SURVEILLANCE NO. 4 Report for the “ and Skagerrak herring” Norges Fiskarlag

Report No.: 2018-020, Rev. 2 Authors: Hans Lassen, Sandhya Chaudury Date: 10.12.2018 Certificate number: MSC-F-61406

Project name: Surveillance No. 4 DNV GL - Business Assurance Report title: Report for the “Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring” DNV GL Business Assurance Customer: Norges Fiskarlag, Pirsenteret, 7462 Trondheim Norway AS Contact person: Tor Bjørklund Larsen Veritasveien 1 Date of issue: 10.12.2018 1322 HØVIK, Norway Project No.: PRJC-504564-2014-MSC-NOR Tel: +47 67 57 99 00 Organisation unit: ZNONO418 http://www.dnvgl.com Report No.: 2018-020, Rev.2 Authors: Hans Lassen, Sandhya Chaudury Certificate No: MSC-F-61406

Objective: The objective of this report is the fourth surveillance audit of the “Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fisheries”.

Prepared by: Verified by:

Sandhya Chaudhury [Name] Team Leader and Chain of Custody responsible [title]

Hans Lassen Principle expert

Copyright © DNV GL 2014. All rights reserved. This publication or parts thereof may not be copied, reproduced or transmitted in any form, or by any means, whether digitally or otherwise without the prior written consent of DNV GL. DNV GL and the Horizon Graphic are trademarks of DNV GL AS. The content of this publication shall be kept confidential by the customer, unless otherwise agreed in writing. Reference to part of this publication which may lead to misinterpretation is prohibited. DNV GL Distribution: Keywords: ☒ Unrestricted distribution (internal and MSC Fisheries, Norway North Sea and Skagerrak external) herring, surveillance ☐ Unrestricted distribution within DNV GL ☐ Limited distribution within DNV GL after 3 years ☐ No distribution (confidential) ☐ Secret

Rev. No. Date Reason for Issue Prepared by Verified by 0 2018-11-08 First issue Hans Lassen, Sandhya Chaudhury 1 2018-11-28 Revised rationals Hans Lassen, Sandhya Chaudhury 2 2018-12-10 Harmonisation Hans Lassen, Sandhya Chaudhury

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 2

Table of contents

GLOSSARY ...... 4 Abbreviations & acronyms 4 Stock assessment reference points 4

1 GENERAL INFORMATION ...... 5

2 BACKGROUND ...... 7 2.1 Fishery overview and catch data 7 2.2 Stock Status - North Sea Autumn Spawning Herring 14 2.3 Impact on the 17 2.4 Changes to the management system 19 2.5 CoC considerations 19 2.6 Summary of Assessment Conditions 19

3 THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS ...... 20 3.1 Scope of the assessment 21 3.2 History of the assessments 21 3.3 Harmonisation 25 3.4 Inseparable or Practically Inseparable (IPI) stocks 26

4 RESULTS ...... 27 4.1 Principle Level Scores 27

5 CONCLUSION ...... 30

6 REFERENCES ...... 31

APPENDICES ...... 34 Appendix 1. Re-scoring evaluation table 34 Appendix 2. Condition 1: Harvest Control Rules 38 Appendix 3: Stakeholder submissions 41 Appendix 4. Surveillance audit information 45 Appendix 5. Additional detail on conditions/ actions/ results 45 Appendix 6. Revised Surveillance Program 45 Appendix 7. List of member vessels: North Sea herrings 46

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 3

GLOSSARY

Abbreviations & acronyms ACOM ICES Advisory Committee on Management CAB Conformity assessment body COC Chain of Custody CPUE Catch per unit of effort CR Certification Requirements DoF Directorate of Fisheries EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EU European Union HCR Harvest Control Rule ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea IMR Institute of Marine Research (Havforskninsinstituttet, Norway) MP Management plan MSC Marine Stewardship Council NSASH North Sea Autumn Spawning Herring NEAFC North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission NFA Norwegian Fishermen’s Association NFVOA Norwegian Fishing Vessel Owners Association UoA Unit of Assessment UoC Unit of Certification WBSS Western Baltic Spring Spawning Herring

Stock assessment reference points

B0 The (spawning) biomass expected if there had been no fishing (assuming recruitment as estimated through stock assessment).

Blim Spawning biomass limit reference point, sometimes used as a trigger within harvest control rules, or defined as the point below which recruitment is expected to be impaired or the stock dynamics are unknown

Bmsy Spawning Biomass at which the maximum sustainable yield is expected

(sometimes expressed as SBmsy)

Btarg Spawning biomass target reference point

Flim Exploitation rate limit reference point, often taken as Fmsy based on UNFSA

Fmsy Fishing mortality rate associated with the achieving maximum sustainable yield

Ftarg Fishing mortality target reference point MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 4

1 GENERAL INFORMATION

Table 1 General information Fishery name Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fishery Unit(s) of Assessment Species: Herring (Clupea harengus) (UoA) Stock: North Sea herring Geographical area: North Sea and Skagerrak; ICES Division IV and IIIa; within EEZ of Norway Harvest method: Purse-seine and Pelagic trawl Management: The stock is managed according to EU-Norway Agreement. This agreement is implemented in Norway under National management systems, advised by ICES. Client group: The fishery is certified by the client Norges Fiskarlag on behalf of all registered vessels in the Norwegian fleet fishing within the Unit of Certification.

Other eligible fishers: Not applicable Date certified 30 July 2014 Date of expiry 29 July 2019 Surveillance level and Surveillance level 1 (surveillance level 0 according to v. 1.3), type Off-site surveillance Date of surveillance 16-17 October 2018 audit Surveillance stage 1st Surveillance 2nd Surveillance 3rd Surveillance 4th Surveillance X Other (expedited etc) Surveillance team Lead assessor: Sandhya Chaudhury Assessor(s):Hans Lassen CAB name DNV GL Business Assurance CAB contact details Address Veritasveien 1 1322 HØVIK, Norway http://www.dnvgl.com Phone/Fax +4767579900/+4797762507 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Mrs. Sandhya Chaudhury Client contact details Address Norges Fiskarlag, Pirsenteret, 7462 Trondheim, Norway Phone/Fax +47 980 33 041 Email [email protected] / [email protected] Contact name(s) Tor Bjørklund Larsen

This report contains the findings of the fourth annual MSC Fisheries surveillance audit conducted for the Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fisheries during 16-17 October 2018. The purpose of this annual Surveillance Report is:

1. To establish and report on any material changes to the circumstances and practices affecting the original complying assessment of the fishery; 2. To monitor the progress made to comply with any Conditions raised and described in the Public Certification Report of 03.07.2014 and in the corresponding Action Plan drawn up by the client;

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 5

3. To monitor any actions taken in response to any Recommendations made in the Public Report; 4. To re-score any Performance Indicators (PI) where practice or circumstances have materially changed during the intervening year, focusing on those PIs that form the basis of Conditions raised.

The primary focus of this surveillance report is to review the changes occurred since the previous year. For a complete picture of the fishery, this report should be read in conjunction with the Public Certification Report available for download at www.msc.org.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 6

2 BACKGROUND

The fourth surveillance audit of the Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fishery is based on the Re-assessment Public Certification Report DNV GL dated 3 July 2014. The current certificate is valid until 29 July 2019. Information from the second certification period is available at: https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/norway-north-sea-and-skagerrak-herring/@@assessments The default assessment tree, set out in the MSC Certification Requirements, v 1.3, was used for the re-assessment. The fishery attained a score of 80 or more against each of the MSC Principles and did not score less than 60 against any of the individual MSC Criteria. The fishery did not score below 80 against on any of the scoring indicators; hence no conditions were set for the certification of the fishery. No recommendations were set for the certification of the fishery.

2.1 Fishery overview and catch data

The fishery continued as in previous years. The same gears purse seine and pelagic trawls were used. The grounds are unchanged, Figure 1. Catch data for 2016-2018 are presented in Table 2 TAC and Catch DataTable 2 and Table 3. Table 2 TAC and Catch Data TAC Year 2017 Amount 481,608 MT UoA share of TAC Year 2017 Amount 145,282 MT UoC share of TAC Year 2017 Amount 145,282 MT Total green weight catch Year (most recent) 2017 Amount 135,804 MT by UoC Year (second most 2016 Amount 154,171 MT recent)

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 7

Table 3 Norway North Sea and Skagerrak Herring Total green weight catch taken by the client group. Source: Directorate of Fisheries sales notes Fishing year TAC (Tonnes) UoC share Client Total green weight catch taken by the client group of the total share of TAC the total (Tonnes) TAC (Tonnes)

Danish Gill-nets Hooks and Seine Pelagic Other seine (not lines (not nets trawl specified) specified) (purse)

518,000 155,919 154,171 0 4 0 119,992 34,174 1 Mixed fishery (less than 50 % herring 769 - - 0 158 610 1 in each landing) Targeted fishery (more than 50 % 153,402 0 3 - 119,834 33,564 1 herring in each landing) Bycatch of: Cod - - - 27 20 - Haddock - - - 1 27 - Saithe - - - 195 112 - Tusk ------2016 Ling ------Monkfish - - - - 0 - Flatfishes - - - 1 - - Catfish - - - - 0 - Whiting - - - 1 13 - Hake ------Horse - - - 159 379 - mackerel Lumpsucker - - - - 8 -

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 8

Fishing year TAC (Tonnes) UoC share Client Total green weight catch taken by the client group of the total share of TAC the total (Tonnes) TAC (Tonnes)

Danish Gill-nets Hooks and Seine Pelagic Other seine (not lines (not nets trawl specified) specified) (purse)

Blue ling ------Picked ------dogfish Other sharks ------Sprat ------Sandeel ------Skates ------Norway pout - - - 24 72 - Blue Whiting - - - 116 664 1 Argentines ------Mackerel - - - 755 346 1 481,608 145,282 137,472 - 4 0 99,974 37,494 - Mixed fishery (less than 50 % herring 1,668 - 1 0 556 1,111 - in each landing) Targeted fishery (more than 50 % 135,804 - 3 - 99,418 36,383 - herring in each landing) Bycatch of: Cod 2017 Preliminary - 0 - 10 4 1 Haddock - 0 - 0 5 Saithe - 0 - 145 160 2 Tusk - 0 - - - - Ling - 0 - - - -

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 9

Fishing year TAC (Tonnes) UoC share Client Total green weight catch taken by the client group of the total share of TAC the total (Tonnes) TAC (Tonnes)

Danish Gill-nets Hooks and Seine Pelagic Other seine (not lines (not nets trawl specified) specified) (purse)

Monkfish - 0 - - - - Flatfishes 0 - - -

Catfish - 0 - - - - Whiting - 0 - 2 52 - Hake ------Horse - 8 278 - mackerel Lumpsucker - - - 0 3 - Blue ling ------Picked - - - - 0 - dogfish Other sharks ------Sprat - - - 8 - - Sandeel - - - - 1 - Skates ------Norway pout - - - - 76 - Blue Whiting - - - 32 168 - Argentines ------Mackerel - 0 - 492 341 - 491,355 179,391 155,300 0 3 - 109,932 45,365 -

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 10

Fishing year TAC (Tonnes) UoC share Client Total green weight catch taken by the client group of the total share of TAC the total (Tonnes) TAC (Tonnes)

Danish Gill-nets Hooks and Seine Pelagic Other seine (not lines (not nets trawl specified) specified) (purse)

2018 Including Mixed fishery (less than 50 % herring 3,584 - - - 2,241 1,343 - catch figures up to in each landing) 4th of October Targeted fishery (more than 50 % 151,716 0 3 - 107,691 44,022 - herring in each landing) Bycatch of: Cod - 0 - 0 1 - Haddock - 0 - 1 8 - Saithe - 0 - 29 32 - Tusk ------Ling - 0 - 0 0 - Monkfish - 0 - 0 - - Flatfishes - 0 - - 0 - Catfish ------Whiting - - - 0 12 - Hake ------Horse - - - 43 55 - mackerel Lumpsucker - - - 0 0 - Blue ling ------Picked - - - 0 0 - dogfish Other sharks - - - - 0 - Sprat ------

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 11

Fishing year TAC (Tonnes) UoC share Client Total green weight catch taken by the client group of the total share of TAC the total (Tonnes) TAC (Tonnes)

Danish Gill-nets Hooks and Seine Pelagic Other seine (not lines (not nets trawl specified) specified) (purse)

Sandeel ------Skates ------Norway pout - - - 6 306 - Blue Whiting - - - 49 516 - Argentines - - - - 128 - Mackerel - 0 - 689 502 -

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 12

Table 4 Herring catches (tons) in North Sea and Skagerrak. Norwegian vessels for 2017 and by ICES Subdivisions. Source: Fiskeridirektoratet 2017 IIIa IVa IVb Total Vessel size Purse seine Trawl Purse seine Trawl Purse seine Trawl < 11 m 0.4 0.5 250.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 251.5 11-14,99 m 57.2 0.0 346.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 403.7 15-20,99 m 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21-27,99 m 92.2 0.0 2,759.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,851.5 28+ m 0.0 3,187.9 96,135.6 32,550.9 417.3 1,754.4 134,046.0 Unknown 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Total 149.9 3,188.5 99,491.8 32,551.0 417.3 1,754.4 137,552.8 Total 3,338.4 134,214.5

Figure 1 Norwegian effort in 2017 (vessels > 15 m) targeting pelagic species (Blue is effort targeting North Sea and IIIa Herring. Source Fiskeridirektoratet

The fishery almost exclusively takes place in the North Sea (IVa) about 96% of the catch in 2017 is from this area, Table 4. The catch in the North Sea (IVa, IVb) is almost exclusive North Sea Autumn Spawning herring, while the catch in Skagerrak takes a significant proportion of Western Baltic Spring Spawning herring, Table 5.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 13

Table 5 Herring catches (all countries) in North Sea (4) and Skagerrak (IIIa) by stock for 2017: Source ICES (2018a and 2018b) NSASH (t) WBSSH (t) WBSSH %of WBSSH % total herring of total catch WBSSH ICES 22-24 0 26,513 57.2 Division III a 7,600 19,159 71.6 41.4 Subarea 4 491,100 632 0.1 1.3 Total 498,700 46,360 100.0

2.2 Stock Status - North Sea Autumn Spawning Herring

The Norwegian herring fishery in ICES Divisions IVa and IIIa affects two stocks a) the autumn spawning North Sea herring (Herring in 4 and 7.d) and the Western Baltic Spring Spawning herring (ICES 20-24). The North Sea herring dominates the Norwegian catches. In Division IIIa (Skagerrak) the Norwegian herring catch is primarily from the Western Baltic Spring Spawning Herring. The Western Baltic Spring Spawning herring (WBSSH) is scored as by-catch under 2.1 (retained catch).

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 14

North Sea Autumn Spawning Herring

Figure 2 North Sea Autumn Spawning Herring. Stock status and stock trends. Source: ICES (2018f) Figure 1 and Table 1

The stock was benchmarked in 2018 (ICES, 2018c). The time-varying natural mortality was updated, using the outputs from the North Sea multispecies assessment model, and a method implemented to make it consistent in future updates. New survey indices were added, and assessment methodology updated. These modifications resulted in more precise stock estimates and reduced assessment bias. The stock trend did not change substantially compared to the 2017 assessment. However, the change in natural mortality resulted in a rescaling of the SSB and F time-series to levels similar to the 2015 assessment. The reference points were updated accordingly. Spawning-stock biomass (SSB) fluctuated between 1.5 and 2.6 million tonnes between 1998 and 2017, and in all these years it was above MSY Btrigger. Fishing mortality (F) has been below FMSY since 1996. Even though the size of the stock has been large, the recruitment (R) has been relatively low since 2002, with the two lowest year classes falling within the recent four of the last 30 years.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 15

Fishing pressure on the stock is below FMSY, Fpa and Flim; and spawning stock size is above MSY Btrigger, Bpa, and Blim. Herring fisheries in this area were managed by a joint EU–Norway Management Strategy (EU– Norway, 2017). However, the biological productivity of the stock varies, and ICES changed the reference points in 2018, ICES (2018c), Table 6. Norway and the European Union have not yet agreed on a specific management strategy and communicated this to ICES. Under these circumstances ICES gives advice based on the MSY approach; the EU–Norway Management Strategy is thus not used as basis of the advice for this shared stock. Table 6 Reference points for North Sea Autumn Spawning herring. Source: ICES (2018a) Framework Reference Value Technical basis point

5th percentile of BFMSY MSY Btrigger 1,400,000 t MSY Stochastic simulations with a segmented regression approach FMSY 0.26 and Ricker stock–recruitment curve from the short time-series (2002–2016). Breakpoint in the segmented regression of the stock– Blim 800,000 t recruitment time-series (1947–2016). Bpa = Blim × exp(1.645 × σ) with σ ≈ 0.10, based on the Bpa 900,000 t Precautionary average CV from the terminal assessment year. FP50% leading to 50% probability of SSB > Blim with a Approach Flim 0.34 segmented regression and Ricker stock–recruitment curve (2002–2016). Fpa = Flim × exp(−1.645 × σ) with σ ≈ 0.08, based on Fpa 0.30 the average CV from the terminal assessment year.

2.2.1 Stock Management

The harvest control rules for North Sea herring fisheries are set out in the Long- Term Management Strategy agreed between the EU and Norway on 1st January 2015. These harvest control rules require, inter alia, that the TAC shall be calculated using a value of F of no more than 0.26 (or a lower value if the stock is under 1.5Mt). The inter-annual variation of TAC is constrained by these harvest control rules to “…no more than 15% greater or 15% less than the TAC of the preceding year.”

At the meeting of the EU and Norway delegations in December 2017 the parties agreed to follow the ICES advice pertaining at that time (which was that Fmsy was 0.33 rather than the previous estimate of 0.26, the Fmsy was in June 2018 readjusted to 0.26 the former value, see Table 6). The meeting concluded that “…it would be appropriate to follow the ICES MSY advice rather than the management strategy. The TAC of 600,588t represents a 25% increase compared to 2017.” The TAC set for 2018 therefore exceeds the inter-annual constraints set out in the harvest control rules. It will, nevertheless, control the exploitation of North Sea herring during 2018.

It is noted that: a) At the time when the 2018 TAC was agreed, ICES had advised that an F value of 0.33 would be consistent with MSY. b) The ICES advice for the North Sea herring fishery in 2019 would indicate a TAC of 311,572t. Attaining this level of exploitation would require a further breach of the harvest control rules presently in place (because the TAC would need to fall by nearly 50% between 2018-19). c) Inter-annual TAC variations have exceeded the levels required by the harvest control rules for this fishery before, resulting in a condition of certification that was raised in 2011 and closed in 2014.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 16

It is further noted that in June 2018, Norway and the EU made a formal request to ICES to provide advice on proposals for revised harvest control rules for the fishery that would allow the TAC to be based on the current ICES estimate of Ftarget and which would allow for a larger inter-annual variation. The harvest control rules in place for the fishery might therefore change. ICES have not yet provided a response to this request.

2.3 Impact on the ecosystem

The Western Baltic Spring-Spawning Herring constitutes a significant by-catch and is scored under 2.1 (Retained catch). By-catches of other species in the fishery are documented in Table 3.

2.3.1 Western Baltic Spring Spawning Herring

WBSSH catches remained small in the North Sea (632 t in 2017 or ~1.3 % of the Norwegian herring catch in the North Sea and Skagerrak, Table 5. In Skagerrak the total Norwegian catch was around 3.2 kt (purse seine and trawl combined) and around 70% of this catch was from the WBSSH stock, ref. Table 4 and Table 5.The total fishery on the WBSSH stock was 46,360t in 2017- ref. Table 5. In the 2014 re-assessment WBSS herring was scored under PI 2.1 and not classified as a ‘main’ species. This classification has not changed since the proportion that the WBSS herring constitutes of the total catch is unchanged and below 2% of the Norwegian catch. The biomass reference points were updated in 2018 (Blim from 90 000 to 120 000 tonnes, MSY Btrigger from 110 000 to 150 000 tonnes, ICES, 2018b)- ref. Table 6 combined with the continued decline in recruitment have changed the perception of the stock dynamics. Based on the 2018 assessment SSB has been below Blim since 2006. The basis for changing the reference points is the extension of the time-series where consistently low recruitment at low SSB is observed since 2006. Fishing mortality (F) has been relatively constant slightly above FMSY since 2010. Recruitment has been low since the mid-2000s and has been declining in recent years, with the lowest values of the time-series in 2016 and 2017. An EU Multiannual Plan (MAP; EU, 2016) was established in 2016 and applies to herring in subdivisions 22–24, which is part of the distribution area of the WBSS stock. The MAP is in the process of being updated (EC, 2018), the main change expected is the reference to latest reference points rather than to a fixed list. This plan is not adopted by Norway.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 17

Western Bal�c Sea Spring Spawning Herring

Figure 3 Western Baltic Spring Spawning Herring. Stock status and stock trends. Source: ICES (2018g) Figure 1 and Table 1

Table 7 Western Baltic Spring Spawning Herring. Reference points, values and their technical basis. Source: ICES (2018b) Framework Reference Value Technical basis point

Bpa equal to the upper 95% confidence limit of Blim. MSY MSY Btrigger 150,000 t Approach Stochastic simulations (Eqsim) with Beverton-Holt, FMSY 0.31 Ricker, and segmented regression stock–recruitment curve from the full time-series (1991–2016). Chosen as the mean of the two lowest SSB (1998, Precautionary Blim 120,000 t 1999) values with above average recruitment. Approach Upper 95% confidence limit of Blim with σ≈0.136, using Bpa 150,000 t the CV from the final-year SSB estimate in the assessment. FP50% leading to 50% probability of SSB>Blim under Flim 0.45 stochastic simulations with Beverton-Holt, Ricker, and segmented stock–recruitment from the full time-series (1991–2016). Fpa = Flim × exp(-1.645 × σ) with σ ≈0.145, based on Fpa 0.35 the CV from the terminal assessment year.

The WBSS herring is an IPI species for this fishery. The WBSS herring catch is around 2,550 t in 2017 which is 1.8% of the total Norwegian catch (137,552 t) see Table 4 and Table 5. The fishery remains within the 2% IPI constraint.

The status of the fishery has changed, and PI 2.1.1 is rescored for WBSSH for both gears combined.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 18

The fisheries have continued as in previous years without any major changes. Fishing grounds were unchanged- see Figure 1.

By-catches in the fishery are documented in Table 3 and show only small effects as assessed at the 2014 re-assessment. There are no reports of catch of ETP species. The gears are unchanged and without impact on bottom habitats.

With the exception of the status of the Western Baltic Spring Spawning Herring there are no changes.

2.4 Changes to the management system

The fisheries management system remained as in previous years, as verified by the information collected at the on-site visit. MCS activities have continued at an unchanged level. There was no indication of systematic non- compliance. Less than 5% of the inspections found significant offences. There are no changes to the management system.

2.5 CoC considerations

The status, with regard to the Chain of Custody has remained unchanged since the last surveillance audit in 2017.

There are no changes in landing points from earlier years and the catch that is landed by foreign vessels cannot be mixed with certified catch based on the traceability system described in the public certification report.

The systems of tracking and tracing in the fishery are still considered sufficient to make sure all fish and fish products identified and sold as certified by the fishery originate from the certified fishery.

Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring products landed by Norwegian vessels, recorded by the Directorate of Fisheries and the sales organization Norges Sildesalgslag, and sold through or by approval from the sales organization Norges Sildesalgslag are eligible to enter further Chain of Custody. The scope of the MSC Fishery certification is up to the point of landing and Chain of Custody commences from the point of landing.

2.6 Summary of Assessment Conditions

There were no conditions for the re-assessment of this fishery in July 2014 and none during surveillance audits 1 to 3. A new condition has been raised at this, 4th surveillance audit:

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 19

Table 8 Condition Performance Indicator (PI) Status PI original PI revised score number score at this audit

1 1.2.2: Evidence should be New at this 80 70 provided to demonstrate that the audit harvest control tools in place are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules.

3 THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The fourth surveillance assessment was an on-site audit in accordance with the surveillance program and was done as a joint effort with the following:

1. Spring spawning herrings & Blue whiting: surveillance 4 2. Spring spawning herrings: Re- assessment 3. North Sea and Skagerrak herrings: surveillance 4 4. North Sea herrings: Re- assessment 5. North East Arctic cod: Surveillance 3 6. North East Arctic haddock: Surveillance 3

The audit was announced on the MSC website and by stakeholder notification of the 6th September 2018 and the client submitted required information in early October 2018. The on-site visit took place on the 16th & 17th October 2018 in Bergen and , Norway. Meeting participants are listed in Table 9

Table 9 Meetings and Persons involved with the surveillance audit Meeting Topics Name and organisation 16 October 2018 1. Surveillance no 3: NEA cod & haddock Fiskeridirektoratet 9:00-15:00 (including condition 1 & 2 from NEA Cod Modulf Overvik Directorate of PCR dt. 01.10.2015) IMR Fisheries, Bergen 2. Surveillance no 4: Spring spawning Erling K. Stenevik herrings & Blue whiting; North Sea and Cecilie Kvamme Skagerrak herrings Åge Høines 3. Re-assessment: Spring spawning Tom Williams herrings & North Sea and Skagerrak Norges Sildesalgslag – client herrings representative

Tor B Larsen DNV GL Hans Lassen Mrs. Sandhya Chaudhury 17 October 2018 1. Surveillance no 3: NEA cod & haddock Ministry for Trade and Fisheries 9:30-11:30 (including condition 1 & 2 from NEA Cod Geir Ervik Ministry of Trade and PCR dt. 01.10.2015) Sara Lier Fagerbakke fisheries, Oslo 2. Surveillance no 4: Spring spawning Norges Sildesalgslag – client herrings & Blue whiting; North Sea and representative Skagerrak herrings Tor B Larsen 3. Re-assessment: Spring spawning DNV GL herrings & North Sea and Skagerrak Hans Lassen herrings Mrs. Sandhya Chaudhury

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 20

17 October 2018 1. Surveillance no 3: NEA cod & haddock Norges Sildesalgslag – client 13:00- 16:00 (including condition 1 & 2 from NEA Cod representative PCR dt. 01.10.2015) Tor B Larsen 2. Surveillance no 4: Spring spawning Roald Oen, Norges Sildesalgslag herrings & Blue whiting; North Sea and Charles Aas, Norges Råfisklag Skagerrak herrings DNV GL 3. Re-assessment: Spring spawning Hans Lassen herrings & North Sea and Skagerrak Mrs. Sandhya Chaudhury herrings

There were no inputs from other stakeholders.

PI 1.2.2 & 2.1.1 was re-scored - ref. Appendix 1. Re-scoring evaluation table.

3.1 Scope of the assessment

The MSC Fisheries CR and guidance v2 define the Unit of Certification (UoC) (i.e., the unit entitled to receive an MSC certificate) as follows: “The target stock or stocks (= biologically distinct unit/s) combined with the fishing method/gear and practice (including vessel type/s) pursuing that stock and any fleets, groups of vessels, or individual vessels of other fishing operators.” The fisheries covered by this certification are defined as described in Table 10 below.

Table 10 UoC Fishery name: Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fisheries Species: Herring (Clupea harengus) Stock: North Sea herring Geographical area: North Sea and Skagerrak; ICES Division IV and IIIa; within EEZ of Norway Harvest method: Purse-seine and Pelagic trawl Unit of Management: The stock is managed according to EU Norway certification Agreement. This agreement is implemented in Norway under National management systems, advised by ICES. Client group: The fishery is certified by the client Norges Fiskarlag on behalf of all the registered vessels in the Norwegian fleet fishing within the Unit of Certification. Other eligible Not applicable. fishers:

3.2 History of the assessments 3.2.1 Summary of the original assessment

The intent of the Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fishery to become MSC certified was announced on 16 October 2007, and the fishery received its initial certification on 30 April 2009. Four annual audits were completed during the initial certification period. The re-assessment of the Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fishery was announced on 2nd April 2013, and the continued certification of the fishery was confirmed through the release of the Re-assessment Public Certification Report dt. 3rd July 2014. The current certificate validity end date is 29th July 2019. The scope of MSC Fisheries certification is up to the point of landing and chain of custody commences from point of landing.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 21

Information from the initial certification, second certification and previous surveillance audits is available at: https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/norway-north-sea-and-skagerrak- herring/@@assessments

The default assessment tree, set out in the MSC Certification Requirements, version 1.3, was used for the re-assessment. The fishery attained a score of 80 or more against each of the MSC Principles and did not score less than 60 against any of the individual MSC Criteria. In the initial certification, the scores of the three Principles are summarized.

Table 11 Principle scores – Original assessment: Principle Purse seine Pelagic Trawl Principle 1 – Target Species 96.3 Principle 2 – Ecosystem 94.3 94.7 Principle 3 – Management System 96.1

The fishery did not achieve a score of below 80 against any scoring indicators; hence no conditions were set for the certification of the fishery. No recommendations were set for the certification of the fishery.

3.2.2 First annual surveillance – 2015

The first surveillance audit was performed as an off-site review of new information and conducted according to MSC Certification Requirements, version 1.3. The default assessment tree, set out in the MSC Certification Requirements v1.3 was used as basis for this surveillance.

The surveillance was announced on the MSC website 26 March 2015 followed by a supporting notice to stakeholders issued by MSC on the same date. Direct email notification was also sent to the stakeholders that had previously been identified for this fishery, inviting interested parties to The surveillance audit for this fishery was conducted on 20-21 May 2015. The off-site surveillance audit was completed by John Nichols (principle expert, team leader) and Guro Meldre Pedersen (CoC responsible, project manager), both members of the assessment team for the re-assessment of the fishery. Changes to roles in the assessment team were announced on the MSC website and listed stakeholders informed by direct mail notification.

The assessment team gathered input from various stakeholders through remote mechanisms, incl. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, Directorate of Fisheries and the client. The Institute of Marine Research was approached but not involved. Details on information submitted by stakeholders in the assessment process are included as basis for this report.

The fishery remains in conformance with the scope criteria relating to unilateral exemption and destructive fishing practices (Certification Requirements v1.3 section 27.4.4). The fishery cannot be considered as an enhanced fishery as it does not meet the enhanced fisheries criteria required under the MSC CR 27.4.12.

There were no changes to scoring of performance indicators at the first surveillance audit.

3.2.3 Second annual surveillance – 2016

The second surveillance audit was performed as an on-site audit and conducted according to MSC Certification Requirements, version 1.3. The default assessment tree, set out in the MSC Certification Requirements v1.3 was used as basis for this surveillance. The surveillance was announced on the MSC website 28 June 2016 followed by a supporting notice to stakeholders issued by MSC on the same date. Direct email notification was also sent to the stakeholders that had previously been identified for this fishery, inviting interested parties to contact the audit team.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 22

The surveillance took place on-site 5-6 September 2016 in Oslo and Bergen. The team met with representatives of the Client, Norwegian Ministry for Trade, Industry and Fisheries, the Norwegian Directorate for fisheries and the Institute for Marine Research (IMR). At all these meetings it was reported that the fishery has developed as in previous years, that there were no changes in the management, control and enforcement and that the fleet has remained without significant changes.

The stock status also has remained as in previous years, see section 2.1 above. The Client and the Directorate provided fisheries detailed fishery statistics documenting this status. The statistics included also by-catch information.

3.2.4 Third annual surveillance – 2017

The third surveillance audit was performed as an offsite audit and conducted according to MSC Certification Requirements, version 2.0. The default assessment tree, set out in the MSC Certification Requirements v1.3 was used as basis for this surveillance. The surveillance was announced on the MSC website 20 June 2017 followed by a supporting notice to stakeholders issued by MSC on the same date. Direct email notification was also sent to the stakeholders that had previously been identified for this fishery, inviting interested parties to contact the audit team.

The client submitted the Remote audit checklist on 11th august 2017 with accompanying information (Appendix 1). The audit team had a verifying telephone conference with the client representatives. At this meeting, it was confirmed that the fishery has developed as in previous years, that there were no changes in the management, control and enforcement and that the fleet changes are reflected in the updated vessel list (Appendix 2).

The stock status has remained as in previous years, ICES (2017a) and ICES (2017b). The client provided detailed fisheries statistics documenting this status. The statistics included also by-catch information. The fishery has no conditions and the surveillance plan remains the same.

3.2.5 Fourth annual surveillance – 2018

The fourth surveillance audit was performed as an on-site audit and conducted according to MSC Certification Requirements, version 1.3. The default assessment tree, set out in the MSC Certification Requirements v1.3 was used as basis for this surveillance. The surveillance was announced on the MSC website on 6th September 2018 followed by a supporting notice to stakeholders issued by MSC on the same date. Direct email notification was also sent to the stakeholders that had previously been identified for this fishery, inviting interested parties to contact the audit team. The surveillance took place on-site on 16th October 2018 in Bergen and on 17th October 2018 in Oslo. The team met with representatives of the Client, Norwegian Ministry for Trade, Industry and Fisheries, the Norwegian Directorate for fisheries and the Institute for Marine Research (IMR). See Table 9 for details.

3.2.5.1 Revision of HCR and setting TACs 2018-19

The breach of the TAC inter-annual constraint laid down in the HCR has been assessed as a failure of PI 1.2.2c at the SG80 level and a new condition 1 has been established. This condition requires the establishment of a revised HCR based on ICES evaluation and is found in Appendix 1 (Rescoring).

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 23

3.2.5.2 Western Baltic Spring-spawning herring (WBSSH)

The status of the WBSSH has deteriorated significantly and fisheries which have this stock as their main target have been suspended (MSC.org, see section on Harmonisation). Data do not allow separation of the two gears in this fishery with respect to catch of WBSSH herring and the two gears are scored together, using combined data.

As noted above, the fishery is operating on a variation allowing an exemption to the Certification Requirements regarding IPI stocks for the WBSSH granted by MSC 18 July 2013. However, this variation is granted based on the following three factors presented by the CAB:

• That western Baltic spring spawning herring (WBSSH) can be defined as IPI catches, as they are practically inseparable from the target stock of North Sea herring during normal fishing operations, they comprise less than 15% of the overall catch, they are not certified separately, and they are not ETP species.

• Post hoc estimation of the proportions of each stock component in the catches is made by biological sampling, which indicates that WBSSH catches are a very small (<1.5% - i.e 1103 t) percentage of the total Norwegian catch of North Sea herring (estimated at 75,591 t – based on a three-year average 2010–12 on data from “The Wonderful Table” of the ICES Herring Assessment Working Group 2013). The very small catches from this fishery means that they do not negatively impact the overall stock. The current SSB for this stock is at 87,936 t and the agreed TAC has not been exceeded since 2010.

• The status of the WBSSH stock remains stable at or about Blim and although F is higher than Fmsy, it has been declining steadily over the past 5-6 years. Although, there is no formally agreed management plan, the ICES precautionary advice has been adopted as the basis for the EU–Norway management of this fish stock.

The first two bullet points remain valid while the third with the downgrading of the status of the WBSSH stock is questionable. It was therefore decided to review the scoring under 2.1.1 (retained species) for the WBSSH, see Appendix 1 for details.

PI 2.1.1a was rescored at SG80, i.e. it was not assumed that “There is a high degree of certainty that retained species are within biologically based limits and fluctuating around their target reference points.”. PI 2.1.1b requires “There are target reference points defined for the stock” and this remain unchanged, PI 2.1.1c only refers to ‘main’ species. PI 2.1.1.d refers to stocks for which status is poorly known. This is not the case for the WBSSH stock. And these two Scoring issues are not scored.

3.2.5.3 Summary

In summary the score for PI 1.2.2 was changed to 70 from 80 while the score for PI 2.1.1 was maintained at 90. The revised score Table is therefore as follows- in Table 12

Table 12 Original Assessment (2014) Surveillance audit 4 (2018)

Purse seine Pelagic Trawls Purse seine Pelagic Trawls

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 24

Principle 1 96.3 95.0

Principle 2 94.3 94.7 94.3 94.7

Principle 3 96.1 96.1

Hence, the fishery remains certified.

3.3 Harmonisation 3.3.1 North Sea Herring fisheries

The following fisheries are certified for the North Sea autumn spawning herring: Table 13 Harmonisation fisheries Nr Fishery Name Status Gear CAB

1 Norway North Sea and Certified Purse-seine and Pelagic DNV GL Skagerrak herring 30.04.2009 trawl

2. DPPO and DFPO North Sea Certified Surrounding Nets - With Control Union herring 25.06.2009 purse lines (purse Pesca Ltd. seines), Trawls - Midwater trawls

3 SPFPO Swedish North Sea Certified Surrounding Nets - With Lloyds herring 16.06.2018 purse lines (purse seines) Register

4. FROM Nord North Sea and Certified Trawls - Midwater trawls Control Union Eastern Channel pelagic trawl 22.04.2015 Pesca Ltd. herring

5. Northern Ireland Pelagic Certified Trawls - Midwater trawls Lloyds Sustainability Group(NIPSG) 05.12.2016 Register Irish Sea- & North Sea herring

6. PFA & SPSG North Sea Herring Certified Trawls - Midwater trawls Lloyds 17.04.2017 Register

The harmonisation done by the PFA & SPSG North Sea herring fisheries, certified in April 2017, shows that the scoring of these fisheries is similar across Principle 2 and 3 and for the majority of Principle 1. ICES advice published 31 May 2018 triggered harmonisation activities between the 3 CAB’s with harmonisation activities conducted by emails and a Skype meeting on 12th September 2018.

The harmonisation discussions concluded with a condition to be raised for PI 1.2.2 (Appendix 2) as the 2018 TAC for the North Sea Autumn Spawning herring was not set in accordance with the HCR in the long- term management plan for this fishery. The 25% increase in the set TAC for 2018 was in excess of the 15% inter-annual TAC’s set in the HCRs. 3.3.2 Western Baltic Spring Spawning Herring fisheries

There are presently two MSC-certified fisheries for Western Baltic Spring Spawning herring:

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 25

• Western Baltic Spring spawning herring Erzeugergemeinschaft der Nord– und Ostseefischer GmbH (CAB: Lloyld’s Register). Suspended 21 September 2018

• DFPO, DPPO and SPFPO Skagerrak, and Western Baltic Herring Fishery (CAB: MRAG). Suspended 21 September 2018. Another fishery for Western Baltic Spring Spawning herring is presently under assessment:

Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Western Baltic spring spawning herring These fisheries however, have the WBSS herring as target species and score these under PI 1 while the Norwegian fishery has this stock as by-catch scored under 2.1 (retained catch).

Harmonisation activities have been carried out between MRAG Americas and Lloyld’s Register. These activities have included: • Technical discussions of perception of stock status to ensure that both CABs arrive at a harmonised outcome. • Coordinated audit planning to ensure that timescales for responding to the changes in perceived stock status will ensure a harmonised response with respect to MSC-certified products from the fishery entering chains of custody. These discussions have ensured that the conclusions and actions of the two CABs in respect of the certified fisheries are harmonised. With regard to the Germany Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Western Baltic spring spawning herring fishery that is under assessment, the Lloyld’s Register Team Leader and Principle 1 expert for the Western Baltic Spring Spawning herring Erzeugergemeinschaft der Nord– und Ostseefischer GmbH are also the Team Leader and Principle 1 expert for the assessment. The team has discussed the implications of the change in perception resulting from the stock assessment with the client.

3.4 Inseparable or Practically Inseparable (IPI) stocks

During the re-assessment process of the Norway North Sea and Skagerrak herring fishery, Western Baltic spring spawning herring (WBSSH) was identified as a potential IPI stock. A Variation allowing an exemption to the Certification Requirements regarding IPI stocks for the WBSSH was granted by MSC on 18th July 2013.

As noted in section 2.3.1 the share of the WBSS herring in the Norwegian North Sea/Skagerrak herring fishery remained below 2% in 2017.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 26

4 RESULTS

The Assessment team concluded that

• The fishery remained within the MSC scope and that there were no changes with respect to enhancement (no occurring).

• The state of the North Sea Autumn spawning herring stock remained unchanged • The state of the Western Baltic Spring Spawning stock has changed, and PI 2.1 is rescored with the result that the score remained unchanged at 90.

• There are no changes with respect to stock assessment data and assessment methodology, on habitats and on ecosystem functioning

• There are no changes in the management of the fishery • MCS and compliance is unchanged • Personnel and management organisation is unchanged

PI 1.2.2 has been re-scored at this 4th surveillance audit with a score of 70 – Appendix 1 and a harmonised condition of certification has been raised- Appendix 2.

4.1 Principle Level Scores

The final principle scores after the re-scoring at this expedited audit of Principle 1 is given in Table 14

Table 14 Principle Level Scores

Principle 1 – Target Principle 2 – Principle 3 – Stock Gear Species Ecosystem Management System

Purse siene 95.0 (previously 96.3) 94.3 96.1 Herring Pelagic trawl 95.0 (previously 96.3) 94.7 96.1

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 27

4.1.1 Summary of Performance Indicator Level Scores

NORTH SEA & SKAGERRAK HERRING FISHERY- PURSE SEINE Prin- Wt Component Wt PI Performance Indicator (PI) Wt Weight in ciple (L1) (L2) No. (L3) Principle Score Either Or One 1 Outcome 0,5 1.1.1 Stock status 0,5 0,25 0,333 0,1667 100 1.1.2 Reference points 0,5 0,25 0,333 0,1667 100 1.1.3 Stock rebuilding 0,333 0,1667 Management 0,5 Harvest strategy 0,25 1.2.1 0,125 100 1.2.2 Harvest control rules & 0,25 tools 0,125 70 1.2.3 Information & monitoring 0,25 0,125 90 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 0,25 0,125 100 Two 1 Retained 0,2 2.1.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 90 species 2.1.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 90 2.1.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 85 Bycatch 0,2 2.2.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 100 species 2.2.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 100 2.2.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 95 ETP species 0,2 2.3.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 100 2.3.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 95 2.3.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 85 Habitats 0,2 2.4.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 95 2.4.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 100 2.4.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 85 Ecosystem 0,2 2.5.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 95 2.5.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 100 2.5.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 100 Three 1 Governance Legal & customary 0,25 and policy 0,5 3.1.1 framework 0,125 85 Consultation, roles & 0,25 3.1.2 responsibilities 0,125 100 Long term objectives 0,25 3.1.3 0,125 100 Incentives for sustainable 0,25 3.1.4 fishing 0,125 100 Fishery 0,5 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 0,2 0,1 90 specific 3.2.2 Decision making processes 0,2 management 0,1 90 3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement 0,2 system 0,1 100 Research plan 0,2 3.2.4 0,1 100 Management performance 0,2 3.2.5 evaluation 0,1 100

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 28

NORTH SEA & SKAGERRAK HERRING FISHERY- PELAGIC TRAWL Prin- Wt Component Wt PI Performance Indicator (PI) Wt Weight in ciple (L1) (L2) No. (L3) Principle Score Either Or One 1 Outcome 0,5 1.1.1 Stock status 0,5 0,25 0,333 0,1667 100 1.1.2 Reference points 0,5 0,25 0,333 0,1667 100 1.1.3 Stock rebuilding 0,333 0,1667 Management 0,5 Harvest strategy 0,25 1.2.1 0,125 100 1.2.2 Harvest control rules & 0,25 tools 0,125 70 1.2.3 Information & monitoring 0,25 0,125 90 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 0,25 0,125 100 Two 1 Retained 0,2 2.1.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 90 species 2.1.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 90 2.1.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 85 Bycatch 0,2 2.2.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 100 species 2.2.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 100 2.2.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 95 ETP species 0,2 2.3.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 100 2.3.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 95 2.3.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 85 Habitats 0,2 2.4.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 95 2.4.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 100 2.4.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 90 Ecosystem 0,2 2.5.1 Outcome 0,333 0,0667 95 2.5.2 Management 0,333 0,0667 100 2.5.3 Information 0,333 0,0667 100 Three 1 Governance Legal & customary 0,25 and policy 0,5 3.1.1 framework 0,125 85 Consultation, roles & 0,25 3.1.2 responsibilities 0,125 100 Long term objectives 0,25 3.1.3 0,125 100 Incentives for sustainable 0,25 3.1.4 fishing 0,125 100 Fishery 0,5 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 0,2 0,1 90 specific 3.2.2 Decision making processes 0,2 management 0,1 90 3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement 0,2 system 0,1 100 Research plan 0,2 3.2.4 0,1 100 Management performance 0,2 3.2.5 evaluation 0,1 100

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 29

5 CONCLUSION

The fishery continues to be within the scope of the MSC fisheries standard (MSC FCR v2.0 § 7.4) according to the following determinations (MSC FCR v2.0 § 7.4): • The target species is a fish and the fishery does not use poisons or explosives; • The fishery is not conducted under a controversial unilateral exemption to an international agreement; • The client or client group does not include an entity that has been successfully prosecuted for a forced labour violation in the last 2 years; • The fishery has mechanisms for resolving disputes and disputes do not overwhelm the fishery; • The fishery is not enhanced or based on an introduced species.

There was no condition on this fishery. The surveillance team did not identify issues that would require that additional conditions would be set for the Norway North Sea & Skagerrak herring fishery.

Table 15 Conclusion Fishery Status of Comment certification Norway North Certified The assessment team concludes that the MSC Certificate for the Norway Sea & Skagerrak North Sea & Skagerrak herring fishery shall remain active. herring fishery

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 30

6 REFERENCES

1. EU–Norway. 2013. Report from the Working Group on Management Measures for Herring in ICES Division IIIa (Skagerrak and Kattegat). Bergen, 19–20 June 2013. 10 pp. EU– Norway. 2015. Agreed record of fisheries consultations between Norway and the European Union for 2016, Bergen, 4 December 2015. 32 pp. Accessed 31 May 2018 at https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/d1ae7bd33edc41faa40bafcc64efa4cf/norge-eu- nordsjoen-4-des-2015.pdf.

2. EU–Norway. 2016. Agreed record of fisheries consultations between Norway and the European Union for 2017, Bergen, 2 December 2016. 31 pp. Accessed 31 May 2018 at https://www.pelagic-ac.org/media/pdf/20161202%20%20agreed%20records%20EU- Norway%20for%202017%20(signed).pdf. EU–Norway. 2017. Agreed record of fisheries consultations between Norway and the European Union for 2018, Bergen, 1 December 2017. 34 pp. Accessed 6 April 2018 at https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/081ac5699f1748deb255621d5d32f42d/nordsjo en.pdf.

3. ICES. 2017. Herring (Clupea harengus) in Subarea 4 and divisions 3.a and 7.d, autumn spawners (North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat, eastern English Channel). http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2017/2017/her.27.3a47d.pdf .

4. ICES. 2018. Herring (Clupea harengus) in Subarea 4 and divisions 3.a and 7.d, autumn spawners (North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat, eastern English Channel). http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Forms/DispForm.aspx?ID=34279.

5. Norwegian Delegation, and European Union Delegation. 2018. Agreed Record of Consultations on Long-Term Management Strategies Between Norway and the European Union. London, 7th June 2018. Pages 1–5. London. https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/2018--norway-06-2018.pdf.

6. Norwegian Government, and European Union Delegation. 2017. Agreed Record of Fisheries Consultations between Norway and the European Union for 2018. Bergen, 1 December 2017. Pages 1–34. https://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/sites/fisheries/files/2018-agreed-record- eu-norway-north-sea-12-2017.pdf.

7. ICES. 2003. Report of the Working Group on Fish Ecology (WGFE), 3–7 March 2003, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, .

8. ICES CM 2003/G:04. 113 pp. ICES. 2015a. EU and Norway request to evaluate the proposed Long-Term Management Strategy for herring (Clupea harengus) in the North Sea and the Division IIIa herring TAC-setting procedure. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2015. ICES Advice 2015, Book 9, Section 9.2.3.2. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/Special_Requests/EUNo rway_LTMS_for_NS_%20herring.pdf.

9. ICES. 2015b. Second Interim Report of the Working Group on Maritime Systems (WGMARS), 2–5 December 2014, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2014/SSGSUE:08. 35 pp.

10. ICES. 2016. Advice basis. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2016. ICES Advice 2016, Book 1, Section 1.2.

11. ICES. 2018a. Herring (Clupea harengus) in subdivisions 20–24, spring spawners (Skagerrak, Kattegat, and western Baltic). In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2018. ICES Advice 2018, her.27.20-24.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 31

12. ICES. 2018b. Stock Annex: Herring (Clupea harengus) in Subarea 4 and divisions IIIa and 7.d, autumn spawners (North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat, eastern English Channel) (her- 47d3). Produced by the Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62°N (HAWG). 65 pp. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Stock%20Annexes/2018/her.27.3a4 7d_SA.pdf.

13. ICES. 2018c. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Pelagic Stocks (WKPELA), 12–16 February 2018, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2018/ACOM:32. 297 pp.

14. ICES. 2018d. Interim Report of the Working Group on Multispecies Assessment Methods (WGSAM), 16–20 October 2017, San Sebastian, Spain. ICES CM 2017/SSGEPI:20. 395 pp.

15. ICES. 2018e. Herring (Clupea harengus) in Subarea 4 and divisions IIIa and 7.d, autumn spawners. Section 2 in Report of the Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62°N (HAWG), 29–31 January 2018 and 12–20 March 2018, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2017/ACOM:07. Available from the ICES library here.

16. ICES. 2018f. Herring (Clupea harengus) in Subarea 4 and divisions IIIa and 7.d, autumn spawners (North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat, eastern English Channel). ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch, and effort Greater North Sea Ecoregion Published 31 May 2018 her.27.3a47d https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.4387 ICES Advice 2018

17. ICES, 2018g. Herring (Clupea harengus) in subdivisions 20–24, spring spawners (Skagerrak, Kattegat, and western Baltic. ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch, and effort Baltic Sea and Greater North Sea Ecoregions Published 31 May 2018 her.27.20-24 https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.4390 ICES Advice 2018

18. EU–Norway. 2016. Agreed record of fisheries consultations between Norway and the European Union on the Regulation of Fisheries in Skagerrak and Kattegat for 2017. Bergen, 2 December 2016. Accessed 8 May 2017 at https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/94a6940d93f74856851bf5d2555c41ef/skagera k-2017.pdf.

19. ICES. 2007. Report of the Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62°N (HAWG), 13–22 March 2007, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2007/ACFM:11. 538 pp.

20. ICES. 2011. Report of the Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62°N (HAWG), 16–24 March 2011, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2011/ACOM:06 .749 pp.

21. ICES. 2015. EU request to ICES to provide FMSY ranges for selected North Sea and Baltic Sea stocks. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2015. ICES Advice 2015, Book 6, Section 6.2.3.1. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/Special_Requests/EU_F MSY_ranges_for_selected_N S_and_BS_stocks.pdf.

22. ICES. 2016. Advice basis. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2016. ICES Advice 2016, Book 1, Section 1.2.

23. ICES. 2017. Herring (Clupea harengus) in Subarea 4 and divisions IIIa and 7.d, autumn spawners (North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat, eastern English Channel). In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2017. ICES Advice 2017, her.27.3a47d.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 32

24. ICES. 2018a. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Pelagic Stocks (WKPELA 2018), 12– 16 February 2018, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2018/ACOM:32. 12 pp.

25. ICES. 2018b. Herring in Division IIIa and subdivisions 22–24, spring spawners. Section 3 in Report of the Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62°N (HAWG), 29–31 January 2018 and 12–20 March 2018, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2017/ACOM:07.

26. Off-Site Surveillance Visit - Report for PFA & SPSG North Sea Herring Fishery- November 2018. Jim Andrews and John Nichols. Acoura Marine.

27. 3 Annual Surveillance Report of DPPO and DFPO North Sea herring fishery- December 2018: Kat Collinson, Geir Hønneland, Lisa Borges. Control Union Pesca Lyd.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 33

APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Re-scoring evaluation table

PI 1.2.2 Harvest Control Rules: Revised, Harmonised scoring PI 2.1.1 There are SG60 SG80 SG100 well defined and effective harvest control rules in place a Guidepost Generally understood Well defined harvest rules are in harvest control place that are rules are in place consistent with the that are consistent harvest strategy and with the harvest which act to reduce the strategy and exploitation rate as limit ensure that the reference points are exploitation rate is approached. reduced as limit reference points are approached. Met? Y Y

Justification Unchanged

B Guidepost The selection of The design of the the harvest harvest control rules control rules takes takes into account a into account the wide range of main uncertainities uncertainities Met? Y N

Justification Unchanged

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

The principal tool used to achieve the exploitation levels required Justification under the harvest control rules for the North Sea herring fishery is the TAC agreed annually between the EU and Norway. The harvest control rules for North Sea herring fisheries are set out in the Long- Term Management Strategy agreed between the EU and Norway on 1st January 2015. These harvest control rules require, inter alia, that the TAC shall be calculated using a value of F

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 34

of no more than 0.26 (or a lower value if the stock is under 1.5Mt). The inter-annual variation of TAC is constrained by these harvest control rules to “…no more than 15% greater or 15% less than the TAC of the preceding year.” At the meeting of the EU and Norway delegations in December 2017 the parties agreed to follow the ICES advice pertaining at that time (which was that Fmsy was 0.33 rather than the previous estimate of 0.26). This was based on changes in the time series of natural mortality made by the ICES assessment working group. The meeting concluded that “…it would be appropriate to follow the ICES MSY advice rather than the management strategy. The TAC of 600,588t represents a 25% increase compared to 2017.” The TAC set for 2018 therefore exceeds the inter-annual constraints set out in the harvest control rules and was based on a value of F that exceeds the value set out in the harvest control rules. It will, nevertheless, control the exploitation of North Sea herring during 2018. It is noted that: a) At the time when the 2018 TAC was agreed, ICES had advised that an F value of 0.33 would be consistent with MSY. b) The ICES advice for the North Sea herring fishery would indicate a TAC of 311,572t. Attaining this level of exploitation would require a further breach of the harvest control rules presently in place (because the TAC would need to fall by nearly 50% between years). c) Inter-annual TAC variations have exceeded the levels required by the harvest control rules for this fishery before, resulting in a condition of certification that was raised in 2011 and closed in 2014. It is further noted that in June 2018, Norway and the EU made a formal request to ICES to provide advice on proposals for revised harvest control rules for the fishery that would allow the TAC to be based on the current ICES estimate of Ftarget and which would allow for a larger inter-annual variation. The harvest control rules in place for the fishery might therefore change. ICES have not yet provided a response to this request.

Having considered the information available, it is concluded that the SG60 requirements for this SI are met because there is evidence that the harvest control tools used to implement the harvest control rules have been effective in controlling the exploitation of North Sea herring.

The inter-annual variation of TAC between 2017 and 2018 exceeded the constraints specified in the harvest control rules for this fishery and have resulted in an exploitation level in 2018 that is higher than the level set out in the HCRs. As a result, the TAC has allowed for a level of exploitation that is higher than that set out in the HCRs, so the SG80 requirements are not considered to be met.

ICES, 2005, 2008, 2011b, 2012a, 2012c, 2012d, 2014a, 2014b, References 2015b, 2015c. 2015d, 2016a, 2016c (ICES 2017, 2018, Norwegian Government and European Union Delegation 2017, Norwegian Delegation and European Union Delegation 2018) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE 70

CONDITION NUMBER 1

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 35

PI 2.1.1 Retained species outcome for Western Baltic Spring-spawning herring PI 2.1.1: The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained species

PI 2.1.1 SG60 SG80 SG100 Main retained species Main retained There is a A Guidepost high degree are likely to be within species are highly of certainty that Retained biologically based likely to be within retained species are limits. biologically based within biologically species limits. based limits If not, go to scoring and status fluctuating around their If not, go to issue c below. target reference points. scoring issue c

below.

Met? NA NA N

Justification There is no ‘main’ retained species in this fishery. WBSS herring is below 2% of the total fishery and therefore SG60 and SG80 are not relevant for this fishery. By default, SG80 is met. The WBSS herring is at increased risk, i.e. below Blim so SG100 is not met. Target reference points B are defined for retained Target species. reference points

Met? Y

Justification The target reference point for this stock is MSY Btrigger, which corresponds to a SSB of 150,000t. Target reference points are defined for the retained species. SG100 is met. If main retained species If main retained C Guidepost are outside the limits species are Recovery there are measures in outside the limits place that are expected there is a partial and to ensure that the strategy of rebuilding fishery does not hinder demonstrably recovery and rebuilding effective of the depleted species. management measures in place

such that the fishery does not hinder recovery and rebuilding.

Met? NA NA

Justification There is no ‘main’ retained species in this fishery. This Scoring issue is not scored If the status is poorly D known there are

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 36

Measures measures or practices in place that are if poorly expected to result in the understood fishery not causing the retained species to be outside biologically based limits or hindering recovery.

Met? NA

Justification The status of WBSS herring is well documented through fishery statistics and survey results. Furthermore, there are management measures under the EU CFP and in consultation with Norway that that are expected to keep the stock above biologically based limits and not hindering recovery. This scoring issue is not relevant

References ICES (2018a)

ICES (2018b)

ICES (2018c)

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE 90

CONDITION NUMBER NA

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 37

Appendix 2. Condition 1: Harvest Control Rules

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

Score 70

SI 1.2.2(c): Available evidence indicates that the tools in use are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules. The principal tool used to achieve the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules for the North Sea herring fishery is the TAC agreed annually between the EU and Norway. The harvest control rules for North Sea herring fisheries are set out in the Long- Term Management Strategy agreed between the EU and Norway on 1st January 2015. These harvest control rules require, inter alia, that the TAC shall be calculated using a value of F of no more than 0.26 (or a lower value if the stock is under 1.5Mt). The inter-annual variation of TAC is constrained by these harvest control rules to “…no more than 15% greater or 15% less than the TAC of the preceding year.” At the meeting of the EU and Norway delegations in December 2017 the parties agreed to follow the ICES advice pertaining at that time (which was that Fmsy was 0.33 rather than the previous estimate of 0.26). This was based on changes in the time series of natural mortality made by the ICES assessment working group. The meeting concluded that “…it would be appropriate to follow the ICES MSY advice rather than the management strategy. The TAC of 600,588t represents a 25% increase compared to 2017.”

The TAC set for 2018 therefore exceeds the inter-annual constraints set out in the harvest control rules and was based on a value of F that exceeds the Rationale value set out in the harvest control rules. It will, nevertheless, control the exploitation of North Sea herring during 2018.

It is noted that: a) At the time when the 2018 TAC was agreed, ICES had advised that an F value of 0.33 would be consistent with MSY. b) The ICES advice for the North Sea herring fishery in 2019 would indicate a TAC of 311,572t. Attaining this level of exploitation would require a further breach of the harvest control rules presently in place (because the TAC would need to fall by nearly 50% between 2018-19). c) Inter-annual TAC variations have exceeded the levels required by the harvest control rules for this fishery before, resulting in a condition of certification that was raised in 2011 and closed in 2014. It is further noted that in June 2018, Norway and the EU made a formal request to ICES to provide advice on proposals for revised harvest control rules for the fishery that would allow the TAC to be based on the current ICES estimate of Ftarget and which would allow for a larger inter-annual variation. The harvest control rules in place for the fishery might therefore change. ICES have not yet provided a response to this request.

Having considered the information available, it is concluded that the SG60 requirements for this SI are met because there is evidence that the harvest control tools used to implement the harvest control rules have been effective in controlling the exploitation of North Sea herring in the past. The inter-annual variation of TAC between 2017 and 2018 exceeded the constraints specified in the harvest control rules for this fishery and have

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 38

resulted in an exploitation level in 2018 that is higher than the level set out in the HCRs. As a result, the TAC has allowed for a level of exploitation that is higher than that set out in the HCRs, so the SG80 requirements are not considered to be met.

A condition of certification has been raised to address this issue.

Evidence should be provided to demonstrate that the harvest control tools in Condition place are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules.

Given the substantial reduction in TAC that is likely to be required to restore fishing mortality to the level specified in the Harvest Control Rules, it is considered appropriate to set out milestones over a period of 4 years.

Year 1: Evidence shall be presented to demonstrate that the harvest control tools are being used to restore fishing mortality to a level that is closer to the value set out in the harvest control rules in force. Resulting Score: 70

Year 2: Evidence shall be presented to demonstrate that the harvest control tools are being used to restore fishing mortality to a level that is closer to the Milestones value set out in the harvest control rules in force. Resulting Score: 70

Year 3: Evidence shall be presented to demonstrate that the harvest control tools are being used to restore fishing mortality to a level that is closer to the value set out in the harvest control rules in force. Resulting Score: 70

Year 4: Evidence shall be presented to demonstrate that the harvest control tools are appropriate and effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under the Harvest Control Rules in place. Resulting Score: 80 In June 2018, EU and Norway met to discuss long term management strategies for the jointly managed stocks, including North Sea herring. An advice request was drafted and sent to ICES seeking options for revised long- term management strategies, this included North Sea herring. The key component embedded in the long- term management strategy will be a precautionary harvest control rule. On receiving the request, ICES notified EU and Norway that given the extensive scope of work involved the advice could not be delivered before the first quarter of 2019. EU and Norway accepted this timeframe. In the meantime, the parties informed ICES to provide the 2019 TAC advice based on MSY principles. The outline plan is that EU and Norway will meet shortly after the ICES LTMS Client action plan options have been delivered in 2019 to agree a new LTMS for North Sea herring. Once this has been agreed ICES will be asked to provide the 2020 TAC advice based on the new LTMS.

Year 1: NFA will continue its work as a long- standing member of the Norwegian delegation to the coastal states negotiations and argue for the 2019 TAC to be set at a level based on the harvest control rule in place at the time the TAC is determined. Furthermore, NFA will participate at the ICES workshop drafting the options for a new long- term management strategy. NFA will participate in the EU/Norway meeting considering the ICES LTMS options.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 39

Year 2 NFA will continue to work with the Norwegian Ministry of trade, industry and fisheries (“Ministry”) and participate in delegations to coastal states negotiations with the goal to set the 2020 TAC based on the harvest control rule in place at the time the TAC is determined.

Year 3 NFA will continue to work with the Ministry and participate in delegations to coastal states negotiations with the goal set the 2021 TAC based on the harvest control rule in place at the time the TAC is determined.

Year 4 NFA will continue to work with the Ministry and participate in delegations to coastal states negotiations with the goal set the 2022 TAC based on the harvest control rule in place at the time the TAC is determined.

Within SA4, evidence should be available to allow for a rescoring of 1.2.2 to a level of 80 or above.

None. The condition relies upon NFAs well-established position as a delegation participant at coastal states negotiations and as a recognized stakeholder with Consultation on significant lobbying power towards Norwegian management authorities. This condition status is also well documented through P3 assessment.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 40

Appendix 3: Stakeholder submissions

MSC TO

Requirement SubID Page Ref Grade Oversight Description PI CAB Comment Version

Section 3.2.5.1 page 17-18: The CAB has split the UoC by fishing area during the 4th surveillance audit. The UoC definition is not based on fishing area.

FCR-7.4.8 requires that the CAB confirms the UoC to The original UoC is maintained and 29047 17-18 Major FCR-7.4.8 v2.0 include: target stock, fishing method or gear type/s, no change is introduced. vessel types and/or practices and fishing fleets or individual fishing operators pursuing that stock including those client group members initially intended to be covered by the certificate. The UoC definition is not based on fishing area.

Section 3.2.5.1 page 17-18: The CAB cannot change the UoC during assessment. This remains applicable for the 29048 17-18 Major FCR-7.4.10 v2.0 The original UoC is maintained 5-year certificate period, the UoC cannot be changed without approved variation request.

Section 3.2.5.1 page 18, 20, 21, 24-25: The CAB has rescored the Western Baltic Spring spawning herring stock under PI1.1.1 (page 24-25). It is not clear why the Western Baltic Spring Spawning stock (WBSSH) is The original classification of WBSSH 18, 20, 21, rescored under PI1.1.1, nor is there a 29049 Major FCR-7.4.8 v2.0 as by-catch classified as ‘minor’ is 24-25 process/requirement allowing this to occur. restored in the revised version WBSSH was assessed in the first re-assessment as a retained species under PI2.1.1 and classifed as an IPI stock. It is not defined as a target P1 stock in the UoC and cannot be scored under PI1.1.1.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 41

Section 2.2.2, page 12: The CAB states on page 12 "The status of the fishery has changed, and PI 2.1.1 is Rescoring of 2.1.1 is inserted in 29050 12 Major FCR-7.23.12.5 v2.0 2.1.1, rescored for WBSSH for both gears." No re-scoring of appendix 1 this PI has been presented in the surveillance report.

Section 3.2.5.1, page 17: The CAB notes variation to the IPI requirements granted on 18 July 2013 (page 269- 270 of first re-assessment report) on page 17 of 4th surveillance report. However, the conditions noted are 29051 17 Minor not the MSC conditions for granting the variation request The text is corrected and are not the requirements CR-27.4.10 applied at the time. Instead these are justification the CAB provided in the variation request to demonstrate they meet relevant requirements in CR27.4.10 to allow IPI stocks.

Section 2.5, page 13 and section 3.4, page 19: It is not The corrections specified here in 29052 13, 19 Major FCR-7.23.21 v2.0 clear in surveillance report that the CAB has followed CAB comment are in accordance to Annex PA during the surveillance audit. PA5.1

Section 2.5, page 13 and section 3.4, page 19: During surveillance audits the CAB shall review any changes The original UoC is maintained and 29053 13, 19 Major FCR-7.23.12.4 v2.0 affecting traceability. The impact of a change to the UoC no change in traceability identified. and IPI stocks during the certification period should be reported in the surveillance report (FCR-7.23.16).

Section 3.3, page 19: North Sea herring stock harmonisation: The 4th surveillance report references harmonisation activities in 2017, but fails to reference The conclusion of the harmonization the harmonisation activities that occurred between CABs text now is that the other fisheries of certified fisheries with North sea herring stocks as 29054 19 Major FCR-PB3.1 v2.0 have WBSSH as P1 species while target P1 stock in September 2018. The DPPO and DFPO this fishery has the stock as North Sea Herring and PFA & SPSG North Sea herring retained by-catch. fisheries (section 3.1.1) have reported in variation requests to the MSC, publicly avalible on Track a Fishery, that harmonisation meeting was held in

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 42

September 2018. These dates were prior to the site visit for this fishery surveillance.

Section 2.2.2. page 11: Refers to WGSSH. Is this a type 29055 11 Guidance Typo has been corrected error?

SubID PageReference Grade RequirementVersion OversightDescription Pi CABComment

The MSC raised a previous TO finding (29054) which has not been adequately addressed.

Previous finding on North Sea herring stock harmonisation: The 4th surveillance report references harmonisation activities in 2017, but fails to reference the harmonisation activities that occurred between CABs of certified fisheries with North sea herring stocks as target P1 stock in September 2018. The DPPO and DFPO North Sea Herring and PFA & SPSG North Sea herring fisheries (section 3.1.1) have reported in variation requests to the MSC, publicly avalible on Track a Changes made to chapter 2.6; 3.3; Fishery, that harmonisation meeting was held in 4 & 6 as well as Appendices 1,2 &3 29056 23 Major FCR-PB3.1 v2.0 September 2018. These dates were prior to the site visit to include harmonisation, rescoring for this fishery surveillance. and new condition.

DNV's response was 'The conclusion of the harmonization text now is that the other fisheries have WBSSH as P1 species while this fishery has the stock as retained by-catch'. However, the TO finding was raised in relation to North Sea herring stock harmonisation activities that occurred between CABs of certified fisheries with North sea herring stocks as target P1 stock in September 2018. It is still not clear if or how DNV took part in these harmonisation activities, nor how they were considered during the 4th Surveillance Audit of the Norway North Sea and Skagerak herring fishery. The MSC previously raised a TO finding (29052) which Following text added below Table 7 29057 22, 24 Major FCR-7.23.21 v2.0 has not been adequately addressed. Western Baltic Spring Spawning

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 43

Herring. Reference points, values The report states that 'the first two bullet points (i.e. and their technical basis. Source: statements on IPI stocks on page 22) remain valid'. ICES (2018b): The WBSS herring is However, it's not clear if the CAB has reviewed the an IPI species for this fishery. The continuing performance of IPI stock(s) (FCR-PA5.1), WBSS herring catch is around including the consideration of ongoing recognition of IPI 2,550 t in 2017 which is 1.8% of stocks in relation to the criteria under FCR-7.4.13.1 - the total Norwegian catch (137,552 specifically 7.4.13.1.e 'the stocks are not certified t) see Table 4, Table 5 and the text separately', and FCR-7.4.14.2.a.i 'the catch proportion table above. The fishery remains of IPI stocks is less than or equal to 2% and the total within the 2% IPI constraint. catch of IPI stock(s) by the UoA does not create a significant impact on the IPI stock(s) as a whole'.

The MSC notes that WBSSH is certified separately (although currently suspended) as reported on page 23 of the Surveillance Rport. The MSC notes that the data used to determine catch proportions was a three-year average from 2010-2012 data.

Please clarify how FCR-7.4.13.1.e and FCR-7.4.14.2.a.i have been considered during the surveillance audit, with regards to the application of Annex PA as per FCR- 7.23.21.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 44

Appendix 4. Surveillance audit information

The client provided

- Catch statistics 2016-2018

- Map of the effort distribution for 2017

Appendix 5. Additional detail on conditions/ actions/ results

Not required

Appendix 6. Revised Surveillance Program This is the fourth surveillance assessment and there is no requirement to review the surveillance program.

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 45

Appendix 7. List of member vessels: North Sea herrings

H -0045-FS Aktiv II H -0152-B Hellebuen SF-0003-A Albacore VA-0330-S Hellevig 1 SF-0003-A Albacore ST-0001-O Hepsøhav M -0620- SF-0001-V Andrea L HØ Herøy M -0021- R -0057-K Anna Christine HØ Herøyfjord M -0250- NT-0030-NR Arnøyfjord HØ Herøyhav T -0042-T Asbjørn Selsbane SF-0246-A Hillersøy SF-0055-A Atløy Viking H -0055-L Hosøybuen H -0022-T Austbris H -0006-FJ Hovdagut H -0273-B Barmen R -0022-B Håflu SF-0069-SU Barstein F -0184-M Ingrid Majala H -0051-K Benjaco H -0158-S Jadar H -0085-B Bergblom N -0145-VR Johan Berg N -0020-MS Bernt Oskar H -0090-S Jonar H -0087-AV Birkeland SF-0144-A Juno M -0108- F -0004-H Bjarne Nilsen HØ Jøkul SF-0012-F Bluefin N -0050-Ø Kamilla Grande H -0071-S Bogagutt N -0119-SO Ketlin M -0022- H -0062-S Bogaskjær HØ Kings Bay H -0021-S Bogasund H -0058-AV Knester H -0077-S Bogen SF-0049-A Koggen H -0001-BN Brennholm N -0006-V Kransvik jr SF-0045-A Buefjord R -0004-ST Kristina R -0085-SD Bøen H -0069-S Krossfjord H -0175-B Bømmelbas H -0017-BN Krossøy T -0100-T Båragutt N -0400-B Kvannøy M -0150-HØ Christina E H -0016-B Kvikk 2 M -0158-SM Dyrnesvåg H -0124-B Kvoten M -0003- ST-0018-F Edna Synnøve HØ Leinebjørn N -0025-ME Einar Erlend H -0003-F Liafjord M -0011- H -0002-O Elias AV Liaholm H -0140-B Elisabeth H -0002-F Ligrunn H -0148-S Elisabeth H -0002-F Ligrunn M -0064- MD Emma T -0100-LK Lise-Beate

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 46

H -0021-F Endre Dyrøy N -0114-L Lurøybas M -0029-HØ Eros H -0030-B Lønningen H -0116-B Evengutt H -0004-B Lønnøy R -0097-K Falcon N -0307-LN M.Ytterstad M -0101-SM Fiskebank H -0088-AV Magnarson SF-0230-F Fiskebas H -0088-AV Magnarson M -0625-H Fiskeskjer H -0200-B Magne H -0040-AV Flipper H -0077-AV Malene S H -0010-AM Fonnes H -0026-AV Manon M -0014- T -0025-I Frantsen Junior MD Midøy Viking H -0015-B Fyrholm H -0217-AV Mikki VA-0031-S Fyrio VA-0041-K Monsun SF-0046-V Gambler VA-0026-S Morild I M -0035-MD Gangstad Jr H -0402-AV Morten Einar H -0034-AV Gardar H -0402-AV Morten Einar M -0077-HØ Genesis H -0569-B Mostein H -0032-AV Gerda Marie H -0182-AV Norderveg M -0031-HØ Gollenes N -0001-B Nordfisk T -0079-T Grimsholm T -0008-I Nordsild H -0027-B Gry Marita T -0008-I Nordsild M -0028-HØ Grønholm T -0008-I Nordsild M -0005-AV Gularøy M -0040-HØ Nordsjøbas N -0346-Ø Gunnar K H -0147-B Notabåten M -0139-A Gunnar Langva H -0165-B Notholmen M -0056- M -0139-A Gunnar Langva MD Nybo H -0130-B Harengus M -0027-HØ Nybris H -0001-O Hargun H -0077-B Nyvåg H -0015-K Hartho H -0188-B Nøstbakk M -0061-SØ Harto N -0001-SO Olagutt M -0061-SØ Harto N -0001-SO Olagutt H -0001-AV Harvest M -0058-AV Orfjord H -0001-AV Harvest M -0174-AV Paul Senior H -0050-AV Haugagut VA-0095-K Piraja M -0058-VN Haugen Junior SF-0071-SU Pløy

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 47

H -0081-BN Havdrøn R -0080-ES Roaldsen M -0070- H -0005-ØN Havglans HØ Rogne N -0066- M -0200-A Havskjer MS Rowenta M -0200-A Havskjer M -0121-A Runing M -0195- MD Havsnurp N -0118-LN Rødholmen M -0300-A Havstål H -0004-O Røttingøy M -0300-A Havstål R -0333-K Salvøy N -0244- H -0127-B Havørn 2 MS Sander Andre R -0178-K Helena R -0001-H Scombrus

T -0050-LK Segla N -0160-Ø Øksnesværing M -0018-A Selbjørnsfjord H -0099-AV Østerbris M -0018-A Selbjørnsfjord H -0037-K Øyfisk SF-0308-A Selvik Junior N -0200-DA Åkerøy N -0024-ME Selvåg Senior SF-0069-SU Barstein N -0020- N -0024-ME Selvåg Senior MS Bernt Oskar N -0060-B Senior H -0083-B Bømmelfjord VA-0110-S Sille Marie R -0015-K Cetus H -0095-B Silver Bay T -0005-LK Einarson H -0042-B Silverboy H -0015-F Endre Dyrøy SF-0017-SU Sjarmør H -0040-AV Flipper H -0091-K Sjofjord SF-0075-B Frøybas H -0260-K Sjohav SF-0010-B Frøyhav SF-0051-SU Sjonglør SF-0010-B Frøyhav M -0122-HØ Sjøbris SF-0006-V Gambler M -0079- SF-0008-A Sjøglans HØ Genesis T -0023-T Skagøysund N -0246-Ø Gunnar K N -0053-BØ Skarholmen H -0120-AV Hardhaus VA-0134-M Skogsøyjenta H -0120-AV Hardhaus N -0025-VV Skolmen H -0120-AV Hardhaus M -0001- T -0111-T Skulbaren SØ Harto H -0010-AV Slaatterøy M -0200-A Havskjer M -0520- N -0110-L Slettholmen HØ Herøyhav

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 48

M -0250- M -0065-HØ Smaragd HØ Herøyhav VA-0076-M Solfuglen SF-0220-A Hillersøy Ø -0150-H Spjæringen Senior SF-0003-S Hovden Senior Ø -0150-H Spjæringen Senior F -0249-H Kamøyfisk Ø -0150-H Spjæringen Senior H -0009-AV Knester Ø -0100-H Spjærlys N -0019-DA Knester H -0095-AV Staaløy H -0015-AV Kremmervik H -0227-AV Steinsund H -0034-BN Krossøy H -0005-FJ Stording H -0002-F Ligrunn N -0051- M -0345-A Storegg ME Meløyfjord H -0380-AV Storeknut H -0005-AV Morten Einar M -0038-AV Stormfuglen R -0004-B Nilssabas M -0425-H Strand Senior H -0181-AV Nordervon R -0020-V Straumbas N -0001-B Nordfisk M -0190- N -0001-LF Straumberg HØ Nordsjøbas M -0056- SF-0100-SU Sulebas MD Nybo M -0515- M -0119-HØ Svanaug Elise MD Nyskjer M -0050- SF-0008-SU Svebas MD Nystrøm M -0110- M -0027-VD Sæbjørn SM Ny-Viking H -0040-B Sørwaag T -0111-G Odd Lundberg M -0020-A Sørøyfisk T -0260-G Odd Lundberg H -0074-AV Talbor N -0007-SO Olagutt M -0174- H -0066-B Teinebas AV Paul Senior SF-0029-A Tempo H -0002-AV Radek H -0035-O Terten H -0119-B Rasken H -0306-B Tin ST-0008-O Rav H -0012-B Tirill ST-0008-O Rav M -0070-AV Tojako N -0118-LN Rødholmen M -0007-G Topas R -0017-H Scombrus M -0007-G Topas T -0050-LK Segla H -0120-B Tor H -0035-F Siglar H -0014-K Tor SF-0014-SU Sjarmør H -0039-K Toreson H -0004-K Sjohav H -0020-B Trygvason H -0004-K Sjohav

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 49

H -0004-BN Trym SF-0002-A Sjøglans NT-0500-V Trønderbas ZZ-1620-ZZ Skagholm ST-0031-RS Trønderhav N -0001-BØ Skarholmen NT-0200-V Trønderkari M -0050-A Sklinnabanken H -0180-K Tunfisk N -0110-L Slettholmen R -0007-K Vea SF-0084-S Stadt Viking H -0004-AV Vendla NT-0050-V Stig Harry M -0038- M -0116-HØ Vestbas AV Stormfuglen N -0001- SF-0050-G Vestbris ME Støttfjord H -0008-AM Vestbris I ST-0019-F Svanaug Elise SF-0001-A Vesterhav ST-0019-F Svanaug Elise SF-0028-B Vestfart N -0134-LN Svensgam M -0001- H -0012-AV Vestviking HØ Teigenes SF-0001-G Vibeke Helene H -0016-S Tempo N -0007-BØ Vikanøy SF-0085-V Torill R -0003-K Vikingbank SF-0210-V Vester Junior R -0003-K Vikingbank SF-0033-G Vibeke Helene SF-0068-SU Viktor R -0003-K Vikingbank H -0043-AV Zander N -0160-Ø Øksnesværing SF-0007-SU Øygutt

DNV GL – Report No. 2018-020, Rev. 2 – www.dnvgl.com Page 50

About DNV GL Driven by our purpose of safeguarding life, property and the environment, DNV GL enables organizations to advance the safety and sustainability of their business. We provide classification and technical assurance along with software and independent expert advisory services to the maritime, oil and gas, and energy industries. We also provide certification services to customers across a wide range of industries. Operating in more than 100 countries, our 16,000 professionals are dedicated to helping our customers make the world safer, smarter and greener.