higher pup survival. Population viability analyses have been conducted for the Western and Loughlin’s Steller Sea Lion subspecies but not for the species as a whole. However, given that abundance of both subspecies is currently increasing the probability of extinction is certainly less than 10% in 100 years (Gelatt and Sweeney, 2016).
Northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus) Northern fur seals are a widely-distributed species in the waters of the North Pacific Ocean and the adjacent Bering Sea, Sea of Okhotsk and Sea of Japan (Gelatt et al., 2015). They breed on rookeries in Russia located at Kuril Islands, Commander Islands and Tyuleniy (Robben) Island (Kuzin 1999; Kuzin, 2010). Overharvesting in the 19th century eradicated the population on the Kuril Islands where Northern fur seals were considered extinct until the mid- 1950s. Pup production grew rapidly on the Kurils during 1962-1977 (19.9% annual increase). The population stabilized around 1978 and trend became slightly negative (-0.8%) during 1978-1988. Pup production in the Kuril Islands has increased 82.4% since 1988 (+3.8% annually) and is now comparable to the Tyuleniy Island population. During the count in 2006, approximately 27,090 pups were counted. Total abundance of fur seals in the Kuril Islands in 1999 exceeded 100,000 individuals (Kuzin, 1999). The IUCN (Gelatt et al, 2015) lists the species as globally threatened under the category "vulnerable".
Short-tailed albatross (Phoebastria albatrus) Its marine range covers most of the northern Pacific Ocean, but it occurs in highest densities in areas of upwelling along shelf waters of the Pacific Rim, particularly along the coasts of Japan, eastern Russia, the Aleutians and Alaska (Birdlife International, 2018d). The key threats to this species are the instability of soil on its main breeding site (Torishima), the threat of mortality and habitat loss from the active volcano on Torishima, and mortality caused by fisheries (Birdlife International, 2018d). Given that there are now 609 breeding pairs on Torishima, the species has undergone an enormous increase since its rediscovery and the onset of conservation efforts. Modelling work has showed that even a small increase in low level chronic mortality (such as fisheries bycatch) has more of an impact on population growth rates than stochastic and theoretically catastrophic events, such as volcanic eruptions (Artyukhin et al., 2006). Phoebastria albatrus has the greatest potential overlap with fisheries that occur in the shallower waters along continental shelf break and slope regions, e.g., sablefish and Pacific halibut longline fisheries off the coasts of Alaska and British Columbia. Although, overlap between the distribution of birds and fishery effort does not mean that interactions necessarily occur, P. albatrus are known to have been killed in U.S. and Russian longline fisheries for Pacific cod.
Red-legged kittiwake (Rissa brevirostris) Rissa brevirostris breeds in the Commander Islands (Arij Kamen, Toporkov, Bering and Mednyy), Russia and the Pribilof (St Paul, St George and Otter), Bogoslof (Bogoslof and Fire) and Buldir (Buldir, Outer Rock, Middle Rock) islands in the USA (Birdlife International, 2019). The Pribilof Islands account for >82% of the breeding population, with an estimated 235,624 breeding birds at St. George Island. The Commander Islands contain the only known Red- leggged Kittiwake colonies outside of the United States. These islands contain approximately 32,300 breeding birds (del Hoyo et al. 1996, Artukhin & Burkanov, 1999), which is approximately 14% of the breeding population. The colonies on Bering Island support by far the largest portion of the breeding birds of the Commander Islands, with an estimated 30,600 breeding birds in 1993. Recent counts for Bering Island and the other colonies in the Commander Islands group are not available. Overall, the population size in Alaska has been estimated at 247,300 breeding adults, along with the population size of 32,300 in the Commander Islands, Russia. This gives a global population size estimate of 279,600 mature individuals, placed here in the range 100,000-499,999 mature individuals. This species nests in colonies on ledges on vertical sea cliffs, and feeds on small fish (e.g. lampfish), squid and marine invertebrates (Byrd and Williams, 1993). Birds arrive at nesting colonies in April and leave around September, dispersing southwards over the north-east Pacific and east to the Gulf of Alaska (Byrd and Williams, 1993). The reasons for the population decline remain unclear, but it has been attributed to a reduction in food supply as a result of excessive commercial fishing. Shifts in the distribution of prey fish species, resulting from climate change and rising sea temperatures may also contribute to current and future declines. Being restricted to a range within 10 degrees of latitude, the species is vulnerable to the impacts of changing ice distribution and sea surface temperature.
Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) Blue whales have been protected from commercial hunting by the International Whaling Commission since 1966, although illegal catches by Russian Federation fleets continued until 1972. No Blue whales have been reported as having been caught deliberately since 1978. The species is on Appendix I of both the Conservation on International
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 77 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Trade in Wild Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) (Cooke, 2018a).
Harbour seal (Phoca vitulina)
Harbour seals are distributed very widely and their total population size is estimated at about 600,000. Trend in abundance is unknown for four of the subspecies; the Eastern Pacific harbour seal is known to be increasing. While in many areas harbour seals share the coastal zone with increasing human populations and suffer some impacts as a result, current threats appear to be tolerable and/or manageable. As a species, the harbour seal does not meet any IUCN criteria for a threatened listing and is listed as Least Concern (Lowry, 2016). Subspecies Phoca vitulina stejnegeri is in the Russian Red Book (category 3 – rare).
Sea otter (Enhydra lutris)
Enhydra lutris nereis is listed on CITES Appendix I. All other subpopulations are included on CITES Appendix II. In Canada, Sea Otters are protected and managed under the Species at Risk Act. In the United States, Sea Otters are protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA) and in southwest Alaska and California, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is the federal agency responsible for their conservation and management (Doroff & Burdin, 2015). Currently, the most stable and secure part of the sea otter's range is Russia. Before the 19th century, around 20,000 to 25,000 sea otters lived near the Kuril Islands, with more near Kamchatka and the Commander Islands. After the years of the Great Hunt, the population in these areas, currently part of Russia, was only 750 (Kornev & Korneva, 2004). By 2004, sea otters had repopulated all of their former habitat in these areas, with an estimated total population of about 27,000. Of these, about 19,000 are at the Kurils, 2,000 to 3,500 at Kamchatka and another 5,000 to 5,500 at the Commander Islands (Kornev & Korneva, 2004).
Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)
The humpback whale is a cosmopolitan species with a large range covering all oceans. The current global population is estimated at 135,000 and the mature population at about 84,000, which is higher than the level of three generations ago. This is true of the global population as well as the three main regional populations individually – North Pacific, North Atlantic and the Southern Hemisphere. The species does not, therefore, qualify for a Red List threatened category, and is listed as Least Concern (Cooke, 2018b). Humpback whale is in the Russian Red Book (category 1 – endangered).
Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus)
The cause of the population reduction in fin whales (commercial whaling) that occurred in the 20th century is reversible, understood, and has been brought under control. For this reason, the species is assessed under IUCN Red List criterion A1, not under A2, A3, or A4. The current global population size is uncertain due to lack of data from major parts of the range, especially from mid-latitudes in the Southern Hemisphere. Therefore, rigorous evaluation against the criteria is not possible. However, plausible projections of the global mature population size indicate that it has probably recovered to over 30% of the level of three generations ago (1940) (i.e., reduction of <70% over the last three generations) but has not necessarily yet reached 50% of that level; therefore, the Red List category is changed from Endangered to Vulnerable. It is important that existing data on abundance and distribution be worked up, and that data be collected in the areas where it is currently lacking, in order to verify to what extent the predicted recovery has occurred (Cooke, 2018с).
Bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus)
The global (pan-arctic) population of the bowhead whale appears to be increasing, due primarily to the well- documented increase in the large Bering – Chukchi – Beaufort Seas subpopulation (also known as the Western Arctic population or stock). The global population size, at over 25,000 animals, is well above the IUCN Red List Vulnerable threshold for a non-declining population. The Bering – Chukchi – Beaufort subpopulation (estimated to be over 16,000 and increasing at 3% per year or more) may have recovered to near or even above its level prior to commercial whaling. The East Canada – West Greenland subpopulation is estimated to exceed 4,000 and has probably been increasing but is still below its pre-whaling level (Cooke, Reeves, 2018). Bowhead whale is in the Russian Red Book (category 1 – endangered for Okhotsk sea population and category 3 – rare for Bering Sea and Chukchi Sea population).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 78 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
North Pacific Right whale (Eubalaena japonica)
The North Pacific Right Whale has been severely reduced throughout its former range relative to historical levels, and it is especially rare in the eastern North Pacific. Neither the current range-wide population size nor the population trend has yet been satisfactorily quantified. No breeding grounds have been located. The species has to date been listed on the IUCN Red List as Endangered under Criterion D, mature population size below 250 individuals which would correspond to about 400-500 individuals in total. Until all the available data from sighting surveys in the Okhotsk Sea and north-western North Pacific have been comprehensively analysed to yield a reliable abundance estimate, the taxon remains listed as Endangered, based on a precautionary application of criterion D, even though it is possible that the number of mature individuals exceeds 250. The Eastern North Pacific Right Whale subpopulation is listed separately as Critically Endangered (Cooke & Clapham, 2018).
Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus)
The estimated population size for the grey whale is above the threshold for any IUCN Red List threatened category, and the population has increased over the last three generations, with some fluctuation. The only definitely surviving breeding population is in the eastern North Pacific. The North Atlantic breeding population is extinct, and the western North Pacific breeding population is possibly extinct (Cooke, 2018d).
Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus)
The cause of the population reduction in this species (commercial whaling) is reversible, understood, and is not currently in operation. For this reason, the species is assessed under criterion A1, not under A2, A3 or A4. Physeter macrocephalus is globally widespread (thus not qualifying as threatened under criterion B) and does not have a global population that warrants listing under criteria C-D. Empirical trend data for this species globally are unavailable. However, commercial whaling at a large scale for this species in the North Pacific and Antarctic within the last three generations (82 years) certainly resulted in a global decline during this period. Commercial whaling for this species has ceased and therefore this population is evaluated under the A1 criterion rather than under the A2-4 criteria (Taylor et al., 2008).
Black-legged Kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla)
Black-legged kittiwake is a coastal breeding bird found throughout the North Atlantic, but also around the margins of the North Pacific. It is reported to be extant and vagrant in Russia. The global population is estimated to number c. 14,600,000-15,700,000 (Wetlands International, 2016), but has declined in recent years; primarily this appears to be due to trophic shifts, largely due to climate change, which has removed the prey base for a large proportion of the population, but oil spills and chronic oil pollution may also have contributed to the decline, as well as some fisheries that target prey species of the black-legged kittiwake. It is also noted as a bycatch species in longline fisheries, although it is reportedly adept at removing prey without capture at least where the hooks are large, and the severity of fisheries impact is considered negligible (compared with rapid declines attributed to climate change and severe weather, and slow, significant declines attributed to pollution). An analysis appears to show that the population in the North Pacific declined rapidly in the 1990s but has since recovered (Descamps et al., 2017). It is assessed under IUCN Red List criterion A2 as Vulnerable since 2017, population trend decreasing (Birdlife International, 2018f).
ETP MANAGEMENT AND INFORMATION As a member of the LFA, all vessels in the UoC are required to complete a bycatch logbook that covers all non-target catch and interactions, including large marine animals (marine mammals, sharks, reptiles), birds as well as invertebrates such as molluscs, cold-water corals, sponges and other bottom-dwelling organisms. WWF Russia have assisted the LFA to develop this recording programme and have provide a manual on observer duties and rights. This observer programme is conducted in association with TINRO and KamchatNIRO, whose staff have undergone observer training. However, when analysing the available materials, it turned out that the observers did not indicate the exact coordinates of the meeting places of marine mammals, their data were descriptive. The possible risks of interactions with ETPs and other out of scope species in this bottom longline fishery includes causing anxiety for marine mammals; predation of the catch as it is fisher by toothed whales and other marine mammals, physical contact of whales with vessels engaged in fishing and transport operations; accidental entanglement of mammals, birds and fishes with fishing gears; pollution of the environment by shipboard debris (including plastic) and the disposal of damaged fishing gear (net, various ropes, ropes, etc.). The client fleet has a number of general rules of behaviour when detecting large marine mammals. If a single or a cluster of animals is observed, they should not: approach them at a distance closer than 100 m, conduct trawling in the vicinity of large whales,
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 79 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
direct the vessel towards the animals or cross the course of their movement, thereby forcing them to rise to the surface from the water stay close to whales for a long time, move at high speed near animals, putting them in danger of collision with the vessel. If a whale or a group of whales is observed, they must: observe the animals from the distance, record the time and coordinates of the meeting place in the ship's logbook, take pictures of animals to confirm the meeting and provide possibility for subsequent photo- identification, report the situation to other vessels nearby; not approach animals closer than 100 m, when animals are approaching the vessel, switch to a neutral speed and allow them to pass by, not linger at the meeting place of animals and leave it at a slow speed. If possible, all collected information and photos should be transferred to one of the Research Institute of the Federal Fisheries Agency, TINRO and others, or Kamchatka Branch of PGI FEB RAS, POI FEB RAS. Interaction for sea mammals with the fishery: Fomin with co-authors (2016) investigated the possible effect of longline fisheries on the Steller sea lion mortality, interviewing fishermen and surveyed Steller sea lions - fishery interactions while working on boats. All twelve fishermen from longline fisheries confirmed that Steller sea lions sometimes predate hooked fish in longline fishery. To protect the catch from Steller sea lion depredation, ten respondents (83%) used guns and firecrackers to deter Steller sea lions. Observers were present during the fishery for a total of 199 days at sea in the Western Bering Sea in 2003-2004 (November - January), 2008 (July-October), 2010 (July-October) and 2013 (July-August). Steller sea lions were observed near the fishing vessels only 9 times: 7 in Karaginskiy Gulf (one encounter in 2004 and six encounters in 2008) and 2 in Gulf of Anadyr. Steller sea lions were seen in late fall or winter in Karaginskiy Gulf in a groups of up to 10 animals and two single individuals in summer 2013 at Gulf of Anadyr. Steller sea lions were consuming fish from the longlines or foraged on fishery waste near vessels for a time period that ranged from 5 minutes to 2 hours. In 2013 crew tried to deter Steller sea lions using guns, but Steller sea lions moved farther from the vessel and continued foraging. The direct observation of longline fisheries in the western Bering Sea demonstrates that Steller sea lions rarely approach the longline vessels. Probably, the Steller sea lions - longline fishery interactions occurs mostly in Karaginskiy Gulf, where the fishery conducted mostly during winter. Fomin et al. (2016) concluded that the number of injured and killed Steller sea lions during the longline fishery in the western Bering Sea is probably low. Lajus et al (2019) consulted with fishers and the LFA, who confirmed that interactions (i.e., depredation events) with Steller sea lions are very rare, and that therefore the issue of deterrence was not a concern. Further, as species listed in the Red Data Book, actions that may lead to death of Steller sea lions are prohibited by Article 265 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 8.35 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation. Consequently, guns and firecrackers are not used to deter Steller sea lions in the LFA fishery. Interaction with sea birds: with regards to seabird catches, the main management approach has been the adoption of streamers on the longline snoods (Figure 22).
Figure 22 – Scheme of streamers usage at the longline vessel. These have been compulsory since 2011 and have shown to be very effective in reducing bird hooking incidence. Different studies showed that the use of streamers reduces seabird by-catch in pelagic longline fisheries as well as in bottom longline fisheries (Brothers, 1991). According to Artyukhin et al. (2013), the number of birds observed on the vessels without streamers is much higher than on the vessels with streamers (for example, fulmars: 215 and 19, slaty- backed gull: 53 and 15, short-tailed shearwaters: 14 and 2, respectively).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 80 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
The results of the observations and their comparison with similar data from adjacent waters of the Bering Sea showed that the features of relations between seabirds and bottom longline fishing in Russian and American waters are identical, allowing one to apply foreign experience, obtained as a result of special experimental studies (Artyukhin et al., 2006). The effectiveness of streamers is also discussed in the section on secondary main species.
7.3.7 Habitats
The following section is summarised from KamchatNIRO (2016), TINRO report (2014), TINRO report (2018a) and Lajus et al (2019). Benthic communities The Bering seafloor is partitioned into a series of sedimentary basins, including the Aleutian Basin, just north of the Shirshov Ridge, Bowers Bank, and Aleutian Islands; the Komandorsky (Commander) Basin, adjacent to the Komandorsky Islands, Kamchatka Peninsula, and Shirshov Ridge; the Anadyr Basin, encompassing the Gulf of Anadyr; the Chirikov Basin, adjacent to the Chukotka Peninsula and Bering Strait (NRC, 1996) (Figure 23).
Figure 23 – Bottom fauna of the Bering Sea. Source: Filatova & Neyman, 1963. Sublittoral community: 1 – epifauna community; 2 - Mytilus edulis; 3 - Echinarachnius parma; 4 - Echinarachnius + Tellina lutea; 5 - Astarte rollandi; 6 - Astarte borealis; 7 - community with predominance of amphipods; 8 - Venericardia; 9 - Spisula polynima; 10 - Echiurus echiurus; 11 - Serripes groenlandicus; 12 - Macoma calcarea; 13 - M. calcarea + Ophiura sarsi + Yoldia hyperborean; 14 - M. calcarea + Nicomache lumbricalis; 15 – O. sarsi + M. calcarea + Nucula tenuis + Onuphis parvastriata; 16 - M. calcarea + O. sarsi + Golfingia margaritacea; 17 - M. calcarea + O. sarsi + Maldane sarsi + N. tenuis; 18 - M. calcarea + Amphiodia craterodmeta; 19 - Leda pernula; 20 - M. calcarea (eastern grouping); 21 – O. sarsi; 22 - Cucumaria calcigera; 23 – N. tenuis; 24 - Yoldia traciaeformis + Ctenodiscus crispatus; 25 - Chiridota ochotensis; 26 - Crenella columbiana; 27 - Axiothella catenata + Praxitella gracilis. Bathic communities: 28 - Brisaster townsendi, B. latifrons; 29 – Y. beringiana + Travisia forbessi; 30 - Porifera + Plascolion lutense + Eremicaster + Pogonophora + Amphipoda; 31 – B. zenkewitchi + Eremicaster + Pogonophora; 32 - Bathysiphon + Maldane sarsi + O. leptoctenia; 33 - population of the northern margin of the Aleutian Basin; 34 - Polybrachia annulata + Heptabrachia gracilis + Eremicaster + Porifera; 35 - Porifera + Polybrachia annulata + Heptabrachia gracilis + Travisia profundii; 36 - deep-water epifauna (Porifera, Stylasteridae, Bryozoa, Brachiopoda); 37 - oceanic complex; 38 – Porifera.
The Bering Sea shelf is unusual from the global perspective in being extremely smooth and generally featureless, with the exception of three large and some small islands, with bathymetry less than 200 m deep and a very steep continental margin (Sharma, 1977). Principal unconsolidated seafloor sediments are gravels, sands, silts and clays. Bottom sediments derived from the Alaskan mainland rivers and coastal erosion are deposited on the seafloor and
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 81 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR then swept by northward currents toward the Bering Strait. Sediments from the Russian coast deposited on the Bering Shelf are swept northward and eastward toward the Bering Strait as well (NRC, 1996). Studies of benthic communities in the western part of the Bering Sea have a long history (Vinogradova, 1954; Belyaev, 1960; Neyman, 1961, 1963; Filatova & Neyman, 1963; Filatova & Barsanova, 1964; Shuntov, 2001). Various benthic surveys were conducted on the shelf of the Bering Sea, which permitted a comparison of the status of bottom invertebrates in the modern period to their status in 1980s and 1960s. For example, in the 1960s in the western part of the Bering Sea around 30 community types were found out (Filatova & Neyman, 1963; Filatova & Barsanova, 1964). Large-scale studies were done by TINRO twice in the end of 20th and in the beginning of 21st century in three areas: Korfo-Karaginskiy area (Karaginskiy Gulf and Olyutorskiy Gulf), Gulf of Anadyr and the shelf of the Koryakskiy coast, using a similar distribution of stations in 2005 as those sampled in the 1980s, that allowed an estimate to made of the long-term variability of bottom communities under the influence of fishing. Some 27 taxa were represented with bivalve molluscs, sea urchins and polychaete worms making up 88% of the biomass. Comparison of the 1985 and 2005 data indicated few changes and generally a similar spatial distribution of biomass and taxa. In 2005, the average biomass of benthos in the Gulf of Anadyr was 426.6±87.8 g/m2, i.e. it increased compared with biomass in the 1980s and became almost the same as in the 1960s. In 2005, seven macrozoobenthos communities were identified in the Gulf of Anadyr. The largest of them are the community of the cake urchin Echinarachnius parma, the bivalve mollusc Macoma calcarea and the polychaetes Axiothella catenata + Artacama proboscidea. The first two communities were noted in the Gulf since the 1950s. The latter was reported for the first time. This community, as well as the newly reported polychaete Maldane sarsi community, and the mollusc community took the place where the O. sarsi community had previously been located. The area of E. parma and foraminifera communities decreased, while the average biomass of the E. parma community increased by two-fold, the average biomass of the foraminifera community did not change. The areas and average biomasses of the mollusc communities of M. calcarea and polychaetes increased. The average biomass of macrobenthos on the Koryak shelf in 2005 was equal to 510.1±52.6 g/m2 and it increased by 1.7 times compared with biomass in the 1980s. Within the surveyed area in 2005, seven macrozoobenthos communities were identified. The largest, as in 1985, was with the dominance of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus pallidus and the barnacles. Four macrobenthos communities: with the dominance of the sea urchins, barnacles, sponges and bivalve Astarte (= Tridonta) borealis were noted earlier. Communities dominated by ascidians, sea anemones and bivalve mollusc Serripes groenlandicus were identified for the first time. In 2005, communities with the dominance of the bivalve mollusc Hiatella arctica, foraminifera and cake urchin were not identified. The area occupied by the sea urchin community remained almost the same, and its average biomass has doubled. The area occupied by the barnacle community increased, and its average biomass remained at the same level. Within the surveyed water area of the Olyutorskiy Gulf, according to the 2012 data, four macrobenthos communities were identified in the depth range of 51–270 m. Three of them: with the dominance of the bivalve Macoma calcarea and with the dominance of cake urchin Echinarachnius parma and sea urchin Strongylocentrotus pallidus occupied almost the entire surveyed area of the Gulf. In 1985, the picture was similar. The community distribution pattern shows that in 2012, during the bottom dredge survey, only a small part of the sea urchin community in the west part of the bay was investigated, as well as a part of the cake urchin community in the central part of the bay. The main bottom areas occupied by these communities are obviously located in the coastal zone. The average biomass of benthos in the Karaginskiy Gulf increased by 2001, compared with biomass in the 1980s. In 2001, 8 macrozoobenthos communities were reported. The largest of them were the community of the cake urchin Echinarachnius parma, the bivalve mollusc Macoma calcarea and the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus pallidus. It should be noted that the area of the cake urchin community has increased, the area of the community of Macoma calcarea has decreased, and the area of the sea urchin has remained almost the same. These communities and communities dominated by bivalves Cyclocardia crebricostata + Crassicardia crassidens and ascidians have been noted in the gulf before. A part of the area that in 1983 was occupied by the community of Cyclocardia crebricostata + Crassicardia crassidens was occupied by small communities of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis, barnacles and polychaetes. Thus, the main seabed communities, noted in the 1980s, in the early 2000s generally retained their location and quantitative characteristics. As for the communities occupying small plots of the bottom, their detection depends on a combination of subjective reasons (the fragmentation of the sampling stations net, the number of replications in sampling, etc.). The average total biomass of macrozoobenthos in the 2000s in all studied areas increased (Table ), and the list of dominant taxonomic groups and species remained almost the same.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 82 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 30 – Bottom fauna of the Bering Sea.
Area Year B, g/m2 Year B, g/m2 Gulf of Anadyr 1985 384.1 2005 426.6 Koryak shelf 1985 297.5 2005 510.1 Olyutorskiy Gulf 1985 561.1 2012 581.3 Karaginskiy Gulf 1983 305.0 2001 421.9
Figure 24 – The distribution of the communities of the dredge macrobenthos in the western part of the Bering Sea. Source: Chukotskiy, Anadyrskiy and Koryakskiy districts – survey in 2012, Olyutorskiy Gulf – survey in 2017.
Data are collected in 2012 trawl survey (for the Olyutorskiy Gulf were used survey data of 2017), in total – 267 sampling stations. Bottom communities are identified by the dominant species using Voronoy diagrams (Borisovets & Nadtochiy, 2003). In the depth range of 20–770 m, 10 benthic communities were identified: communities with dominance of sea anemones (depths of 45–520 m), ascidians (20–125 m), sea stars (20–770 m), bivalves (81–100 m), gastropods of Buccinidae family (28–270 m), brittle stars (48–640 m), sponges (40–770 m), sea urchin Strongylocentrotus pallidus (22–541 m), crinoid Heliometra glacialis (770 m) and cake urchin Echinarachnius parma (70 m). In general, the studies performed demonstrate a high degree of stability of bottom communities and their resistance to climatic changes and the effects of fishing.
Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs)
According to FCR v2.0 (SA3.13.3.2), the term “VME” also includes “potential VME” to cover situations when a governance body uses a precautionary approach (e.g., where there is doubt over whether a habitat is a VME or not) and when a habitat is being treated as a potential VME. However, the MSC interpretation “Identification of VMEs” responded to the question “Who identifies a VME within an assessment?” by stating “The CAB shall consider those VMEs and potential VMEs (as defined by the FAO Guidelines; see GSA3.13.3.2) that have been accepted, defined or identified as such by a local, regional, national, or international management authority/governance body.”2
2 https://mscportal.force.com/interpret/s/article/identification-of-VMEs-SA3-13-3-1527262008557
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 83 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
In this regard, while Russia is a member of the North Pacific Fisheries Commission (NPFC, and the ‘Small Scientific Committee on Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs)’ has identified four orders of corals as indicators of potential VMEs, Russia has not identified any species as VMEs within Russian waters of the Far East region. As such, the VME requirements have not been scored in the assessment of this fishery. With respect to knowledge of sensitive species, the following section is summarised from WWF report (2018), KamchatNIRO report (2016) and TINRO report (2018a). Trawl surveys were conducted in 2008 and 2012 to study benthic biotopes, and scientific researchers marked several taxa that could be potential VME indicators. In the Chukotskaya zone of the Bering Sea 5 taxa of megazoobenthos were noted, which are potential indicators of VME: sponges (common species Myxilla incrustans, Halichondria panicea, Semisuberites cribrosa), large tunicates (Halocynthia aurantium, Boltenia ovifera), large barnacles Chirona evermanni, brittle star Gorgonocephalus eucnemis, soft corals Gersemia rubiformis. At this zone settlements of immobile sestonophages predominate, forming on solid coarsely-fragmented and mixed soils at the northern and southern coasts at depths of 20–60 m. In the Gulf of Anadyr six taxa of megazoobenthos were noted, which are potential indicators of VME: Gersemia rubiformis, sponges (common species Myxilla incrustans, Halichondria panicea, Semisuberites cribrosa); large tunicates (Halocynthia aurantium, Boltenia ovifera), bryozoans (common species Cystisella saccata, Flustra foliacea), large barnacles Chirona evermanni, brittle star Gorgonocephalus eucnemis. The studied epifauna species in the Gulf of Anadyr are divided into two groups — immobile sestonophages (alcyonarians, sponges, ascidians, bryozoans, Balanus sp.) and mobile filter feeders (gorgonocephals). Settlements of immobile sestonophages are confined to relatively warm waters above the internal shelf front and are bordered from the seaward side by the Navarinsky stream (Anadyr current) (Verkhunov, 1995; Shuntov, 2001; Khen & Zavolokin, 2015). This zone is characterized by an increased level of biological productivity (Sapozhnikov et al., 2011; Kivva, 2016). Gorgonocephalus spp. (basket stars) concentrate mainly in the area of the cold bottom spot localized in the central part of the Gulf of Anadyr (Verkhunov, 1995; Shuntov, 2001). In the Koryakskiy district, along with taxa that were typical for Chukotskaya zone and the Gulf of Anadyr, among the megabenthos species - potential indicators of VME, were also noted 3 species of alcyonaria (Anthomastus rylovi, Paragorgia arborea and Swiftia pacifica), sea pens Halipteris willemoesi, crinoids Heliometra glacialis and sea anemones Actinostola callosa. The studied epifauna species in the Koryakskiy district are divided into 3 groups — immobile (or sedentary) sestonophages (alcyonarians, sponges, ascidians, bryozoans, Balanus spp., sea pens, crinoids), mobile filter feeders (Gorgonocephalus spp.) and predators (sea anemones). In terms of the depth of occurrence, the studied animals are divided into three groups: 1. Shelf group (barnacles, bryozoans, Boltenia ovifera and Gersemia rubiformis); 2. Continental slope group (octocorals (3 species), sea pens and crinoids); 3. Intrazonal group (sponges, gorgonocephals, ascidians and sea anemones). The results of long-term observations (Nadtochiy et al., 2017a, b) demonstrate the stability of localization and quantitative characteristics of epibenthos settlements in the studied areas of the north-western part of the Bering Sea. The data available in the literature allow to describe the composition, distribution and abundance of megazoobenthos taxa — potential indicators of VME (Nadtochiy et al., 2017a, b) (Figure 25). In summary, it can be noted that currently there is practically no complete and reliable information on the species composition, distribution of indicator species of VMEs as defined in NPFC (Antipatharia, Alcyonacea, Gorgonacea and Scleractinia) in the northwest part of the Bering Sea and in waters surrounding the Kamchatka Peninsula and the Kuril Islands. For this purpose, well-planned special research is required. Still, it should be noted that this problem is not only of the area under assessment, but also of many other areas, since its solution involves complex and very expensive studies. The appearance of special video recording equipment (towed cameras, remotely controlled underwater vehicles, etc.) has greatly simplified the task, and such work on the mapping of VMEs using modern methods is being carried out all over the world. In recent years, significant areas of the water ranges of ridges, seamounts and slopes of the Atlantic Ocean, the southwestern Pacific and the Indian Ocean have been investigated. Many of the mapped areas served as traditional fishing sites or are potential bottom fishing areas (report of the UN Secretary General at the 71st session of the UN General Assembly).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 84 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Figure 25 – Distribution of bottom biota in the north-western part of the Bering Sea (61.01) from 2012 trawl survey: I – Chukotskaya zone, II – Gulf of Anadyr district, III – Koryakskiy district. (Source: Nadtochiy et al., 2017b).
In the longline catches of LFA in the West Bering Sea zone, four species of sponges were found by observers; however, the quantity taken in the catches was insignificant. In the Karaginskaya subzone, sponges were encountered in a limited area in catches of three series. Their catches amounted to 1.33% of all catches in number. At the same time, on hard, snaggy bottoms, to which the settlements of the immobile epibenthos are mainly confined, some fishing gears are torn; therefore, fishermen avoid working in such areas. In general, bottom longline fishing can have a negative effect on sensitive habitats when their distribution overlaps with fishing areas, however, this effect does not cause critical damage to benthic communities. For the Bering Sea, it has been established on the basis of data from bottom surveys that the localization of epibenthos settlements has remained stable for many decades: these are shallow waters near capes with coarsely clastic and mixed soil (Vinogradova, 1954; Neyman, 1963; Shuntov, 2001; Nadtochiy et al., 2017a, b). Studies from other locations indicate that one deep-sea bottom trawl is comparable in impact on bottom communities with 0.3–1.7 thousand longlines (Fosså et al. 2002), while survey data from another deep-water site showed that slow growing, sensitive species that are vulnerable to mechanical impact were still prevalent in areas with a more than 20-year history of longline fishing (Pham et al. 2014). Finally, in the “Code of conduct and policy of corporate social and ecological responsibility” of LFA a policy in respect of VMEs, protected species and the impact of fishing on the environment is declared. This reflects LFA’s corporate responsibility regarding seabed impacts.
7.3.8 Data collected by independent observers at the fishing vessels The following section is summarised from KamchatNIRO (2018), TINRO (2018a) and Lajus et al (2019). Data on the monitoring of bottom longline fishery by independent observers was provided for 2014– 2017. The monitoring was conducted in Chukotskaya and West-Bering Sea zones, and in Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzones by scientific observers from KamchatNIRO, TINRO-Center, VNIRO. Based on the need to ensure the regular presence of observers on longline vessels fishing Pacific cod, one observer is planned for the one longline vessel to collect materials during fishing season in all fishing areas. The minimum time spent by an observer is determined by the time needed to collect data on the species structure of catches, size-age structure of the main objects of fishing and information on by-catch. According to preliminary calculations, for full coverage of the entire fishing season and all areas, it is necessary to involve 2-3 observers each year. The work time of each will be limited to 90-105 days, excluding delivery to and from the vessel (TINRO, 2018). In order to standardize the collection of materials by observers, their onboard duties, the scheme for conducting observations and processing primary data on voyages and onshore, the TINRO-Center has developed and updates a ‘Memo to an Observer in Longline Fishing’. Before the start of the voyage, all observers receive this Memo and they
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 85 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR are consulted by specialists on work at the sea, on the methods used, on the specifics and volume of materials collected. In addition, the observer must have the necessary documents for working at sea, keys to flora and fauna, lists of fish and invertebrates, and computer software for entering and storing primary information for further processing. Before starting work, the observer must receive information on the vessel’s characteristics - tonnage, length, width, moulded depth, main engine power, longline and net selection machines power, maximum speed, number of crew and working crews, daily processing and outcome (outcome according to documents and real one), yield factors by types of production, the capacity of production lines (freezing rate per hour, t), limiting factor for the number of fishing operations - fishing time or processing capabilities, which objects are used for the preparation of the product, and if not all objects are used - why it happens, the volume and the number of freezers, refrigerator spaces and the volume of fish hopper (t and m3). The observer must know the characteristics and types of fishing gear used on the vessel, and their parameters - dimensions, equipment, manufacturers and features of the gear (changes made, differences). Upon arrival at the ship, the observer is provided with the place of residence and the necessary equipment (electronic scales, overalls, etc. by prior arrangement) and resolves all issues with the shipowner or his representative on board (the ship’s captain). During the transition to the area of work, the observer clarifies all the issues of interaction with the captain, navigators, the master of production (the observer's location during sampling, the workplace for conducting bioassays and measurements), the fishing master (which species can be cut and when, how to cut not to spoil the marketable condition of the product, when and how to weigh fish on scales in a fish shop floor). The observer prepares the equipment and the place of work, inquires the time of approach to the area of work and the start of fishing. During the voyage, the work of the observer should be planned in such a way that information should be fully collected on all sites (fishing areas) and on all supervised species, taking into account the daily dynamics of catches of commercial objects and systematic, fully reviewed lifting of the longline series. When observers are in cruises on fishing vessels, they carry out the full range of necessary work, and report the results every fortnight. Specialists on shore monitor the work and the collection of materials and, if necessary, correct the work of observers, or inform them of new input data for further work. Observers also collect data on the bait usage. Observers have to selectively view a part of the exposed cassettes, making calculations of hooks that have gone into the water without bait (the hooks may not catch the bait when they are automatically baited; the bait may fall down from the hooks before entering the water; the loss of bait may also occur after the hook enters the water). The collected information is summarized and averaged to calculate the average coefficient of baiting. Observers have to collect information: on the total amount of bait on a vessel in one voyage, the amount of bait used for fishing effort - one vessel day of fishing, one series, one cassette, 1,000 hooks, average weight of the bait on one hook. Observers are also required to monitor interactions with ETP species, including killer whales (their coordinates, distance from the vessel, diving time and number, their gender, presence of young animals) are monitored by the observer (or, at his request, by navigators, crew). If it occurs, any damage inflicted by killer whales to the fishery (i.e., depredation) is estimated. Also it is necessary to observe the attacks of the birds on the hooks that are set and document the observations. To do this, it is necessary, when setting the longline, to view a certain number of hooks set up (several cassettes) preferably daily. Attacks of various bird species, their bait capture on a hook, knocking down bait from hooks, hitting the birds on the hooks not only when they seize the hook with their beak, but also with other parts of the body are registered. All hooks in the observed selected cassettes are viewed, hooks without bait (originally left from the ship) and hooks from which the bait was removed by birds, hooks gone into the water with caught birds are marked. Observation of bycatch when fishing is not systematic. Bycatch observation is carried out only when it is possible and when there is no impact on the materials collection and information on the main objects of the specialized longline fishery. And since in the longline fishery there is always only one observer aboard, with very large volumes of necessary work on the main objects, analysis of bycatch is not the first priority and they are always performed in lower quantities and quality. At the end of the study, the observer processes the primary information and provides a voyage report. In 2014–2017 studies were conducted on 10 LFA vessels (four of which are from the client fleet) at depths of 10–1330 m (Table 31). These included both specialized and re-equipped vessels for longline fishing equipped with Mustad’s ‘Autoline’ mechanised longline system.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 86 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 31 – Client vessel working areas and times and fishing depth (2014–2017).
Area of work Fishing Vessel Name Period WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 depth m Tarpon 20.03–24.06.2014 96–490 Tiburon 18.08–25.08.2014 100–500 Kalkan 22.06–19.07.2015 16–466 Tiburon 08.10–23.11.2015 56–213 Kalkan & Blanket 08.03–13.06.2016 93–531 Tarpon 22.02–29.03.2017 100–300
In total, during the observation period, observers analysed data from 2004 longline sets in various fishing areas (Table 32). Half the observations (989) were carried out in the West Bering Sea zone, a third in the Karaginskaya subzone and the remainder in the Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone. Table 32 – The number of longline sets analysed by LFA vessel observers in each fishing area in 2014–2017.
Fishing area No. of longline sets
West Bering Sea zone 989 50%
Karaginskaya subzone 684 34%
Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone 313 16%
Total 1,986 100%
The number of observers on fishing vessels is currently limited by the desire of companies to accept observers from research institutes for the duration of fishing. Typically, observers are on 10-15 cruises per year in all types of fishing. The exceptions are planned works, usually trawl or trap surveys. The number of scientific groups during their implementation can be up to 15 employees of research institutes.
7.3.9 Cumulative impacts The client fleet is currently part of the Longline Fisheries Association (LFA) fleet already certified through as the Western Bering Sea Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline fishery (see Lajus et al, 2019). This is essentially the same fishery, although also includes the Chukotskaya zone (67.01) to the north-east of the Western Bering Sea Zone. As such, the fishing effort is exactly the same over the three management areas under consideration in the current assessment and her is no additional effort involved.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 87 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.3.10 Principle 2 Performance Indicator scores and rationales PI 2.1.1 – Primary species outcome PI 2.1.1 The UoA aims to maintain primary species above the point where recruitment would be impaired (PRI) and does not hinder recovery of primary species if they are below the PRI Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Main primary species stock status Guide Main primary species are Main primary species are There is a high degree of likely to be above the PRI. highly likely to be above the certainty that main primary post PRI. species are above the PRI
and are fluctuating around a
OR level consistent with MSY. OR
If the species is below the PRI, the UoA has measures If the species is below the a in place that are expected to PRI, there is either evidence ensure that the UoA does not of recovery or a hinder recovery and demonstrably effective rebuilding. strategy in place between all MSC UoAs which categorise this species as main, to ensure that they collectively do not hinder recovery and rebuilding. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
There are six primary main species:
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Primary Pacific herring (bait) Main Main Main No Primary Pacific halibut Main Main Minor Primary Aleutian skate Main Main n/a No Primary Alaska skate Main Minor Main No Primary Walleye pollock Main Minor Minor No Primary Giant grenadier Minor Main Minor No
Pacific herring (bait) Pacific herring is a main primary species for both UoAs. The spawning and commercial stocks biomass continue to stay at a high level, and the TAC is systematically underutilised. SG 100 is met. Pacific halibut Pacific halibut is a main primary species in the West Bering Sea zone and in Karaginskaya subzone. In the West Bering Sea (and Chukotskaya) zones, the Pacific halibut total biomass was lower than the Bmsy level during the period 1996-2010 and was especially low in the 2001, 2002, and 2005 (Gavrilov & Glebov, 2013; Datsky et al., 2014). These estimations were obtained based on the results of research surveys, which did not cover the entire range of the stock component (Gavrilov & Glebov, 2013; Datsky et al., 2014). Recent analysis indicates that biomass of Pacific halibut was considerably underestimated; in fact, recent simulations show that Pacific halibut total biomass has fluctuated around Bmsy level during the 2001-2011 period, with biomass above the Bmsy level afterward until
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 88 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
recently (TINRO, 2018). At the same time, catch (F) during the period 2000-2016 was always lower than FMSY, which testifies to a healthy condition of the stock (SA2.2.4.1). Since this stock component is at or fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY, this SI achieves SG60 and SG80. In the waters of the Karaginskaya subzone (61.02.1) the Pacific halibut total biomass fluctuated around Bmsy during 1999-2009 and has remained above Bmsy level from 2010 until the present (TINRO, 2018), i.e. during the last 8 years. Since this stock component is at or fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY, this SI receives SG60 and SG80. Aleutian & Alaska skates All skates in aggregations are considered a commercial stock. Aleutian skate is a main primary species only in the West Bering Zone and the Karaginskaya subzone. Alaska skate is a main primary species in both the Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzones. The dynamics of the commercial stock of skates of the Karaginskaya subzone shows small stock fluctuations over the past decades. Over the entire study period, the commercial stock (FSB) was at the long-term annual average level. In the Western Bering Sea, the Alaska skate stocks were stable across the years, being above the average interannual biomass level in 2012 and again in 2015 (Savin & Glebov, 2016). Aleutian skates are also relatively numerous in the Western Bering Sea (Balykin & Tokranov, 2010). Because there is no precise information on each species of skates and only on skates as a group, only SG 80 is met for Aleutian skate and SG 80 is met for Alaska skate. Walleye pollock Walleye pollock is a major primary species in the West Bering Sea only. The fishery takes pollock as a bycatch only. The TAC for pollock in the West Bering Sea zone varied significantly interannually in accordance with the change of its biomass. The maximum catch (542,400 t) in the region east of 174°E was recommended in 2007, after which it decreased until 2010 due to a decrease in resources. Starting from 2011 up to 2017, the pollock TAC in the Navarinskiy district gradually increased from 331,900 to 475,500 t. The TAC for the walleye pollock fishery in the Bering Sea is around 400,000 t a year and it has been almost fully utilised over recent years. In the Russian part of the Bering Sea in 2017, the pollock biomass in the bottom layer was estimated at 1.36 million t. SG 100 is met. Giant grenadier Giant grenadier is a main primary species only in the Karaginskaya subzone. It is taken as a bycatch species, only. The dynamics of the Giant grenadier commercial stock of the Karaginskaya subzone shows small stock fluctuations over the past decades. The accumulated materials make it possible to determine the value of the total and commercial stock, to estimate the TAC for Giant grenadier of the Karaginskaya subzone, but the information available is not sufficient to use the models of exploited stock. SG 80 is met in Karaginskaya subzone.
Minor primary species stock status Guide Minor primary species are highly likely to be above the post PRI.
OR b If below the PRI, there is evidence that the UoA does not hinder the recovery and rebuilding of minor primary species. Met? No
Rationale
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 89 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
There are nine primary minor species that have not already been covered above:
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Primary Greenland halibut Minor Minor Minor No Primary Sablefish Minor n/a n/a No Primary Arrowtooth flounder Minor Minor n/a No Primary Kamchatka flounder Minor Minor n/a No Primary Northern rock sole Minor n/a n/a No Primary Flathead sole Minor Minor n/a No Primary White-blotched skate Minor Minor n/a No Primary Rock greenling n/a Minor Minor No Primary Short-raker rockfish Minor Minor n/a No
Greenland halibut Greenland halibut is a minor primary species in the West Bering Sea zone and the Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzones. In the West Bering Sea zone, the catch/TAC for Greenland halibut in 2009–2017 ranged from 48–87%, with a long-term average annual value of 68%. Nevertheless, from a precautionary perspective the Assessment Team has elected not to score Greenland halibut at SG100, and so it meets SG80 by default. Sablefish Sablefish is a minor primary species in the West Bering Sea zone only. There is no directed fishery for this species, and catches have been decreasing, possibly reflecting a small decline in the stock biomass detected by surveys over 2008 – 2015. From a precautionary perspective the Assessment Team has elected not to score arrowtooth flounder at SG100, and so it meets SG80 by default. Arrowtooth flounder Arrowtooth flounder is a minor primary species in West Bering Sea zone and the Karaginskaya subzone. Arrowtooth flounder fishery is regulated by the recommended catch. Flounders of genus Atheresthes were not dominant species in 1996– 2005, but since 2004 their relative biomass (especially of arrowtooth flounder) has increased, and both species (Atheresthes stomias and A. evermanni) are now more abundant. Recently, by official data, the annual catches of flounders of genus Atheresthes sp. range between 80–146 t, which does not exceed 20% of the recommended catch. Nevertheless, from a precautionary perspective the Assessment Team has elected not to score arrowtooth flounder at SG100, and so it meets SG80 by default. Kamchatka flounder Kamchatka flounder is a minor primary species in the West Bering Sea zone and the Karaginskaya subzone. Kamchatka flounder harvest is regulated by the recommended catch. It reaches the greatest abundance in waters prone to the warm ocean waters, along the Koryak coast from the Olyutoriy cape to Navarin cape, and also between Navarin cape and the Bristol Bay. Recently, by official data, the annual catches of flounders of genus Atheresthes sp. range between 80–146 t, which does not exceed 20% of the recommended catch. Nevertheless, from a precautionary perspective the Assessment Team has elected not to score Kamchatka flounder at SG100, and so it meets SG80 by default. Northern rock sole The northern rock sole (Lepidopsetta polyxystra) is a demersal species that lives on sand, mud and gravel bottoms at depths of up to 700 m, though it is most commonly found between 19 and 246 metres. From a precautionary perspective the Assessment Team has elected not to score arrowtooth flounder at SG100, and so it meets SG80 by default. Flathead sole The flathead sole (Hippoglossoides elassodon) is a demersal fish that lives on soft, silty or muddy bottoms at depths of up to 1,050 metres. From a precautionary perspective the Assessment Team has elected not to score arrowtooth flounder at SG100, and so it meets SG80 by default. White-blotched skate The white-blotched skate (Bathyraja maculata) is a species of skate from the western North Pacific Ocean and is found at depths of up to 1,000 m. From a precautionary perspective the Assessment Team has elected not to score arrowtooth flounder at SG100, and so it meets SG80 by default.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 90 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Rock greenling Rock greenling is the minor primary species in the Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzones. The TAC is set for the two greenlings together – genus Hexagrammos sp. and Pleurogrammus sp. It is very widespread in the North Pacific Ocean from the Yellow Sea in the south to the northern part of the Bering Sea, including the mainland coast of the Sea of Japan, the Sea of Okhotsk and the waters around the Japanese (to Hokkaido along the Pacific coast and the Sanin area along Japan Sea coast), Kuril and Commander Islands. In terms of abundance, this species is one of the dominant representatives of the family Hexagrammidae. Experts at the moment do not identify risks of population depletion, although there is no special research performed for stock assessment of this species, therefore, only SG 80 is met. Short-raker rockfish Short-raker rockfish is a minor primary species in West Bering Sea zone and in the Karaginskaya subzone. TAC is set for 2 species of genus Sebastes sp. together without separation by species: Sebastes borealis and Sebastes alutus. The commercial stock biomass of rockfish of the genus Sebastes sp. is relatively stable and has varied in recent years from 3,000 to 5,000 t in the West Bering Sea zone and from 400 to 600 t in the Karaginskaya subzone. Only SG 80 is met. References
TINRO, 2018b; Datskiy et al., 2014; Antonov & Kuznetsova, 2013; Glebov et al, 2003; Gavrilov & Glebov, 2013; Lajus et al, 2019.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 91 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 33 – PI 2.1.1 Scoring calculations.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 92 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought 1. Catch composition data from the UoC vessels 2. Stock assessment data from: a. Sablefish b. Northern rock sole c. Flathead sole d. White-blotched skate
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 93 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.1.2 – Primary species management strategy PI 2.1.2 There is a strategy in place that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of primary species, and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Management strategy in place Guide There are measures in place There is a partial strategy in There is a strategy in place for the UoA, if necessary, that place for the UoA, if for the UoA for managing post are expected to maintain or to necessary, that is expected to main and minor primary not hinder rebuilding of the maintain or to not hinder species. main primary species at/to rebuilding of the main primary a levels which are likely to be species at/to levels which are above the PRI. highly likely to be above the PRI.
Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
According to the national legislation (Article 43.1. “Fishery regulations” from Federal Law of the Russian Federation dated 6 December, 2007 № 333), catches of all primary species are regulated through TAC and recommended catch. They are annually estimated for each fishing area and then quotas are distributed between users (fishing companies), which allocate individual quotas to particular vessels. Each vessel then receives a licence from the fisheries authorities where permitted target species are listed with indication of permitted catch size and gears to be used. There is also a ban to fish in closed areas and in some periods of the year. The TAC and recommended catch are annually reviewed according to new information based on the data came from research surveys or observations onboard commercial fishing vessels that is subsequently used for analytical models. The rate of exploitation of fish stocks by different vessel/gear type across the years is analysed when defining the recommended catch for the next year. It is reviewed that the selectivity of the longline gear is relatively high, compared with gear used in the UoA (Terentyev, 2020). Joined together, the measures from the established approach for fishing, resembling the partial strategy, SG80 is met. Although it is reported that the bycatch of primary species is processed, there is no data from any sources on estimates of actual discards and mortality, and SG100 is not met.
Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are considered There is some objective Testing supports high likely to work, based on basis for confidence that the confidence that the partial post plausible argument (e.g., measures/partial strategy will strategy/strategy will work, b general experience, theory or work, based on some based on information directly comparison with similar information directly about the about the fishery and/or fisheries/species). fishery and/or species species involved. involved. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The approach taken to the management of retained species is consistent with that taken in other fisheries. All vessels are monitored with VMS by the CFMC. There are fines for vessels if they fish in areas prohibited for fishing, fish more than they are allowed to catch, do not have a properly functioning VMS or do not report their coordinates regularly, do not complete their log books correctly, etc. The fishery is monitored by independent observers, but the coverage of observations is quite small and heterogenous compared to the scale of fishery. Annual revision of TAC and
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 94 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR recommended catch allows for the intensity of fishing to be reduced quickly if the abundance of the species fished was found to be decreasing. There is objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy will work for retained species, and SG60 and SG80 are met. There are limited quantitative data on the discards and mortality of by-catch of some primary species, though, so SG100 is not met.
Management strategy implementation Guide There is some evidence that There is clear evidence that the measures/partial strategy the partial strategy/strategy is post is being implemented being implemented c successfully. successfully and is achieving its overall objective as set out in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes No
Rationale
Some evidence that the partial strategy is being implemented successfully consists in presence of different restrictions of the fishery (licences with quotas, TAC and recommended catch, control of vessels on water, monitoring system etc.), and because primary species are currently being managed at or below the TAC and/or at a level consistent with BMSY. SG80 is met. Clear evidence that the partial strategy is being implemented successfully is absent, the stock differentiation and status is not studied in detail in all species, and for some of them (skates, greenlings, rockfish) TACs are set for the groups of species, so SG100 is not met.
Shark finning Guide It is likely that shark finning is It is highly likely that shark There is a high degree of d not taking place. finning is not taking place. certainty that shark finning is post not taking place. Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
Shark finning is not taking place in the fisheries under assessment, the scoring of SI d is not relevant.
Review of alternative measures Guide There is a review of the There is a regular review of There is a biennial review of potential effectiveness and the potential effectiveness the potential effectiveness post practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- e related mortality of unwanted related mortality of unwanted related mortality of unwanted catch of main primary catch of main primary species catch of all primary species, species. and they are implemented as and they are implemented, as appropriate. appropriate. Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
As there is no unwanted catch of primary species reported, SI e is also not scored.
References
TINRO report, 2018a; Lajus et al, 2019.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 95 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 96 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.1.3 – Primary species information PI 2.1.3 Information on the nature and extent of primary species is adequate to determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage primary species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Information adequacy for assessment of impact on main primary species Guide Qualitative information is Some quantitative information Quantitative information is adequate to estimate the is available and is adequate available and is adequate to post impact of the UoA on the to assess the impact of the assess with a high degree main primary species with UoA on the main primary of certainty the impact of the respect to status. species with respect to status. UoA on main primary species with respect to status.
OR OR a If RBF is used to score PI If RBF is used to score PI 2.1.1 for the UoA: 2.1.1 for the UoA: Qualitative information is Some quantitative information adequate to estimate is adequate to assess productivity and susceptibility productivity and susceptibility attributes for main primary attributes for main primary species. species. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Main primary species under assessment for the three elements within each UoA are present in Table (and also listed in a scoring calculation table at the end of the scoring text for this PI). Quantitative catch information is available for all main primary species identified in the catch. The status of Pacific halibut and Pacific herring stocks are well known. In the West Bering Sea zone the Pacific halibut total biomass was lower than the Bmsy level during the period 1996-2010 and was especially low in the 2001, 2002, and 2005 (Gavrilov & Glebov, 2013; Datsky et al., 2014). But it should be noted that these estimations were obtained based on the results of research surveys, which did not cover the entire range of the stock component (Gavrilov & Glebov, 2013; Datsky et al., 2014). In the waters of the Karaginskaya subzone the Pacific halibut total biomass fluctuated around Bmsy during 1999-2009 and has remained above Bmsy level from 2010 until the present (TINRO, 2018b), i.e. during the last 8 years. In waters of Petropavlovsk-Komandorskaya subzone (61.02.2), the Pacific halibut total biomass fluctuated around the Bmsy level until the 2010 period, but was lower than Bmsy since 2011 until the present (TINRO, 2018b). Currently, the stocks of Pacific herring in the Sea of Okhotsk are at a consistently high level, the herring fishery does not affect the natural dynamics of the abundance of its populations in the North-Okhotsk subzone. Pacific halibut and Pacific herring all meet SG60, SG80 and SG100. Information about status of giant grenadier, walleye pollock, Alaska and Aleutian skates are based on stock assessments. Commercial stocks of Giant grenadier, walleye pollock, Alaska and Aleutian skates are stable over past decades. The accumulated materials make it possible to determine in general the value of the total and commercial stock, to estimate TACs for Giant grenadier and walleye pollock, and recommended catch for group “skates” of these subzones. But the characteristics of the structure and quality of information support for these species of this subzone, where bottom trawl surveys are very rare, and the intensity of their fishing has been low until recently, reflect a lack of comprehensive information available. Giant grenadier, walleye pollock, Alaska and Aleutian skates meet SG60 and SG80, but not SG100.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 97 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Information adequacy for assessment of impact on minor primary species Guide Some quantitative information is adequate to estimate the b post impact of the UoA on minor primary species with respect to status. Met? Yes
Rationale
Minor primary species under assessment for both UoAs and 3 elements within each UoA are present in Table 25 (and also listed in a scoring calculation table at the end of the scoring text for this PI). For primary minor species, independent observer surveys and other assessments of stock status are undertaken. As shown for the management units of UoAs for 2003-2017 (Terentyev, 2020), and catch data for all species are collected routinely. This demonstrates that some quantitative information is adequate to estimate the impact of the UoA on minor primary species with respect to status, and so this SG100 requirement is met for all minor elements.
Information adequacy for management strategy Guide Information is adequate to Information is adequate to Information is adequate to support measures to manage support a partial strategy to support a strategy to manage post main primary species. manage main primary all primary species, and c species. evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective. Met? Yes No No
Rationale
Minor species meet SG80 by default. The available quantitative information on catch (rather than landings) in the fishery is heterogeneous both between areas and years. Therefore, it is difficult to quantify species as main and minor with confidence. In particular, there was limited observer data available in the West Bering Sea zones together and for Karaginskaya subzone in 2016. Essentially, while the data are quantitative and are certainly adequate to support measures to manage main primary species (thereby meeting SG60), the assessment team was not convinced that the data are adequate to support a partial strategy to manage main primary species. SG60 is met but not SG80.
References
TINRO, 2018b; Gavrilov & Glebov, 2013; Datsky et al., 2014; Lajus et al, 2019.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 98 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 34 – PI 2.1.3 scoring calculation.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 99 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range 60-79
Information gap indicator More information sought Status of some minor species
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 100 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.2.1 – Secondary species outcome PI 2.2.1 The UoA aims to maintain secondary species above a biologically based limit and does not hinder recovery of secondary species if they are below a biological based limit Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Main secondary species stock status Guide Main secondary species are Main secondary species are There is a high degree of likely to be above biologically highly likely to be above certainty that main post based limits. biologically based limits. secondary species are above biologically based limits.
OR OR
If below biologically based If below biologically based limits, there are measures in limits, there is either place expected to ensure that evidence of recovery or a the UoA does not hinder demonstrably effective recovery and rebuilding. partial strategy in place such that the UoA does not hinder a recovery and rebuilding. AND Where catches of a main secondary species outside of biological limits are considerable, there is either evidence of recovery or a, demonstrably effective strategy in place between those MSC UoAs that have considerable catches of the species, to ensure that they collectively do not hinder recovery and rebuilding. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
There is one in scope secondary main species and three out of scope main secondary species as follows: Component Data- Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 deficient In scope Secondary Pacific sleeper shark Main Minor n/a Yes Out of scope Secondary Fulmars Main Main Main No Secondary Slaty-backed gulls Main Main Main No Secondary Short-tailed shearwater Main Main Main No
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 101 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Pacific sleeper shark (Somniosus pacificus) Pacific sleeper shark is a main secondary species in the West Bering Sea and a minor secondary species in the Karaginskaya subzone. It is one of the most abundant and widely spread fishes in the northern Pacific. Its abundance in the western part of the Bering Sea increased from 12,600 t in 1999 to 87,500 t in 2002, indicating that there is a large biomass of reproductively active fish is present, and the species is highly unlikely to be below biologically-based limits. Given that the Pacific sleeper shark is a main secondary species in the West Bering Sea and that there do not appear to be any recent stock assessments or empirical status estimates in this fishery zone, we would intend to use the risk- based framework for this species, conducting a Productivity – Susceptibility Analysis (PSA). No score has yet been allocated to this species at this stage. Fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis) Fulmars breed throughout the North Atlantic and North Pacific, with northern populations being migratory and travelling south as the sea freezes in winter. The latest assessment (Birdlife international 2018a) indicates that the global population of fulmars is estimated to be 20,000,000 with an overall ‘increasing’ population trend. Therefore this main secondary species is highly likely to be above biologically based limits and meet SG60 and SG80. With their increasing population trend, there is also a high degree of certainty that fulmars are within biologically based limits, so this species meets SG100. Slaty-backed gulls (Larus schistisagus) Slaty-backed gulls have a large range, and breed in north-eastern Siberia from Cape Navarin south to the northern tip of North Korea, including the Commander Islands and Hokkaido, Japan. In winter its distribution extends south to encompass Korea, the extreme North East of China, much of Japan and Taiwan. Information on the global population is somewhat limited but is estimated at 25,000 – 1,000,000 individuals; there are considered to be no factors at present that pose a genuine risk to the species (Birdlife International 2018b). Therefore this main secondary species is highly likely to be above biologically based limits and meets SG80. Short-tailed shearwater (Ardenna tenuirostris) Short-tailed shearwaters breed in Tasmania and south Australia, but undergoes trans-equatorial migration, wintering in Russia and the Aleutian islands, with some venturing north of the Bering Strait. The birds return to Australia through the central Pacific, with some traversing the west coast of North America. The population was estimated to exceed 23,000,000, although ecosystem change resulting from global climate change may be causing a population decline (Birdlife International 2018a). This main secondary species is highly likely to be above biologically based limits and meets SG80.
SIa SIb Main / (Main (Minor Element Element Fishing Area PI Score Minor only– 60, only– 60, score 80, 100) 80, 100)
Pacific sleeper shark WBS 61.01 Main RBF RBF RBF K 61.02.1 Minor RBF RBF RBF RBF PK 61.02.2 n/a - - -
Fulmars WBS 61.01 Main 100 - 100 K 61.02.1 Main 100 - 100 100 PK 61.02.2 Main 100 - 100
Slaty-backed gulls WBS 61.01 Main 100 - 80 K 61.02.1 Main 100 - 80 80 PK 61.02.2 Main 100 - 80
Short-tailed shearwater WBS 61.01 Main 100 - 80 K 61.02.1 Main 100 - 80 80 PK 61.02.2 Main 100 - 80
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 102 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Minor secondary species stock status Guide Minor secondary species are highly likely to be above post biologically based limits.
OR b If below biologically based limits’, there is evidence that the UoA does not hinder the recovery and rebuilding of secondary species Met? No
Rationale
There are seven secondary minor species identified as follows:
Component Scoring element WBS 61.01 K 61.02.1 PK 61.02.2 Data-deficient Secondary Spiny dogfish Minor n/a n/a No Secondary Yellow Irish lord Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Purple grey sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Plain sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Great sculpin Minor Minor Minor No Secondary Soldatov’s eelpout Minor n/a n/a No Secondary Gilbert’s Irish lord n/a Minor Minor No
Sculpins (Yellow Irish lord, Gilbert’s Irish lord, purple-grey sculpin, plain sculpin & great sculpin) Recommended catch is established for the mass representatives of sculpins as a group, so information on this group is relevant for Yellow Irish lord, Gilbert’s Irish lord, purple-grey sculpin, plain sculpin & great sculpin). Fishing is not directed on these species. For 2019, recommended catch for the West Bering Sea zone is 24,290.5 t, for Karaginskaya subzone – 1480 t, for Petropavlovsko-Komandorskaya subzone – 2,689.5 t. The commercial stock of common species of the Cottidae family in the period 2013-2017 is estimated at approximately 103,800 t for Chukotskaya and the West Bering Sea zones together. In the Karaginskaya subzone and Petropavlovsko- Komandorskaya subzone, fishing is carried out only as a by-catch. The catch in 2018 was 567 t in the West Bering Sea zone. In areas where sculpins are harvested as by-catch, most of the fish are discarded. It is considered that most of sculpins may stay alive after the release, therefore, impact of the fishery to the stock status is low (i.e., even if the species were below biologically-based limits, and there is no indication that they are, the fishery would not hinder recovery and rebuilding). SG 100 is met. Spiny dogfish Spiny dogfish is reviewed as a rare species in the UoA, it is discarded by the local fisheries. The official catch monitoring data is reviewed and is not showing catches of this fish and is a minor species only in the West Bering Sea zone. In the adjacent areas outside the UoA (Northeast Pacific) the abundance is reported to be high, and it is subjected to TAC allocation. There is no indication that this species is likely to be below biologically based limits, so SG 100 is met.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 103 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Soldatov’s eelpout For 2019, recommended catch for eelpouts in the Western Kamchatka subzone of the Sea of Okhotsk zone is 299 t, for Kamchatka -Kuril subzone of the Sea of Okhotsk zone –998 t (http://свту.рф/images/docs/Prikazi_2019/0512_obem1.pdf). The study of eelpouts in the Sea of Okhotsk state, that the Soldatov’s eelpout has very high number and biomass in the species group, the abundance according to long-term average data (2000-2013) is 353.64 million specimens, total stock biomass is 92.97 thousand t, and the fishery stock biomass is 47.73 thousand t. With the existing fishery in the Sea of Okhotsk, stocks of the species stable, the value of its annual catch is recommended in the amount of 6.35 thousand t (Badaev, 2015). Thus, it can be concluded that the species are not below the biological limits, SG100 is met.
References
KF TIG report, 2017; KamchatNIRO report, 2018; Artyukhin et al., 2006; Orlov, 1999b; Lajus et al, 2019.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator It is noted that a PSA will need to be conducted for Pacific sleeper shark. Information will need to be gathered on its productivity and selectivity
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 104 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.2.2 – Secondary species management strategy PI 2.2.2 There is a strategy in place for managing secondary species that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Management strategy in place Guide There are measures in place, There is a partial strategy in There is a strategy in place if necessary, which are place, if necessary, for the for the UoA for managing post expected to maintain or not UoA that is expected to main and minor secondary hinder rebuilding of main maintain or not hinder species. secondary species at/to levels rebuilding of main secondary a which are highly likely to be species at/to levels which are above biologically based highly likely to be above limits or to ensure that the biologically based limits or to UoA does not hinder their ensure that the UoA does not recovery. hinder their recovery. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The main secondary species are the ‘in scope’ Pacific sleeper shark and ‘out of scope’ sea birds. The minor secondary species are the spiny dogfish and various sculpins. It is noted that minor species meet SG80 by default. Main management measure has been the adoption of streamers on the longline snoods, and it have shown to be very effective in reducing bird hooking incidence. The other measures are: all the UoC vessels are required to record seabird bycatch and logbooks show that it is not high. There are regular scientific research carried out to study the background mortality of birds in the fishery. The usage of weighted main fishing line prevents the interaction of birds with fish. Together all this allow to conclude that there is a strategy in place for seabirds, so SG 100 is met for this group. For the Pacific sleeper shark, the measures together comprise a partial strategy, meeting SG80 (although SG80 is met by default for minor species) but does not meet SG 100.
Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are considered There is some objective Testing supports high likely to work, based on basis for confidence that the confidence that the partial post plausible argument (e.g. measures/partial strategy will strategy/strategy will work, b general experience, theory or work, based on some based on information directly comparison with similar information directly about the about the UoA and/or species UoAs/species). UoA and/or species involved. involved. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Minor species meet SG80 by default for this SI. There is good evidence from fisheries worldwide that the use of streamers is one of the key methods of minimizing seabird bycatch in demersal longline fisheries (e.g., Løkkeborg, 2011; Melvin et al., 2001). For this fishery the use of streamers has reduced seabird bycatch by a factor of 11 (Artyukhin et al. 2013), and their use has been mandatory since 2011. There is independent monitoring of bycatch through the observer programme, and the LFA continues to monitor the by-catch of birds in the wider fishery, having
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 105 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR introduced a new Code of Practice in 2018. The quantities of secondary species of all species taken annually represent small or very small proportions of the populations of the affected species. Therefore, there is some objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy (fish) / strategy (seabirds) will work, based on some information directly about the UoA and species involved and SG 80 is met for all species. There has not been extensive testing, though, for example to establish that bycatch rates are sufficiently low to avoid almost all possibility of long-term impact on the species, so SG100 is not met.
Management strategy implementation Guide There is some evidence that There is clear evidence that the measures/partial strategy the partial strategy/strategy is post is being implemented being implemented c successfully. successfully and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes No
Rationale
Minor species meet SG80 by default for this SI. All vessels in the UoC are equipped with streamers, their usage have been compulsory since 2011. Client vessels adhere to the LFA “Code of Conduct and Policy of Corporate Social and Ecological Responsibility”, the last version of which was signed off in 2018. Comparison of the global or regional abundance of seabird populations (and their survival rates in nature), found in by-catch, with calculated estimates of their mortality in the bottom longline fisheries in the fishing zones under consideration shows that mortality is incomparably small and, presumably, does not have a significant negative effect on the condition of most birds, which are common or widespread in the region (KF TIG report, 2017). The situation with discards and mortality of by-catch of fish species is not clear, even though the by-catch is very low, so only SG 80 is met.
Shark finning Guide It is likely that shark finning is It is highly likely that shark There is a high degree of d not taking place. finning is not taking place. certainty that shark finning is post not taking place. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The shark finning is not practiced in Russian fisheries. The catch landed in the UoA is subjected to thorough monitoring in the port, the data submitted via the VMS system and the fishing documents always can be checked by FSB or customs, and it should allow to confirm that there is no such product as shark fins. Although it is not typical, it cannot be concluded that it never occurs, SG80 is met, while for a precautionary purpose SG100 is not met.
Review of alternative measures to minimise mortality of unwanted catch Guide There is a review of the There is a regular review of There is a biennial review of post potential effectiveness and the potential effectiveness the potential effectiveness practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- e related mortality of unwanted related mortality of unwanted related mortality of unwanted catch of main secondary catch of main secondary catch of all secondary species. species and they are species, and they are implemented as appropriate. implemented, as appropriate.
Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 106 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Seabirds: Apart from the Pacific sleeper shark (see next), the main secondary species are only seabirds. In the recent years studies are carried out annually to see how effective the usage of streamers and the weighted main fishing line are as alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of main secondary species, thus meeting SG 80. However no biennial review is made, so does not meet SG 100.
Pacific sleeper shark: for the Russian Far East, an assumption is made that the long-term biological data on population of Pacific sleeper shark and relatively good state of stock may allow to reduce the mortality of unwanted catch by means of making it a commercially retained species with its own catch quota. SG60 can be met. SG 80 is also probably met, but will be confirmed (or not) during the site visit. The same can be said about sculpins, eelpouts and spiny dogfish, but since they are secondary minor species and their shares in catches is comparatively lower, the requirements for implementation of measures and regular review are not obligate. SG80 is met is met by default, but there is no evidence of a biennial review, so SG 100 is not met.
References
KF TIG report, 2017; KamchatNIRO report, 2018; Brothers et al., 1991; Artyukhin et al., 2013; Løkkeborg, 2011; Melvin et al., 2001; Orlov, 2017; Lajus et al, 2019.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 107 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 35 – PI 2.2.2 Scoring calculations.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought Further information on client fleet seabird catch mitigation measures, bycatch recording (are they signed up to the 2018 LFA ‘Code of Conduct & Policy of Corporate Social & Ecological Responsibility’? More information on Pacific sleeper shark stock assessment, discards and alternative measures to reduce mortality.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 108 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 109 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.2.3 – Secondary species information PI 2.2.3 Information on the nature and amount of secondary species taken is adequate to determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage secondary species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Information adequacy for assessment of impacts on main secondary species Guide Qualitative information is Some quantitative information Quantitative information is adequate to estimate the is available and adequate to available and adequate to post impact of the UoA on the assess the impact of the UoA assess with a high degree main secondary species with on main secondary species of certainty the impact of the respect to status. with respect to status. UoA on main secondary species with respect to status.
OR OR a If RBF is used to score PI If RBF is used to score PI 2.2.1 for the UoA: 2.2.1 for the UoA:
Qualitative information is Some quantitative information adequate to estimate is adequate to assess productivity and susceptibility productivity and susceptibility attributes for main secondary attributes for main secondary species. species. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The main secondary species are the in scope Pacific sleeper shark and out of scope sea birds. Pacific sleeper shark Some fishery-independent survey data provides data on distribution of Pacific sleeper shark, its length, maturation and reproduction. It is believed that due to low occurrence in catches, and differences in various positioning of sharks and gear in relation to depth, fishing is not undermining the reproductive part of the population (Orlov, 2017). SG60 and 80 are met, but since it is not known, what is the survivorship after discards, from a precautionary approach, SG100 is not met. Seabirds Quantitative information is available on all seabird species which are secondary main species, it is adequate to assess with a high degree of certainty that fishery doesn’t cause a serious impact on these species. Dead birds were found in 425 of the 1,874 controlled longline lines (22.7%). The number of dead birds varied from 1 to 160 individuals per longline, but in the most cases (337 of 425) did not exceed 4 individuals. Data from KF TIG report (2017) show that mortality of birds at the fishery is incomparably small to their natural mortality. SG 100 is met.
Information adequacy for assessment of impacts on minor secondary species Guide Some quantitative information is adequate to estimate the b post impact of the UoA on minor secondary species with respect to status. Met? Yes
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 110 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Rationale
Minor secondary species are scored 80 by default.
Information adequacy for management strategy Guide Information is adequate to Information is adequate to Information is adequate to support measures to manage support a partial strategy to support a strategy to manage post main secondary species. manage main secondary all secondary species, and c species. evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective. Met? Yes No No
Rationale
Pacific sleeper shark The amount of information available on status of Pacific sleeper shark is somewhat limited, but it states that the biomass is increasing. The measures for limitation of interception of deep-sea sharks with fisheries are reviewed, but information proof of their efficiency is considered insufficient. Since the sharks are discarded, as it is commonly done outside the UoA (Davis et al., 2013), it might be reviewed as a management measures, but not a strategy, since the strategy requires comparison with some orienteers. SG60 is met. However this information is insufficient to support a partial strategy, so SG 80 is not met. Seabirds Quantitative information on bird catches is written in the logbooks, streamers are used on all vessels. The available quantitative information is heterogeneous both between areas and years. Therefore, it is difficult to quantify species as main and minor with confidence. In particular, there was limited observer data available in the West Bering Sea zones together and for Karaginskaya subzone in 2016. Essentially, while the data are quantitative and are certainly adequate to support measures to manage main primary species (thereby meeting SG60), the assessment team was not convinced that the data are adequate to support a partial strategy to manage main primary species, so SG80 is not met. Minor species Minor species meet SG80 by default.
References
KF TIG report, 2017; KamchatNIRO report, 2018; Brothers et al., 1991; Artyukhin et al., 2013; Lajus et al, 2019.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 111 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 36 – PI 2.2.3 Scoring calculation.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 112 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range 60-79
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 113 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.3.1 – ETP species outcome PI 2.3.1 The UoA meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species The UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Effects of the UoA on population/stock within national or international limits, where applicable Guide Where national and/or Where national and/or Where national and/or international requirements set international requirements set international requirements set post limits for ETP species, the limits for ETP species, the limits for ETP species, there a effects of the UoA on the combined effects of the is a high degree of certainty population/ stock are known MSC UoAs on the population that the combined effects of and likely to be within these /stock are known and highly the MSC UoAs are within limits. likely to be within these limits. these limits. Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
There are no national and/or international requirement that set limits for the ETP species that interact with the fishery. This SI is therefore considered to be not relevant.
Direct effects Guide Known direct effects of the Direct effects of the UoA are There is a high degree of UoA are likely to not hinder highly likely to not hinder confidence that there are no b post recovery of ETP species. recovery of ETP species. significant detrimental direct effects of the UoA on
ETP species. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
ETP species in this assessment are the following: Steller sea lion, blue whale, harbour seal, Northern fur seal, sea otter, humpback whale, fin whale, bowhead whale, North Pacific right whale, grey whale, sperm whale, short-tailed Albatross, red-legged kittiwake, blacklegged Kittiwake. Direct effects can be caused only to ETP species of birds (short-tailed albatross, red-legged kittiwake and black-legged Kittiwake). By-catch of ETP species of marine mammals was absent in all cases during longline fishery observation. In the Far East of Russia, research on the effects of bottom longline fishing on the state of seabirds has been conducted since 2002 with the support of the WWF. The main part of the material was collected in 2003-2017 in the framework of WWF-supported projects to study the background mortality of seabirds in the bottom longline fishery and to develop and put into practice means for reducing by-catch of birds . One third of the longline operations (636 lines, or 33.9%) was performed on the vessels of the LFA as a whole. To increase the sample size, the analysis also included data on bird by-catch obtained by employees of KamchatNIRO in 1991, 1992, 1994 and 2000 in the amount of 205 lines. The cases of ETP bird species catch are singular: only two individuals of short-tailed albatross were caught. The current estimate of the global abundance of the short-tailed albatross is 4,200 individuals (KF TIG report, 2017). If analysed the share of species, which was seen during one vessel day near the vessels fishing, for short-tailed albatross it would be 0.001% and 0.003%. for the red-legged kittiwake. Therefore, known direct effects of the UoA are highly likely to not hinder recovery of ETP species, so SG80 is met. Observer coverage levels are not sufficiently high to meet SG100.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 114 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Indirect effects Guide Indirect effects have been There is a high degree of considered for the UoA and confidence that there are no c post are thought to be highly significant detrimental likely to not create indirect effects of the UoA unacceptable impacts. on ETP species. Met? Yes No
Rationale
Indirect effects are considered to be impacts on behaviour, feeding efficiency, habitats or other aspects of ETP species’ life histories. Effects from marine pollution (including, for example, lost or dumped fishing gear, oil or chemical spillages, and garbage thrown overboard) are also considered In longline fishery, indirect effects mainly consist in predation by ETP species of bait and hooked fish from longlines. From all potential ETP species, only Steller sea lion and Short-tailed albatross sometimes was seen depredating in longline fishery. There is highly likely that indirect effects do not create unacceptable impacts, but there’s no high degree of confidence that there are no significant detrimental indirect effects of the fishery on ETP species, so only SG80 is met.
References
TINRO report, 2018a; KF TIG report, 2017; KamchatNIRO report, 2018; Lajus et al, 2019.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought UoC specific data on interactions / mortality rates form ETP interactions for the client fleet.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 115 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.3.2 – ETP species management strategy PI 2.3.2 The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: - meet national and international requirements; - ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species.
Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Management strategy in place (national and international requirements) Guide There are measures in place There is a strategy in place There is a comprehensive that minimise the UoA-related for managing the UoA’s strategy in place for post mortality of ETP species, and impact on ETP species, managing the UoA’s impact are expected to be highly including measures to on ETP species, including a likely to achieve national and minimise mortality, which is measures to minimise international requirements for designed to be highly likely mortality, which is designed to the protection of ETP species. to achieve national and achieve above national and international requirements for international requirements for the protection of ETP species. the protection of ETP species. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Russia has been a party to CITES since 1976. The Russian Red Book is a state document established for documenting rare and endangered species of animals, plants and fungi, as well as some local subspecies that exist within the Russian Federation territory and its continental shelf and marine exclusive economic zone. All LFA vessels, which includes the client fleet, are required to complete a bycatch logbook that covers all non-target catch and interactions, including large marine animals (marine mammals, sharks, reptiles), birds as well as invertebrates such as molluscs, cold-water corals, sponges and other bottom-dwelling organisms. WWF Russia have assisted the LFA to develop this recording programme and have provide a manual on observer duties and rights. This observer programme is conducted in association with TINRO and KamchatNIRO, whose staff have undergone observer training. By-catch of ETP species of marine mammals was absent in all cases during longline fishery observation. From all potential ETP species, only Steller sea lion and Short-tailed albatross sometimes was seen depredating in longline fishery, cases of by-catch of Short-tailed albatross are singular. To protect the catch from Steller sea lion depredation, fishermen used guns and firecrackers to deter Steller sea lions. For ETP bird species the main management strategy has been the adoption of streamers on the longline snoods, and it has shown to be very effective in reducing bird hooking incidence, so SG 80 is met, but there’s no comprehensive strategy in place for managing the UoA’s impact on ETP species, including measures to minimise mortality, which is designed to achieve above national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species, so SG 100 is not met.
Management strategy in place (alternative) Guide There are measures in place There is a strategy in place There is a comprehensive that are expected to ensure that is expected to ensure the strategy in place for post the UoA does not hinder the UoA does not hinder the managing ETP species, to b recovery of ETP species. recovery of ETP species. ensure the UoA does not hinder the recovery of ETP species. Met? NA NA NA
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 116 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Rationale
Not relevant. See scoring issue A. This issue applies only where species are recognized as ETP but requirements are not defined in legislation or agreements. This scoring issue is not applicable because requirements for protection and rebuilding are provided through national ETP legislation.
Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is an objective basis The strategy/comprehensive considered likely to work, for confidence that the strategy is mainly based on post based on plausible measures/strategy will work, information directly about the argument (e.g., general based on information directly fishery and/or species c experience, theory or about the fishery and/or the involved, and a quantitative comparison with similar species involved. analysis supports high fisheries/species). confidence that the strategy will work. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The strategy is mainly based on information directly about the fishery, because all interactions with ETP species should be recorded in the logbooks. Data from observers confirms that no catches of marine mammals were registered and that the catches of ETP bird species were singular. This provides an objective basis for confidence that the strategy will work, based on information directly about the fishery and/or the species involved, so SG 80 is met. There is quantitative analysis for some species (KF TIG report, 2017), but from a precautionary perspective. SG100 is not met.
Management strategy implementation Guide There is some evidence that There is clear evidence that the measures/strategy is the strategy/comprehensive post being implemented strategy is being implemented d successfully. successfully and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a) or (b). Met? Yes No
Rationale
The approach taken to minimise interactions between the fishery and ETP species is based on information directly about the fishery and the species involved. The levels of catch of ETP species in the fishery is very small. SG80 is met, but as far as the coverage of observers is not 100%, it cannot be proved that all interactions were registered and that the strategy/comprehensive strategy is being implemented successfully, so SG 100 is not met.
Review of alternative measures to minimise mortality of ETP species Guide There is a review of the There is a regular review of There is a biennial review of potential effectiveness and the potential effectiveness the potential effectiveness post practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative and practicality of alternative e measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- measures to minimise UoA- related mortality of ETP related mortality of ETP related mortality ETP species, species. species and they are and they are implemented, as implemented as appropriate. appropriate. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 117 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
LFA, of which the client fleet is a member, regularly (i.e., at least every five years) collaborates with research institutes and WWF to carry out the monitoring of fishery, as well for getting better data on interactions with ETP species and to review potential means to reduce interactions (e.g. TINRO 2018a, KamchatNIRO report, 2018). All LFA vessels are required to complete a bycatch logbook that covers all non-target catch and interactions, including large marine animals (marine mammals, sharks, reptiles), birds as well as invertebrates such as molluscs, cold-water corals, sponges and other bottom-dwelling organisms. WWF Russia have assisted the LFA to develop this recording programme and have provide a manual on observer duties and rights. This observer programme is conducted annually in association with TINRO and KamchatNIRO, whose staff have undergone observer training. The effectiveness of streamers to prevent bird interactions and different scaring devices to prevent marine mammals interactions was evaluated prior to their implementation and continues to be monitored. SG 80 is met, but the specific review of effectiveness for all ETP species is not conducted at least biennially so SG100 is not met.
References
TINRO report, 2018a; KF TIG report, 2017; KamchatNIRO report, 2018, Lajus et al, 2019
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought UoC specific data on interactions / mortality rates from ETP interactions for the client fleet. Also confirmation that all LFA requirements are applicable to the client fleet.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 118 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.3.3 – ETP species information PI 2.3.3 Relevant information is collected to support the management of UoA impacts on ETP species, including: - Information for the development of the management strategy; - Information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and - Information to determine the outcome status of ETP species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Information adequacy for assessment of impacts Guide Qualitative information is Some quantitative information Quantitative information is adequate to estimate the is adequate to assess the available to assess with a post UoA related mortality on ETP UoA related mortality and high degree of certainty the species. impact and to determine magnitude of UoA-related whether the UoA may be a impacts, mortalities and
threat to protection and injuries and the OR recovery of the ETP species. consequences for the status of ETP species. a If RBF is used to score PI OR 2.3.1 for the UoA:
Qualitative information is If RBF is used to score PI adequate to estimate 2.3.1 for the UoA: productivity and susceptibility attributes for Some quantitative information ETP species. is adequate to assess productivity and susceptibility attributes for ETP species. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Quantitative information is enough to assess the UoA related mortality and number of interactions with ETP species, but the observer coverage is not 100% and magnitude of all UoA related impacts is hard to predict, especially of indirect impacts, so SG 80 is met, but not SG 100.
Information adequacy for management strategy Guide Information is adequate to Information is adequate to Information is adequate to support measures to measure trends and support support a comprehensive post manage the impacts on ETP a strategy to manage strategy to manage impacts, species. impacts on ETP species. minimise mortality and injury b of ETP species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objectives. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 119 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Quantitative information is adequate to measure trends and support a strategy to manage impacts on ETP species of birds. The cases of ETP bird species catch are singular: only two individuals of short-tailed albatross were caught since 1998. There’s a possibility to other ETP bird species - red-legged kittiwake and black-legged kittiwake to be caught, although there is no information that these species were caught. The current estimate of the global abundance of the short-tailed albatross is 4,200 individuals (KF TIG report, 2017), for red legged kittiwake it is 337,000-377,000 mature individuals, for black-legged kittiwake - c. 14,600,000-15,700,000 individuals (Wetlands International, 2016). But as far as no marine mammals were caught, information on them is only descriptive and better data collection is needed, so SG 80 is met, but not SG 100.
References
Wetlands International, 2016; KF TIG report, 2017; Lajus et al, 2019
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought UoC specific data on interactions / mortality rates from ETP interactions for the client fleet. Also confirmation that all LFA requirements are applicable to the client fleet.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 120 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.4.1 – Habitats outcome PI 2.4.1 The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure and function, considered on the basis of the area covered by the governance body(s) responsible for fisheries management in the area(s) where the UoA operates Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Commonly encountered habitat status Guide The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly unlikely There is evidence that the reduce structure and function to reduce structure and UoA is highly unlikely to post of the commonly encountered function of the commonly reduce structure and function a habitats to a point where encountered habitats to a of the commonly encountered there would be serious or point where there would be habitats to a point where irreversible harm. serious or irreversible harm. there would be serious or irreversible harm. Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
The commonly encountered habitat is considered to be sand on the lower shelf and upper slope in depths of around 100 to 500 m, with a low lying epibenthic and in-faunal community. Studies of benthic communities in the western part of the Bering Sea have a long history. Various benthic surveys were conducted on the shelf of the Bering Sea, which permitted to compare status of bottom invertebrates in the modern period to their status in 1980s and 1960s in the areas affected by the long-line fisheries. Large-scale studies were done by TINRO twice in the end of 20th and in the beginning of 21st century in three areas: Korfo-Karaginskiy area (Karaginskiy Gulf and Olyutorskiy Gulf), Gulf of Anadyr and the shelf of the Koryakskiy coast, using a similar set of stations in 2005 as those sampled in the 1980s, that allows to address the long-term variability of bottom communities under the influence of fishing. Some 27 taxa were represented with bivalve molluscs, sea urchins and polychaete worms making up 88% of the biomass. Comparison of the 1985 and 2005 data indicated few changes and overall a similar spatial distribution of biomass and taxa. Modern-time studies are also performed (Terentyev, 2020). In the subzones of Eastern Kamchatka and Northern Kurils (Nadtochy & Koblikov, 2005), data is also available and reported to be similar to Southern Kurils, it is stated that it can be assumed that the state of its communities has not undergone irreversible changes (Terentyev, 2020). Although there has not been a detailed review and assessment of benthic impacts from longlining from this fishery, the information on longlining impacts in other areas (e.g., Fosså et al. 2002; Orejas et al. 2009; & Pham et al. 2014) provides evidence that the fishery is highly unlikely to reduce habitat structure and function of the commonly encountered habitat to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. SG100 is met.
VME habitat status Guide The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly unlikely There is evidence that the reduce structure and function to reduce structure and UoA is highly unlikely to post of the VME habitats to a point function of the VME habitats reduce structure and function b where there would be serious to a point where there would of the VME habitats to a point or irreversible harm. be serious or irreversible where there would be serious harm. or irreversible harm.
Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
The North Pacific Fisheries Commission (NPFC) ‘Small Scientific Committee on Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs)’ has identified four orders of corals as indicators of potential VMEs: soft corals (Alcyonacean and Gorgonacea), black corals (Antipatharia) and hard corals (Scleractinia), with the potential for addition of new taxa.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 121 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
There is a database on FAO website on the areas with restrictions of fishing, controlled by regional fisheries management organisations. However, the NPFC does not have jurisdiction within Russian waters. In Russian waters at the Far East, there are extensive areas with restrictions or prohibition of bottom trawling, for general habitat and species conservation purposes. However, the concept of VMEs and potential VMEs (as defined by the FAO Guidelines; see GSA3.13.3.2) has not been accepted, defined or identified in the region by the Russia as the management authority/governance body and therefore VMEs are not scored (MSC interpretation ‘Identification of VMEs’ ). Should this situation change in future, the fishery would need to be scored against VMEs at that time.
Minor habitat status Guide There is evidence that the UoA is highly unlikely to post reduce structure and function c of the minor habitats to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. Met? Yes
Rationale
Fishing is carried out in three fishing areas, mostly in depths of 100 m to 500 m but occasionally in shallower or deeper areas of 10–1,330 m, but still on soft sediments with a low-lying epifaunal and in-faunal community. In general, the studies performed demonstrate a high degree of stability of bottom communities and their resistance to climatic changes and the effects of fishing. Sometimes, the new communities could be identified. For example, in 2005 on the Koryak shelf communities dominated by ascidians, sea anemones and bivalve mollusc Serripes groenladicus were identified for the first time, as well as community of polychaetes Axiothella catenata + Artacama proboscidea and polychaete Maldane sarsi community in the water area of the Gulf of Anadyr. The biomass of other not so abundant groups is also identified and reviewed (Terentyev, 2020). SG 100 is met.
References
WWF report, 2018; KamchatNIRO report, 2016; KamchatNIRO report, 2018; TINRO report, 2018a; Vinogradova, 1954; Belyaev, 1960; Neyman, 1961, 1963; Filatova & Neyman, 1963; Filatova & Barsanova, 1964; Shuntov, 2001, Terentyev, 2020.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought Update on VME definition / identification in Russian waters.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 122 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.4.2 – Habitats management strategy PI 2.4.2 There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the habitats Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Management strategy in place Guide There are measures in There is a partial strategy in There is a strategy in place for place, if necessary, that are place, if necessary, that is managing the impact of all a post expected to achieve the expected to achieve the MSC UoAs/non-MSC fisheries Habitat Outcome 80 level of Habitat Outcome 80 level of on habitats. performance. performance or above. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
As a member of the LFA, client vessels adhere to the 2018 “Code of Conduct and Policy of Corporate Social and Ecological Responsibility” that: • The LFA client vessels support the idea of registering all species caught as by-catch as a useful tool for collecting the data necessary to assess the impact of the fishery on the environment. • The LFA client vessels undertake to take the following measures for by-catch: (1) record the bycatch of all species of fish, invertebrates, seabirds and mammals using the by-catch logbook developed in collaboration with WWF Russia; <…> (4) apply available technologies to minimize by-catch; (5) follow scientific guidelines for minimizing bycatch of non-target species; (6) to facilitate systematic scientific observations carried out by qualified specialists on fishing vessels to assess the impact of fishing on target species, as well as on all types of by-catch, including non-target species of fish, invertebrates, birds and marine mammals. Fishermen avoid working in areas with hard bottom. Information about these areas is collected also by fishermen themselves during fishing, put on the maps, so crew of different vessels exchange such information. Besides, there’s a program of scientific research carried out by state institutes, which has monitored the status of benthic communities for more than 50 years. In combination with the fact that the LFA vessels use longlines (which are a low-impact gear) and are constrained in their activity level by their licensing and quota availability, these measures form a partial strategy that is in place, so SG 80 is met. But there is no strategy in place for managing the impact of all MSC UoAs and especially non-MSC fisheries on habitats, so SG 100 is not met.
Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high considered likely to work, basis for confidence that confidence that the partial post based on plausible argument the measures/partial strategy strategy/strategy will work, b (e.g. general experience, will work, based on based on information directly theory or comparison with information directly about about the UoA and/or similar UoAs/habitats). the UoA and/or habitats habitats involved. involved. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Large scale seabed surveys have been conducted in the area of the fishery, and fishers share information on habitats locally to facilitate avoidance of hard substrates. Several studies have identified that longlines have a very low impact to benthic habitats and communities. Even to habitats that are generally considered sensitive, impacts are very localised and of low level (e.g., Fosså et al. 2002, Orejas et al. 2009, Pham et al. 2014). Seabed mapping and the use of VMS plus observer coverage to check compliance with quota and licensing requirements are standard approaches
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 123 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR that are well-tested. Hence, overall, there is some objective basis for confidence that the measures/partial strategy will work, based on information directly about the UoA and/or habitats involved, so SG 80 is met. No benthic survey has been conducted after 2005, hence it is not possible to state with high confidence that there is strong evidence that the strategy is working based on direct testing. However there is evidence that regulated deep- sea longlining has a reduced impact on benthic communities with low bycatch and in situ damages (Pham et al, 2014). Being precautionary, it cannot be said that explicit “testing” has been undertaken. SG100 is not met because there is no specific testing of the partial strategy.
Management strategy implementation Guide There is some quantitative There is clear quantitative evidence that the evidence that the partial post measures/partial strategy is strategy/strategy is being c being implemented implemented successfully and successfully. is achieving its objective, as outlined in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes No
Rationale
The partial strategy to manage habitat impacts is supported by large scale seabed surveys in the area of the fishery, and comprises the fishery using a gear type (long lines) that is low impact and avoiding areas of hard substrate, together with sharing information on seabed types. The vessels engaged in the fishery are monitored by observers and are inspected periodically at sea and when landing ashore. All vessels are also equipped with VMS which identifies their location of activity and speed, such that it would be known if gear other than longlines were employed, or if they were fishing beyond their quota and licence. This provides some quantitative evidence that the partial strategy is being implemented successfully so SG80 is met. However, observer coverage is rather limited, so SG 100 is not met.
Compliance with management requirements and other MSC UoAs’/non-MSC fisheries’ measures to protect VMEs Guide There is qualitative There is some quantitative There is clear quantitative evidence that the UoA evidence that the UoA evidence that the UoA d post complies with its complies with both its complies with both its management requirements to management requirements management requirements and protect VMEs. and with protection measures with protection measures afforded to VMEs by other afforded to VMEs by other MSC UoAs/non-MSC MSC UoAs/non-MSC fisheries, fisheries, where relevant. where relevant. Met? NA NA NA
Rationale
In Russian waters at the Far East, there are extensive areas with restrictions or prohibition of bottom trawling, for general habitat and species conservation purposes. However, the concept of VMEs and potential VMEs (as defined by the FAO Guidelines; see GSA3.13.3.2) has not been accepted, defined or identified in the region by the Russia as the management authority/governance body and therefore VMEs are not scored (MSC interpretation ‘Identification of VMEs’ ). Should this situation change in future, the fishery would need to be scored against VMEs at that time.
References
Fosså et al. 2002, Orejas et al. 2009, Pham et al. 2014, WWF, 2018; KamchatNIRO report, 2016; KamchatNIRO report, 2018; TINRO report, 2014; TINRO report, 2018a, Lajus et al, 2020.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 124 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought Spatial location of UoC activity, observer data on any benthic bycatch e.g. entangled hard / soft corals; evidence of rate of loss of longline hooks / branch lines.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 125 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.4.3 – Habitats information PI 2.4.3 Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to the habitat by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on the habitat Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Information quality Guide The types and distribution of The nature, distribution and The distribution of all habitats the main habitats are broadly vulnerability of the main is known over their range, post understood. habitats in the UoA area are with particular attention to the known at a level of detail occurrence of vulnerable
relevant to the scale and habitats. OR intensity of the UoA.
If CSA is used to score PI OR a 2.4.1 for the UoA:
Qualitative information is If CSA is used to score PI adequate to estimate the 2.4.1 for the UoA: types and distribution of the main habitats. Some quantitative information is available and is adequate to estimate the types and distribution of the main habitats. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The commonly encountered (main) habitat is considered to be sand on the lower shelf and upper slope in depths of around 100 to 500 m, with a low lying epibenthic and infauna community. Studies of benthic communities in the western part of the Bering Sea have a long history. Data of two large-scale surveys conducted by TINRO-Center showed that the main bottom communities, described in the 1980s, in the early 2000s generally retained their location and quantitative characteristics. The average total biomass of macro- zoobenthos in the 2000s in all studied areas increased, and the list of dominant taxonomic groups and species remained almost the same. There was no large-scale detailed survey conducted in the last years, meaning that the distribution of all habitats is over their range is unknown, thus SG 80 is met, but not SG 100.
Information adequacy for assessment of impacts Guide Information is adequate to Information is adequate to The physical impacts of the broadly understand the allow for identification of the gear on all habitats have post nature of the main impacts of main impacts of the UoA on been quantified fully. gear use on the main the main habitats, and there habitats, including spatial is reliable information on the overlap of habitat with fishing spatial extent of interaction b gear. and on the timing and location of use of the fishing
gear. OR
OR If CSA is used to score PI
2.4.1 for the UoA: If CSA is used to score PI Qualitative information is
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 126 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
adequate to estimate the 2.4.1 for the UoA: consequence and spatial Some quantitative information attributes of the main is available and is adequate habitats. to estimate the consequence and spatial attributes of the main habitats. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Reliable information on the spatial extent of interaction and on the timing and location of use of the fishing gear is available. According to survey data, negative effect of longline fishing does not cause critical damage to benthic communities. Longlines are considered gears with reduced impact. One deep-sea bottom trawl is comparable in impact on bottom communities with 0.3–1.7 thousand longlines (Pham et al, 2014). The physical impacts of the gear have not been quantified fully, thus SG 80 is met, but not SG 100.
Monitoring Guide Adequate information Changes in all habitat continues to be collected to distributions over time are c post detect any increase in risk to measured. the main habitats.
Met? Yes No
Rationale
Monitoring by independent observers and studies by research institutes and WWF on quantitative composition of catches of longliners are continuing which allow to control the risks to main habitats. VMS data are also collected on all vessels participating in the fishery. However, no monitoring of habitats is performed, which would allow to detect changes of their distribution, thus SG 80 is met, but not SG 100.
References
WWF report, 2018; KamchatNIRO report, 2016; KamchatNIRO report, 2018; TINRO report, 2014; TINRO report, 2018a.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought Spatial mapping of UoC fishing effort
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 127 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.5.1 – Ecosystem outcome PI 2.5.1 The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key elements of ecosystem structure and function Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Ecosystem status Guide The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly unlikely to There is evidence that the disrupt the key elements disrupt the key elements UoA is highly unlikely to post underlying ecosystem underlying ecosystem disrupt the key elements a structure and function to a structure and function to a underlying ecosystem point where there would be a point where there would be a structure and function to a serious or irreversible harm. serious or irreversible harm. point where there would be a serious or irreversible harm. Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
The key ecosystem element for the region where this longline fishery operates is trophic structure and function of the shelf and upper slope. Over more than 30 years of research of the ecosystem of the Bering Sea, more than 30 pelagic and more than 20 bottom surveys were conducted during various seasons of the year, which allow control the dynamics of ecosystem components in considerable detail over a long period. Results show that the Western Bering Sea is a more active ecosystem on the lower trophic levels, and that while there have been fluctuations in the abundance of different species and groups over time, there is no evidence to suggest that these fluctuations were caused by this or the wider LFA longline fishery, directly or indirectly. The biomass of fish and commercial invertebrates for the three Far Eastern seas and the Kuril and Kamchatka waters was estimated at 150 million t, of which 90–100 million t for Russian waters, which is explained as a result of normal structuring and functioning of marine ecosystems (Terentyev, 2020). Further, Pacific cod are predators of upper trophic levels, thus their removal is not so destructive for the ecosystem, as, for instance, removal of planktivorous fish. Pacific cod constitute only a very small fraction of the biomass of the entire ecosystem, their feeding habits are well described; therefore, it is considered that there is evidence that their removal within the fishery is highly unlikely to have a significant effect on the ecosystem as a whole, such the key elements underlying ecosystem structure and function would be disrupted to a point where there would be a serious or irreversible harm. SG 100 is met.
References
KamchatNIRO report, 2016; TINRO report, 2018a; Lajus et al, 2019; Terentyev, 2020.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI None
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 128 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.5.2 – Ecosystem management strategy PI 2.5.2 There are measures in place to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Management strategy in place Guide There are measures in place, There is a partial strategy in There is a strategy that if necessary which take into place, if necessary, which consists of a plan, in place post account the potential takes into account available which contains measures to impacts of the UoA on key information and is expected address all main impacts of a elements of the ecosystem. to restrain impacts of the the UoA on the ecosystem, UoA on the ecosystem so as and at least some of these
to achieve the Ecosystem measures are in place. Outcome 80 level of
performance. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Russian fisheries management is still largely based upon single stock units in specific fisheries management areas, but all TACs are formally reviewed (in the form of an environmental impact assessment) by the State Ecological Expertise in the Ministry of Natural Resources. The State Ecological Expertise provides some degree of wider assessment of the impact of permitted fishing mortality on the wider marine ecosystem. In reality, management probably focuses more on the direct impacts of the fishery on the target / similar commercial stock(s), without looking at wider tropic impacts, or impacts on non-target species. The measures that support ecosystem outcomes in this fishery include licensing and TAC-setting for commercially important species (e.g., Pacific cod), as well as closed seasons and closed areas that limit fishing activity. So, the partial strategy is in place and SG 80 is met. There is not a specific strategy addressing all main impacts in place, so SG100 is not met.
Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high considered likely to work, basis for confidence that confidence that the partial post based on plausible argument the measures/ partial strategy strategy/ strategy will work, b (e.g., general experience, will work, based on some based on information directly theory or comparison with information directly about the about the UoA and/or similar UoAs/ ecosystems). UoA and/or the ecosystem ecosystem involved. involved.
Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The ecosystem partial strategy for this longline fishery is based on limiting fishing activity and is supported by a data collection programme for the region. There is evidence of the absence of negative impacts on the components of the ecosystem (and therefore on their roles that form the key elements of the ecosystem), which indicates that the partial strategy will work. The partial strategy makes use of available physical, biological, and fishing effort information collected via research surveys, observer data, and ocean monitoring assets and is expected to restrain impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem. Indicators of ecosystem health such as water temperature and biomass of forage fish species represent the state of the important elements of the ecosystem. SG 80 is met. However, not all functional relationships are well understood and there is no complex testing supporting the strategy, SG 100 is not met.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 129 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Management strategy implementation Guide There is some evidence that There is clear evidence that the measures/partial strategy the partial strategy/strategy is post is being implemented being implemented c successfully. successfully and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a). Met? Yes No
Rationale
There is ample evidence that ecosystem partial strategy it is being implemented successfully through monitoring of fishing activity and catch within the LFA fleet as a whole, including the client vessels, including through observers and VMS monitoring, with analysis of fishery data collected by the observers on the amount and composition of retained species, bycatch species and interactions with ETP species, so SG 80 is met. But as far as not all functional relationships are well understood and ecological modelling is rather poor, SG 100 is not met.
References
KamchatNIRO report, 2016; TINRO report, 2018a; Lajus et al, 2019; Terentyev, 2020.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 130 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 2.5.3 – Ecosystem information PI 2.5.3 There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the UoA on the ecosystem Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Information quality Guide Information is adequate to Information is adequate to a identify the key elements of broadly understand the key post the ecosystem. elements of the ecosystem. Met? Yes Yes
Rationale
The key ecosystem element for the region where this longline fishery operates is the shelf and upper slope. Quantitative estimates covering the period of the 1980s were carried out by TINRO within the entire economic zone in two directions - for bottom and pelagic communities (Shuntov, 1985; Borets, 1990, 1997; Balanov & Ilyinsky, 1992; Shuntov et al., 1993 ; Radchenko, 1994; Ilyinsky, 1995; Lapko, 1995, 1996). The biomass of fish and commercial invertebrates for the three Far Eastern seas and the Kuril and Kamchatka waters was estimated at 150 million t, of which 90–100 million t for Russian waters, which is explained as a result of normal structuring and functioning of marine ecosystems (Terentyev, 2020). Primary production and its role in trophic chains in the UoA was also comprehensively studied and reviewed (Shuntov & Dulepova, 1993, 1995, 1996; Shuntov, 2001). SG80 is met.
Investigation of UoA impacts Guide Main impacts of the UoA on Main impacts of the UoA on Main interactions between the these key ecosystem these key ecosystem UoA and these ecosystem post elements can be inferred from elements can be inferred from elements can be inferred from b existing information, but have existing information, and existing information, and not been investigated in some have been have been investigated in detail. investigated in detail. detail. Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
Main interactions between the UoA and key ecosystem elements of trophic structure and function of the shelf and upper slope region can be inferred from existing information and have been investigated in detail. The catch of Pacific cod, as well as other commercial species has been sustainable over a long period. The effects of longline gear on bottom habitat, marine mammals and seabirds have been studied and considered very limited. It is extremely unlikely that there would be any detectable impact from longlining on plankton communities, so this has not been investigated, and so this would not be considered a ‘main’ interaction. Climatic effects are periodically addressed and estimated in scientific studies of the marine ecosystems. SG 100 is met.
Understanding of component functions Guide The main functions of the The impacts of the UoA on P1 components (i.e., P1 target target species, primary, post species, primary, secondary secondary and ETP species c and ETP species and and Habitats are identified Habitats) in the ecosystem and the main functions of are known. these components in the ecosystem are understood. Met? Yes Yes
Rationale
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 131 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
There is enough information on all ecosystem components, the main functions of these components are understood. Information is collected by fishermen, independent observers, research institutes (in the region and worldwide), WWF etc. Data on more sensitive benthic habitats and species is presented by WWF and KamchatNIRO, on seabirds – by KF TIG, on bottom communities – by KamchatNIRO, on observation program – by KamchatNIRO and TINRO, on target species and other by-catch species – by TINRO, on ETP species – by KamchatNIRO and TINRO, on ecosystems – by TINRO, on catches – by LFA and independent observers. SG 100 is met.
Information relevance Guide Adequate information is Adequate information is available on the impacts of available on the impacts of post the UoA on these the UoA on the components d components to allow some of and elements to allow the the main consequences for main consequences for the the ecosystem to be inferred. ecosystem to be inferred. Met? Yes No
Rationale
Adequate information is available on the impacts of the UoA on the ecosystem components, all components are identified and the impacts described, so SG 80 is met. But more precise information is needed to assess some elements, for example, there is a lack of information on some P2 species due to their biological peculiarities and distribution that is limited to deep water areas and the species and habitats are not clearly identified in some parts of the UoA (Southern Kuril zone) so SG 100 is not met.
Monitoring Guide Adequate data continue to be Information is adequate to collected to detect any support the development of e post increase in risk level. strategies to manage ecosystem impacts. Met? Yes No
Rationale
Coverage of monitoring by independent observers is not 100%. In 2014–2017 studies were conducted on four client vessels in the three fishing areas at depths of 10–1,330 m. Observation of bycatch when fishing is not systematic. It is not possible to send two observers on one vessel and this limits the quality and extent of bycatch monitoring. Scientific surveys are carried only periodically, so whilst SG 80 is met, SG 100 is not.
References
Shuntov, 1985a; Borets, 1990a, 1997; Balanov & Ilyinsky, 1992; Shuntov et al., 1993 ; Radchenko, 1994; Ilyinsky, 1995; Lapko, 1995, 1996; Shuntov, Dulepova, 1993, 1995, 1996; Shuntov, 2001; KamchatNIRO report, 2016; TINRO report, 2018a; Lajus et al, 2019; Terentyev, 2020.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 132 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 133 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.3.11 Principle 2 references Altukhov A.V., Andrews R.D., Calkins D.G., Gelatt T.S., Gurarie E.D., Loughlin T.R. (2015). Age Specific Survival Rates of Steller Sea Lions at Rookeries with Divergent Population Trends in the Russian Far East. PLoS ONE 10(5): e0127292. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127292. Antonov N.P., & Kuznetsova E.N. (2013). The current status of fishing for marine fish in the seas of the Far East // Ryb. hoz-vo. № 2. S. 55–57. [Антонов Н.П., Кузнецова Е.Н. 2013. Современное со стояние промысла морских рыб в морях Дальнего Востока // Рыб. хоз-во. № 2. С. 55–57.] Artyuhin Y.B., Vinnikov A.V., Terentyev D.A. (2006). Morskie pticy i donnoe yarusnoe rybolovstvo v kamchatskom regione. M.: 2006. – 56 p. [Артюхин Ю.Б., Винников А.В., Терентьев Д.А. Морские птицы и донное ярусное рыболовство в камчатском регионе. М.: 2006. – 56 с.] Artyukhin, Y., A. Vinnikov, D. Terentyev and O. Ilyin (2013). Streamer lines — effective seabird scarer for demersal longline fishery. TINRO. Vol. 175. P. 277–290. Badaev O.Z. (2015). Biology, stock status, and possibilities for fishing of Soldatov’s eelpout Lycodes soldatovi (Perciformes: Zoarcidae) in the Sea of Okhotsk. // VNIRO. 16(3): 321-331. Balanov, A.A., V. V. Zemnukhov & O. Ivanov (2004). Distribution of the Eelpout Lycodes soldatovi (Pisces: Zoarcidae) over the Continental Slope of the Sea of Okhotsk. Russian Journal of Marine Biology 30(4):248-258. DOI: 10.1023/B:RUMB.0000039155.99140.22 Balykin P.A., and Tokranov A.M. (2010). Fish fauna and fishing in the north-western part of the Bering Sea. // Studies on the aquatic biological resources of Kamchatka and Northwest part of the Pacific Ocean. Vol. 17. Barnett, L.A.K., Winton, M.V., Ainsley, S.M., Cailliet, G.M., and Ebert, D.A. (2013). Comparative Demography of Skates: Life-History Correlates of Productivity and Implications for Management. PLoS ONE 8(5): e65000. Batanov R.L., Chikilev V.G., Datskiy A.V. (1999). Biology, state of stocks and fishing of cod in the AnadyrNavarinsky district // Izv. TINRO. - 1999. - T. 126. - Pp. 202-209. [Батанов Р.Л., Чикилев В.Г., Датский А.В. Биология, состояние запасов и промысел трески Анадырско-Наваринского района // Изв. ТИНРО. - 1999. - Т. 126. - С. 202-209.] Belyaev G.M. (1960). Quantitative distribution of bottom fauna in the north-western part of the Bering Sea // Tr. IOAN SSSR. – 1960. – T. 34. – Pp. 85–103. [Беляев Г.М. Количественное распределение донной фауны в северозападной части Берингова моря // Тр. ИОАН СССР. – 1960. – Т. 34. – С. 85–103.] BirdLife International 2018a. Fulmarus glacialis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T22697866A132609419. Downloaded on 21 November 2018. BirdLife International 2018b. Larus schistisagus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T22694362A132544713. Downloaded on 15 March 2021. BirdLife International 2018c. Ardenna tenuirostris. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T22698216A132635686. Downloaded on 15 March 2021. BirdLife International 2018d. Phoebastria albatrus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T22698335A132642113. Downloaded on 15 March 2021. BirdLife International 2018e. Rissa brevirostris. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T22694502A132557429. Downloaded on 15 March 2021. BirdLife International. 2019. Rissa tridactyla (amended version of 2018 assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019: e.T22694497A155617539. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018- 2.RLTS.T22694497A155617539.en. Downloaded on 15 March 2021. Borets L.A. (1990). The current state of bottom fish resources on the shelf of the Far Eastern seas // Biol. resources of the shelf and marginal seas of the Soviet Union. M .: Nauka. Pp. 181-196. Borets L.A. (1997). Bottom ichthyocoenes of the Russian Far Eastern shelf: composition , structure, elements of functioning and commercial importance. Vladivostok: TINRO-Center. 217 p. [Борец Л.А. Донные ихтиоцены российского шельфа дальневосточных морей: состав, структура, элементы функционирования и промысловое значение. – Владивосток: ТИНРО-центр, 1997. – 217 с.] Borisovets E.E., & Nadtochij V.A.(2003). Diagrammy Voronogo kak odin iz metodov ocenki sostoyaniya resursov // Rol' klimata i promysla v izmenenii struktury zoobentosa shel'fa (kamchatskij krab, islandskij grebeshok, severnaya krevetka i dr.). – Tez. dokl. mezhdunar. seminara. – Murmansk, 2003. – P. 17. [Борисовец Е.Э., Надточий В.А. Диаграммы Вороного как один из методов оценки состояния ресурсов // Роль климата и промысла в изменении
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 134 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
структуры зообентоса шельфа (камчатский краб, исландский гребешок, северная креветка и др.). –Тез. докл. междунар. семинара. – Мурманск, 2003. – С. 17.] Brazil, M. (2009). Birds of East Asia: eastern China, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, eastern Russia. Christopher Helm, London. Brooke, M. de L. (2004). Albatrosses and Petrels Across the World. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Brothers N. (1991). Albatross mortality and associated bait loss in the Japanese longline fishery in the Southern Ocean // Biological Conservation 55: 255–268. Burkanov V., Laskina N., Mamaev E., Nikulin V., Phomin S., Ryazanov S., Tretyakov A., Usatov I., Vertyankin V. (2016). Alarming Results of the 2015 Steller Sea Lion Survey in Three Russian Far East Regions. Paper presented at the Alaska Marine Science Symposium, Anchorage, Alaska, USA. P. 222. Byrd, G., and J. Williams (1993). Red-legged Kittiwake Rissa brevirostris. In: Poole, A.; Gill, F.B. (ed.), The birds of North America, No. 60, pp. 1-12. Academy of Natural Sciences and American Ornithologists' Union, Philadelphia and Washington, DC. Chereshnev I.A., Volobuev V.V., Hovanskij I.E., SHestakov A.V. (2001). Pribrezhnye ryby severnoj chasti Chuchukalo V.I. (2006). Pitanie i pishchevye otnosheniya nektona i nektobentosa v dal'nevostochnyh moryah. // Vladivostok: TINRO-centr, 2006. – 511 p.Commission of the European Communities. 2009. European community plan for action for the conservation and management of sharks. // Brussel. 2009(106). Conover D.O., Clarke L.M., Munch S.B., Wagner G.N. 2006. Spatial and temporal scales of adaptive divergence in marine fishes and the implications for conservation // Journal of Fish Biology. Vol. 69. P. 21–47. Cooke, J.G. & Clapham, P.J. (2018). Eubalaena japonica. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T41711A50380694. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-1.RLTS.T41711A50380694.en. Downloaded on 21 November 2018. Cooke, J.G. (2018a). Balaenoptera musculus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018:e.T2477A50226195. Downloaded on 20 November 2018. Cooke, J.G. (2018b). Megaptera novaeangliae. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T13006A50362794. Downloaded on 20 November 2018. Cooke, J.G. (2018d). Eschrichtius robustus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T8097A50353881. Downloaded on 21 November 2018. Cooke, J.G. (2018с). Balaenoptera physalus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018: e.T2478A50349982. Downloaded on 20 November 2018. Datskiy A.V. & Andronov P.Y. (2007). Ichthyocene of the upper shelf of the north-western part of the Bering Sea. Magadan: SVCTs DVO RAN, 261 p. [Датский А.В., Андронов П.Ю. 2007. Ихтиоцен верхнего шельфа северо- западной части Берингова моря. Магадан: Изд-во СВНЦ ДВО РАН, 261 с.] Datskiy A.V. (2017). Biological features of common fish species in the Olyutorsko-Navarinsky region and the adjacent waters of the Bering Sea. 4. Family Cottidae // Voprosy ihtiologii. T. 57, № 3. Pp. 251-263. [Датский А.В. 2017. Особенности биологии массовых видов рыб в Олюторско-Наваринском районе и прилегающих водах Берингова моря. 4. Семейство рогатковые (Cottidae) // Вопросы ихтиологии. Т. 57, № 3. С. 251-263.] Datsky A.V., Yarzhombek A.A., Andronov P.Yu. (2014). Arrow-toothed halibuts Atherestes spp. (Pleuronectiformes, Pleuronectidae) and their role in the fish community of OlyutorskyNavarin region and adjacent areas of the Bering Sea // Journal of Ichthyology. Vol. 54. No. 4. P. 266–285. [Датский А. В., Яржомбек А. А., Андронов П. Ю. 2014. Стрелозубые палтусы Atheresthes spp. (Pleuronectiformes, Pleuronectidae) и их роль в рыбном сообществе Олюторско -Наваринского района и прилегающих акваториях Берингова моря// https://elibrary.ru/contents.asp?titleid=7706 . Т. 54. № 3. С. 303-322.] Davis B., VanderZwaag D.L., Cosandey-Godin A., Hussey N.E., Kessel S.T., Worm B. (2013). The conservation of the Greenland shark (Somniosus microcephalus): setting scientific, law and policy coordinates for avoiding a species at risk. // Journal of international wildlife law and policy. 16(4): 300-330. Del Hoyo, J., A. Elliot and J. Sargatal (1992). Handbook of the Birds of the World, vol. 1: Ostrich to Ducks. Lynx Editions, Barcelona, Spain. Descamps, S., Anker-Nilssen, T., Barrett, R.T., Irons, D.B., Merkel, F., Robertson, G.J., Yoccoz, N.G., Mallory, M.L., Montevecchi, W.A., Boertmann, D., Artukhin, Y.; Christensen-Dalsgaard, S., Erikstad, K.-E., Gilchrist, H.G., Labansen, A.L., Lorentsen, S.-H., Mosbech, A., Olsen, B., Petersen, A., Rail, J.-F., Renner, H.M., Strøm, H., Systad, G.H., Wilhem, S.I., Zelenskaya, L. (2017). Circumpolar dynamics of a marine top-predator track ocean warming rates. Global Change Biology. 23(9): 3770–3780.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 135 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Dolganov V.N. (1999).Stocks of skates of the Far Eastern seas of Russia and the prospects for their commercial use // Izv. TINRO. - 1999. - T. 126. - S. 650-652. [Долганов В.Н. Запасы скатов дальневосточных морей России и перспективы их промыслового использования // Изв. ТИНРО. - 1999. - Т. 126. - С. 650-652.] Doroff, A. & Burdin, A. (2015). Enhydra lutris. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T7750A21939518. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-2.RLTS.T7750A21939518.en. Downloaded on 20 November 2018. Dulepova E.P. (2002). Sravnitel'naya bioproduktivnost' makroekosistem dal'ne-vostochnyh morej. – Vladivostok: TINRO-Centr, 2002. – 273 p. [Дулепова Е.П. Сравнительная биопродуктивность макроэкосистем дальне- восточных морей. – Владивосток: ТИНРО-Центр, 2002. – 273 с.] Fadeev N.S. 1971. Biology and fisheries of Pacific flounders. Vladivostok: Dallastat. Ebert, D.A. (2003). Sharks, Rays and Chimaeras of California. University of California Press, Berkley. Ebert, D.A. (2005). Reproductive biology of skates, Bathyraja (Ishiyama) along the eastern Bering Sea continental slope. Journal of Fish Biology 66: 618-649. Ebert, D.A., Smith, W.D., Haas, D.L., Ainsley, S.M. and Cailliet, G.M. (2007). Life history and population dynamics of Alaskan skates: providing essential biological information for effective management of bycatch and target species. North Pacific Research Board Final Report. Fadeev N.S. (2005). Handbook of biology of fishes and fisheries of the North Pacific Ocean. Vladivostok: TINRO- Center. 366 p. [Фадеев Н.С. 2005. Справочник по биологии и промыслу рыб северной части Тихого океана. Владивосток: Изд-во ТИНРО-центр, 366 с.] Federal Agency for Fisheries. 2015. Order No. 104 of the Federal Fisheries Agency of the Russian Federation from 06.02.2015.// Moscow: Federal Agency for Fisheries. Filatova Z.A., and Barsanova N.G. (1964). Communities of the bottom fauna of the western part of the Bering Sea // Tr. IOAN SSSR. – 1964. – T. 69. – Pp. 6–97. [Филатова З.А., Барсанова Н.Г. Сообщества донной фауны западной части Берингова моря // Тр. ИОАН СССР. – 1964. – Т. 69. – С. 6–97.] Filatova Z.A., and Neyman A.A. (1963). Biocenoses of the bottom fauna of the Bering Sea // Okeanologiya. – 1963. – T. 3, vyp. 6. – Pp. 1079 – 1084. [Филатова З.А. Нейман А.А. Биоценозы донной фауны Берингова моря // Океанология. – 1963. – Т. 3, вып. 6. – С. 1079 – 1084.] Fomin, S., Artukhin, Y., Testin, A., Belonovich, O., & Burkanov, V. (2016). First evaluation of effect of longline fisheries on the Steller sea lion in the Russian part of the Bering Sea. Paper presented at the Alaska Marine Science Symposium, Anchorage, Alaska, USA. P. 221. Fosså, J.H., Mortensen P.B. & D.M. Furevik (2002). The deep-water coral Lophelia pertusa in Norwegian waters: distribution and fishery impacts. Hydrobiologia, V. 471, pp. 1-12. Gavrilov G.M., and Glebov I.I. (2013). The composition and community structure of benthic fish in the economic zone of Russia Bering Sea on the results of studies of “TINRO CENTRE” in 2005-2012 // Uspekhi Sovremennogo Estestvoznaniya. No. 11. P. 37-49. Gelatt, T. & Sweeney, K. (2016). Eumetopias jubatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T8239A45225749. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-1.RLTS.T8239A45225749.en. Downloaded on 20 November 2018. Gelatt, T., Ream, R. & Johnson, D. (2015). Callorhinus ursinus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T3590A45224953. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T3590A45224953.en. Downloaded on 20 November 2018. Glebov I.I., Gavrilov G.M., Starovoytov A.N., Sviridov V.V. (2003). Structure and interannual variability of the composition of benthic ichthyocenes of the north-western part of the Bering Sea // Vopr. rybolovstva. T. 4. № 4 (16). Pp. 575–589. [Глебов И.И., Гаврилов Г.М., Старовойтов А.Н., Свиридов В.В. 2003. Структура и межгодовая изменчивость состава донных ихтиоценов северо-западной части Берингова моря // Вопр. рыболовства. Т. 4. № 4 (16). С. 575–589.] Glubokov A.I. (2004). New data on the Pacific shark Somniosus pacificus (Squalidae) from the north-western part of the Bering Sea // Vopr. ihtiologii. T. 44. № 3. Pp. 357–364. [Глубоков А.И. 2004. Новые данные о тихоокеанской полярной акуле Somniosus pacificus (Squalidae) из северо-западной части Берингова моря // Вопр. ихтиологии. Т. 44. № 3. С. 357–364.] Glubokovskii M.K., Tarasyuk S.N., Zver’kova L.M. et al. 2012. Russian Fishery Resources in 2012 (Areas of Russian Jurisdiction). Moscow: VNIRO. Golovin, P (2020). Russian Northwest Pacific cod and halibut longline fishery – Pre-assessment Report. Produced by Marine Certification. 155 pp + appendices
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 136 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Hood D. (1983). The Bering Sea // Ecosystems world. «Estuaries and Enclosed Seas». – 1983. – Vol. 26. – P. 337– 373. Ilyinsky E.N. (1995). Nectonic Mesopelagial Community of the Sea of Okhotsk // Biological resources of marine and freshwater ecosystems: Abstract. doc. - Vladivostok: TINRO Center. Pp. 37-39. Intertek Moody Marine (2013). Russian Sea of Okhotsk Mid-water Trawl Walleye Pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) Fishery. Public Certification Report, 24 September 2013. 303 pp. Ivanenkov V.N. (1964). Gidrohimiya Beringova morya. – M.: Nauka, 1964. – 138 p. [Иваненков В.Н. Гидрохимия Берингова моря. – М.: Наука, 1964. – 138 с.] KamchatNIRO (2016). Report on research work on topics: “Bottom biocoenoses mapping, species indicators of VME in the Western Bering Sea and Pacific waters of Kamchatka” and “Influence of Pacific cod and Pacific halibut on the structure of bottom communities in the Western Bering Sea and Pacific waters of Kamchatka”. Petropavlovsk- Kamchatsky. 36 p. KamchatNIRO 2018. Report on research work on topics: “Review of the monitoring of bottom longline fishery by scientific observers in 2014–2017”. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. 49 p. Kantakov G. A. (2000). Oceanographic regime of the Pacific shelf and continental slope of the Northern Kuriles and its influence on the distribution of water bodies // Promyslovo-biologicheskie issledovaniya ryb v tihookeanskih vodah Kuril'skih ostrovov i prilezhashchih rajonah Ohotskogo i Beringova morej v 1992–1998 gg.: Sbornik nauchnyh trudov. – M.: Izd-vo VNIRO, 2000. – Pp. 54-64. [Кантаков Г. А. Океанографический режим тихоокеанского шельфа и материкового склона Северных Курил и его влияние на распределение водных объектов // Промыслово- биологические исследования рыб в тихоокеанских водах Курильских островов и прилежащих районах Охотского и Берингова морей в 1992–1998 гг.: Сборник научных трудов. – М.: Изд-во ВНИРО, 2000. – С. 54-64.] KF TIG (2017). Report on the influence of the Pacific cod and Pacific halibut bottom longline fishery on the seabird populations state in the Chukotskaya, West Bering Sea and West Kamchatka fishery zones of the Russian Federation (report on research work under contract without number from October, 10 2017). Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. 36 p. Khen G.V. (1988). Sezonnaya i mezhgodovaya izmenchivost' vod Beringova morya i ee vliyanie na raspredelenie i chislennost' gidrobiontov: Dis. ... kand. biol. nauk. – Vladivostok: TINRO, 1988. – 160 p. [Хен Г.В. Сезонная и межгодовая изменчивость вод Берингова моря и ее влияние на распределение и численность гидробионтов: Дис. ... канд. биол. наук. – Владивосток: ТИНРО, 1988. – 160 с.] Khen G.V., and Zavolokin A.V. (2015). Change in water circulation and its importance in the distribution and abundance of salmon in the western part of the Bering Sea at the beginning of the 21st century // Izv. TINRO. – T. 181. – Pp. 95–115. [Хен Г.В., Заволокин А.В. 2015. Перемена в циркуляции вод и ее значение в распределении и обилии лососей в западной части Берингова моря в начале 21 века // Изв. ТИНРО. – Т. 181. – С. 95–115.] Kivva K.K. (2016). Gidrohimicheskie usloviya pervichnogo producirovaniya v Beringovom more: Dis. … kand. geogr. nauk. – M.: MGU im. M.V. Lomonosova. – 297 p. [Кивва К.К. 2016. Гидрохимические условия первичного продуцирования в Беринговом море: Дис. … канд. геогр. наук. – М.: МГУ им. М.В. Ломоносова. – 297 с.] Klovach N.V., Rovnina O.A., Koltsov D.V. (1995). Biology and fishing of Pacific cod Gadus macrocephalus in the Anadyr-Navarinsky region of the Bering Sea // Vopr. ihtiol. - 1995. - T. 35, vyp. 1. - Pp. 4852. [Кловач Н.В., Ровнина О.А., Кольцов Д.В. Биология и промысел тихоокеанской трески Gadus macrocephalus в Анадырско- Наваринском районе Берингова моря // Вопр. ихтиол. - 1995. - Т. 35, вып. 1. - С. 48-52.] Kornev S.I. & Korneva S.M. (2004). Population dynamics and present status of sea otters (Enhydra lutris) of the Kuril Islands and southern Kamchatka. Marine Mammals of the Holarctic, Proceedings of 2004 conference. pp. 273–278. Kotlyar A.N. (2006). Belobryuhij polucheshujnyj bychok – Hemilepidotis jordani Bean, 1881 // Kuzin, A. (1999). The northern fur seal. Russian Marine Mammal Council Pacific Fishery and Oceanography Research Center. Kuzin, A. (2010). The intrapopulation structure of the northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus L.) on Tyuleniy Island during the post-depression years (1993–2009). Russian Journal of Marine Biology 36: 507-517. Kuznetsova N.A. (1998). Osobennosti pitaniya treski (Gadus macrocephalus) v Beringovom i Yaponskom moryah / Arhiv TINRO. - 1998. - № 22493. - 8 p. [Кузнецова Н.А. Особенности питания трески (Gadus macrocephalus) в Беринговом и Японском морях / Архив ТИНРО. - 1998. - № 22493. - 8 с.] Lajus, D., D. Safronova, A. Orlov & R. Blyth-Skyrme (2019). Western Bering Sea Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline. Public Certification Report – October 2019. Report to the Longline Fishery Association by marine Certification. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/western-bering-sea-pacific-cod-and-pacific-halibut- longline/@@assessments
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 137 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Lapko V.V. (1995). The role of mesopelagic fish in the ichthyocene of the epipelagic Sea of Okhotsk // Vopr. ichthyology. 35(6): 782-787. Lapko V.V. (1996). Composition, structure and dynamics of the nekton of the epipelagic zone of the Sea of Okhotsk. // PhD thesis. Vladivostok: TINRO Center. 24 p. Løkkeborg, S. (2011). Best practice to mitigate seabird bycatch in longline, trawl and gillnet fisheries – efficiency and practical applicability. Marine Ecology Progress Series, V. 435, pp. 285-303. Lowry, L. (2016). Phoca vitulina. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species2016: e.T17013A45229114. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-1.RLTS.T17013A45229114.en. Downloaded on 20 November 2018. Maznikova O.A., Afanasyev P.K., Datskiy A.V. (2015). Distribution, biology and stock status of the Pacific Greenland halibut Reinchardtius hippoglossoides matsuurae according to data of various fishing gear in the western Bering Sea and off the east coast of Kamchatka // Tr. VNIRO. 2015. T. 155. Pp. 31–55. [Мазникова О.А., Афанасьев П.К., Датский А.В. и др. Распределение, биология и состояние запасов тихоокеанского черного палтуса Reinchardtius hippoglossoides matsuurae по данным различных орудий лова в западной части Берингова моря и у восточного побережья Камчатки // Тр. ВНИРО. 2015. Т. 155. С. 31–55.] Maznikova O.A., Novikov R.N., Datskiy A.V., Novikova S.V., Orlov A.M. (2018). The current state of the Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides matsuurae (Pleuronectidae) fishery in the western Bering Sea and off the east coast of Kamchatka // Voprosy rybolovstva, 2018. Tom 19. №1. Pp. 42–57. [Мазникова О.А., Новиков Р.Н., Датский А.В., Новикова С.В., Орлов А.М. Современное состояние промысла черного палтуса Reinhardtius hippoglossoides matsuurae (Pleuronectidae) в западной части Берингова моря и у восточного побережья Камчатки // Вопросы рыболовства, 2018. Том 19. №1. С. 42–57] Melvin, E.F., and J.K. Parrish, K.S. Dietrich, and O.S. Hamel (2001). Solutions to seabird bycatch in Alaska’s demersal longline fisheries. Washington Sea Grant Program. Project A/FP-7. Available on loan from the National Sea Grant Library, and from publisher. WSG-AS 01-01. Mokievskaya V.V. (1959). Nutrients in the upper water layers of the Bering Sea // Tr. IO AN SSSR. – 1959. – T. 33. – Pp. 87–113. [Мокиевская В.В. Биогенные элементы в верхних водных слоях Берингова моря // Тр. ИО АН СССР. – 1959. – Т. 33. – С. 87–113.] Nadtochiy V.A., Kolpakov N.V., Korneychuk I.A. (2017a). The distribution of macrozoobenthos taxa - potential indicators of vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) in the western part of the Bering Sea. 1. Anadyr district // Izv. TINRO. Vladivostok: izd-vo: TINRO-centr. – T. 189. Pp. 156–170. [Надточий В.А., Колпаков Н.В., Корнейчук И.А. 2017а. Распределение таксонов макрозообентоса – потенциальных индикаторов уязвимых морских экосистем (УМЭ) в западной части Берингова моря. 1. Анадырский район // Изв. ТИНРО. Владивосток: издво: ТИНРО- центр. – Т. 189. С. 156–170.] Nadtochiy V.A., Kolpakov N.V., Korneychuk I.A. (2017b). The distribution of macrozoobenthos taxa - potential indicators of vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) in the western part of the Bering Sea. 2. Chukotka and Koryak districts // Izv. TINRO. Vladivostok: izdvo: TINRO-centr. – T. 191. Pp. 177–195. [Надточий В.А., Колпаков Н.В., Корнейчук И.А. 2017b. Распределение таксонов макрозообентоса – потенциальных индикаторов уязвимых морских экосистем (УМЭ) в западной части Берингова моря. 2. Чукотский и Корякский районы // Изв. ТИНРО. Владивосток: издво: ТИНРО-центр. – Т. 191. С. 177–195.] Nadtochy V.A. and Koblikov V.N. (2005). Investigations of the benthos of the Far Eastern seas in the TINRO Center // Izvestiya TINRO (Pacific Research Fisheries Center). 141:229-236. Napazakov V.V. (2003). Diet and trophic relationships of fishes of bottom ichthyocene of the western Bering Sea. Ph.D. dissertation. Vladivostok: TINRO. 184 p. [Напазаков В.В. Питание и пищевые отношения рыб донных ихтиоценов западной части Берингова моря: Дис. … канд. биол. наук. - Владивосток: ТИНРО, 2003. - 184 с.] Neyman A.A. (1961). Some regularities of the quantitative distribution of benthos in the Bering Sea // Okeanol. – 1961. – T. 1, vyp. 2. – Pp. 294– 304. [Нейман А.А. Некоторые закономерности количественного распределения бентоса в Беринговом море // Океанол. – 1961. – Т. 1, вып. 2. – С. 294– 304.] Neyman A.A. (1963). The quantitative distribution of benthos on the shelf and the upper horizons of the slope of the eastern part of the Bering Sea // Trudy VNIRO. 48:145-205. NRC (1996). National Research Council (1996). The Bering Sea Ecosystem. Committee on the Bering Sea Ecosystem. 320 pages. Orejas, C., Gori, A., Iacono, C.L., Puig, P., Gili, J.-M. & M.R.T. Dale (2009). Cold-water corals in the Cap de Creus canyon, north-western Mediterranean: spatial distribution, density and anthropogenic impact. Marine Ecology Progress Series, V. 397, pp. 37-51.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 138 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Orlov A. M., and Ulchenko V. A. (2012). Multi-annual changes of bottom temperatures in the Pacific off the North Kuril Islands and South Kamchatka (Northwestern Pacific, Russia) and demography of selected groundfish species. Res.J.Recent Sci. Vol. 1(2), 1-19, Feb. (2012). Orlov A.M. (1999a). Trophic relationships of commercial fishes in the Pacific waters off south-eastern Kamchatka and the northern Kuril Islands // Ecosystem Approaches for Fisheries Management. Alaska Sea Grant College Program. AK-SG-99-01. Fairbanks: University of Alaska. P. 231-263. Orlov A.M. (1999b). The catch of a very large Pacific polar shark Somniosus pacificus (Squalidae) and some observations on its ecology in the north-western part of the Bering Sea // Вопр. ихтиологии. Т. 39. № 4. Pp. 558–563. [Орлов А.М. 1999. Поимка особо крупной тихоокеанской полярной акулы Somniosus pacificus (Squalidae) и некоторые замечания по ее экологии в северо-западной части Берингова моря // Вопр. ихтиологии. Т. 39. № 4. С. 558–563.] Orlov A.M., and Mukhametov I.N. (2001a). Flounders Atherestes spp. (Pleuronectidae, Pleuronectiformes) from the waters of the northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka. Message 1. Distribution Features // Vopr. rybolovstva. T. 2. № 2 (6). Pp. 258-274. [Орлов А.М., Мухаметов И.Н. 2001а. Стрелозубые палтусы Atherestes spp. (Pleuronectidae, Pleuronectiformes) из вод северных Курильских островов и юго-восточной Камчатки. Сообщение 1. Особенности распределения // https://elibrary.ru/contents.asp?titleid=9772 Т. 2. № 2 (6). С. 258- 274.] Orlov A.M., and Mukhametov I.N. (2001b). Flounders Atherestes spp. (Pleuronectidae, Pleuronectiformes) from the waters of the northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka. Message 2. Size composition, biology and probable migrations // Vopr. rybolovstva. T. 2. № 3 (7). Pp. 448-464. [Орлов А.М., Мухаметов И.Н. 2001b. Стрелозубые палтусы Atherestes spp. (Pleuronectidae, Pleuronectiformes) из вод северных Курильских островов и юго-восточной Камчатки. Orlov A.M., and Zolotov O.G. (2010). Distribution and some features of the biology of the rock greenling Hepagrammos lagocephalus in the Pacific waters of the northern Kuril Islands and south-eastern Kamchatka // Voprosy ihtiologii, 2010, tom 50, № 2. Pp. 216–230. [Орлов А. М., Золотов О. Г. Распределение и некоторые черты биологии зайцеголового терпуга Hexagrammos lagocephalus в тихоокеанских водах северных Курильских островов и юговосточной Камчатки // Вопросы ихтиологии, 2010, том 50, № 2, с. 216–230.] Orlov, A.M, Tokranov, A. and Fatykhov, R. (2006). Common deep-benthic skates (Rajidae) of the northwestern Pacific: Basic ecological and biological features. Cybium 30(4): (suppl.) 49-65. Orlov, A.M. (2017). The pacific sleeper shark Somniosus pacificus: A deterrence for existing fisheries or a promising target? In: Advances in Medicine and Biology. Editor: Leon V. Berhardt. Vol. 119. P. 277-289. Ormseth, O. and Matta, B. (2011). Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands skates. Stock assessment and fishery evaluation report for the groundfish resources of the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands region. North Pacific groundfish stock assessment and fishery evaluation reports for 2011. Ormseth, O.A., Foy, R., Davis, C.D., Ebert, D.A. & Orlov, A. (2015). Bathyraja parmifera. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T161471A80675583. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015- 4.RLTS.T161471A80675583.en . Downloaded on 11 March 2021. Pham, C.K., Diogo, H., Menezes, G., Porteiro, F., Braga-Henriques, A., Vandeperre, F. & T. Morato 2014. Deep-water longline fishing has reduced impact on Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems. // Scientific Reports, 4(4837). Radchenko V.I. (1994). Composition, structure and dynamics of nekton communities of the Bering Sea epipelagic zone // PhD thesis. - Vladivostok: TINRO. 24 p. Sapozhnikov V.V., and Naletova I.A. (1995). Study of the biohydrochemical structure of the euphotic layer and primary production in the Bering Sea // Okeanologiya. – 1995. – T. 35, № 2. – Pp. 206–214. [Сапожников В.В., Налетова И.А. Исследование биогидрохимической структуры эвфотического слоя и первичная продукция в Беринговом море // Океанология. – 1995. – Т. 35, № 2. – С. 206–214.] Sapozhnikov V.V., Ivanova O.S., Mordasova N.V. (2011). Selection of local upwelling in the Bering Sea by hydrochemical indicators // Okeanologiya. – T. 51. № 2. – Pp. 258–265. [Сапожников В.В., Иванова О.С., Мордасова Н.В. 2011. Выделение локальных апвеллингов в Беринговом море по гидрохимическим показателям // Океанология. – Т. 51. № 2. – С. 258–265.] Savin A.B., and Glebov I.I. (2016). Modern state of demersal fish stocks at the shelf of the exclusive economical zone of Russia related to north-western part of the Bering Sea. // Izvestiya TINRO. Semenova, A.V., A. N. Stroganov, A. A. Smirnov, K. I. Afanas’ev, and G. A. Rubtsova (2014). Genetic variations in Clupea pallasii herring from Sea of Okhotsk based on microsatellite markers. Russian Journal of Genetics, 2014, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 175–179.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 139 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Sharma, G. D. (1977). The Alaskan Shelf: Hydrodynamic, Sedimentary, and Geochemical Environment. New York: Springer-Verlag. Sheiko, B.A. and Fedorov, V.V. (2000). Chapter 1. Class Cephalaspidomorphi – Lampreys. Class Chondrichthyes – Cartilaginous Fishes. Class Holocephali – Chimaeras. Class Osteichthyes – Bony Fishes. In: R.S. Moiseev and A.M. Tokranov (eds), In: Catalogue of vertebrates of Kamchatka and adjacent waters., pp. 7-69. Kamchatskii Pechatnyi Dvor, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky (In Russian). Shuntov V.P. (1972). Morskie pticy i biologicheskaya struktura okeana. – Vladivostok: Dal'izdat, 1972. – 377 p. [Шунтов В.П. Морские птицы и биологическая структура океана. – Владивосток: Дальиздат, 1972. – 377 с.] Shuntov V.P. (1985). Biological resources of the Sea of Okhotsk. // M.: Agropromizdat. 224 p. Shuntov V.P. 2001. Biology of the Far Eastern Seas of Russia // Vladivostok: TINRO-Center. - 580 p. Shuntov V.P., and Dulepova E.P. (1993). Biological balance, the current state of bio- and fish productivity of the Okhotsk Sea ecosystem and elements of its functioning // Gidrometeorol. and hydrochemical. seas. Sea of Okhotsk. - SPb .: Hydrometeoizdat. 9(2):81-93. Shuntov V.P., and Dulepova E.P. (1995). Current status, bio and fish productivity of the Bering Sea ecosystem // Complex. researched ecosyst. Bering Sea. // M .: VNIRO. Pp. 358-388. Shuntov V.P., and Dulepova E.P. (1996). Current status and interannual dynamics of bottom and pelagic communities of the Sea of Okhotsk ecosystem // Izvestiya TINRO. 119: 3-32. Shuntov V.P., Volkov A.F., Temnyh O.S., Dulepova E.P. (1993). Mintaj v ehkosistemah dal'nevostochnyh morej. – Vladivostok: TINRO, 1993. – 426 p. [Шунтов В.П., Волков А.Ф., Темных О.С., Дулепова Е.П. Минтай в экосистемах дальневосточных морей. – Владивосток: ТИНРО, 1993. – 426 с.] Springer A.M., McRoy C.P., Flint M.V. (1996). The Bering Sea Green Belt: shelf edge processes and ecosystem production // Fish. Oceanogr. – 1996. – Vol. 5, № 3/4. – P. 205–223. Taylor, B.L., Baird, R., Barlow, J., Dawson, S.M., Ford, J., Mead, J.G., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Wade, P. & Pitman, R.L. (2008). Physeter macrocephalus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T41755A10554884. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T41755A10554884.en. Downloaded on 21 November 2018. Terentyev D.A. (2020). Report for YAMSy JSC, KZB-seld JSC as part of the provision of scientific research materials for preliminary assessment with the aim of further certification of bottom longline fishery for cod and halibut according to the MSC standard in the area of company fishing. // Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky: YAMSy. 210 p. TINRO (2014). Analysis of the Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus) longline fishery in the Western Bering Sea to assess its compliance with MSC standards (report on research work under contract No. 14-44). Vladivostok: TINRO- Center. 147 p. TINRO (2018a). Analytical report on the topic “Estimation of possibility to certify the Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline fishery in the Bering Sea according to MSC standards” (report on research work under contract No. 118-17). Vladivostok: TINRO-Center.163 p. TINRO (2018b). Materials for certification of Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline fisheries in the Bering Sea according to MSC standards (report on research work under contract No. 77-18). Inventory number 28243. Vladivostok: TINRO-Center. TINRO (2019). The status of fishing resources. Forecast of the total catch of the aquatic biological resources at the Far Eastern fishery basin on 2019 (Short version) // Compiled by: Boldyrev V.Z. et al. Vladivostok: TINRO Publishing. 448 p. (In Russian). Tokranov A.M. (1986). Kerchaki i polucheshujnye bychki // Biologicheskie resursy Tihogo okeana. M.: Nauka. Pp.319– 328. [Токранов А.М. 1986. Керчаки и получешуйные бычки // Биологические ресурсы Тихого океана. М.: Наука. С.319–328.] Tokranov A.M. (2014). Rogatkovye ryby (Cottidae) prikamchatskih vod i problemy ispol'zovaniya ih resursov // Sb. dokl. Vseros. konf. “Vodnye i ehkologicheskie problemy, preobrazovanie ehkosistem v usloviyah global'nogo izmeneniya klimata”. Habarovsk: Izd-vo IVEHP DVO RAN. Pp. 162–165. [Токранов А.М. 2014. Рогатковые рыбы (Cottidae) прикамчатских вод и проблемы использования их ресурсов // Сб. докл. Всерос. конф. “Водные и экологические проблемы, преобразование экосистем в условиях глобального изменения климата”. Хабаровск: Изд-во ИВЭП ДВО РАН. С. 162–165.] Tuponogov V.N., & Snytko V.A. (2014). Atlas promyslovyh vidov ryb dal'nevostochnyh morej Rossii. Vladivostok: Izd- vo TINRO-centr, 206 p. [Тупоногов В.Н., Снытко В.А. 2014. Атлас промысловых видов рыб дальневосточных морей России. Владивосток: Изд-во ТИНРОцентр, 206 с.]
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 140 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Tyurin P.V. (1972). "Normal" curves of survival and the rate of natural mortality of fish as a theoretical basis for the regulation of fisheries // Izvestiya GosNIORH, t. 71. Nauchnye osnovy rybnogo hozyajstva na vnutrennih vodoyomah SSSR. Pp. 71-128. [Тюрин П.В. 1972. "Нормальные" кривые переживания и темпов естественной смертности рыб как теоретическая основа регулирования рыболовства // Известия ГосНИОРХ, т. 71. Научные основы рыбного хозяйства на внутренних водоёмах СССР. С. 71-128.] Verkhunov A.V. (1995). Rol' gidrologo-gidrohimicheskih processov na shel'fe Beringova morya v formirovanii bioproduktivnosti // Kompleksnye issledovaniya ekosistemy Beringova morya / otv. red. V.V. Sapozhnikov. – M.: VNIRO, 1995. – Pp. 52– 79. [Верхунов А.В. Роль гидрологогидрохимических процессов на шельфе Берингова моря в формировании биопродуктивности // Комплексные исследования экосистемы Берингова моря / отв. ред. В.В. Сапожников. – М.: ВНИРО, 1995. – С. 52– 79.] Vinogradova N.G. (1954). Materials on the quantitative accounting of the bottom fauna of some bays of the Sea of Okhotsk and Bering Sea // Tr. IOAN SSSR. – 1954. – T. 9. – Pp. 136–158. [Виноградова Н.Г. Материалы по количественному учету донной фауны некоторых заливов Охотского и Берингова морей // Тр. ИОАН СССР. – 1954. – Т. 9. – С. 136–158.] Wetlands International (2016). Waterbird Population Estimates. Available at: wpe.wetlands.org. Zgurovsky K.A., Lajus D.L., Spiridonov V.A., Moiseev A.R., Katz E.S., Gvozdeva D.A., Sennikov S.A., Wilderbuer, Thomas K.; Nichol, Daniel G.; Lauth, Robert (2010). Kamchatka Flounder. NPFMC Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands SAFE. Alaska Fisheries Science Center. Retrieved 201108-03. WWF (2018). The state of vulnerable bottom marine biotopes (ecosystems) in the West Bering Sea zone, Karaginskaya and Petropavlovsk-Komandorskaya subzones (report on research work under contract without number from December, 24 2017). Vladivostok-Moscow. 186 p. Zolotov O.G. (1985). Concerning the distribution of the rock greenling Hexagrammos lagocephalus (Pallas) in Kuril- Kamchatka waters // Vopr. ihtiologii. T. 25. Vyp. 4. Pp. 603–609. [Золотов О.Г. 1985. О распpеделении зайцеголового терпуга Hexagrammos lagocephalus (Pallas) в Куpило-Камчатских водах // Вопр. ихтиологии. Т. 25. Вып. 4. С. 603–609.]
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 141 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.4 Principle 3 7.4.1 Principle 3 background
Jurisdiction The fishery takes place exclusively in the Russian Economic Zone and managed by Russian authorities only. Hence, it is a single jurisdiction fishery.
Management set-up and legislation Within the Russian Government, fisheries policy falls under the purview of the Ministry of Agriculture (Minselkhoz). The implementing body for fisheries management under the Ministry is the Federal Fisheries Agency (FFA) (Rosrybolovstvo), which is the successor of the former State Committee for Fisheries (abolished in 2004), and in turn the Soviet Ministry of Fisheries. The Ministry is responsible for the formulation of Russia’s fisheries policy, while the FFA oversees the daily management of fisheries, including the determination of specific fishing rules and the implementation of regulations set by the Ministry. Within the Russian Government, the Ministry of Agriculture interacts with other federal ministries, e.g. with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (Minprirody) through its implementing Agency for Monitoring of Natural Resources (Rosprirodnadzor), which carries out environmental impact assessments of fisheries regulations. The Ministry of Agriculture interacts with other federal ministries, e.g. with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (in Russian: Minprirody) through its implementing Agency for Monitoring of Natural Resources (in Russian: Rosprirodnadzor), which carries out environmental impact assessments of fisheries regulations. The FFA has 18 territorial administrations (in Russian: upravlenia), most of which cover several federal subjects. The territorial administrations are responsible for licencing, monitoring of quota uptake, and the administration of closed areas, among other things. The UoA fishery is subject to the control of the North Eastern Territorial Administration (NETA, in Russian SVTU), located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy and covering the federal subjects of Kamchatskiy krai and Chukotka autonomous okrug. The traditional geographical entities in Soviet/Russian fisheries management are the ‘basins’. Currently there are eight basins; one of them is the Far Eastern Fisheries Basin, which includes the Chukchi Sea, the Bering Sea, the Sea of Okhotsk, the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Sea west of Western Kamchatka and the Kuril Islands. The basin level is no longer a central management level in Russia, but there are still advisory boards at basin level as well as general fishing rules that apply to the entire basin (see below). In addition to the territorial administrations, which are an integral part of the FFA, the federal agency has a number of subordinate bodies of governance. One group is the rybvods (Russian acronym for fisheries administration), formally ‘basin administrations for fisheries and protection of biological aquatic resources’. There is one main office (Glavrybvod, literally main fisheries administration) in Moscow and 26 regional offices, including one in Kamchatskiy Krai, located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy. The rybvods existed in Soviet times and had an important role in fisheries management as the Ministry of Fisheries’ main representations at regional level, responsible, among other things, for licencing, quota control and enforcement in port and at sea. During the post-Soviet period, enforcement responsibilities have gradually been transferred to other bodies of governance (see PI 3.2.3 below), but the rybvods still exist and are now primarily involved in aquaculture, reproduction and enhancement of fisheries. Other groups of organizations subordinate to the FFA are scientific institutes and educational institutions, such as universities and colleges. There is one federal fisheries research institute, VNIRO (the Russian Federal Research Institute for Fisheries and Oceanography). VNIRO has 28 regional branches, the so-called NIROs (Russian abbreviation for the words “Scientific Research Fisheries Oceanography”, used in the names of all the fisheries research institutes). These used to be administratively independent but were in 2019 incorporated into VNIRO as the federal institute’s regional offices. In the Far Eastern Fishery Basin there are five regional institutes: MagadanNIRO (Magadan in Magadan Oblast), KamchatNIRO (Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy in Kamchatka Krai), KhabarovskNIRO (Khabarovsk in Khabarovsk Krai), SakhNIRO (Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk in Sakhalin Oblast) and TINRO (Vladivostok in Primorskiy Krai, “T” stands for Tikhookeanskiy, which means the Pacific Ocean). Yet another group of institutions subordinate to the FFA are the federal and regional offices of the Center for Systems for Monitoring of Fisheries and Communication (Fisheries Monitoring Centre). These are the technical hubs for all kinds of reporting from vessels, including electronic logbooks, and vessel monitoring systems (VMS). There are seven regional Monitoring Centres, including one in Kamchatskiy krai, located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy. All the above are federal management bodies, which have the leading role in Russian fisheries management. There is, however, a limited role also for regional authorities. Kamchatskiy krai is one of Russia’s 85 federal subjects (‘regions’). Just like the federal level of governance, regional authorities in Russia have their own executive, legislative and judicial powers. The executive power is led by a Governor’s office with a subordinate ‘regional administration’ or “government” (either designation can be used), which in turn consists of a number of departments (where there is a regional administration) or ministries (where there is a government). Kamchatskiy krai has a government of 21
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 142 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR ministries and 4 agencies, including a Ministry of Fisheries, which is not to be confused with the Federal Fisheries Agency’s regional office (NEFA/SVTU; see above), although they are both located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy – the former is subordinate to the (regional) Governor, the latter to the (federal) Minister of Agriculture. The basic legal document underpinning fisheries management in the Russian Federation is the 2004 Federal Act on Fisheries and Conservation of Aquatic Biological Resources (Federal Fisheries Act). The Act has been revised several times, last in 2014. Other important legislation at the federal level includes the Federal Act on the Protection of the Environment (10 January 2002), the Federal Act on the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Russian Federation (17 December 1998) and the Federal Act on the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation (30 November 1995).
Objectives Management objectives: Russian fisheries law defines protection and rational use of aquatic biological resources as the main goal of the country’s fisheries management. ‘Protection and rational use’ was an established concept in Soviet legislation on the protection of the environment and exploitation of natural resources, and has remained so in the Russian Federation. ‘Rational use’ bears resemblance to the internationally recognized ideal of sustainability, insofar as the emphasis is on long-term and sustained use of the resource, supported by science for socio-economic purposes. The Federal Fisheries Act states that the protection of aquatic biological resources shall be given priority to their rational use. The precautionary approach is not mentioned explicitly, but the requirement to protect aquatic biological resources and take the best scientific knowledge into account equals the requirements of the precautionary approach, as laid out in the FAO Code of Conduct and its technical guidelines. The Russian Federation has signed and ratified a number of international agreements which adopt the precautionary approach, including the 1995 UN Straddling Stocks Agreement. The provisions of international agreements entered into by the Russian Federation stood above those of national law according to the 1993 Russian Constitution, but that was changed when the Constitution was subjected to its first major revision in 2020. In Russia, the rights of fishery-dependent communities are explicitly stated in the Federal Fisheries Act. The Act states that ‘the small indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East’ (ethnic groups with a ‘traditional’ lifestyle consisting of less than 50,000 people) shall be given access to fish resources in order to secure their livelihood. It gives ‘fisheries to protect the traditional lifestyle of small indigenous peoples of the North Siberia and the Far East’ extended rights compared to the other types of fisheries listed in the Act (of which the most important are ‘industrial fisheries’, ‘coastal fisheries’ and ‘fisheries for scientific and enforcement purposes’). Client Code of Conduct objectives: The UoA client is member of the Longline Fishery Association (LFA). In its Code of Conduct, the LFA requires its member enterprises to: strictly comply with the requirements of applicable international law and national legislation, and work actively to develop sustainable fisheries and fishing practices, taking into account all relevant biological, technological, economic, social, environmental and commercial aspects; ensure the responsible conservation of marine living resources, as well as fisheries management and development; ensure the long-term protection of marine living resources and their habitats, as well as coastal areas; promote scientific fisheries research; ensure that only selective and environmentally sound fishing gear and methods are used and that such gear and methods are further developed and used, to the extent practicable, to conserve the biodiversity and structure of marine ecosystems and the quality of fish products; minimize waste, catch of non-target fish species and other species, and impacts on associated and dependent species; ensure that fisheries, catch management, processing and distribution of fish and fishery products are carried out in a manner that preserves the nutritional value, quality and safety of the products, reduces waste and minimizes adverse environmental impacts; ensure full traceability of all catch from the fishing area through the supply chain to the final consumer; ensure that fishing conditions and equipment used, as well as the fishing activities themselves, comply with health, safety, working and living conditions and international standards adopted by relevant organizations. Several sections in the Code of Conduct relate to the bycatch discard policy. In this regard, the LFA recognizes the existence of:
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 143 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
environmentally responsible release, which is the release of non-target species into the sea, taking into account the likelihood of survival after being caught in a gear; environmentally irresponsible release, which shall be prohibited, and if such prohibition is not possible, minimized. Ecologically responsible discard includes:
non-target species with a high probability of survival after entering the gear (e.g. certain invertebrates); non-target species that may be by-caught while fishing for other species (sharks, rays, marine mammals); live females with eggs (e.g. certaom invertebrates); benthic organisms (sponges, corals, starfish etc.) of no commercial value. All species of fish and other organisms returned to their environment as part of an environmentally responsible release during fishing operations should be recorded in accordance with established recording protocols, and data on such releases should be reported to LFA management on a regular basis. The LFA advocates a policy of absence of environmentally irresponsible release, which includes the release of dead and dying fish that has potential commercial value in their living state, including young commercial fish species (caught in specialized fisheries or as bycatch), as well as the release of protected species. The LFA undertakes to take the following measures with respect to discards:
minimize environmentally responsible discards; minimize the catch of non-target species of fish and other organisms and the impact on associated or dependent species, including protected species; collect discard data; take appropriate measures to minimize production wastes and discards; apply available technologies to minimize discards; use appropriate selective systems to minimize discards; use available instruments to prevent non-target species from entering the gear; to promote the full use of catch where possible; promote systematic scientific observations to monitor the implementation of the policy of no environmentally irresponsible discards by members of the LFA and to collect data on bycatch released into the environment; introduce and monitor a system of discard registration on vessels of fishing enterprises - members of the LFA.
Consultation mechanisms The Russian (and previously Soviet) system for fisheries management has a long tradition of involving industry and other stakeholders in the management process. In recent years, the traditional arenas for interaction between authorities and stakeholders has been supplemented by new platforms for public engagement with management. The Federal Fisheries Act requires that any citizen, public organization or association (of legal entities) has the right to provide their input into the decision-making process within Russia’s system for fisheries management. A formal arena for interaction between government, industry and other stakeholders are the advisory boards, the so-called fishery councils, set up at federal, basin and regional levels. At the federal level, the Public Fisheries Council was established in 2008 in accordance with the requirement in the Federal Public Chamber Act that all federal bodies of governance (with a few exceptions) shall have a public council that will serve as an arena of interaction between the authorities and the general public. The Council consists of members from various federal bodies of governance, the fishing industry, research institutions and other interested stakeholders, such as non-governmental organizations (WWF). Members are proposed by the public (in practice public organizations), and the FFA appoints up to 50 members for periods of two years. Basin-level fishery councils have existed since Soviet times, named ‘scientific-technical councils’. In line with the general regionalization that took place in Russia during the 1990s, similar bodies were set up at the level of federal subjects, named ‘regional fisheries councils’. Both were made mandatory in the 2004 Federal Fisheries Act. Rules of procedures for the ‘basin scientific-technical councils’ in the Russian Federation were adopted in 2008. They state that the councils shall advice the authorities on a wide range of fishery-related issues, including conduct of fisheries in the
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 144 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR relevant basin; control and surveillance; conservation; recovery and harvesting of aquatic biological resources; distribution of quotas and other issues of importance to ensure sustainable management of fisheries. The fishery councils consist of representatives of federal and regional authorities, the fishing industry, research institutions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including the indigenous people of the North, Siberia and the Far East. The basin level councils are headed by federal authorities, the councils at federal subject level by regional authorities. The Far Eastern Basin Scientific-Technical Council consists of representatives from the FFA, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Federal Security Service (FSB), the Veterinary Agency, the Antimonopoly Agency, scientific institutions, fishing companies and associations and representatives of the indigenous peoples of the Russian Far East and Far North. The Council is headed by a Deputy Director of the FFA, i.e. the federal management authority. As with other public councils at different management levels, the Far Eastern Scientific-Technical Council has an advisory role in all aspects of fisheries management. It has a particularly important role in coordinating stakeholder input to revisions of fisheries legislation and regulations. The Council actively encourages proposals from stakeholders and acts as a coordinating body for further input into the management process. Meetings are held in Vladivostok at least twice a year. The meetings are open to the public. At a more general level, all new federal regulations in Russia have to go through public hearings; i.e. all draft proposals for new regulations have to be published at the website https://regulation.gov.ru, administered by the Ministry of Economic Development, where the public are given 15–30 days to provide their comments. Further, the FFA has a dedicated “Open Agency” initiative which is comprehensively detailed on their website. In addition to the use of the Public Fisheries Council and consultation bodies at lower level, this includes the use of internet conferences with citizens, reference groups to discuss policy initiatives, and a general objective to increase public access to information. Management bodies also have functions on their websites by which citizens can get in touch with the authorities. E.g., at the website of the FFA, there is detailed information about how citizens can get in touch via telephone and directly from the website. There is even the possibility to book a personal appointment at the Agency.
Enforcement, sanctions and compliance Enforcement of fisheries regulations in Russia is the joint responsibility of the FFA though its regional offices and the Coast Guard, which is under the Border Service of the Federal Security Service (FSB). The FFA is responsible for control of quota uptake and also takes care of paper control related to licenses, catch logs and VMS data, while the Coast Guard carries out physical inspections at sea. The Coast Guard’s authority is limited to marine waters; the FFA, through its regional offices and those of the rybvods (see above), is responsible for the management of freshwater basins. Fish caught in waters under Russian jurisdiction must be landed in Russian ports. The Coast Guard conducts random inspections at sea, including from helicopters. Inspectors control the catch, gear and documents. The Federal Fisheries Monitoring Centre, with its 7 territorial departments including one in Kamchatka, is the technical hub for all electronic reporting from the fishing companies and vessels, including electronic logbooks and other catch reports as well as VMS and AIS data. The FFA territorial departments and the Coast Guard cooperate with the Fisheries Monitoring Centres, as well as with other countries and international fisheries organizations where relevant. The Veterinary Service (in Russian: Rosselkhoznadzor) is the only sluzhba ([controlling] service; see PI 3.1.1 above) under the Ministry of Agriculture. For several years in the mid- and late 2000s, it was responsible for monitoring and enforcement across all fields of work under the Ministry, including fisheries, but now its remit is limited to more traditional veterinary services, such as supervision of animal health. Hence, it is responsible for sanitary inspections of landed fish. The Ministry of Agriculture and its subordinate bodies of governance cooperate with other governmental agencies in the enforcement of fisheries regulations. The Federal Customs Service inspects cargoes with fish caught under Russian jurisdiction and intended for export and hence plays an important role in maintaining traceability of fish products. The Federal Tax Service is involved in investigations of economic crime within the fishing industry. The Ministry of Natural Resources through its Agency for Monitoring of Natural Resources (Rosprirodnadzor) assessess the environmental impact of fisheries and is responsible for the protection of habitats and protected, endangered or threatened species. Sanctions to deal with non-compliance in Russian waters exist in within the system for fisheries management, as well as in the wider legal system. Both make wide use of administrative fines and refer serious cases to the judicial system. The Russian Federal Fisheries Act requires the withdrawal of quota rights if a fishing company has committed two serious violations of the fisheries regulations within one calendar year, among other things. The Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Infractions specifies the level of fines that can be issued administratively by enforcement bodies, e.g. up to RUR 5,000 for ‘citizens’, 50,000 for ‘executive officers’ and 200,000 for companies. The Criminal Code requires that illegal fishing such as causing ‘large damage’, conducted in spawning areas or migration ways leading to such areas, or in marine protected areas be penalized by either fines up to RUR 300,000 or an amount corresponding to 1-2 years’ income for the violator, compulsory work of no less than 480 hours, corrective work for at least two years or arrest for at least 6 months.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 145 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
A more detailed overview of sanctions is provided in Table 37. Table 37 – Sanctions prescribed in Russian law for different types of fishery-related offences (source: pre-assessment report).
Type of violation/offences Corresponding sanction/fine "Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses" 30.12.2001 № 195-FZ Article 8.16 (2). Failure to comply with Administrative penalty - from 5 to 10 thousand rubles. the rules for maintaining ship documents Aricle 8.17 (2). Violation of regulatory Administrative penalty: requirements or conditions of activity in inland sea waters, in the territorial for citizens from ½ to 1 of the costs of biological resources, with sea, on the continental shelf, in the or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear; exclusive economic zone of the for executives from 1 to 1.5 of the costs of biological resources, Russian Federation or in the open with or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear; sea for enterprises from 2 to 3 of the costs of biological resources, with or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear; Article 8.33 Administrative warning; Administrative penalty: Violation of the rules of protection of for citizens from 2 to 5 thousand rubles; the habitat or migration routes of objects of the animal world for executives from 5 to 10 thousand rubles; and aquatic for enterprises from 10 to 15 thousand rubles. biological resources Article 8.37 (2). Violation of hunting Administrative penalty: rules, rules governing fishing and other uses of wildlife for citizens from 1 to 5 thousand rubles, with or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear; for executives from 20 to 30 thousand rubles, with or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear; for enterprises from 100 to 200 thousand rubles, with or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear. Aricle 8.38. Violation of the rules for Administrative penalty: the protection of aquatic biological resources for citizens from 2 to 3 thousand rubles; for executives from 10 to 15 thousand rubles; for entrepreneurs from 10 to 15 thousand rubles or ban for activity up to 90 days; for enterprises from 100 to 200 thousand rubles or ban for activity up to 90 days; Article 8.39. Violation of the rules for Administrative penalty: the protection and use of natural resources in specially protected for citizens from 3 to 4 thousand rubles, with or without natural territories confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear and illegal productions; for executives from 15 to 20 thousand rubles, with or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear and illegal productions; for enterprises from 300 to 500 thousand rubles, with or without confiscation of a vessel and fishing gear and illegal productions.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 146 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Article 18.3 (2) Violation of the border Administrative warning; Administrative penalty: regime in the territorial sea and internal sea waters of the Russian for citizens from 3 hundred to 1 thousand rubles with or without Federation confiscation of the instruments of Commission or the subject of an administrative offense; for executives from 2 to 5 thousand rubles with or without confiscation of the instruments of Commission or the subject of an administrative offense; for enterprises from 8 to 12 thousand rubles with or without confiscation of the instruments of Commission or the subject of an administrative offense.
"The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation" 13.06.1996 № 63-FZ Article 256. Illegal fishery (catch) of (1) Penalty for Illegal fishery from 300 to 500 thousand rubles, or salary aquatic biological resources (income) for 2-3 years, or obligatory work up to 480 hours, or correctional work up to 2 years, or prison up to 2 years. (3) If illegal fishery committed by a person using his official position or by a group of persons in a preliminary conspiracy or by an organized group or persons who have caused particularly serious damage are punishable by penalty from 500 to 1000 thousands rubles, or salary (income) for 3-5 years, or prison 2-5 years with the deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a period of up to 3 years or without it. Article 257. Violation of the rules for Penalty up to 200 thousand rubles, or salary (income) 18 moths, or the protection of aquatic biological deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain resources activities for a period of up to 3 years, or obligatory work up to 480 hours, or correctional work up to 2 years.
According to information from the FSB (presented in the pre-assessment report of the UoA fishery, in Table 38), the number of inspections at sea in the longline fishery in the area where the UoA fishery takes place are as follows in recent years: 2015: 19, 2016: 24, 2017: 38, 2018: 38 and 2019: 32. In addition, 16 inspections were carried out in port in 2018 and 25 were carried out in 2019. The number of infringements of fishing rules was as follows: 2015: 4, 2016: 1, 2017: 1, 2018: 1, 2019: 3. Hence, infringements were revealed in approx. 5 % of inspections. No infringements were serious enough for the case to be transferred to criminal investigation. The number and amounts of fines issued within the UoA fishery are as follows: 2015: 4 (400,000 RUR), 2016: 2 (120,000 RUR), 2017: 2 (130,000 RUR), 2018: 2 (16,000 RUR) and 2019: 6 (510,000 RUR) (Table 39). Table 38 - Inspections carried out by the FSB in the UoA fishery during 2015–2019 (source: pre-assessment report).
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 The number of FSB inspections at the sea (including transshipment) 19 24 38 38 32
The number of FSB inspections in the port - - - 16 25
Article 8.33 Violation of the rules of protection of the habitat or migration routes of - - - 1 - objects of the animal world and aquatic
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 147 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
biological resources
Article 8.16 (2). Failure to comply with the rules for - - - 1 - maintaining ship documents Article 8.37 (2). Violation of hunting rules, rules 4 1 1 - 3 governing fishing and other uses of wildlife Article 18.3 (2) Violation of the border regime in the territorial sea and internal sea - - - - 1 waters of the Russian Federation
Table 39 – Fines given in the UoA fishery during 2015–2019 (source: pre-assessment report).
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Number and 4 2 2 2 6 sum of fines (400 thou (120 (130 (16 (510 rubles) thou rubles thou rubles thou rubles thou rubles Entities 4 1 1 1 3 (100 (110 (11 (450 thou rubles) thou rubles) thou rubles) thou rubles Individuals - 1 1 1 3 (20 (20 (5 (60 thou rubles) thou rubles) thou rubles) thou rubles)
Review of the management system There are various mechanisms in place to evaluate key parts of the fishery-specific management system, but at varied levels of ambition and coverage. At the fishery council meetings, found at federal, basin and regional levels, management authorities receive feedback on management practices from the industry and other interested stakeholders. The FFA and the Ministry of Agriculture report annually to the Government, the Presidential Administration and the Federal Assembly (to both the lower chamber, the State Duma, and the upper chamber, the Federation Council) about their work, with emphasis on achievements in the fishing industry. Other federal agencies also review parts of the fisheries management system. For instance, the Auditor General evaluates how allocated funds are spent, and the Anti-Monopoly Service how competition and investment rules are observed. Within FFA, there is regular review of the performance of the Agency’s regional offices. In the establishment of TACs, the scientific advice from VNIRO’s regional branches is peer reviewed by the head office in Moscow, and then forwarded to FFA and the federal natural resources monitoring agency Rosprirodnadzor for comments. It is also presented to the general public for discussion at public hearings, announced in the local press. At the regional level, the Kamchatskiy krai Ministry of Fisheries is under scrutiny by the regional Government, as well as the legislative body at oblast level, the regional Duma.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 148 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.4.2 Principle 3 Performance Indicator scores and rationales PI 3.1.1 – Legal and/or customary framework PI 3.1.1 The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: - Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); - Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and - Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Compatibility of laws or standards with effective management Guide There is an effective national There is an effective national There is an effective national legal system and a legal system and organised legal system and binding post framework for cooperation and effective cooperation procedures governing with other parties, where with other parties, where cooperation with other a necessary, to deliver necessary, to deliver parties which delivers management outcomes management outcomes management outcomes consistent with MSC consistent with MSC consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2 Principles 1 and 2. Principles 1 and 2.
Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
The fishery takes place the Russian EEZ and hence falls under exclusive Russian jurisdiction. Within the Russian Government, fisheries policy falls under the purview of the Ministry of Agriculture (Minselkhoz). The implementing body for fisheries management under the Ministry is the Federal Fisheries Agency (FFA) (Rosrybolovstvo), which is the successor of the former State Committee for Fisheries (abolished in 2004), and in turn the Soviet Ministry of Fisheries. The Ministry is responsible for the formulation of Russia’s fisheries policy, while the FFA oversees the daily management of fisheries, including the determination of specific fishing rules and the implementation of regulations set by the Ministry. Within the Russian Government, the Ministry of Agriculture interacts with other federal ministries, e.g. with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (Minprirody) through its implementing Agency for Monitoring of Natural Resources (Rosprirodnadzor), which carries out environmental impact assessments of fisheries regulations. The Ministry of Agriculture interacts with other federal ministries, e.g. with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (in Russian: Minprirody) through its implementing Agency for Monitoring of Natural Resources (in Russian: Rosprirodnadzor), which carries out environmental impact assessments of fisheries regulations. The FFA has 18 territorial administrations (in Russian: upravlenia), most of which cover several federal subjects. The territorial administrations are responsible for licencing, monitoring of quota uptake, and the administration of closed areas, among other things. The UoA fishery is subject to the control of the North Eastern Territorial Administration (NETA, in Russian SVTU), located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy and covering the federal subjects of Kamchatskiy krai and Chukotka autonomous okrug. The traditional geographical entities in Soviet/Russian fisheries management are the ‘basins’. Currently there are eight basins; one of them is the Far Eastern Fisheries Basin, which includes the Chukchi Sea, the Bering Sea, the Sea of Okhotsk, the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Sea west of Western Kamchatka and the Kuril Islands. The basin level is no longer a central management level in Russia, but there are still advisory boards at basin level as well as general fishing rules that apply to the entire basin (see PI 3.1.2 below). In addition to the territorial administrations, which are an integral part of the FFA, the federal agency has a number of subordinate bodies of governance. One group is the rybvods (Russian acronym for fisheries administration), formally ‘basin administrations for fisheries and protection of biological aquatic resources’. There is one main office (Glavrybvod, literally main fisheries administration) in Moscow and 26 regional offices, including one in Kamchatskiy
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 149 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Krai, located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy. The rybvods existed in Soviet times and had an important role in fisheries management as the Ministry of Fisheries’ main representations at regional level, responsible, among other things, for licencing, quota control and enforcement in port and at sea. During the post-Soviet period, enforcement responsibilities have gradually been transferred to other bodies of governance (see PI 3.2.3 below), but the rybvods still exist and are now primarily involved in aquaculture, reproduction and enhancement of fisheries. Other groups of organizations subordinate to the FFA are scientific institutes and educational institutions, such as universities and colleges. There is one federal fisheries research institute, VNIRO (the Russian Federal Research Institute for Fisheries and Oceanography). VNIRO has 28 regional branches, the so-called NIROs (Russian abbreviation for the words “Scientific Research Fisheries Oceanography”, used in the names of all the fisheries research institutes). These used to be administratively independent but were in 2019 incorporated into VNIRO as the federal institute’s regional offices. In the Far Eastern Fishery Basin there are five regional institutes: MagadanNIRO (Magadan in Magadan Oblast), KamchatNIRO (Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy in Kamchatka Krai), KhabarovskNIRO (Khabarovsk in Khabarovsk Krai), SakhNIRO (Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk in Sakhalin Oblast) and TINRO (Vladivostok in Primorskiy Krai, “T” stands for Tikhookeanskiy, which means the Pacific Ocean). Yet another group of institutions subordinate to the FFA are the federal and regional offices of the Center for Systems for Monitoring of Fisheries and Communication (Fisheries Monitoring Centre). These are the technical hubs for all kinds of reporting from vessels, including electronic logbooks, and vessel monitoring systems (VMS). There are seven regional Monitoring Centres, including one in Kamchatskiy krai, located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy. All the above are federal management bodies, which have the leading role in Russian fisheries management. There is, however, a limited role also for regional authorities. Kamchatskiy krai is one of Russia’s 85 federal subjects (‘regions’). Just like the federal level of governance, regional authorities in Russia have their own executive, legislative and judicial powers. The executive power is led by a Governor’s office with a subordinate ‘regional administration’ or “government” (either designation can be used), which in turn consists of a number of departments (where there is a regional administration) or ministries (where there is a government). Kamchatskiy krai has a government of 21 ministries and 4 agencies, including a Ministry of Fisheries, which is not to be confused with the Federal Fisheries Agency’s regional office (NEFA/SVTU; see above), although they are both located in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy – the former is subordinate to the (regional) Governor, the latter to the (federal) Minister of Agriculture. The basic legal document underpinning fisheries management in the Russian Federation is the 2004 Federal Act on Fisheries and Conservation of Aquatic Biological Resources (Federal Fisheries Act). The Act has been revised several times, last in 2014. Other important legislation at the federal level includes the Federal Act on the Protection of the Environment (10 January 2002), the Federal Act on the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Russian Federation (17 December 1998) and the Federal Act on the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation (30 November 1995). Hence, there is an effective national legal system in place to deliver management outcomes consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2. SG 60 and SG 80 are met. There is a system in place which delivers such outcomes. SG 100 is met.
Resolution of disputes Guide The management system The management system The management system incorporates or is subject by incorporates or is subject by incorporates or is subject by post law to a mechanism for the law to a transparent law to a transparent resolution of legal disputes mechanism for the resolution mechanism for the resolution b arising within the system. of legal disputes which is of legal disputes that is considered to be effective appropriate to the context of in dealing with most issues the fishery and has been and that is appropriate to the tested and proven to be context of the UoA. effective. Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
There are effective, transparent dispute resolution mechanisms in place, as fishers can take their case to court if they do not accept the rationale behind an infringement accusation by enforcement authorities or the fees levied against them. Verdicts at the lower court levels can be appealed to higher levels. However, most disputes are solved within the system for fisheries management, not requiring judicial treatment. There are well-established systems of consultation with user groups in place for the fishery (see PI 3.1.2 below), confirmed in federal and regional legislation and transparent for actors within the fishing industry.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 150 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Hence, the management system incorporates or is subject by law to a mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes. SG 60 is met. These mechanisms are transparent and considered to be effective in dealing with most issues and is appropriate to the context of the UoA. SG 80 is met. It cannot be concluded at ACDR stage that the mechanism has been tested and proven to be effective. SG 100 is not met.
Respect for rights Guide The management system has The management system has The management system has a mechanism to generally a mechanism to observe the a mechanism to formally post respect the legal rights legal rights created explicitly commit to the legal rights created explicitly or or established by custom of created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing established by custom of c people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood in a people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood in a manner consistent with the for food and livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. 1 and 2. Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
In Russia, the rights of fishery-dependent communities are explicitly stated in the Federal Fisheries Act. The Act states that ‘the small indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East’ (ethnic groups with a ‘traditional’ lifestyle consisting of less than 50,000 people) shall be given access to fish resources in order to secure their livelihood. It gives ‘fisheries to protect the traditional lifestyle of small indigenous peoples of the North Siberia and the Far East’ extended rights compared to the other types of fisheries listed in the Act (of which the most important are ‘industrial fisheries’, ‘coastal fisheries’ and ‘fisheries for scientific and enforcement purposes’). This is implemented in Kamchatskiy krai though an annual regulation that allots small quota shares to people of indigenous origin. Hence, the management system has a mechanism to generally respect the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. SG 60 is met. The system has a mechanism to observe such rights, so SG 80 is also met. Since it is founded in law, the mechanism formally commits to these rights, and SG 100 is met.
References
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О РЫБОЛОВСТВЕ И СОХРАНЕНИИ ВОДНЫХ БИОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ РЕСУРСОВ, No. 166-ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014). Об утверждении правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 No. 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Приказ Министерства рыбного хозяйства Камчатского края от 29.12.2020 № 142-м ‘О распределении квот добычи (вылова) водных биологических ресурсов в целях обеспечения традиционного образа жизни и осуществления традиционной хозяйственной деятельности коренных малочисленных народов Севера, Сибири и Дальнего Востока Российской Федерации, проживающих в Камчатском крае, на 2021 год’ (Order of the Ministry of Fisheries of Kamchatskiy krai of 29.12.2020 No. 142-m ‘On the distribution of quotas of catch of aquatic biological resources for 2021 in support of the traditional way of life of the indigenous, small peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, living in Kamchatskiy krai’). Приказ Минсельхоза России от 29.10.2019 No. 610 (ред. от 28.08.2020) ‘Об утверждении общего допустимого улова водных биологических ресурсов во внутренних морских водах Российской Федерации, территориальном море Российской Федерации, на континентальном шельфе Российской Федерации, в исключительной экономической зоне Российской Федерации и Каспийском море на 2020 год’ (Order of the Ministry of the Ministry
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 151 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR of Agriculture of the Russian Federation of 29.10.2019 No. 610 (revised 28.8.202) on total allowable catches of aquatic biological resources in the internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation, as well as in the Caspian Sea for 2020, Ministry of Agriculture, 2020). Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver. Websites of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://www.fish.gov.ru/), the North East Territorial Administration of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://xn--b1a3aee.xn--p1ai/), Glavrybvod/rybvody (http://www.fish.gov.ru/podvedomstvennye-organizatsii/rybvody), the Federal Fisheries Monitoring Center (http://cfmc.ru/), Kamchatka Department of Glavrybvod (https://cfmc.ru/filialy-i-otdely/kamchatskiy_filial/).
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 152 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 3.1.2 – Consultation, roles and responsibilities PI 3.1.2 The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to interested and affected parties The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant parties Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Roles and responsibilities Guide Organisations and individuals Organisations and individuals Organisations and individuals involved in the management involved in the management involved in the management post process have been identified. process have been identified. process have been identified. Functions, roles and Functions, roles and Functions, roles and a responsibilities are generally responsibilities are explicitly responsibilities are explicitly understood. defined and well defined and well understood for key areas of understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction. responsibility and interaction. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The functions, roles and responsibilities of the different countries involved in the management of the Barents Sea fisheries, as well as of the different organisations and individuals involved at the national level, are explicitly defined in international agreements and national laws and regulations, as well as in long-standing practice; see SI 3.1.1a for an overview of the main state bodies engaged in the management of the fishery, and SI 3.1.2b for an overview of non- governmental organisations involved. Organisations and individuals involved in the management process have been identified, and according to the submitted client checklist, their functions, roles and responsibilities are generally understood. SG 60 is met. The functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined in legislation and long-standing practice and well understood for key areas of responsibility and interaction. SG 80 is met. It remains to be seen at interviews during the site visit whether these are well understood for all areas. At this point SG100 is not met.
Consultation processes Guide The management system The management system The management system includes consultation includes consultation includes consultation post processes that obtain processes that regularly processes that regularly relevant information from seek and accept relevant seek and accept relevant the main affected parties, information, including local information, including local b including local knowledge, to knowledge. The management knowledge. The management inform the management system demonstrates system demonstrates system. consideration of the consideration of the information obtained. information and explains how it is used or not used. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
The Russian (and previously Soviet) system for fisheries management has a long tradition of involving industry and other stakeholders in the management process. In recent years, the traditional arenas for interaction between authorities and stakeholders has been supplemented by new platforms for public engagement with management.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 153 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
The Federal Fisheries Act requires that any citizen, public organization or association (of legal entities) has the right to provide their input into the decision-making process within Russia’s system for fisheries management. A formal arena for interaction between government, industry and other stakeholders are the advisory boards, the so-called fishery councils, set up at federal, basin and regional levels. At the federal level, the Public Fisheries Council was established in 2008 in accordance with the requirement in the Federal Public Chamber Act that all federal bodies of governance (with a few exceptions) shall have a public council that will serve as an arena of interaction between the authorities and the general public. The Council consists of members from various federal bodies of governance, the fishing industry, research institutions and other interested stakeholders, such as non-governmental organizations (WWF). Members are proposed by the public (in practice public organizations), and the FFA appoints up to 50 members for periods of two years. Basin-level fishery councils have existed since Soviet times, named ‘scientific-technical councils’. In line with the general regionalization that took place in Russia during the 1990s, similar bodies were set up at the level of federal subjects, named ‘regional fisheries councils’. Both were made mandatory in the 2004 Federal Fisheries Act. Rules of procedures for the ‘basin scientific-technical councils’ in the Russian Federation were adopted in 2008. They state that the councils shall advice the authorities on a wide range of fishery-related issues, including conduct of fisheries in the relevant basin; control and surveillance; conservation; recovery and harvesting of aquatic biological resources; distribution of quotas and other issues of importance to ensure sustainable management of fisheries. The fishery councils consist of representatives of federal and regional authorities, the fishing industry, research institutions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including the indigenous people of the North, Siberia and the Far East. The basin level councils are headed by federal authorities, the councils at federal subject level by regional authorities. The Far Eastern Basin Scientific-Technical Council consists of representatives from the FFA, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Federal Security Service (FSB), the Veterinary Agency, the Antimonopoly Agency, scientific institutions, fishing companies and associations and representatives of the indigenous peoples of the Russian Far East and Far North. The Council is headed by a Deputy Director of the FFA, i.e. the federal management authority. As with other public councils at different management levels, the Far Eastern Scientific-Technical Council has an advisory role in all aspects of fisheries management. It has a particularly important role in coordinating stakeholder input to revisions of fisheries legislation and regulations. The Council actively encourages proposals from stakeholders and acts as a coordinating body for further input into the management process. Meetings are held in Vladivostok at least twice a year. The meetings are open to the public. At a more general level, all new federal regulations in Russia have to go through public hearings; i.e. all draft proposals for new regulations have to be published at the website https://regulation.gov.ru, administered by the Ministry of Economic Development, where the public are given 15–30 days to provide their comments. Further, the FFA has a dedicated “Open Agency” initiative which is comprehensively detailed on their website. In addition to the use of the Public Fisheries Council and consultation bodies at lower level, this includes the use of internet conferences with citizens, reference groups to discuss policy initiatives, and a general objective to increase public access to information. Management bodies also have functions on their websites by which citizens can get in touch with the authorities. E.g., at the website of the FFA, there is detailed information about how citizens can get in touch via telephone and directly from the website. There is even the possibility to book a personal appointment at the Agency. Hence, the management system includes consultation processes that obtain relevant information from the main affected parties, including local knowledge, to inform the management system. SG 60 is met. The processes regularly seek and accept relevant information, and the management system demonstrates consideration of the information obtained. SG 80 is met. At ACDR stage, it cannot be ascertained that the authorities also explain how their input is used or not used. SG 100 is met.
Participation Guide The consultation process The consultation process provides opportunity for all provides opportunity and post interested and affected encouragement for all c parties to be involved. interested and affected parties to be involved, and facilitates their effective engagement. Met? Yes No
Rationale
As follows from SI 3.1.2b above, the consultation processes provide opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be involved at both national and international level. Meetings are publicly announced, and authorities encourage all
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 154 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR interested parties, including NGOs and the media, to attend. The various hearing opportunities available online also contribute to encouraging and facilitating public involvement. Hence, the consultation process provides opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be involved. SG 80 is met. It has not been adequately documented at ACDR stage that authorities not only provide opportunity, but actively encourage all parties to be involved and facilitate their effective engagement. SG 100 is not met.
References
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О ПОРЯДКЕ РАССМОТРЕНИЯ ОБРАЩЕНИЙ ГРАЖДАН РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ, N 59-ФЗ (Federal Act on the treatment of citizens’ requests to state organs, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2006). ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О РЫБОЛОВСТВЕ И СОХРАНЕНИИ ВОДНЫХ БИОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ РЕСУРСОВ, N 166- ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014). утверждении правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 N 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Об образовании Общественного совета при Федеральном агентстве по рыболовству, N 301 (Regulation on the establishment of a public council at the Federal Fisheries Agency, 2008). ОБ УТВЕРЖДЕНИИ ПОРЯДКА ДЕЯТЕЛЬНОСТИ БАССЕЙНОВЫХ НАУЧНО- ПРОМЫСЛОВЫХ СОВЕТОВ (On the confirmation of arrangements for basin scientific and fishery councils, Federal Fisheries Agency, Russian Federation, 2008). Приказ Минсельхоза России от 29.10.2019 N 610 (ред. от 28.08.2020) ‘Об утверждении общего допустимого улова водных биологических ресурсов во внутренних морских водах Российской Федерации, территориальном море Российской Федерации, на континентальном шельфе Российской Федерации, в исключительной экономической зоне Российской Федерации и Каспийском море на 2020 год’ (Order of the Ministry of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation of 29.10.2019 No. 610 (revised 28.8.202) on total allowable catches of aquatic biological resources in the internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation, as well as in the Caspian Sea for 2020, Ministry of Agriculture, 2020). Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver. Websites of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://www.fish.gov.ru/), the North East Territorial Administration of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://xn--b1a3aee.xn--p1ai/), Glavrybvod/rybvody (http://www.fish.gov.ru/podvedomstvennye-organizatsii/rybvody), the Federal Fisheries Monitoring Center (http://cfmc.ru/), Kamchatka Department of Glavrybvod (https://cfmc.ru/filialy-i-otdely/kamchatskiy_filial/).
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80 Information gap indicator More information sought More information is sought on whether functions and roles are understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction; whether management authorities explain how stakeholder input is used or not used; and whether the authorities actively facilitate stakeholder engagement.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 155 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 3.1.3 – Long term objectives PI 3.1.3 The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision-making that are consistent with MSC Fisheries Standard, and incorporates the precautionary approach Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Objectives Guide Long-term objectives to guide Clear long-term objectives Clear long-term objectives decision-making, consistent that guide decision-making, that guide decision-making, post with the MSC Fisheries consistent with MSC consistent with MSC a Standard and the Fisheries Standard and the Fisheries Standard and the precautionary approach, are precautionary approach are precautionary approach, are implicit within management explicit within management explicit within and required policy. policy. by management policy. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Russian fisheries law defines protection and rational use of aquatic biological resources as the main goal of the country’s fisheries management. ‘Protection and rational use’ was an established concept in Soviet legislation on the protection of the environment and exploitation of natural resources, and has remained so in the Russian Federation. ‘Rational use’ bears resemblance to the internationally recognized ideal of sustainability, insofar as the emphasis is on long-term and sustained use of the resource, supported by science for socio-economic purposes. The Federal Fisheries Act states that the protection of aquatic biological resources shall be given priority to their rational use. The precautionary approach is not mentioned explicitly, but the requirement to protect aquatic biological resources and take the best scientific knowledge into account equals the requirements of the precautionary approach, as laid out in the FAO Code of Conduct and its technical guidelines. The Russian Federation has signed and ratified a number of international agreements which adopt the precautionary approach, including the 1995 UN Straddling Stocks Agreement. The provisions of international agreements entered into by the Russian Federation stood above those of national law according to the 1993 Russian Constitution, but that was changed when the Constitution was subjected to its first major revision in 2020. Hence, clear long-term objectives that guide decision-making, consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria and the precautionary approach, are explicit within management policy. SG 60 and SG 80 are met. However, such objectives are not made mandatory for lower-level regulations and policy implementation at national level. SG 100 is not met.
References
Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (Fish Stocks Agreement), New York, 4 August 1995. Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, FAO, Rome, 31 October 1995. ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О РЫБОЛОВСТВЕ И СОХРАНЕНИИ ВОДНЫХ БИОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ РЕСУРСОВ, N 166- ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014). Об утверждении правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 N 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Precautionary Approach to Capture Fisheries and Species Introductions, FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries, No. 2, FAO, Rome, 1996. Приказ Министерства рыбного хозяйства Камчатского края от 29.12.2020 № 142-м ‘О распределении квот добычи (вылова) водных биологических ресурсов в целях обеспечения традиционного образа жизни и
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 156 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
осуществления традиционной хозяйственной деятельности коренных малочисленных народов Севера, Сибири и Дальнего Востока Российской Федерации, проживающих в Камчатском крае, на 2021 год’ (Order of the Ministry of Fisheries of Kamchatskiy krai of 29.12.202 No. 142-m ‘On the distribution of quotas of catch of aquatic biological resources for 2021 in support of the traditional way of life of the indigenous, small peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, living in Kamchatskiy krai’). Приказ Минсельхоза России от 29.10.2019 N 610 (ред. от 28.08.2020) ‘Об утверждении общего допустимого улова водных биологических ресурсов во внутренних морских водах Российской Федерации, территориальном море Российской Федерации, на континентальном шельфе Российской Федерации, в исключительной экономической зоне Российской Федерации и Каспийском море на 2020 год’ (Order of the Ministry of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation of 29.10.2019 No. 610 (revised 28.8.202) on total allowable catches of aquatic biological resources in the internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation, as well as in the Caspian Sea for 2020, Ministry of Agriculture, 2020). Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver. Websites of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://www.fish.gov.ru/), the North East Territorial Administration of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://xn--b1a3aee.xn--p1ai/), Glavrybvod/rybvody (http://www.fish.gov.ru/podvedomstvennye-organizatsii/rybvody), the Federal Fisheries Monitoring Center (http://cfmc.ru/), Kamchatka Department of Glavrybvod (https://cfmc.ru/filialy-i-otdely/kamchatskiy_filial/).
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 157 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 3.2.1 – Fishery-specific objectives PI 3.2.1 The fishery-specific management system has clear, specific objectives designed to achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2 Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Objectives Guide Objectives, which are Short and long-term Well defined and measurable broadly consistent with objectives, which are short and long-term post achieving the outcomes consistent with achieving the objectives, which are expressed by MSC’s outcomes expressed by demonstrably consistent with a Principles 1 and 2, are MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, are achieving the outcomes implicit within the fishery- explicit within the fishery- expressed by MSC’s Principles specific management system. specific management system. 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery-specific management system. Met? Yes Yes Partial
Rationale
Short- and long-term objectives are explicit in legislation at federal and regional level, as well as in the in the research programmes of the relevant research institutes. These are broadly consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. SG 60 is met. This includes objectives to maintain fish stocks at sustainable levels (here: both target stocks and other retained species) and protect other parts of the ecosystem, such as habitats. These objectives are short- and long-term and measurable, in the sense that performance against them can be measured through the enforcement bodies’ recording and inspection routines (see PI 3.2.3). SG 80 is met. P1 objectives are well defined, but P2 objectives are less so, warranting a partial score at SG 100.
References
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О РЫБОЛОВСТВЕ И СОХРАНЕНИИ ВОДНЫХ БИОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ РЕСУРСОВ, N 166- ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014). Об утверждении правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 N 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Приказ Министерства рыбного хозяйства Камчатского края от 29.12.2020 № 142-м ‘О распределении квот добычи (вылова) водных биологических ресурсов в целях обеспечения традиционного образа жизни и осуществления традиционной хозяйственной деятельности коренных малочисленных народов Севера, Сибири и Дальнего Востока Российской Федерации, проживающих в Камчатском крае, на 2021 год’ (Order of the Ministry of Fisheries of Kamchatskiy krai of 29.12.202 No. 142-m ‘On the distribution of quotas of catch of aquatic biological resources for 2021 in support of the traditional way of life of the indigenous, small peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, living in Kamchatskiy krai’). Приказ Минсельхоза России от 29.10.2019 N 610 (ред. от 28.08.2020) ‘Об утверждении общего допустимого улова водных биологических ресурсов во внутренних морских водах Российской Федерации, территориальном море Российской Федерации, на континентальном шельфе Российской Федерации, в исключительной экономической зоне Российской Федерации и Каспийском море на 2020 год’ (Order of the Ministry of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation of 29.10.2019 No. 610 (revised 28.8.202) on total allowable catches of aquatic biological resources in the internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation, as well as in the Caspian Sea for 2020, Ministry of Agriculture, 2020).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 158 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver. Websites of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://www.fish.gov.ru/), the North East Territorial Administration of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://xn--b1a3aee.xn--p1ai/), Glavrybvod/rybvody (http://www.fish.gov.ru/podvedomstvennye-organizatsii/rybvody), the Federal Fisheries Monitoring Center (http://cfmc.ru/), Kamchatka Department of Glavrybvod (https://cfmc.ru/filialy-i-otdely/kamchatskiy_filial/).
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 159 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 3.2.2 – Decision-making processes PI 3.2.2 The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Decision-making processes Guide There are some decision- There are established making processes in place decision-making processes a post that result in measures and that result in measures and strategies to achieve the strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. fishery-specific objectives. Met? Yes Yes
Rationale
Established decision-making procedures at federal and regional levels have evolved over several decades and are now codified in the Federal Fisheries Act, general provisions for fisheries in the Far Eastern Fishery Basin and specific regulations for the cod fishery. The Ministry of Agriculture decides on policy and regulatory schemes, while the FFA acts as an implementing body under the Ministry, with a main responsibility for secondary legislation and day-to-day regulation of the fishery (see SI 3.1.1a above). The FFA acts centrally, but to a large extent also through its regional departments (here: NETA/SVTU) and subordinate bodies of governance (such as the rybvods, here: Kamchatrybvod). The decision-making processes include the establishment of regulatory measures based on scientific advice and corroborated in stakeholder bodies, public hearings and environmental impact assessments. All decisions are formally made by the FFA at federal level and NETA/SVTU at regional level, including the establishment of regulations and TAC. In practice, internal distribution of the TAC at regional level is to a large extent influenced by the Far Eastern Basin Scientific-Technical Council, which formally only has an advisory role. The council has representatives from all relevant stakeholders; it meets twice a year in Vladivostok and is open to the public. Decisions are made by simple majority, but are in practice nearly always based on consensus. There are also procedures for more general public hearings in place. Consultation mechanisms are further described in SI 3.1.2b above, the enforcement system in SI 3.2.3a below. Hence, there are decision-making processes in place that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery- specific objectives. This applies to the UoA fishery as it does to Russian fisheries in general; see PIs 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 above. SG 60 is met. The processes are well established – evolved over several decades and now codified in the 2004 Federal Fisheries Act and secondary legislation at federal and regional level. SG 80 is also met.
Responsiveness of decision-making processes Guide Decision-making processes Decision-making processes Decision-making processes respond to serious issues respond to serious and respond to all issues post identified in relevant other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, b in a transparent, timely and evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take some account of the wider adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions. account of the wider implications of decisions. implications of decisions. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 160 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
The well-established decision-making procedures at federal and regional level in Russia respond to serious and other issues identified in research, monitoring, evaluation or by groups with an interest in the fishery through the arenas for regular consultations between governmental agencies and the public. This happens in the fishery councils at basin and regional level and through ad hoc consultation with the industry and other stakeholders (see PI 3.1.2 above). In addition, there is close contact between authorities and scientific research institutions, primarily between the FFA and VNIRO at the federal level and their subordinate bodies at regional level. SGs 60 and 80 are met. It is difficult to document that all issues are responded to. SG 100 is not met.
Use of precautionary approach Guide Decision-making processes use the precautionary c post approach and are based on best available information. Met? Yes
Rationale
Decision-making processes at the national level in Russia are based on scientific recommendations from VNIRO. The Federal Fisheries Act, which applies to the capture of all marine species, requires fisheries management to be based on the precautionary approach and the best available information (see PI 3.1.3 above). SG 80 is met.
Accountability and transparency of management system and decision-making process Guide Some information on the Information on the fishery’s Formal reporting to all fishery’s performance and performance and interested stakeholders post management action is management action is provides comprehensive generally available on available on request, and information on the fishery’s request to stakeholders. explanations are provided for performance and any actions or lack of action management actions and d associated with findings and describes how the relevant recommendations management system emerging from research, responded to findings and monitoring, evaluation and relevant recommendations review activity. emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
Information is available on the fishery’s performance and management action on the websites of the FFA and its regional offices, here NETA/SVTU, as well as those of regional authorities, here the Ministry of Fisheries of Kamchatskiy krai. SG 60 is met. Explanations are provided for actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity, to some extent on the mentioned websites but in particular at the public meetings and hearings presented under SI 3.1.2b above. SG 80 is also met. In order to reach SG 100, reporting must be formal and information comprehensive. Timely online posting of all protocols counts, in the opinion of the assessment team, as formal reporting as much as distribution via mail or email. Protocols from meetings in the public councils and ad hoc public hearings are available on the NETA/SVTU website. Protocols are comprehensive and posted in a timely fashion. SG 100 is met.
Approach to disputes e Guide Although the management The management system or The management system or authority or fishery may be fishery is attempting to fishery acts proactively to
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 161 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
post subject to continuing court comply in a timely fashion avoid legal disputes or rapidly challenges, it is not indicating with judicial decisions arising implements judicial decisions a disrespect or defiance of from any legal challenges. arising from legal challenges. the law by repeatedly violating the same law or regulation necessary for the sustainability for the fishery. Met? Yes Yes Yes
Rationale
The Russian system for fisheries management is not subject to continuing court challenges or indicating a disrespect or defiance of the law by repeatedly violating the same law or regulation necessary for the sustainability for the fishery. SG 60 is met. If taken to court by fishing companies, the management authority complies with the judicial decision in a timely manner, in accordance with the formal procedures laid down in the fisheries acts and general legislation on the distribution of power in the respective country. SG 80 is met. The management authority maintains a tight cooperation with user groups at the regulatory level (see PI 3.1.2 above), ensuring as high legitimacy as possible for regulations and other management decisions. Regulatory and enforcement authorities offer advice to the fleet on how to avoid infringements, keeping them updated on changes in the regulations. They also have the authority to issue administrative penalties for minor infringements (serious enough to be met by a reaction above a written warning), thus referring only the more serious cases to prosecution by the police and possible transfer to the court system. Since the management system acts proactively to avoid legal disputes and rapidly implements judicial decisions, SG 100 is met.
References
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О ПОРЯДКЕ РАССМОТРЕНИЯ ОБРАЩЕНИЙ ГРАЖДАН РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ, N 59-ФЗ (Federal Act on the treatment of citizens’ requests to state organs, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2006). ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О РЫБОЛОВСТВЕ И СОХРАНЕНИИ ВОДНЫХ БИОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ РЕСУРСОВ, N 166- ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014). Об образовании Общественного совета при Федеральном агентстве по рыболовству, N 301 (Regulation on the establishment of a public council at the Federal Fisheries Agency, 2008). ОБ УТВЕРЖДЕНИИ ПОРЯДКА ДЕЯТЕЛЬНОСТИ БАССЕЙНОВЫХ НАУЧНО- ПРОМЫСЛОВЫХ СОВЕТОВ (On the confirmation of arrangements for basin scientific and fishery councils, Federal Fisheries Agency, Russian Federation, 2008). Об утверждении правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 N 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Приказ Министерства рыбного хозяйства Камчатского края от 29.12.2020 № 142-м ‘О распределении квот добычи (вылова) водных биологических ресурсов в целях обеспечения традиционного образа жизни и осуществления традиционной хозяйственной деятельности коренных малочисленных народов Севера, Сибири и Дальнего Востока Российской Федерации, проживающих в Камчатском крае, на 2021 год’ (Order of the Ministry of Fisheries of Kamchatskiy krai of 29.12.202 No. 142-m ‘On the distribution of quotas of catch of aquatic biological resources for 2021 in support of the traditional way of life of the indigenous, small peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, living in Kamchatskiy krai’). Приказ Минсельхоза России от 29.10.2019 N 610 (ред. от 28.08.2020) ‘Об утверждении общего допустимого улова водных биологических ресурсов во внутренних морских водах Российской Федерации, территориальном море Российской Федерации, на континентальном шельфе Российской Федерации, в исключительной экономической зоне Российской Федерации и Каспийском море на 2020 год’ (Order of the Ministry of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation of 29.10.2019 No. 610 (revised 28.8.202) on total allowable catches of aquatic biological resources in the internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation, as well as in the Caspian Sea for 2020, Ministry of Agriculture, 2020).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 162 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver. Websites of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://www.fish.gov.ru/), the North East Territorial Administration of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://xn--b1a3aee.xn--p1ai/), Glavrybvod/rybvody (http://www.fish.gov.ru/podvedomstvennye-organizatsii/rybvody), the Federal Fisheries Monitoring Center (http://cfmc.ru/), Kamchatka Department of Glavrybvod (https://cfmc.ru/filialy-i-otdely/kamchatskiy_filial/).
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 163 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 3.2.3 – Compliance and enforcement PI 3.2.3 Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the management measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
MCS implementation Guide Monitoring, control and A monitoring, control and A comprehensive post surveillance mechanisms surveillance system has monitoring, control and exist, and are implemented in been implemented in the surveillance system has been the fishery and there is a fishery and has demonstrated implemented in the fishery a reasonable expectation that an ability to enforce relevant and has demonstrated a they are effective. management measures, consistent ability to enforce strategies and/or rules. relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Enforcement of fisheries regulations in Russia is the joint responsibility of the FFA though its regional offices and the Coast Guard, which is under the Border Service of the Federal Security Service (FSB). The FFA is responsible for control of quota uptake and also takes care of paper control related to licenses, catch logs and VMS data, while the Coast Guard carries out physical inspections at sea. The Coast Guard’s authority is limited to marine waters; the FFA, through its regional offices and those of the rybvods (see SI 3.1.1a), is responsible for the management of freshwater basins. Fish caught in waters under Russian jurisdiction must be landed in Russian ports. The Coast Guard conducts random inspections at sea, including from helicopters. Inspectors control the catch, gear and documents. The Federal Fisheries Monitoring Centre, with its 7 territorial departments including one in Kamchatka, is the technical hub for all electronic reporting from the fishing companies and vessels, including electronic logbooks and other catch reports as well as VMS and AIS data. The FFA territorial departments and the Coast Guard cooperate with the Fisheries Monitoring Centres, as well as with other countries and international fisheries organizations where relevant. The Veterinary Service (in Russian: Rosselkhoznadzor) is the only sluzhba ([controlling] service; see PI 3.1.1 above) under the Ministry of Agriculture. For several years in the mid- and late 2000s, it was responsible for monitoring and enforcement across all fields of work under the Ministry, including fisheries, but now its remit is limited to more traditional veterinary services, such as supervision of animal health. Hence, it is responsible for sanitary inspections of landed fish. The Ministry of Agriculture and its subordinate bodies of governance cooperate with other governmental agencies in the enforcement of fisheries regulations. The Federal Customs Service inspects cargoes with fish caught under Russian jurisdiction and intended for export and hence plays an important role in maintaining traceability of fish products. The Federal Tax Service is involved in investigations of economic crime within the fishing industry. The Ministry of Natural Resources through its Agency for Monitoring of Natural Resources (Rosprirodnadzor) assessess the environmental impact of fisheries and is responsible for the protection of habitats and protected, endangered or threatened species. Hence, monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms exist and are implemented in the fishery, and there is a reasonable expectation that they are effective. SG 60 is met. These measures qualify as a system and have demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and rules; see SI 3.2.3c below on compliance. SG 80 is met. At ACDR stage, it is too early to conclude that the system is comprehensive and has demonstrated an ability to enforce regulations. SG 100 is not met.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 164 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Sanctions Guide Sanctions to deal with non- Sanctions to deal with non- Sanctions to deal with non- post compliance exist and there is compliance exist, are compliance exist, are b some evidence that they are consistently applied and consistently applied and applied. thought to provide effective demonstrably provide deterrence. effective deterrence. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Sanctions to deal with non-compliance in Russian waters exist in within the system for fisheries management, as well as in the wider legal system. Both make wide use of administrative fines and refer serious cases to the judicial system. The Russian Federal Fisheries Act requires the withdrawal of quota rights if a fishing company has committed two serious violations of the fisheries regulations within one calendar year, among other things. The Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Infractions specifies the level of fines that can be issued administratively by enforcement bodies, e.g. up to RUR 5,000 for ‘citizens’, 50,000 for ‘executive officers’ and 200,000 for companies. The Criminal Code requires that illegal fishing such as causing ‘large damage’, conducted in spawning areas or migration ways leading to such areas, or in marine protected areas be penalized by either fines up to RUR 300,000 or an amount corresponding to 1-2 years’ income for the violator, compulsory work of no less than 480 hours, corrective work for at least two years or arrest for at least 6 months. The number and amounts of fines issued within the UoA fishery are as follows: 2015: 4 (400,000 RUR), 2016: 2 (120,000 RUR), 2017: 2 (130,000 RUR), 2018: 2 (16,000 RUR) and 2019: 6 (510,000 RUR). Hence, sanctions to deal with non-compliance exist and there is evidence that they are applied. SG 60 is met. Sanctions are consistently applied and thought to provide effective deterrence; see SI 3.2.3c below on compliance. SG 80 is met. Based on the limited level of detail in the information available on compliance in the fishery (see SI 3.2.3c below), it cannot be concluded at ACDR stage that sanctions demonstrably provide effective deterrence, so SG 100 is not met.
Compliance Guide Fishers are generally Some evidence exists to There is a high degree of post thought to comply with the demonstrate fishers comply confidence that fishers management system for the with the management system comply with the management fishery under assessment, under assessment, including, system under assessment, c including, when required, when required, providing including, providing providing information of information of importance to information of importance to importance to the effective the effective management of the effective management of management of the fishery. the fishery. the fishery. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Based on the level of compliance documented in other MSC assessments of Russian fisheries, including pollock fisheries in the Sea of Okhotsk (Radchenko 2017), there is reason to assume that fishers are “generally thought to comply” with regulations and provide information of importance to the effective management of the fishery. SG 60 is met. According to information from the FSB (presented in the pre-assessment report of the UoA fishery), the number of inspections at sea in the longline fishery in the area where the UoA fishery takes place are as follows in recent years: 2015: 19, 2016: 24, 2017: 38, 2018: 38 and 2019: 32. In addition, 16 inspections were carried out in port in 2018 and 25 were carried out in 2019. The number of infringements of fishing rules was as follows: 2015: 4, 2016: 1, 2017: 1, 2018: 1, 2019: 3. Hence, infringements were revealed in approx. 5 % of inspections. No infringements were serious enough for the case to be transferred to criminal investigation. Some evidence exists that fishers comply. SG 80 is met. At ACDR stage, these figures have not been confirmed by the FSB themselves, so it cannot be concluded with a high degree of confidence that fishers comply. SG 100 is not met.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 165 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Systematic non-compliance Guide There is no evidence of d post systematic non-compliance. Met? Yes
Rationale
No evidence of systematic non-compliance has been presented to the assessment team.
References
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О РЫБОЛОВСТВЕ И СОХРАНЕНИИ ВОДНЫХ БИОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ РЕСУРСОВ, No. 166-ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014). КОДЕКС РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ ОБ АДМИНИСТРАТИВНЫХ ПРАВОНАРУШЕНИЯХ (‘Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences‘), No. 195-ФЗ, Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, 2001 (last revised 2017). Marine Certification LLC, Pre-assessment report of the KZB-sel longline cod fishery. Об утверждении правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 N 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver.
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator More information sought More information is sought on the number of inspections and infringements, confirmed by the enforcement authorities.
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 166 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
PI 3.2.4 – Monitoring and management performance evaluation PI 3.2.4 There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
Evaluation coverage Guide There are mechanisms in There are mechanisms in There are mechanisms in post place to evaluate some parts place to evaluate key parts of place to evaluate all parts of a of the fishery-specific the fishery-specific the fishery-specific management system. management system. management system. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
There are various mechanisms in place to evaluate key parts of the fishery-specific management system, but at varied levels of ambition and coverage. At the fishery council meetings, found at federal, basin and regional levels (see SI 3.1.2b above), management authorities receive feedback on management practices from the industry and other interested stakeholders. The FFA and the Ministry of Agriculture report annually to the Government, the Presidential Administration and the Federal Assembly (to both the lower chamber, the State Duma, and the upper chamber, the Federation Council) about their work, with emphasis on achievements in the fishing industry. Other federal agencies also review parts of the fisheries management system. For instance, the Auditor General evaluates how allocated funds are spent, and the Anti-Monopoly Service how competition and investment rules are observed. Within FFA, there is regular review of the performance of the Agency’s regional offices. In the establishment of TACs, the scientific advice from VNIRO’s regional branches is peer reviewed by the head office in Moscow, and then forwarded to FFA and the federal natural resources monitoring agency Rosprirodnadzor for comments. It is also presented to the general public for discussion at public hearings, announced in the local press. At the regional level, the Kamchatskiy krai Ministry of Fisheries is under scrutiny by the regional Government, as well as the legislative body at oblast level, the regional Duma. Hence, the fishery has in place mechanisms to evaluate key parts of the fishery and associated enhancement program management system, so SG 60 and SG 80 are met. It is a principal challenge to claim that ‘all’ parts of a fisheries management system are subject to review, but it seems reasonable to expect some sort of a holistic evaluation of the fishery-specific system as such, which does not seem to take place in the UoA fishery. SG 100 is not met.
Internal and/or external review Guide The fishery-specific The fishery-specific The fishery-specific post management system is management system is management system is b subject to occasional subject to regular internal subject to regular internal internal review. and occasional external and external review. review. Met? Yes Yes No
Rationale
Regular internal review of the fishery-specific management system is performed through FFA’s continuous evaluation of the performance of regional management in the Far Eastern Fishery Basin and other forms of review listed under SI 3.2.4a above. SG 60 is met.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 167 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
As regards external review, the MSC Fisheries Standard states that external here means ‘external to the fishery’, but not necessarily international. The Guidance (GSA4.10.1) specifies that ‘external’ review might be conducted by another department within an agency, or another agency or organization within the country. It is a matter of definition where the division line goes between internal and external reviews, and to what extent external review of elements of the management system constitutes review of the management as such; e.g. review of scientific information is not a review of the management system itself. As part of the fulfilment of an MSC condition in the Russia Sea of Okhotsk fishery, the Russian Far Eastern management system was evaluated. Hence, the system is subject to regular internal and occasional external review, SG 80 is met. It is not subject to regular external review, so SG 100 is not met.
References
ФЕДЕРАЛЬНЫЙ ЗАКОН О РЫБОЛОВСТВЕ И СОХРАНЕНИИ ВОДНЫХ БИОЛОГИЧЕСКИХ РЕСУРСОВ, N 166- ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014). Об утверждении правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 N 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Приказ Министерства рыбного хозяйства Камчатского края от 29.12.2020 № 142-м ‘О распределении квот добычи (вылова) водных биологических ресурсов в целях обеспечения традиционного образа жизни и осуществления традиционной хозяйственной деятельности коренных малочисленных народов Севера, Сибири и Дальнего Востока Российской Федерации, проживающих в Камчатском крае, на 2021 год’ (Order of the Ministry of Fisheries of Kamchatskiy krai of 29.12.202 No. 142-m ‘On the distribution of quotas of catch of aquatic biological resources for 2021 in support of the traditional way of life of the indigenous, small peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, living in Kamchatskiy krai’). Приказ Минсельхоза России от 29.10.2019 N 610 (ред. от 28.08.2020) ‘Об утверждении общего допустимого улова водных биологических ресурсов во внутренних морских водах Российской Федерации, территориальном море Российской Федерации, на континентальном шельфе Российской Федерации, в исключительной экономической зоне Российской Федерации и Каспийском море на 2020 год’ (Order of the Ministry of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation of 29.10.2019 No. 610 (revised 28.8.202) on total allowable catches of aquatic biological resources in the internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation, as well as in the Caspian Sea for 2020, Ministry of Agriculture, 2020). Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver. Websites of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://www.fish.gov.ru/), the North East Territorial Administration of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://xn--b1a3aee.xn--p1ai/), Glavrybvod/rybvody (http://www.fish.gov.ru/podvedomstvennye-organizatsii/rybvody), the Federal Fisheries Monitoring Center (http://cfmc.ru/), Kamchatka Department of Glavrybvod (https://cfmc.ru/filialy-i-otdely/kamchatskiy_filial/).
Draft scoring range and information gap indicator added at Announcement Comment Draft Report stage Draft scoring range ≥80
Information gap indicator Information sufficient to score PI
Overall Performance Indicator scores added from Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage Overall Performance Indicator score
Condition number (if relevant) N/A
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 168 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
7.4.3 Principle 3 references
Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (Fish Stocks Agreement), New York, 4 August 1995. Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, FAO, Rome, 31 October 1995. Marine Certification LLC, Pre-assessment report of the KZB-sel longline cod fishery. Precautionary Approach to Capture Fisheries and Species Introductions, FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries, No. 2, FAO, Rome, 1996. Radchenko V.I. 2017. Russian Fisheries Management System Performance (The Sea of Okhotsk Walleye Pollock Fishery Case Study). North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Vancouver. Websites of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://www.fish.gov.ru/), the North East Territorial Administration of the Federal Fisheries Agency (http://xn--b1a3aee.xn--p1ai/), Glavrybvod/rybvody (http://www.fish.gov.ru/podvedomstvennye-organizatsii/rybvody), the Federal Fisheries Monitoring Center (http://cfmc.ru/), Kamchatka Department of Glavrybvod (https://cfmc.ru/filialy-i-otdely/kamchatskiy_filial/). Кодекс Российской Федерации об административных правонарушениях (‘Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences‘), No. 195-ФЗ, Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, 2001 (last revised 2017). Об образовании Общественного совета при Федеральном агентстве по рыболовству, No. 301 (Regulation on the establishment of a public council at the Federal Fisheries Agency, 2008). Об утверждении порядка деятельности бассейновых научно-промысловых советов (On the confirmation of arrangements for basin scientific and fishery councils, Federal Fisheries Agency, Russian Federation, 2008). Об утверждении Правил рыболовства для Дальневосточного рыбохозяйственного бассейна (с изменениями на 4 июня 2018 года) (редакция, действующая с 1 января 2019 года) (утратил силу с 17.06.2019 на основании приказа Минсельхоза России от 23.05.2019 No. 267). (Fishing regulations for the Far Eastern Fisher Basin, Ministry of Agriculture, 2019). Приказ Министерства рыбного хозяйства Камчатского края от 29.12.2020 № 142-м ‘О распределении квот добычи (вылова) водных биологических ресурсов в целях обеспечения традиционного образа жизни и осуществления традиционной хозяйственной деятельности коренных малочисленных народов Севера, Сибири и Дальнего Востока Российской Федерации, проживающих в Камчатском крае, на 2021 год’ (Order of the Ministry of Fisheries of Kamchatskiy krai of 29.12.2020 No. 142-m ‘On the distribution of quotas of catch of aquatic biological resources for 2021 in support of the traditional way of life of the indigenous, small peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation, living in Kamchatskiy krai’). Приказ Минсельхоза России от 29.10.2019 No. 610 (ред. от 28.08.2020) ‘Об утверждении общего допустимого улова водных биологических ресурсов во внутренних морских водах Российской Федерации, территориальном море Российской Федерации, на континентальном шельфе Российской Федерации, в исключительной экономической зоне Российской Федерации и Каспийском море на 2020 год’ (Order of the Ministry of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation of 29.10.2019 No. 610 (revised 28.8.202) on total allowable catches of aquatic biological resources in the internal waters, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf of the Russian Federation, as well as in the Caspian Sea for 2020, Ministry of Agriculture, 2020). Федеральный закон О порядке рассмотрения обращений граждан Российской Федерации, No. 59-ФЗ (Federal Act on the treatment of citizens’ requests to state organs, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2006). Федеральный закон О рыболовстве и сохранении водных биологических ресурсов, No. 166-ФЗ, (Federal Fisheries Act, Federal Assembly [Parliament] of the Russian Federation, 2004, last revised 2014).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 169 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
8 Appendices 8.1 Assessment information 8.1.1 Small-scale fisheries The KZB-herring Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka Pacific cod bottom longline fishery is not a small-scale fishery (Table 41) because longline fishing activity is completed outside 12 nautical miles of shore on the middle tonnage vessels with total length more than 15 m.
Table 40 – Small-scale fisheries
Percentage of vessels with length Percentage of fishing activity completed Unit of Assessment (UoA) <15m within 12 nautical miles of shore
1 – KZB-herring Western Bering Sea and East Kamchatka 0 % 0 % Pacific cod bottom longline
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 170 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.2 Evaluation processes and techniques 8.2.1 Site visits
The CAB shall include in the report: - An itinerary of site visit activities with dates. - A description of site visit activities, including any locations that were inspected. - Names of individuals contacted.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.16 8.2.2 Stakeholder participation
The CAB shall include in the report:
- Details of people interviewed: local residents, representatives of stakeholder organisations including contacts with any regional MSC representatives. - A description of stakeholder engagement strategy and opportunities available.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.16 8.2.3 Evaluation techniques
At Announcement Comment Draft report stage, if the use of the RBF is triggered for this assessment, the CAB shall include in the report:
- The plan for RBF activities that the team will undertake at the site visit. - The justification for using the RBF, which can be copied from previous RBF announcements, and stakeholder comments on its use. - The RBF stakeholder consultation strategy to ensure effective participation from a range of stakeholders including any participatory tools used. - The full list of activities and components to be discussed or evaluated in the assessment.
At Client Draft Report stage, if the RBF was used for this assessment, the CAB shall include in the report: - A summary of the information obtained from the stakeholder meetings including the range of opinions. - The full list of activities and components that have been discussed or evaluated in the assessment, regardless of the final risk-based outcome.
The stakeholder input should be reported in the stakeholder input appendix and incorporated in the rationales directly in the scoring tables.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.16, FCP v2.2 Annex PF Section PF2.1
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 171 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.3 Peer Review reports To be drafted at Public Comment Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report unattributed reports of the Peer Reviewers in full using the relevant templates. The CAB shall include in the report explicit responses of the team that include:
- Identification of specifically what (if any) changes to scoring, rationales, or conditions have been made; and, - A substantiated justification for not making changes where Peer Reviewers suggest changes, but the team disagrees.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.14
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 172 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.4 Stakeholder input To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
The CAB shall use the ‘MSC Template for Stakeholder Input into Fishery Assessments’ to include all written stakeholder input during the stakeholder input opportunities (Announcement Comment Draft Report, site visit and Public Comment Draft Report). Using the ‘MSC Template for Stakeholder Input into Fishery Assessments’, the team shall respond to all written stakeholder input identifying what changes to scoring, rationales and conditions have been made in response, where the changes have been made, and assigning a ‘CAB response code’.
The ‘MSC Template for Stakeholder Input into Fishery Assessments’ shall also be used to provide a summary of verbal submissions received during the site visit likely to cause a material difference to the outcome of the assessment. Using the ‘MSC Template for Stakeholder Input into Fishery Assessments’ the team shall respond to the summary of verbal submissions identifying what changes to scoring, rationales and conditions have been made in response, where the changes have been made, and assigning a ‘CAB response code’.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Sections 7.15, 7.20.5 and 7.22.3
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 173 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.5 Conditions – delete if not applicable 8.5.1 Summary of conditions closed under previous certificate
The CAB shall include a summary of conditions that were closed during the previous certificate.
8.5.2 Open Conditions at reassessment announcement – delete if not applicable
The CAB shall complete this section if: 1. The assessment is a reassessment, and 2. There are open conditions when the reassessment is announced.
The CAB shall identify conditions that are open at the time of the reassessment announcement, conditions that will be closed during the reassessment including an outline of how and when the condition will be closed, and conditions that are being carried over into the next certificate.
The CAB shall confirm the status of progress for each open condition. For the ACDR the CAB shall base this on the most recent surveillance audit. For the PCDR the CAB shall base this on the site visit.
The CAB shall include details regarding the closing of conditions during the reassessment following Section 5.3.2 from the MSC Surveillance Reporting Template.
The CAB shall only include information on conditions that are being carried over in the ACDR. In the Client and Peer Review Draft Report and subsequent reports the CAB shall incorporate all conditions that are being carried over into Section 8.5.2.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.30.5.
Table 41 – Open Condition X (use existing numbering)
Performance Indicator
Score State score for Performance Indicator.
Cross reference to page number containing scoring template table or copy justification Justification text here.
Condition State condition.
Condition start State when the condition was set.
Condition deadline State deadline for the condition.
Milestones State milestones and resulting scores where applicable.
State a summary of the progress made by the fishery client to address the condition. Progress on Condition Identify if milestones have been revised as part of remedial action at previous
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 174 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Surveillance Audits.
Identify whether this condition is ‘on target’, ‘ahead of target’, ‘behind target’, or progress Progress status is inadequate, and provide justification as per FCP v2.2 7.28.16.1 and 7.28.16.2.
Carrying over condition Check the box if the condition is being carried into the next certificate and include a ☐ justification for carrying over the condition (FCP v2.2 7.30.5.1.a).
Closing the condition Outline how and when the condition will be closed during the reassessment. during the reassessment
8.5.3 Conditions – delete if not applicable To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
The CAB shall document in the report all conditions in separate tables.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.18, 7.30.5 and 7.30.6
Table 42 – Condition 1
Performance Indicator
Score State score for Performance Indicator.
Cross reference to page number containing scoring template table or copy justification Justification text here.
Condition State condition.
Condition deadline State deadline for the condition.
Exceptional Check the box if exceptional circumstances apply and condition deadline is longer than circumstances ☐ the period of certification (FCP v2.2 7.18.1.6). Provide a justification.
Milestones State milestones and resulting scores where applicable.
Verification with other Include details of any verification required to meet requirements in FCP v2.2 7.19.8. entities
Complete the following rows for reassessments.
Check the box if the condition is being carried over from a previous certificate and include a justification for carrying over the condition (FCP v2.2 7.30.5.1.a).
Carried over condition ☐ Include a justification that progress against the condition and milestones is adequate (FCP v2.2 7.30.5.2). The CAB shall base its justification on information from the reassessment site visit.
Check the box if the condition relates to a previous condition that was closed during a Related condition ☐ previous certification period but where a new condition on the same Performance Indicator or Scoring Issue is set.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 175 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Include a justification – why is a related condition being raised? (FCP v2.2 7.30.6 & G7.30.6).
Check the box if the condition has been rewritten. Include a justification (FCP v2.2 Condition rewritten ☐ 7.30.5.3).
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 176 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.6 Client Action Plan To be drafted at Public Comment Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report the Client Action Plan from the fishery client to address conditions.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.19
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 177 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.7 Surveillance To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report the program for surveillance, timing of surveillance audits and a supporting justification.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Section 7.28
Table 43 – Fishery surveillance program
Surveillance level Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
e.g. On-site e.g. On-site e.g. On-site e.g. On-site surveillance audit & e.g. Level 5 surveillance audit surveillance audit surveillance audit re-certification site visit
Table 44 – Timing of surveillance audit
Proposed date of surveillance Year Anniversary date of certificate Rationale audit
e.g. Scientific advice to be released in June 2018, proposal to postpone e.g. 1 e.g. May 2018 e.g. July 2018 audit to include findings of scientific advice
Table 45 – Surveillance level justification
Year Surveillance activity Number of auditors Rationale
e.g. From client action plan it can be deduced that information needed to verify progress towards conditions 1.2.1, 2.2.3 and 3.2.3 can be provided remotely in year 3. Considering that milestones indicate that most e.g. 1 auditor on-site with e.g.3 e.g. On-site audit conditions will be closed out in year 3, remote support from 1 auditor the CAB proposes to have an on-site audit with 1 auditor on-site with remote support – this is to ensure that all information is collected and because the information can be provided remotely.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 178 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.8 Risk-Based Framework outputs – delete if not applicable To be drafted at Client and Peer Review Draft Report stage
8.8.1 Consequence Analysis (CA)
The CAB shall complete the Consequence Analysis (CA) table below for each data-deficient species under PI 1.1.1, including rationales for scoring each of the CA attributes.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Annex PF Section PF3
Table 46 – CA scoring template
Consequence Scoring element Consequence score subcomponents
Population size Principle 1: Stock status outcome Reproductive capacity
Age/size/sex structure
Geographic range
Rationale for most vulnerable subcomponent
Rationale for consequence score
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 179 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.8.2 Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA)
The CAB shall include in the report an MSC Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) worksheet for each Performance Indicator where the PSA is used and one PSA rationale table for each data-deficient species identified, subject to FCP v2.2 Section PF4. If species are grouped together, the CAB shall list all species and group them indicating which are most at-risk.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Annex PF Section PF4
Table 47 – PSA productivity and susceptibility attributes and scores
Performance Indicator
Productivity
Scoring element (species)
Attribute Rationale Score
Average age at maturity 1 / 2 / 3
Average maximum age 1 / 2 / 3
Fecundity 1 / 2 / 3
Average maximum size 1 / 2 / 3 Not scored for invertebrates
Average size at maturity 1 / 2 / 3 Not scored for invertebrates
Reproductive strategy 1 / 2 / 3
Trophic level 1 / 2 / 3
Density dependence 1 / 2 / 3 Invertebrates only
Susceptibility
Fishery Only where the scoring Insert list of fisheries impacting the given scoring element (FCP v2.2 Annex PF element is scored 7.4.10) cumulatively
Attribute Rationale Score
Insert attribute rationale. Note specific requirements in FCP v2.2 Areal Overlap Annex PF4.4.6.b, where the impacts of fisheries other than the UoA 1 / 2 / 3 are taken into account
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 180 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Insert attribute rationale. Note specific requirements in FCP v2.2 Encounterability Annex PF4.4.6.b, where the impacts of fisheries other than the UoA 1 / 2 / 3 are taken into account
Selectivity of gear type 1 / 2 / 3
Post capture mortality 1 / 2 / 3
Catch (weight) Insert weights or proportions of fisheries impacting the given scoring Only where the scoring 1 / 2 / 3 element is scored element (FCP v2.2 Annex PF4.4.4) cumulatively
Table 48 – Species grouped by similar taxonomies (if FCP v2.2 Annex PF4.1.5 is used)
Species common name (if Most at-risk in Species scientific name Taxonomic grouping known) group?
Indicate the group that this species e.g. Genus species belongs to, e.g. Scombridae, Yes / No subspecies Soleidae, Serranidae, Merluccius spp.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 181 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.8.3 Consequence Spatial Analysis (CSA)
The CAB shall complete the Consequence Spatial Analysis (CSA) table below for PI 2.4.1, if used, including rationales for scoring each of the CSA attributes.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Annex PF Section PF7
Table 49 – CSA rationale table for PI 2.4.1 Habitats
Consequence Rationale Score
Regeneration of biota 1 / 2 / 3
Natural disturbance 1 / 2 / 3
Removability of biota 1 / 2 / 3
Removability of substratum 1 / 2 / 3
Substratum hardness 1 / 2 / 3
Substratum ruggedness 1 / 2 / 3
Seabed slope 1 / 2 / 3
Spatial Rationale Score
Gear footprint 1 / 2 / 3
Spatial overlap 1 / 2 / 3
Encounterability 1 / 2 / 3
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 182 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.8.4 Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA)
The CAB shall complete the Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA) table below for PI 2.5.1, if used, including rationales for scoring each of the SICA attributes.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Annex PF Section PF8
Table 50 – SICA scoring template for PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem
Spatial scale of Temporal scale Intensity of Relevant Consequence fishing activity of fishing activity fishing activity subcomponents Score
Species
composition Performance Indicator Functional group PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem composition outcome
Distribution of the
community
Trophic
size/structure
Rationale for spatial scale of fishing activity
Rationale for temporal scale of fishing activity
Rationale for intensity of fishing activity
Rationale for consequence score
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 183 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.9 Harmonised fishery assessments – delete if not applicable
Harmonisation is required in cases where assessments overlap, or new assessments overlap with pre-existing fisheries.
If relevant, in accordance with FCP v2.2 Annex PB requirements, the CAB shall describe in the report the processes, activities and specific outcomes of efforts to harmonise fishery assessments. The report shall identify the fisheries and Performance Indicators subject to harmonisation.
Reference(s): FCP v2.2 Annex PB
In considering nearby fisheries for harmonization, the team reviewed MSC guidance including:
PB1.3.1 Teams assessing overlapping UoAs shall ensure consistency of outcomes so as not to undermine the integrity of MSC fishery assessments.
PB1.3.2 Teams shall prepare for harmonisation with overlapping UoAs no later than the site visit.
PB1.3.3.2 Teams shall ensure that conclusions are consistent between the 2 (or more) fishery assessments, with respect to evaluation, scoring and conditions.
GPB1.1. The MSC-MSCI Vocabulary defines overlapping fisheries as, “2 or more fisheries which require assessment of some, or all, of the same aspects of MSC Principles 1, 2 and/or 3 within their respective units of certification”. This definition is also relevant for the Unit of Assessment (UoA). Harmonisation is not necessary in assessments of fisheries that use similar gears or management approaches but operate in clearly different geographic areas. Based on this MSC guidance, the team identifies five fisheries to consider for harmonization: Western Bering Sea Pollock fishery; Western Bering Sea Pacific Cod and Pacific halibut longline fishery; Among these fisheries only target acific cod with longline gear in the WBS and Eastern Kamchatka UoAs. So there is probably harmonization required for P1. As for spatial overlap, only the Western Bering Sea Pacific Cod and Pacific halibut longline fishery overlaps the UoA in zones 61.01 and 61.02. According the MSC guidance, these fisheries in other areas do not need to be considered for harmonization. However shared ecosystem characteristics, the team will consider harmonization for certain PIs in Principle 2 and Principle 3. See Table 52.
Table 51 – List overlapping fisheries (to be determined)
Performance Indicators to Fishery name Certification status and date harmonise
Western Bering Sea Pollock fishery ACDR P2: 2.2.1a; 2.3.1a; 2.4.2a,c. https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/western-bering- September 2020 P3: PIs 3.1.1 – 3.1.3 sea-pollock/@@view Western Bering Sea Pacific cod and Pacific halibut longline P2: 2.1.1b; 2.2.1a; 2.3.1a; https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/western-bering- Certified: 2.4.2b; 2.4.2a,c. sea-pacific-cod-and-pacific-halibut-longline/@@view October2019 P3: PIs 3.1.1 – 3.1.3
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 184 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
Table 52 – Overlapping fisheries
Supporting information
- Describe any background or supporting information relevant to the harmonisation activities, processes and outcomes.
Was either FCP v2.2 Annex PB1.3.3.4 or PB1.3.4.5 applied when harmonising? Yes / No
Date of harmonisation meeting DD / MM / YY
If applicable, describe the meeting outcome
- e.g. Agreement found among teams or lowest score adopted.
Table 53 – Scoring differences
KZB-herring Western Western Bering Sea Western Bering Sea Performance Bering Sea and East Pollock fishery Pacific cod and Indicators (PIs) Kamchatka Pacific Pacific halibut cod bottom longline longline
SI 2.1.1b 80 - 80
SI 2.2.1a 80 80 100
SI 2.3.1a NA NA NA
SI 2.4.2a 80 80 80
SI 2.4.2b 80 80 80
SI 2.4.2c 80 80 80
PI 3.1.1 100 95 100
PI 3.1.2 80 95 95
PI 3.1.3 80 100 100
Table 54 – Rationale for scoring differences
If applicable, explain and justify any difference in scoring and rationale for the relevant Performance Indicators (FCP v2.2 Annex PB1.3.6).
More than half of the scores are exactly the same, while the rest are within the 80-100 range.
If exceptional circumstances apply, outline the situation and whether there is agreement between or among teams on this determination.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 185 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.10 Objection Procedure – delete if not applicable To be added at Public Certification Report stage
The CAB shall include in the report all written decisions arising from the Objection Procedure.
Reference(s): MSC Disputes Process v1.0, FCP v2.2 Annex PD Objection Procedure
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 186 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 8.11 UoA company and vessel list
Table 55 – Vessel’s list of KZB-herring JSC (in chartered from YAMSY JSC) in UoA. (Source of data: ttps://norebo.ru).
№ Vessel type and Length, m Capacity, t Home port Year of construction name 1 SIAM Kalam 52.55 1.315 1994 2 SIAM Alanett 52.53 1.315 1993 3 SIAM Kalkan 52.53 1.315 1993 4 SIAM Blanket 52.53 1.315 Petropavlovsk- 1994 Kamchatsky 5 SIAM Tyburon 52.53 1.315 1994 6 SIAM Tarpon 52.53 1.315 1994 7 SIAM Tomkod 52.51 1.315 1994 8 SIAM Gruper 52.57 1.315 1994
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 187 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR 9 Corporate branding
This template may be formatted to comply with the Conformity Assessment Body (CAB) corporate identity. The CAB shall ensure that content and structure follow the template.
Examples of appropriate amendments are:
a. A title page with the company logo; b. A company header and footer used throughout the report; c. Replacement of font styles; d. Inclusion of contact details for the assessment team members in relation to consultation e. Deletion of any sections that are not applicable, though CABs should leave any sections that will be populated later in the assessment; and, f. Deletion of introductory text or instructions.
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 188 UCSL UCSL United Certification Systems Limited: KZB-herring WBS and EK Pacific cod bottom longline ACDR
10 Template information and copyright This document was drafted using the ‘MSC Reporting Template v1.2’.
The Marine Stewardship Council’s ‘MSC Reporting Template v1.2’ and its content is copyright of “Marine Stewardship Council” - © “Marine Stewardship Council” 2020. All rights reserved.
Template version control
Version Date of publication Description of amendment
1.0 17 December 2018 Date of first release
1.1 29 March 2019 Minor document changes for usability
1.2 25 March 2020 Release alongside Fisheries Certification Process v2.2
A controlled document list of MSC program documents is available on the MSC website (msc.org).
Marine Stewardship Council Marine House 1 Snow Hill London EC1A 2DH United Kingdom
Phone: + 44 (0) 20 7246 8900 Fax: + 44 (0) 20 7246 8901 Email: [email protected]
MSC FCP 2.2 Template CRV2 Page 189 UCSL