Bay of Biscay Purse Seine Sardine Fishery

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine fishery

Final Report V1

December 2016

Client Group: OPEGUI & OPESCAYA

Fishermen: COFRADIA SAN MARTIN DE LAREDO FEDERACIÓN COFRADÍAS PESCADORES DE GIPUZKOA FEDERACIÓN COFRADÍAS DE PESCADORES BIZKAIA

BUREAU VERITAS IBERIA SPAIN

Autors :

Macarena García Silva Luis Ambrosio Lisa Borges Mike Pawson

Table of contents

Glossary...... 4

1. Executive Summary ...... 6

2. Authorship and Peer Reviewers ...... 8

The Peer Reviewers ...... 10

3. Description of the Fishery ...... 11

3.1 Unit of Certification and scope of certification sought...... 11

3.2 Overview of the fishery ...... 14

3.3 Principle One: Target Species Background ...... 15

3.3.1 Spawning and growth ...... 15

3.3.2 Stock assessment & status ...... 16

3.3.3 History of fishing and management ...... 18

3.4. Principle Two: Ecosystem Background ...... 20

3.4.1 Retained species...... 20

3.4.2. Bycatch species ...... 22

3.4.3. ETP species ...... 23

3.4.4. Habitat ...... 25

3.4.5. Ecosystem ...... 27

3.5. Principle Three: Management System Background ...... 28

4. Evaluation Procedure ...... 33

4.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment ...... 33

4.2 Assessment Methodologies ...... 34

4.3 Evaluation Processes and Techniques ...... 35

4.3.1 Site Visits and consultations ...... 35

4.3.2 Evaluation Techniques ...... 39

5 Traceability ...... 40

5.1 Eligibility Date ...... 40

5.2 Traceability within the Fishery ...... 40

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 2

5.2.1 A description of the tracking, tracing, and segregation systems within the fishery. An evaluation of the robustness of the traceability system ...... 40

5.2.2 An evaluation of whether vessels fish outside the unit of certification ...... 43

5.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody ...... 47

6 Evaluation Results ...... 48

6.1 Principle Level Scores ...... 48

6.2 Summary of Scores ...... 48

6.3 Summary of Conditions ...... 49

6.4 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement ...... 49

7 References ...... 50

Appendix 1 Scoring and Rationales ...... 53

Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs ...... 124

Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) ...... 128

Appendix 1.3 Conditions ...... 132

Appendix 2. Peer Review Reports...... 141

Appendix 2.1 Peer review reports from July 2015 ...... 141

Appendix 2.2 Peer review reports from October 2016 ...... 172

Appendix 3. Stakeholder submissions ...... 196

Appendix 4 Support for Client Action Plan ...... 208

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 3

Glossary

ACOM ICES Advisory Committee AR Autonomous Region AZTI-Tecnalia Basque Country research Center

BMSY Stock biomass at maximum sustainable yield Bpa Precautionary reference point for spawning stock biomass Blim Limit reference point for spawning stock biomass below which recruitment is expected to be impaired. CAB Certification Accreditation Body CAMA Consejo Asesor de Medio Ambiente (Environment Advisory Council) CFP Common Fisheries Policy CR Council Regulation CSIC Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (Advanced Council for Scientific Research) CSP Centro de Seguimiento de Pesca (Fisheries Monitoring Centre) DCF Data Collection Framework DGMARE Directorate General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries EC European Commission EFF EU Fisheries Fund EFCA European Fisheries Control Agency EMFF EU Maritime and Fisheries Fund ETP Endangered, threatened and protected species EU European Union F Fishing Mortality

FMSY Target reference point for fishing mortality that is expected to drive the stock to levels consistent with BMSY. Flim Limit reference point for fishing mortality that is expected to drive the stock to the biomass limit

Fpa Precautionary reference point of fishing mortality expected to maintain the SSB at the precautionary reference point FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation HCR Harvest Control Rules ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 4

IEO Instituto Español de Oceanografía (Spanish Oceanography Institute) MAGRAMA Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente (Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and the Environment) MCS Monitoring, Control and Surveillance MSC Marine Stewardship Council MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield NGO Non-Governmental Organisation PCDR Public Comment Draft Report OEL Onboard Electronic Logbook PO Producer Organisations PSA Productivity Susceptibility Analysis P1 Principle 1 (MSC) P2 Principle 2 (MSC) P3 Principle 3 (MSC) PI Performance Indicator (MSC) OPEGUI Organización de productores de pesca de bajura de Guipuzcoa (Producer Organization from Guipuzcoa) OPESCAYA Organización de Productores de pesca de bajura de Bizkaia (Producer Organization from Bizcaya) TED Target eligibility date RBF Risk Based Framework SICA Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis SGP Secretaría General de Pesca SSB Spawning Stock Biomass STECF Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries SWWAC South West Waters Advisory Council TAC Total Allowable Catch UC Unit of Certification VMS Vessel Monitoring System VPA Virtual Population Analysis WGHANSA Working Group of Hake, Anchovies and Sardines

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 5

1. Executive Summary

After the 30 days period for receiving stakeholders and peer review comments on the PCDR V1 we publish the Final Report (FR V1). This report is the resulting new version of the FR (first version on December 2015), and hereafter it will be referred to as FR V1 (see flow chart below).

FR (V1) December 2016

The client group covered by the certificate comprises two organizations of producers called: Organización de productores de pesca de bajura de Guipuzcoa (OPEGUI) & OPESCAYA (Organización de Productores de pesca de bajura de Bizkaia). Additionally, the purse seine vessels from Cofradía San Martín de Laredo & from the federations called: Federación de Cofradías de Guipuzcoa & Vizcaya are the boats included in the certificate. Henceforth, the term client will be used to refer to them. This assessment covers the activity of the vessels listed in Table 1. Fishing is carried out by 59 purse seine vessels from the Cofradía San Martín de Laredo & from the federations called: Federación de Cofradías de Guipuzcoa & Vizcaya targeting sardine in ICES Subarea VIIIa,b (Bay of Biscay).

The original audit team that conducted the assessment against to MSC standard was comprised of the following members from the Certification Body, Bureau Veritas Iberia: Macarena Garcia Silva, Seafood auditor and Scheme Manager for MSC fisheries from FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 6

Bureau Veritas Iberia, in the role of project coordinator and team leader. The expert team, selected for their stock assessment, ecosystem interactions, and fishery management experience, comprised Lisa Maria Pontes Coelho Borges as expert assessor under Principle 1 & 2, and Luis Ambrosio as expert assessor under Principle 3. Michael Gregg Pawson, joined the team 28 th June 2016 as P1 expert.

The main strengths of this assessment process are listed below:

• Fishing mortality is considered stable and likely to be close to F MSY . • The combined biomass indices (acoustic and egg surveys) shows an increasing trend over the last five years (2011-2015). • The 2013 and 2015 recruitments are the highest in the time-series, though recruitment of sardine is highly dependent of environmental variables. • Though quantitative data are not available, by-catch and discards are considered to be minimal. • Specific harvest control rules have been developed by the main exploiting countries and are being implemented. • Fishers’ compliance is deemed to be strong. • The impact of purse-seines on the seabed is small. • The commitment agreed between the clients of the MSC certified fishery and the Spanish fishery under assessment and the role of the SWWAC as the Advisory Council for the anchovy.

On the other hand the weaknesses are detailed herein:

• No analytical stock assessment is conducted by ICES due to short time-series of age-structure data from areas VIIIa,b,d and lack of data for Sub-area VII. • Biological reference points have not yet been developed. • ICES advice is based on the information from the Bay of Biscay-abundance indicators which are only available for a part of the stock (for ICES areas VIIIa,b,d) and catches are only available for some countries in ICES Sub-area VII. • The stock structure is identified and based on genetic results but further research is needed to take into account mixing with the Iberian pilchard stock.

The CAB has set five conditions for certification with respect to the Performance Indicators 1.2.1; 1.2.2; 2.2.3; 2.3.3; 3.2.1. In order to be awarded an MSC certificate for the fishery, the applicants has signed a written contract agreeing to develop an Action Plan to fulfil the 'Conditions' issued by the audit team. Details of the conditions are provided in Section 6.3.1 of this report.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 7

2. Authorship and Peer Reviewers

Macarena García Silva, assessment team leader Macarena’s academic background includes a Bachelor of Science Degree in Environmental Science from the Madrid Polytechnic University (Spain) and a Master degree in Sustainable Management of Marine and Coastal Systems from Barcelona University (Spain). She was a manager in Inemar (Association for innovation in marine resources and sea studies). She has worked as an assistant in the Spanish Ministry of the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs, carrying out different projects involving human activities and sea resources.

She has participated in several scientific publications, such as the “Ecological framework for the management of the different habitats in Spain (Council Directive 92/43/CE)”, “Supporting report accompanying the thematic cartography of the MedRAS Project”, and “Draft of the Basis for Marine Planning in Spain”. She was responsible for the scientific and technical coordination of the bilingual publication “The Seas of Spain” from the Spanish Ministry of the Environment and Rural and Marine Affairs, and responsible for the scientific and technical coordination of the bilingual publication “Human Activities in the Seas of Spain”.

She has been working as seafood auditor for Bureau Veritas Iberia (Agrofood Department) since September 2011, which involves the technical development of private sustainable labels and seafood companies’ policies. She is the lead auditor for Friends of the Sea, MSC fisheries full assessment and pre-assessment, the chain of custody, and other quality labels (DOP, Mexillon de Galicia, Pesca de Rías). She is the MSC assessment team leader for 7 fisheries moreover she has completed the pre-assessment of numerous fisheries. Since March 2015 she is Scheme Manager of the MSC fishery Standard for Bureau Veritas Iberia. She has the RBF training module.

To download a detailed CV click on the link

Lisa Maria Pontes Coelho Borges, expert assessor under Principle 1 & 2 Lisa is an experienced fishery scientist, with extensive knowledge and experience of assessing the environmental impact of fisheries, and discards and bycatch in particular, as well as fisheries management policies, including harvest control rules, management programmes, and discard policy development. She has experience in assessing pelagic and demersal stocks, and is familiar with MSC assessment procedures, having participated and led several Fisheries Improvement Projects over the last three years.

Lisa has a BSc in Marine Biology & Fisheries from the University of the Algarve (Portugal), an MSc in Fisheries from the University of Porto (Portugal), and a PhD on discards from demersal fisheries from the National University of Ireland.

She has worked for three national fisheries research institutes: IPIMAR (Portugal), the Marine Institute (Ireland), and IMARES (The Netherlands). Lisa also worked for the European Commission in Belgium, developing conservation policies for fish stocks in Atlantic waters. Lisa currently runs her own consulting firm, FishFix ( www.fishfix.eu ).

To download a detailed CV click on the link

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 8

Luis Ambrosio Blazquez, expert assessor under Principle 3 Managing Director of Proyectos Biológicos y Técnicos s.l. (PROBITEC), since 1989 he has worked as a consultant on issues related to fisheries, aquaculture and marine biosphere. Regarding Fisheries and Aquaculture, he has collaborated with a variety of public administrations, private companies, and NGOs.

His main areas of knowledge are: assessment of international fisheries, marine protected areas, marine biodiversity and biotechnology, fisheries policies, commercialization and quality of fisheries products, labelling and certification, environmental interactions of fishing and socio-economic impact of fishing activities. Moreover, has participated in cooperation projects and assignments on issues related to fishing and aquaculture for the Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID), UNDP, the Latin American Organization for Fisheries Development (OLDEPESCA) and other international cooperation agents. He has worked as coordinator of the White Paper on fishing and aquaculture and he belongs to the Spanish Technological Platform on Fishing and Aquaculture (known as PTEPA for its acronym in Spanish), representing the firm PROBITEC.

Concerning his work on the marine environment, worth mentioning are the projects carried out for the Ministry of Environment, the Spanish National Research Council and Non Governmental Organizations, in particular WWF Spain, for whom he is an advisor on matters related to fishing, aquaculture, and marine protected areas.

To download a detailed CV click on the link

Mike Pawson, expert assessor under Principle 1 Dr Mike Pawson has 46 years experience as a fisheries scientist carrying out biological research and providing expert advice in relation to fish stock assessment and fisheries management and regulation to the UK government and the EC. Between 1974 and 1980 Mike initiated and led acoustic surveys on blue whiting and mackerel west of UK and trawl surveys in the North Sea, worked as UNESCO expert with the Libyan fisheries laboratory 1979 to 1981, and from 1980 to 1990 initiated and managed Cefas’s coastal fisheries programme. From 1990 to 2002 Mike led the Western demersal team providing analytical assessments and management advice for 12 finfish stocks in the English Channel, Irish Sea and Celtic Sea. He was chairman of ICES Southern Shelf Demersal Stock Assessment Working Group 1996-98, Sea bass Study Group 2000-04 and Elasmobranch Study Group 2001-02, and initiated and co-ordinated of EC-funded multi-national projects on methods for egg-production stock biomass estimation in Irish Sea (plaice, sole and cod:1995 & 2000), bio-geographical identity of English Channel fish stocks, bio-economic modelling of Channel fisheries, development of assessment methods for elasmobranchs, marine recreational fishing etc. Between 2002 and 2007 Mike directed and managed monitoring and assessment of England and Wales salmonid and eel stocks. In 2007 Mike retired from Cefas, having published 71 formal papers and 13 book chapters, and contributed to numerous technical and assessment reports. He continues to acts as scientific consultant, including specialist input to MSC assessments (14 to date) and peer review of research papers, project applications and MSC assessments (45 to date). He has the RBF training module.

To download a detailed CV click on the link

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 9

The Peer Reviewers

Hans Lassen : Independent consultant holds a cand. scient. (M.Sc.) from Copenhagen University and a HD (B.Sc.) from the Copenhagen School of Commerce. His background is in fish stock assessments, particularly in the application of computers and models. He joined the Danish Institute of Fisheries and Marine Research (DIFRES) in 1971. 1988-1992 he worked in the Greenland Fisheries Research Institute as Deputy Director and Director and returned to DIFRES in 1992. Between 1998 and 2003 he was in charge of the Fisheries Group in the ICES Secretariat as Fisheries Adviser who serves as secretary to the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management. After 2004 he was head of the ICES Advisory Programme within the ICES Secretariat. He retired from the ICES secretariat in 2010 and has since worked on various projects within his expertise in advisory issues.

He has been a member and Chairman of numerous ICES committees and groups, has within the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization chaired STACFIS and the Scientific Council, been a member of STECF (EC, DG Fish), scientific adviser to Danish delegations to fisheries negotiations and chaired an internal EC expert group to provide input to the EC Multi-annual Guidance Program, within the Nordic Council of Ministers he chaired its Working Group on Fisheries and worked with the FAO/DANIDA project (1982-1998) on teaching fish stock assessment. In 2006 he was awarded the prestigious Swedish prize “Kungsfenan” for contributions to communication between science and the fishing industry. At his retirement from ICES he was awarded a Special Service Award.

He has been a member of MSC certification teams for westgreenland shrimp, and Barents Sea Demersal trawl fisheries (Greenland) and Westgreenland lumpfish. He has acted as reviewer for several MSC assessment reports.

Please click to download a detailed CV.

Jose Peiró, he is an independent fisheries consultant and founding partner of Naunet Fisheries Consultants, a marine consultancy firm based in Norwich (UK). His principal area of expertise is in relation to both artisanal and commercial fisheries and rural aquaculture. Currently working for some NGO’s (WWF/North Sea Foundation/Monterey Bay Aquarium) conducting fisheries assessments and developing initiatives to improve living conditions in fishing communities in the South of Europe and the North of Africa.

With more than 8 years of experience working in a wide range of projects associated with marine biodiversity and the sustainable use of living aquatic resources. In 2012 and 2013. He worked as a fisheries scientist in a British marine consultancy specialized in assessing the impact of offshore wind farms on fishing resources. Before he also worked as a marine biologist and fisheries researcher in two marine scientific centres in Portugal, focused mainly on collecting fishing data and developing environmental education programs in the area.

As well as having worked as a researcher, he completed many trips on commercial fishing vessels in the capacity of scientific observer in the NAFO area, West coast of Africa and the Iberian coast. Worked aboard a broad range of fishing vessels including trawlers, long-liners and other small-scale vessels. He has also experience on finfish and shellfish aquaculture that he gained working in the Amazonian basin and as a quality supervisor in fish farms in Spain. He has also worked as a local expert for Food Certification International in Marine Stewardship Council assessments in both Spain and Portugal and currently assigned as a P2 expert for two shrimps fisheries undertake within the North Sea. Please click to download a detailed CV.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 10

3. Description of the Fishery

3.1 Unit of Certification and scope of certification sought

Bureau Veritas Certification confirms that the fishery falls within the scope of the requested MSC certification for assessment.

According to the MSC Guidance, the unit of certification is defined as “the fishery or fish stock (= biologically distinct unit) combined with the fishing method/gear, and practice (= vessel(s) pursuing that stock).”

The CAB reviewed the definition before, during and after the site visit to clarify what was included in the assessment, and what was not. The CAB has reviewed the information available, and concludes that one unit of certification (UoC) is suitable and in accordance with MSC Principles. The definition of the UoC is presented in the box below. The UoA is the same as the UoC because no other eligible fishers were included.

Target species: Common sardine - Sardina pilchardus pilchardus Stock : North Atlantic sardine, from the southern Bay of Biscay to the North Sea and the English Channel, excluding the Mediterranean Sea. Description from ICES: Sardine in Celtic Seas (VIIa,b,c,f,g,j,k), English Channel (VIId, VIIe, VIIh) and in Bay of Biscay (VIIIa,b,d) Fishing area : The fishery takes place mainly in the geographical region VIIIb though occasionally catches may originate from VIIId or VIIIa. Fishing season : from the 1st of January to the 30th of April and from the 1st of September to the 31st of December. Fishing method : Purse Seine (ring net) fishing, by the vessels members of the several organizations: Cofradia San Martin de Laredo, Federación de Cofradias de Pescadores de Guipuzcoa y Fedeeración de Pescadores de Bizkaia Association. Fisheries management authority : Fishing activities are managed by the European Union, Spanish Government and Government of Basque Country and Cantabria. Fleet : 59 purse seine vessels (Table 1). No other eligible fishers.

The UoC was chosen as it encompasses the client’s assessment requirements. As it stands, 59 purse seine vessels are covered by the certificate. All vessels are relatively homogenous insofar as their technical characteristics and concerned (Castro et al., 2007). The vessels within the UoC are included in the purse seine fleet census from the Cantabrian Sea and the northeast of Spain. (See Table 1 for details).

Regarding to 2015 ICES WGHANSA Report, Spanish catches were taken by purse seines from the Basque Country operating mostly in division VIIIb. The Spanish fishery takes place mainly during March and April and in the fourth quarter of the year. Spanish landings averaged around 4,000 t in the late 1990s early 2000s with peaks in 1998 and 1999 at almost 8 thousand tonnes. Catches have then decreased until 2010 to below 1 thousand tonnes. Since 2011, catches have raised again, reaching 16,237 tonnes in 2014.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 11

Figure 1. Fishing zone of Basque Boats. Source: AZTI

For the specific case of the Spanish fleet, the 2014 ICES WGHANSA report concludes that 112 Spanish boats had a license to fish sardine from the ICES VIII stock in 2013, but normally, fishing is carried out by 102 boats, distributed into Basque Country, Cantabria, Asturias and Galicia.

Table 1 List of vessels within the Unit of Certification

Name of the vessel Identification Town Region

AITANA DEL MAR ST.4 05-1 LAREDO CANTABRIA BRAULIN ST.2 03-96 LAREDO CANTABRIA JOSE Y TOMASA ST.2 01-95 LAREDO CANTABRIA MADRE LUCIA ST.2 01-02 LAREDO CANTABRIA NUESTRA MADRE JUANITA ST.2 04-97 LAREDO CANTABRIA NUESTRO PADRE TONINO ST.2 01-04 LAREDO CANTABRIA NUEVO PANELO VILLA ST.2 06-97 LAREDO CANTABRIA NUEVO VIRGEN PODEROSA GI-6 02-99 LAREDO CANTABRIA AMATXO BI-2 01-96 BERMEO VIZCAYA BETI EUSKAL HERRIA BI-1 3127 BERMEO VIZCAYA DEMAR ST-3 1-01 BERMEO VIZCAYA LEKANDA BI-2 4-03 BERMEO VIZCAYA GOROSTIAGA HERMANOS FE-1 1914 CIERVANA VIZCAYA GOROSTIAGA HERMANOS DOS BI-3 3-01 CIERVANA VIZCAYA KALAMUA BI BI-1 2-01 LEKEITIO VIZCAYA ONDARZABAL BI-1 1-01 LEKEITIO VIZCAYA OSKARBI BI-2 4-95 LEKEITIO VIZCAYA ONGI ETORI BI-4 1-04 ONDARROA VIZCAYA GURE IMANOL BI-3 2-04 SANTURCE VIZCAYA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 12

OS XUXOS CO-4 1-99 PASAIA VIZCAYA AGUSTIN DEUNA SS-3 1-02 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA AZKOITIA SS-3 1-03 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA BERRIZ IRIGOIEN SS-3 2-96 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA BERRIZ PATXIKU SS-3 4-03 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA BETI PIEDAD SS-3 4-01 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA IRIGOYEN BERRIA SS-3 1-92 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA IZASKUN BERRIA SS-3 2-02 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA KAXIMIRONA SS-3 1-01 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA MATER BI SS-3 2-03 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA PEDRO JOSE BERRIA SS-3 1406 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA SAN PRUDENTZIO BERRIA SS-3 3-98 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA SANTA LUZIA HIRU SS-3 4-98 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA SANTANA BERRIA SS-3 5-98 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA STELLA MARIS BERRIA SS-3 3-01 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA ALMIRANTE BERRIA BI-2 6-99 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA ARRANTZALE SS-1 3-01 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA ATTONA DOMINGO SS-1 2-03 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA BERRIZ MATUTINA SS-1 1-96 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA KANTAURI SS-3 2 15 GETARIA GUIPÚZCOA BERRIZ KUKUARRI SS-1 3-02 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA GURE AMUITZ SS-1 2-00 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA ITSAS EDER SS-1 5-99 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA ITSAS LAGUNAK SS-1 2-05 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA ITSASOAN SS-1 1-97 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA LUIS BARRANKO SS-1 3-96 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA NUEVO HORIZONTE ABIERTO ST-3 2-98 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA NUEVO ROBER ST-2 1-93 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA PITTAR SS-1 4-99 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA SAN FERMIN BERRIA SS-1 6-03 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA TUKU TUKU SS-1 4-01 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA TXINGUDI SS-1 1-03 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA BERRIZ AVE MARIA SS-1 1-02 ORIO GUIPÚZCOA BETI AINGERU SS-3 2-01 ORIO GUIPÚZCOA BETI SAN LUIS SS-2 1868 ORIO GUIPÚZCOA GURE GOGOA SS-1 2-04 ORIO GUIPÚZCOA MONTSERRAT BERRIA SS-1 1-00 ORIO GUIPÚZCOA SAN ANTONIO BERRIA SS-1 5-01 ORIO GUIPÚZCOA ANSIA SS-1 1-05 PASAIA GUIPÚZCOA BETI ITXAS ARGI GI-4 1-96 HONDARRIBIA GUIPÚZCOA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 13

3.2 Overview of the fishery Sardine in Celtic Seas (VIIa,b,c,f,g,j,k), English Channel (VIId, VIIe, VIIh) and in Bay of Biscay (VIIIa,b,d) are considered to belong to the same stock from a genetic point of view. Therefore, the sardine stock in VIIIa,b,d and VII can be considered as a single-stock unit with substantial mixing between areas.

Catches of sardines in Divisions VIIIa,b,d are mainly taken by France and Spain and by France in Sub-area VII. Major landings of sardine occur in VIIIa,b,d and in the English Channel (VIId, VIIe, VIIf, VIIh) area. Fewer landings occur in other VII areas although they may reach one or two thousand t. There is evidence that some fish landed in VIIIa are caught in VIIh and VIIe and vice versa, and Dutch vessels which operate in the English Channel and North Sea sometimes declare catches in VIIIa.

Historically, Spanish landings of sardine peaked in 1998 and 1999 at almost 8,000 t, but decreased to below 1,000 t by 2010. However, in 2012, 14,948 t were landed, and 21,295 t in 2014 (Table 2). French landings over the same period have increased from around 10,000 t in 1990 -1996 to between 16,000 to 21,000 t since 2006. (Table 2)

Table 2 Sardine general: Landings by France (1983-2012) and Spain (1996-2012) in ICES divisions VIIIa, VIIIb and VIIId as estimated by the WG. * all landings from division VIIIb n/a = not available

Catch (tonnes) Year France Spain* 1983 4367 n/a 1984 4844 n/a 1985 6059 n/a 1986 7411 n/a 1987 5972 n/a 1988 6994 n/a 1989 6219 n/a 1990 9764 n/a 1991 13965 n/a 1992 10231 n/a 1993 9837 n/a 1994 9724 n/a 1995 11258 n/a 1996 9554 2053 1997 12088 1608 1998 10772 7749 1999 14361 7864 2000 11939 3158 2001 11,285 3,720 2002 13,849 4,428 2003 15,494 1,113 2004 13,855 342 2005 15,462 898 2006 15,916 825 2007 16,060 1,263 2008 21,104 717 2009 20,627 228 2010 19,485 642 2011 17,925 5,283 2012 15,952 14,948 2013 20,066 12,423 FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 14

2014 17,706 21,295

The total international catch of sardines in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Sub-area VII is shown in Figure 2 (ICES 2015)

Figure 2 ICES estimates of the catch of sardine in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Sub-area VII 1989 – 2014 (ICES 2015)

3.3 Principle One: Target Species Background

3.3.1 Spawning and growth European sardine ( Sardine pilchardus ; Walbaum, 1792) has a wide distribution extending in the Northeast Atlantic from the Celtic Sea and North Sea in the north to Mauritania in the south. The sardine in the Bay of Biscay is neighbour to the stock covering ICES Areas VIIIc and IXa, extending to the south to the Strait of Gibraltar. The limit with the Bay of Biscay is arbitrary as they were set for management purposes. Because of its continuous distribution in the Northeast Atlantic, it is likely that there is movement of fish between areas but the magnitude of the exchange between the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Peninsula is currently unknown. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that offspring from area VII and VIII contribute to the stock in area IXa, the core area for the Iberian stock. Microsatellite analyses revealed no significant genetic differentiation among sardines in Subareas VII and VIII (Shaw et al., 2012). Therefore, the sardine stock in VIIIa,b,d and VII can be considered as a single-stock unit (WKPELA, 2013).

The sardine exemplifies the life strategy of small pelagic fish around the world: short life, fast growth, high fecundity, and long spawning season (Carrera and Porteiro, 2003; Stratoudakis et al., 2007). As such, the population level depends strongly on the incoming year-class strength, which is highly variable and largely dependent on environmental factors. Sardines are fully mature as soon as they reach a length of around 15-20 cm, generally In the second year of life. The sardine is an indeterminate multiple ‐batch spawner (batch fecundity 300– 400 eggs g ‒1). Spawning occurs along the shelf (with no clearly defined spawning grounds), although areas of permanent upwelling and offshore transport are generally avoided (ICES, 2010). The peak spawning season is in spring/summer (May – September).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 15

In the Bay of Biscay, small sardines (1-2 years old) are mainly distributed in the southern area and coastal northern area, whereas large adult sardines occur mainly in the northern area along the coast and/or along the shelf break. (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Schematic life cycle of sardine around Iberia and in Biscay. Source: ICES 2010

3.3.2 Stock assessment & status Biological sampling and survey data There is little information regarding biological sampling of sardine in the English Channel or in the Celtic Sea. From the information available, it appears that the sardines caught in the Channel tend to be bigger. The lack of commercial sampling, survey and biological information in Subarea VII contrasts with the richness of the datasets available for the Bay of Biscay, where catches were sampled for numbers by length-class by France in Divisions VIIIa,b and Spain in VIIIb. Sardine caught in VIIIa,b range from 9 to 25cm. In 2013, two peaks were observed in catch distribution by size: one at 16 to 18 cm length and the second around 21 cm. French vessels catch a majority of small fish, while sardine caught by Spanish vessels shows a more balanced distribution over the two size peaks.

The French acoustic survey PELGAS takes place every spring in the Bay of Biscay on board the RV Thalassa, with the main objective of studying the abundance and distribution of pelagic fish in the Bay of Biscay and to study the pelagic ecosystem as a whole.

The 2014 survey showed sardines were distributed all along the French coast of the Bay of Biscay (Figure 4). Even though adult sardines appeared in low quantities in the offshore area, the BIOMAN survey showed eggs were present there. This could be because many sardines were high in the water column and couldn’t be detected by the echosounders, or that sardines offshore are bigger than individuals along the coast, and have a higher fecundity.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 16

Figure 4 Adult sardine distribution (density/ESDU) during PELGAS14 (left panel) and sardine Egg distribution mapped during BIOMAN 2014 survey (are within the red line corresponds with the enlarged coverage made in 2014 for sardine). Source: 2014 ICES WGHANSA report.

Since 2000, the series of age distributions shows some consistent cohort strengths, for example, the very low 2005 age class and the very high 2008 age class. In 2014, the relative high abundance of age 2 (37% in number, but 44% in biomass) sardines confirms good recruitment.

The biomass estimate of sardine observed during PELGAS14 was 33,9607 tons, which is the average level of the PELGAS series. It must be emphasised that these surveys do not cover the total area of potential presence of sardine.

Stock assessment The sardine stock in ICES Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII was assessed by ICES in 2013 (WGHANSA, 2013). The lack of catch composition and survey information in the Celtic seas and the English Channel impairs the possibility of performing an analytical assessment for the whole area. ICES advice on the basis of precautionary considerations used biomass indices from two surveys as indicators of stock size.

The data used in the assessment of the sardine stock consist of data from only the Bay of Biscay (Division VIIIa,b,d;):

• Commercial catches (international landing, ages and length frequencies from catch sampling in Divisions VIIIa,b,d only) • Discards are considered negligible and all catches are assumed to be landed (ICES, 2013). • Two survey indices in Divisions VIIIa,b,d (PELGAS (acoustic), BIOMAN (eggs)) • Natural mortality is fixed at 0.33 (same as for southern sardine).

Due to the lack of age-structured data in Subarea VII, it was proposed to assume that the data from the Bay of Biscay could be extended to Subarea VII. This is a strong assumption because fisheries and environmental conditions are known to be different, and the population dynamics of sardine in VII is likely to be different to that in the Bay of Biscay (WKPELAS, 2013).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 17

The exploratory assessment runs conducted by WGHANSA suggest low exploitation rates. However, the models suffer from a lack of data and are sensitive to assumptions made without sufficient tuning data to validate them. Therefore, the output is not yet considered to be of sufficiently quality to serve as a basis for advice (WKPELAS, 2013). The main obstacle for using an analytical assessment to provide advice is that the data only cover Division VIIIa,b and not Subarea VII.

Nevertheless, the majority of the catches are from VIIIa,b, and the level of fishing mortality should give a fair evaluation of the overall exploitation. Analysis of catch curves indicates a modest fishing mortality, in the order of natural mortality, and is likely to be close to the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). According to the surveys, the biomass of the stock fluctuates without any obvious trend, which indicates that exploitation may be sustainable. The landings increased since 2007, and the biomass was estimated to have decreased by more than 20% between the periods 2009–2011 (average of the three years) and 2012– 2013 (average of the two years). ICES recommended a decrease of catches of at most 20% in relation to the average catch of the last three years, corresponding to catches of no more than 27,554 t for 2015.

Since the site visit and preparation of this PCDR V1, ICES have provided new advice for the sardine stock in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII using the ICES framework for category 3 stocks (ICES 2015a). As before, the advice is based on biomass and egg abundance indices from the PELGAS and BIOMAN surveys, used as a combined index of stock size and based solely on information from the Bay of Biscay. Comparing the two latest index values (2014/15) with the three preceding values (2011/12/13), the combined survey index is estimated to have increased by more than 20%, and ICES continues to consider that the exploitation on the stock is stable and likely to be close to FMSY (Figure 5) (ICES, 2015a). Indications of age 1 abundance from the PELGAS survey in Divisions VIIIa,b,d, show that 2013 and 2015 recruitments are the highest in the time-series. The catch advised for 2016 and 2017 is 33,065 t. There are no limit or target reference point estimated by ICES for the northern sardine stock, and there is no TAC and no harvest control rules for this stock.

Figure 5 ICES estimates of the relative harvest rate of sardine in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Sub- area VII (ICES 2015b)

3.3.3 History of fishing and management The Basque purse-seiner fleet is a multispecies fleet that traditionally distributes its activity across three seasons: the mackerel season (from approximately February to May), the anchovy season (from approximately April to June) and the tuna season (from approximately June to November). Nevertheless, some fisheries overlap for certain periods of the year. The

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 18

fleet also targets coastal species such as sardine, horse mackerel and chub mackerel, among others, all along the year. In the second semester the majority of the vessels change fishing gear from purse seine to bait boat, and to a lesser extent to trolling gear, to catch albacore and bluefin tuna (Andrés & Prellezo, 2012). Many vessels close the fishing season in October and November by fishing for sardine and other small pelagic fishes either VIIIc or VIIIb divisions.

The fisheries targeting northern sardine are managed through technical measures such as gear and vessels specifications, minimum landings size and closed areas. There is no TAC or a Harvest Control Rule (HCRR) for this stock. However, to provide scientific advice on catch limits ICES uses as a harvest control rule, for data-limited stocks for which biomass indices are available, an index-adjusted status quo catch. The advice is based on a comparison of the two most recent index values with the three preceding values, combined with recent catch data. Knowledge about the exploitation status also influences the advised catch. (ICES advice 2014).

The boats registered in the North-East Cantabrian National Fishing Grounds, complies with Order AAA/1307/2013, of 1 July, which establishes a management plan for those registered boats.

Key Low Trophic MSC Criteria Sardine is considered according to the MSC criteria as a low trophic species due to its life history: feeds on plankton, short lived, rapid growth, early maturing, high fecundity, small body size and forms dense schools.

However, sardine is not considered a MSC “key” LTL stock. This is because although in the Bay of Biscay ecosystem sardine, together with anchovy, sprat, mackerel and horse mackerel, are the dominant LTL species, and as such transfer a very large proportion of the total primary production through the lower part of the food web, the system is detritus-based and bottom-up controlled (Lassalle et al., 2011).

Furthermore, anchovy is the preferential prey to several high level trophic predators such as tuna (Goñi et al., 2012) and seabirds, while in the Bay of Biscay ecosystem phytoplanktonic and zooplanktonic are the keystone species (Lassalle et al., 2011). Bottom-up processes play a significant role in the population dynamics of upper-trophic-levels and in the global structuring of this marine ecosystem. Finally, there is a marked bottom-up control of small pelagic fish by mesozooplanktonic prey and not by their predators (Lassalle et al., 2011).

To summarize the information in reference to the MSC see the Table below:

Table 3 Sardine species is listed in Box CB1 and in its adult life cycle phase the stock holds a key role in the ecosystem, such that it meets at least two of the following sub-criteria i, ii and iii. MSC Criteria (Box CB1) Comment i. a large proportion of the trophic The energy transfer is not critically connections in the ecosystem involve this dependent on sardines and only a stock, leading to significant predator minor part of the energy transfer is dependency; through the sardine stock ii. a large volume of energy passing between The energy transfer is not critically lower and higher trophic levels passes dependent on sardines and only a through this stock; minor part of the energy transfer is through the sardine stock iii. there are few other species at this trophic There are numerous fish species that

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 19

level through which energy can be takes part in the energy transfer. transmitted from lower to higher trophic levels, such that a high proportion of the total energy passing between lower and higher trophic levels passes through this stock (i.e. the ecosystem is ‘wasp-waisted’).

3.4. Principle Two: Ecosystem Background

3.4.1 Retained species According to MSC standard, retained species in Principle 2 are those parts of the retained catch that are not covered under Principle 1 because they are not included in the UoC. However the retained catch can still be a valuable catch in the fishery, whether it is targeted or taken incidentally, and there is thus an economic incentive for capture.

The Spanish Bay of Biscay purse seine fishery targets a variety of species depending on the season and area: sardine (Sardina pilchardus), anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus), horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus), Atlantic chub (Scomber colias) and mackerel (Scomber scombrus), with all species representing more than 5% of the total catch of this fishery per year (Table 4). The fishing season where the fleet under assessment direct their activity at the sardine areas VIIIab are restricted from the 1st of January to the 30th of April and from the 1st of September to the 31st of December. Therefore the list and percentages reflected in Table 5 have therefore been used to analyse Principle two are from the fishing months described in the UoC (See Point 3.1).

Table 4 Percentage of total annual retained catch by the Unit of Certification purse-seine vessels from 2010 to 2013 (based on logbooks data by trip provided by AZTI) Species (scientific name) 2010 2011 2012 2013 Argyrosomus regius 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Belone belone 0,00% 0,01% 0,00% 0,00% Boops boops 0,48% 0,20% 0,07% 0,14% Dicentrarchus labrax 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Engraulis encrasicolus 13,16% 32,15% 14,12% 23,46% Lithognathus mormyrus 0,06% 0,09% 0,00% 0,06% Mugilidae 0,16% 0,01% 0,00% 0,01% Oblada melanura 0,12% 0,01% 0,03% 0,01% Osteichthyes 0,22% 0,03% 0,00% 0,15% Pagellus acarne 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Pagellus bogaraveo 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Pagellus erythrinus 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Sarda sarda 0,60% 0,37% 0,37% 0,04% Sardina pilchardus 7,21% 32,47% 62,69% 47,72% Sarpa salpa 0,03% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Sciena umbra 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Scomber colias 7,56% 5,86% 7,66% 7,78% Scomber scombrus 53,40% 9,73% 2,92% 3,82% Scomberesox saurus 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Sparidae 0,19% 0,11% 0,02% 0,01% Sparus aurata 0,00% 0,01% 0,02% 0,01% Trachinus draco 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,01% Trachurus mediterraneus 1,41% 1,37% 0,49% 0,67% FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 20

Trachurus trachurus 15,38% 17,57% 11,59% 16,09%

When the vessels are targeting sardine from 1st of January to 30th of April and from the 1st of September to 31st of December, the main retained species are in average: anchovy (3.19%), Atlantic chub mackerel (2.84%), Atlantic mackerel (1.31%) and Atlantic horse mackerel (2.0%) See Table 5.

Table 5 Percentage of total retained catch from the 1st of January to the 30th of April and from the 1st of September to the 31st of December (ICES Area VIIIab) by the Unit of Assessment from 2010 to 2013 (based on logbooks data by trip provided by AZTI) Species (scientific name) 2010 2011 2012 2013 Sardina pilchardus 84,34% 92,07% 95,05% 89,88% Engraulis encrasicolus 6,37% 2,92% 0,01% 3,47% Trachurus trachurus 4,83% 1,75% 0,55% 0,87% Scomber colias 3,32% 2,94% 3,11% 1,98% Scomber scombrus 0,60% 0,00% 1,12% 3,50% Trachurus mediterraneus 0,26% 0,23% 0,15% 0,19% Sarda sarda 0,16% 0,01% 0,00% 0,00% Sparidae 0,08% 0,01% 0,00% 0,00% Mugilidae 0,03% 0,00% 0,00% 0,01% Belone belone 0,01% 0,04% 0,00% 0,00% Boops boops 0,01% 0,02% 0,01% 0,06% Argyrosomus regius 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Dicentrarchus labrax 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,01% Lithognathus mormyrus 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Oblada melanura 0,00% 0,01% 0,00% 0,00% Osteichthyes 0,00% 0,01% 0,00% 0,01% Pagellus acarne 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Pagellus bogaraveo 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Pagellus erythrinus 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Sarpa salpa 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Sciena umbra 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Scomberesox saurus 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% Sparus aurata 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,02% Trachinus draco 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00%

Considering the MSC definition of main retained species, i.e. over 5% of the total catch, or which can be considered as vulnerable, or of particularly high value; only anchovy is considered further for scoring this principle. However, the fishery catches represent on average 2010-2013 1.5% of total international stock catches.

‹ Anchovy

The Bay of Biscay anchovy stock is annually assessed by ICES. The assessment model used is a two-stage Bayesian biomass dynamic model (CBBM) that provides the probability distribution for SSB, and thus the risk of SSB falling below B lim can be estimated directly (ICES, 2014; Ibaibarriaga et al., 2011). In the latest assessment, the 2014 SSB is estimated at around 66000 tonnes average (between 93000 and 47000 tonnes), which is three times more than B lim (21000 tonnes), i.e. biomass under which recruitment is likely to be impaired. Even considering the lowest probabilistic range in the estimates of the 2014 stock biomass, it is still double B lim . Stock biomass has been above B lim since 2010 and it is presently at historical high levels (ICES, 2014).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 21

The fisheries targeting Bay of Biscay anchovy are managed through a TAC and technical measures such as gear and vessels specifications, minimum landings size and closed areas. The EC proposed a long-term management plan in 2009. This plan is yet to be formally adopted by the EU due to administrative delays. Nevertheless, the plan has been used to establish the TAC between 1st July and 30th June from 2010 onwards, since the consecutive fishery closures between July 2005 and December 2009. The management plan follows a harvest control rule (HRC) that should ensure the exploitation of the anchovy at high yields, guarantee the stability of the fishery and have a low risk of stock collapse (EC, 2009). The harvest strategy has been tested by STECF and has proven to be robust to low recruitment scenarios and limited changes in the quota uptake between semesters, and thus was deemed precautionary (STECF, 2013, 2014).

3.4.2. Bycatch species

According to MSC standard, bycatch species are species in the catch that are not retained and that are discarded, as well as those that die as a result of unobserved fishing mortality where those species have not already been assessed under Principle 1 as target species or under the other components in Principle 2. In addition, “main” bycatch species are identified as those species which constitute over 5% of the total catch, or which can be considered as vulnerable, and are discarded.

The most abundant seabirds species in the Bay of Biscay are: gannets ( Sula bassana ), herring gull ( Larus argentatus ), black-backed gulls ( Larus focus and Larus miritimus ), kittiwakes ( Rissa tridactyla ) and auks (i.e. guillemot ( Uria aalge ), razorbills ( Alca torda ) and Atlantic puffins ( Fratercula arctica ) (Certain & Bretagnolle, 2008 in Lassalle et al., 2011). Nevertheless, there was no bycatch of seabirds reported in Perez et al., (1996) study by the purse-seine fishery. Furthermore, in the SAILKA project in 2013, that had the objective of determining survival rates of discarded fish by the purse-seine fishery, 28 hauls were observed in normal fishing operations and again no bycatch of seabirds occurred (AZTI, personal communication).

Although it has been 20 years since the Perez et al., (1996) study, according to the information gathered at the site visit from AZTI and fishers, the fishery seems to continue to operate in a similar fashion and catches and discards are somewhat comparable. The main bycatch fish species associated with the purse-seine Bay of Biscay sardine fishery are also those species that have commercial value and are often landed as retained species. The

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 22

skippers of vessel interviewed described also catches of squid ( Loligo sp. ) that are normally consumed by the crew, and often sunfish (Mola mola) and blue shark (Prionace glauca) that are released alive. The blue shark is classified as Near Threatened by IUCN Red List but does not have any legal protection in European waters.

Considering the MSC definition of bycatch species, only horse mackerel is likely to have significant discards over 5% of total catch, and therefore, for precautionary reasons, is going to be considered further as the main bycatch species.

‹ Horse mackerel

Regarding horse mackerel, ICES also evaluates the stock in Divisions IIa, IVa, Vb, VIa, VIIa- c, e-k, and Subarea VIII (Western stock) annually. In its most recent advice, ICES concludes that SSB, which has varied between 0.65 and 1.72 million tonnes during 1995–2012, is estimated to be at 0.64 million tonnes in 2014, one of the lowest in the time series and puts the stock at almost B trigger (0.63). Fishing mortality has been increasing since 2007 and is now above FMSY . Recruitment has been low from 2004 onwards. Since the 2014 stock biomass is the second lowest in the time series, and recruitment continues to be low, the stock is likely to be outside safe biological limits (ICES, 2013).

The fisheries targeting horse mackerel are managed under the CFP with the global objective of the stock to be maintained at levels that can support MSY. Western horse mackerel is managed through a TAC, minimum landings size and closed areas. It is also subjected to the Landing Obligation from 2015. Since 2008, a management plan has been used to set the horse mackerel EU TAC. The management plan was initially deemed precautionary by ICES in the short term only, because some relevant scenarios were not evaluated. Further evaluation in 2013 suggests that, in its current configuration, the HCR is not robust to more than 2 years of very low recruitment (ICES, 2013).

Although the general management approach is likely to work in the long term as the reductions of the TACs, associated to a Landing Obligation, should lead to a limit on fishing mortality, the TACs have been set above scientific advice for the last 2 years. A revised management plan is currently under development (ICES, 2014) which is likely to take into account periods of low recruitment in the HCR. However, until this revised management plan is not evaluated to be precautionary and used to set the TACs, the harvest strategy is not meeting its objectives of preventing the main targeted fisheries of hindering stock recovery and rebuilding.

3.4.3. ETP species According to MSC standard, ETP (Endangered, Threatened or Protected) species are those that are recognised by national legislation and/or binding international agreements (e.g. CITES) to which the jurisdictions controlling the fishery under assessment are party.

Law 42/2007, of 13 December, on Natural Heritage and Biodiversity, gives absolute protection to wildlife throughout Spain and its surrounding marine Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and its scope extends to the Spanish fleet in international waters. The aforementioned law covers the List of Wild Species under a Special Protection Regime, which includes species, subspecies and populations that need specific care or protection, based on their scientific, ecological, cultural value, as well as their uniqueness, rarity, or how endangered they are, along with those listed as protected in the annexes of the Guidelines and international agreements ratified by Spain. The list was modified by Royal Decree

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 23

1015/2013, of 20 of December, regulating annexes I, II, and V of Law 42/2007, of 13 of December, on Natural Heritage and Biodiversity. See Table 6.

The most likely ETP species affected by purse-seine in the Bay of Biscay are marine mammals and turtles. The most abundant marine mammal species in the Bay of Biscay are: the common dolphin ( Delphinus delphis ), the striped dolphin ( Stenella coeruleoalba ), the bottlenose dolphin ( Tursiops truncatus ), the long-finned pilot whale ( Globicephala melas ) and the harbour porpoise ( Phocoena phocoena ) (Lassalle et al., 2011, 2012).

The following policy statements and regulation apply or are in force and relate to varying degrees to the protection of marine mammals in European waters: EC Regulation 812/2004 laying down measures concerning incidental catches of cetaceans, the EU Habitat Directive on the conservation of natural habitats and ASCOBANS (Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas). The EC Regulation 812/2004 obliges the use of deterrents (ex. pingers) in specific fisheries to avoid contact with cetaceans and also requires monitoring by observers of incidental catches in specific fisheries. The EU Habitats Directive also requires member states to undertake monitoring to determine the levels of incidental mortality for certain species. Finally, ASCOBANS aims to restore and/or maintain biological or management stocks of small cetaceans at the level they would reach when there is the lowest possible anthropogenic influence and proposes to reach these aims through coordinating and implementing conservation measures for small cetaceans.

In an ecosystem study of the fisheries impacts on marine top predators in the Bay of Biscay, Lassalle et al. (2012) concluded that fisheries, in addition to causing significant bycatch mortalities on the common dolphin and harbour porpoise (operational interactions), were demonstrated to affect the bottlenose dolphin through direct, and most probably indirect, competition for food (biological interactions). This study however, considered the totality of fisheries present in the Bay of Biscay, which included for example pelagic trawl that have a higher likelihood of cetacean’s bycatch and prey catches.

The Bay of Biscay sardine purse-seine fishery is not required to follow the provisions of EC Regulation 812/2004 described above since their impact is deemed low. In addition, any marine mammal that is eventually caught in a purse-seine is usually released alive by slippage, and the contact with the gear is minimized by the fishers as this can damage the gear and cause substantial costs. Furthermore, and although there have been occasional interactions between dolphins and purse-seines, there has never been reports of an incident of marine mammal bycatch. In a 1994-1995 study of the discard pattern of the Spanish fisheries based on observers at sea programme, Perez et al., (1996) reported that there was no bycatch of marine mammals or marine reptiles by the purse-seine fishery. Furthermore, in the SAILKA project in 2013, that had the objective of determining survival rates of discarded fish by the purse-seine fishery, 28 hauls were observed in normal fishing operations and again no bycatch of marine mammals or marine reptiles occurred (AZTI, personal communication).

Regarding ETP fish species, the ones that can be found in coastal waters could potentially be caught by purse seiners. These are adult shad, salmon and sea trout that move towards coastal waters in the spring (shad) and in the summer/autumn (salmon and sea trout). Juveniles are found along the coast in spring (MSC sardine assessment). Both species of shad ( Alosa alosa and Alosa fallax ), as well as the Atlantic salmon, are considered to be vulnerable at European level and are included in Appendix III of the Bern Convention (1992) and in Appendices II and V of the Habitats Directive (1994). Nevertheless, there has been no reporting of catches of these species by purse-seines, and considering that the fleet

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 24

operates mainly in offshore areas, the assessment team considers that the likelihood of catching one of this species is very low.

Table 6 Summary of the ETPs which might interact with the fleet and the national regulation for protection. Source: Royal Decree 1015/2013, of 20 of December, regulating annexes I, II, and V of Law 42/2007

Annex II Annex V species requiring the species requiring strict designation of special protection under the conservation areas under the Habitats Directive Habitats Directive Cetaceans Phocoena phocoena All cetaceans Tursiops truncatus Fishes Alosas sp. NA Salmonidae

3.4.4. Habitat There are several areas that have special protection in the Bay of Biscay and Cantabrian Sea deriving from OSPAR or Natura 2000 obligations (Figure 5). The main areas are Iroise Marine Park and Arcachon Basin Marine Park in France 1 and El Cachucho Protected Area in Spain. These areas have been studied extensively and provided some knowledge on the seabed habitat of the Bay of Biscay.

Figure 5. Map of the Bay of Biscay showing the location of all Marine Protected Areas under national legislation, the OSPAR Convention and Natura 2000. Source: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/explore-interactive- maps/european-protected-areas-1

There is good also information regarding to the habitat characteristics of many areas of the European seas, through several international projects and integrated efforts (EUSeaMap, EMODnet, MeshAtlantic), which can provide predicted habitats for many areas including the Bay of Biscay (Figures 6, 7).

http://www.aires-marines.fr/Les-aires-marines-protegees/Carte- interactive/(zone)/Oc%C3%A9an+Atlantique

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 25

Figure 6. Map of the Bay of Biscay showing the habitat type of all Marine Protected Areas. Source: http://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/default.aspx?page=1974

Figure 7. Map of the Bay of Biscay showing the seabed habitat type (yellow areas are sandy substrates) Source: http://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/default.aspx?page=1974

Although only 19% of the total EEZ area of the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Peninsula is mapped, most of the habitat mapping effort is located at 200 meters depths and shallower (Galparsoro et al., 2014). Since a large area of the Bay of Biscay is delimited by the 200 meters bathymetry, the percentage of seabed mapping coverage is significantly higher. In total, the Bay of Biscay encompasses 42 benthic habitats (Figure 7).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 26

Figure 7. Bay of Biscay bathymetry profile. Source: AZTI

Since the fishery uses a gear designed to operate in mid-water and to catch pelagic species it is likely to have negligible impact on benthic habitats. The purse-seine used by the Spanish Bay of Biscay sardine fishery is large (80 meters depth by 550 meters length) but only rarely comes into to contact with the sea bottom as it can be damaged by it, incurring significant costs for fishers. Furthermore, the fishery operates usually over the same fishing grounds, over sandy bottoms and in offshore areas, areas that do not contain vulnerable habitats such as cold-water coral reefs or sea fans, minimizing possible impacts in benthic communities. Finally, VMS data from the fishing fleet is available to the Spanish authorities and there is no evidence that fishing occurred in protected areas.

3.4.5. Ecosystem The Ecosystem component considers the broad ecological community and ecosystem in which the fishery operates. Besides removing target species, fishing also affects the structure of the food -web by removing prey species, which may play an important role in regulating the upper trophic levels.

In the Bay of Biscay ecosystem sardine, together with anchovy, sprat, mackerel and horse mackerel, are the dominant low trophic level species, and as such they transfer a very large proportion of the total primary production through the lower part of the food web (Lassalle et al., 2011).

Furthermore, anchovy is the preferential prey to several high level trophic predators such as tuna (Goñi et al., 2012) and seabirds, while in the Bay of Biscay ecosystem phytoplanktonic and zooplanktonic are the keystone species (Lassalle et al., 2011). Bottom-up processes play a significant role in the population dynamics of upper-trophic-levels and in the global structuring of this marine ecosystem. There is also a marked bottom-up control of small pelagic fish by mesozooplanktonic prey and not by their predators (Lassalle et al., 2011).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 27

3.5. Principle Three: Management System Background

3.5.1 Fishery area of operation

The fishery area of operation is ICES Subarea VIIIa,b (Bay of Biscay) in European Union- managed waters, with only Spain and France allowed catching this species in this area.

As well as the relevant fishery organisations and associations, the main interest groups for this fishery are the Spanish central government, the relevant Autonomous Regions (Cantabria and the Basque Country), and the European Union (EU).

The Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación, y Medio Ambiente (MAGRAMA) is responsible for managing fishing activity in Spain. The Secretaría General de Pesca (SGP) is part of this Ministry and is responsible for carrying out this task.

The SGP Departments are shown below:

The Dirección General de Ordenación Pesquera (Directorate General for Fisheries Regulation) has the following roles relating to this particular fishing activity:

• Fleet planning and regulation. • The management and monitoring of the registry of sea fishing vessels, the registry of fishing boats, and the Official Register of Fishery Companies in Third Countries. • The management of the registry of the sector's professionals. • The management and coordination of EU funds for fishing. • To act as the authority for the management of the European Fisheries Fund and any other future Fund that replaces it. • The planning of economic activity with respect to the marketing and processing of fish, shellfish, and aquaculture products. • Promotion of the creation and control of the activity of both fish producer organisations and other sector representative institutions. • The collection, processing, and verification of the information regarding the activities included in the area of Common Fishing Policy. • Fisheries inspection and coordination of additional services required for the inspection. • Those derived from EU regulation in terms of being a single liaison office responsible for applying the system of mutual assistance between Member States.

Within the Directorate there are the following Subdirectorates: • Subdirección General de Política Estructural (Subdirectorate General for Structural Policy) • Subdirección General de Economía Pesquera (Subdirectorate General for Fishery Economy) • Subdirección General de Control e Inspección (Subdirectorate General for Control and Inspection)

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 28

The Dirección General de Recursos Pesqueros y Acuicultura (Directorate General for Fishing Resources and Aquaculture) has the following roles in fishing activity:

• Those derived from exercising competency over sea fishing in national fishing grounds and EU waters. • The coordination of all activities relating to the Common Fisheries Policy. • To coordinate preparation for the European Union Council of Ministers in the SGP area of competency. • The monitoring of the negotiation and execution of the fishing agreements between the European Union and third countries within the SGP area of competency. • The search for new fishing possibilities and fishing investments in those countries. • Those derived from European Union, and where appropriate, Spanish involvement in the regional fisheries management organisations and other international fishing organisations, without affecting the competencies of other central government departments. • The planning of fishing research activity in coordination with other central government departments with relevant competencies. • The monitoring of fishing resource status with the aim of providing advice on the adoption of measures aimed at protecting, managing, conserving, and regenerating fishing resources, within the framework of the SGP competencies. • The planning of fishing research activity in coordination with other central government departments with relevant competencies. • The monitoring of fishing resource status with the aim of providing advice on the adoption of measures aimed at protecting, managing, conserving, and regenerating fishing resources, within the framework of the SGP competencies. • The protection and proposal to declare protected fishing areas in coordination with autonomous regions where relevant.

Within the Directorate there are the following Subdirectorates: • Subdirección General de Caladero Nacional, Aguas Comunitarias y Acuicultura (Subdirectorate General of National Waters, EU waters, and Aquaculture). • Subdirección General de Acuerdos y Organizaciones Regionales de Pesca (Subdirectorate General for Fishing Agreements and Regional Fishing Organisations). • Subdirección General de Protección de los Recursos Pesqueros (Subdirectorate General for the Protection of Fishing Resources).

When it comes to Autonomous Regions (AR) and the specific case of Cantabria, the Consejería de Ganadería, Pesca y Desarrollo Rural (Livestock, Fishing, and Rural Development Council) is responsible for fishing. The Dirección General de Pesca y Alimentación (Directorate General for Fish and Food) within the Council has the following main fishing related tasks:

• Promoting the fishing and food and agriculture industries. • Providing guidance for the Fisherman Associations and their Federation. • Proposing general regulations. Monitoring and controlling compliance of the current regulation, including the processing of inquiries, the corresponding proposals or resolutions, and ensuring they are applied effectively.

The Directorate is responsible for collecting fish market sales notes, and the Inspection Service shares responsibility with the SGP inspection and control services for controlling the landings and sizes.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 29

For the Basque Country, the Departamento de Desarrollo Económico y Competitividad del Gobierno Vasco (Department of Economic Development and Competitiveness of the Basque Country Government) is responsible for issues relating to fishing and aquaculture in the Basque AR. As well as employing similar inspection and control services to those in Cantabria, this Department is responsible for applying for funding from the European Fisheries Fund.

At a national level, Law 3/2001, of 26 March, on National Sea Fisheries, establishes the legal parameters for fishing activities, essentially covering the contents of European regulation.

The EU fish management system is essentially governed by the EC. Through the Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (DGMARE), the Commission is responsible for proposing, approving, and applying EU fishing regulations throughout the EU. The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is the current EU management framework, which was recently reformed and took effect through Regulation (EU) n° 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 11 December 2013.

There are some management measures in place for this fishery in both EU and National policy. However, there are no explicitly defined and specific short and long-term management objectives for the purse seine sardine fishery. There is no specific management plan for the Bay of Biscay (VIIIa,b,d) sardines.

As there is insufficient data for the stock, there are no defined benchmarks for this fishery. ICES evaluate the stock every two years using data from landings and two oceanographic cruises (PELGAS and BIOMAN). ICES has advised reducing sardine catches for 2014 and 2015. The progressive increase in catches between 2011-2013 led to the precautionary measures being implemented.

3.5.2 Details of the decision-making process or processes, including the recognised participants

The decision-making process can be considered to be well developed, given the use of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and its integrated advisory structure, comprised of the STECF / SWWAC / European Commission and ACFA, as well as the different interested parties having the option to participate in the decision-making. The outcomes of the technical meetings and scientific councils are considered when taking decisions on fisheries management. The formula to calculate the TAC was changed last year after scientists provided new data and has been accepted by all parties.

The South West Waters Advisory Council (SWWAC) for area VIII involves all interested parties in the management of Atlantic fisheries from southern Europe, including the sardine fishery, and has the following missions:

- To propose recommendations to the European Commission and the Member States resulting from a consensus between the fisheries sector and civil organisations. - To respond to the range of consultations launched by the European Commission (communications, Regulation proposals...).

European fisheries management also involves taking decisions based on the best available scientific data. The European Commission receives advice from several scientific

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 30

organisations. Also, in the event of data gaps, the EU has the means to fund studies and projects in the short, medium, and long term with the aim of rectifying the lack of data and, as such, fulfilling the CFP objectives. The Commission's scientific advisory organisations for this fishery are the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) and the ICES.

All the interested parties can generally access the relevant information on the status of the fishery with respect to both its technical and administrative management, as well as the available scientific data. ICES can be consulted for the annual stock assessment results and STECF and ACFA reports and recommendations can also be accessed. The outcomes of the deliberations of the EU Fisheries Commission are also available via their communications and regulations.

All the reports, regulations, and recommendations on this fishery are analysed and discussed in the SWWAC, meaning all interested parties have access to most of the available data.

The Spanish Government regularly convenes the sector to inform them of the resolutions and changes that affect or may affect the fishery, and they work hand in hand to find the best solution. This also means that the Government has first-hand knowledge of the sector's worries and concerns.

Spain is yet to establish a specific management plan, even though the species is captured regularly and has become a complement to the Bay of Biscay. However, others fisheries such as France and the UK have established specific management measures for this fisheries’ activities, which have led to MSC certification being awarded.

When it comes to the fleets, Spanish purse-seiners fishing in the Bay of Biscay are between 14 and 38 m in length, and mainly catch pelagic species such as sardine. This fleet also changes its fishing gear to pole and line in summer to target tuna ( Thunnus spp .). The Basque purse seine fleet is a multispecies fleet that traditionally spreads its activity across three seasons: the mackerel season (approximately February to May), the sardine season (approximately April to June), and the tuna season (approximately June to November) (Andrés & Prellezo, 2012).

General fishery framework: EU management based on ICES advice

Via the CFP, the EU management system creates, respects, and ensures legal rights, which are expressly created or established for the practices of people dependant on fishing for their food or livelihood.

Through the application of the most recent reforms of the CFP, the EU has set quantifiable long-term objectives to achieve and / or maintain secure levels of fish stocks in European waters, as well as the necessary measures to achieve those levels. As such, an annual TAC can be part of a set of management tools within the framework of a multi-annual strategy to manage fisheries in the form of Management Plans. This is not the case for the sardine.

The proposal has considered the results of a consultation process in which the Commission consulted the Member States, as well as representatives of the interested parties in the regional advisory councils, and the SWWAC, in particular.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 31

When it comes to MCS activities, the EU Member States are responsible for complying with the agreed regulations within the CFP framework at an EU level. The European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) was set up in 2007. Its goal is to coordinate fisheries inspection and control operational activities of Member States, as well as provide assistance to the Member States in their application of the CFP.

In Spain, the Subdirección de Control e Inspección is part of the SGP, which is the competent authority for MCS activities both in sea and on land, which coordinates the different activities in this area, occasionally supported by the Autonomous Regions.

Also, since Regulation (EC) Nº 1077/2008 took effect in 2008, laying down detailed rules on electronic recording and reporting of fishing activities, as well as means of remote sensing, it has become compulsory to use an Onboard Electronic Logbook (OEL) on most fishing boats, which reports data on each boat's catch to the control centres. In Spain, this data is sent to the Centro de Seguimiento de Pesca (CSP), located in the facilities of the Subdirección General de Control e Inspección of the SGP (Madrid).

In addition, boats over 15 metres long are obliged to use so-called blue or VMS boxes, which allow the boat to be monitored every two hours, indicating its precise position and the nature of the activity being undertaken at the time (fishing, sailing, etc.) As well as in situ inspections, both in port and at sea, they are also subject to a specific Europe-wide control via a European Union monitoring plan for pelagic fisheries in the western waters of the North East Atlantic, which is coordinated by the EFCA.

There is a list of authorised ports for landing catches, which are subject to the control measures specified in the management plans.

The AR role in the management essentially involves coordination between Madrid and the AR on the closure of the fishery and the sending of sales notes to the SGP for collation with the OEL data.

The Cantabrian sardine fishery has a research programme linked to existing programme for anchovy fishery. The available scientific data essentially comes from ICES Working Groups on this fishery. Scientists from the most important scientific institutions involved in fishery and marine research in each country participate in the ICES Working Groups. In Spain and this specific fishery, these are essentially scientists from the Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO) and the Basque scientific research center named Azti-Tecnalia.

The IEO has a key role in ICES' work. It is the official Spanish representative in both this organisation and the working groups, and contributes resources and knowledge.

The Institute's scientific research forms the basis for their advisory work with the Spanish government. The Institute provides the following data to the SGP: the status of the fishery resources caught where the Spanish fleets operate; the fishing possibilities in the new area; the maintenance and improvement of coastal areas; the areas appropriate for the establishment of marine reserves or of aquaculture interest; and related issues. It also informs about issues involving marine pollution and environmental protection.

In addition, AZTI-Tecnalia, part of the Basque Government, undertakes research in the Basque fisheries with collaboration from the sector and the main European research centres, within the framework of international organisations such as ICCAT, IOTC, ICES/CIEM, NAFO, STECF, etc. Their involvement is to prepare scientific advice on the different levels of

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 32

fishery resource exploitation so the respective political authorities can establish the appropriate management measures to ensure the activity remains sustainable.

AZTI monitors all landings in the Basque Country, comparing the fish market data with the data in the logbook. National coordination meetings are held twice a year during which data from scientific centres with delegated competencies is shared. These essentially include: AZTI, IEO, ICES, and CSIC.

Annual oceanographic campaigns are undertaken to assess the status of the small pelagic populations in the Cantabrian Sea, and the results are incorporated into the management plan.

All the data is used to update the management plan in accordance with the best available scientific data.

4. Evaluation Procedure

4.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment

Considering the definition of overlapping fisheries from the MSC “ Two 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 ”, the Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery and the Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine fishery , both of which are being assessed, can be said to overlap and require such an overlapping assessment.

BV announced and concurrently started an assessment of this fishery, analysing the same fleet (See the Certification Unit), given that the same client contracted both processes in this case. This means there are some shared aspects, such as the European (ICES, EU), national (MAGRAMA), and regional (Basque Country and Cantabria) management bodies. When it comes to Principle 2 components, although the same type of fishing gear is used and the operations are similar, catch composition differs and therefore the assessment results cannot be combined. Lastly, harmonisation does not apply to P1, as target species are different between the two fisheries.

With the aim of optimising time-scales and resources for each assessment, the certification body decided to undertake both processes at the same time whenever possible. The site visit was one example, given that the stakeholders are the same. Data was collected on both fisheries during the visit for later analysis and scoring. However, after the site visit the process followed completely different timeframes. The certificate of the Cantabrian sea purse seine anchovy fishery was awarded on July 2015.

On the other hand, two other sardine fisheries certified since 2010 and starting their re- assessments in 2015 (clearly overlapped with this candidate fishery):

• Cornwall sardine, UK • South Brittany sardine purse seine

Both were harmonized since the beginning of their assessments. Since the start of this certification process the team has been in contact with the Cornish fishery CAB (ME Certification LTD) and with the South Brittany sardine team (Bureau Veritas France).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 33

The assessment teams for the three fisheries (Spanish, Cornish and French) conducted discussions to ensure that the three assessments did not draw inconsistent conclusions with respect to target stock status and fishery management. Principle 1 and Principle 3 Performance Indicators (PIs) were agreed following similar rationales and the same scores. Moreover, the Risk Based Framework (RBF) results were discussed together reaching also the same results for the sardine stock outcome. Appendix 1.2 describes the RBF harmonization in more detail.

Furthermore, all the clients worked together to prepare a Common Management Strategy Commitment for the target stock (Appendix 3), in particular regarding performance indicators 1.2.1 and 1.2.2. The SWWAC organized several meetings with the attendance of the interested stakeholders (French and Spanish fishermen and researchers, including BV) to put forward the Commitment. The final version of the Common Management Strategy Commitment was agreed and sent to the CABs 27 July 2016. The members of the three teams assessed the information attached in Appendix 3 and used it to re-scored P1 PIs, resulting in a weighted average score for P1 equal or more than 80. The document was also used as evidence of the achievement of the conditions 1 and 2.

4.2 Assessment Methodologies

This fishery was assessed using version 1.3 of the MSC Certification Requirements and version 1.3 of the MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template.

After the stakeholder consultation process, the assessment team concluded there was insufficient data to score PI 1.1.1 using the default tree outcome according to Table AC2 of the MSC Certification Requirements (V1.3). The Risk Base Framework (RBF) was used to evaluate the sardine stock (PI 1.1.1) because reference limit points are not described by Blim or Flim, and stock status in relation to target references points cannot be determined.

Following the site visit, the RBF outcomes were evaluate together with two other MSC assessments for the same stock of sardines as part of the harmonisation process. Several consultation actions were organised by both CABs to reach a harmonised conclusion. Full details of the harmonisation process, which relates strongly to the RBF process is summarised in the following table:

Since the announcement of the assessment until November 2015 Several harmonization meeting happened BV assessment team between the 2 CABs to discuss and agree on MEC assessment team RBF results. Stakeholders and clients 16 November 2015 Meeting with the MSC for RBF interpretation. MSC FAM The topics of discussion were the RBF BV assessment team methodology, application of the susceptibility MEC assessment team attributes of the PSA, SICA condition. Stakeholders: AZTI

As a result a RBF scored was agreed and the Final report of the Spanish sardine was published 8 th December 2015. January 2016

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 34

The RBF results were reconsidered as non-MSC fisheries were not included originally in the information-gathering portion of the RBF process. Several emails and conferences occurred between Spanish, French and Cornish teams with the aim of gathering information from other fleets that targets sardine. In addition, new stakeholders were contacted from Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands and Ireland. The information gained was about gears used, their areas and operation to accompany the catch data presented in ICES WGHANSA Report (ICES, 2015). 4 Februa ry 2016 Conference call with the ICES working group BV assessment team chairman. MEC assessment team The topics discussed were gear use of non- Stakeholders: AZTI, IFREMER MSC fisheries targeting sardine stock under assessment. 4 March 2016 Conference call with the following agenda: MSC FAM and MSC Spain • Spatial scale of the SICA BV assessment team • SICA condition MEC assessment team • Cut-off tables for the gears targeting ASI Senior auditor sardine. Stakeholders: AZTI • Discussion: Harmonization overlapping fisheries scoring for P1 and P3. 22 March 2016 Preparation of the final spatial outcomes of BV assessment team the RBF. During the meeting it was prepared Stakeholders: IFREMER, AZTI the areal overlap mapping (See Appendix 1.2). The details of the information gathered and the elaboration process is described on Appendix 1.2. 12 Abril 2016 Preparation of the final spatial outcomes of BV assessment team the RBF. MEC assessment team Writing of the results of the RBF and rationales agreed which are included in Appendix 1.2 of this report.

4.3 Evaluation Processes and Techniques

4.3.1 Site Visits and consultations

On-site consultation with the stakeholders took place in September 2014. This is a critical stage for collecting the necessary information in order to carry out a robust assessment of the fishery. In the fisheries certification process, stakeholder is any person, group, or organisation who: a) may affect, or be affected by a certification decision, or b) has expressed an interest in the fishery being considered for certification assessment, and/or in other potentially affected resources; c) or has information relevant to the assessment of the fishery for MSC certification.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 35

The 3 members of the assessment team visited different sites in the Centre and North of Spain during the first week of September. The site visit was announced on the MSC website in August 2014 (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Locations visited during the site visit (1st to 4th September)

Initial contact via email explained the procedure for the assessment according to MSC standard. Stakeholders were informed about the stages process and were invited to participate. The stakeholders contacted are listed below:

Government agencies: • MAGRAMA, SGP: V Dirección General de Protección de los Recursos Pesqueros. V Subdirección General de Control e Inspección. V Subdirección General de Caladero Nacional, Aguas Comunitarias y Acuicultura.

• Dirección General de Pesca y Alimentación Cantábria. • Dirección General de Pesca y Acuicultura del País Vasco. • Instituto Español de Oceanografía. • AZTI Tecnalia. • IEO • ICES

Non-governmental conservation or other public interest organisations: • SWWAC • OCEANA • WWF • Ecologistas en Acción. • SEO Birdlife • Greenpeace

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 36

On agreeing to take part, they were emailed about the proposed visit to their facilities (date and location) and the information that would be required.

On confirming the date, time, and location, they received an official letter about the visit from the Bureau Veritas audit team, stating their participation as stakeholders in the fishery. The letter included a request for more detailed information based on the specific agency and respondent role. A scheduled programme of consultations took place with key stakeholders in the fishery – including skippers, scientists, fishery protection officers, NGOs, fishery managers and technical support staff. The agenda was as follows:

Monday, 1th September, 2014

Team members MAGRAMA. Carlos Montero (MSC ) Subdirección General Enrique Cárdenas (MAGRAMA) de Protección de los

Recursos Pesqueros. Place: Madrid

Tuesday, 2 th September 2014

Team members Dirección General de Pilar Pereda Pesca y Alimentación Borja Sanchez Cantabria Place: Santander, Cantabria

Team members Cofradía de Laredo Javier Montero (Client). Responsable of the Cofradía de Laredo

Team members Ondarroa harbour Carlos Fernando San Martín (vessel Nuestro padre Tonino) Antonio San Martín (vessel Nuestra madre Juanita)

Wednesday, 3 th September 2014

Team members Andres Uriarte (AZTI): Anchovy assessment and ICES work group member. Responsible for monitoring pelagic fisheries in the Basque Country (AZTI). AZTI produces the reports on Spain for the EU. In coordination with the IEO. Leire Ibaibarriaga (AZTI): Coordinator of anchovy stock assessment from AZTI, ICES & Client the ICES working group. group Martín Aranda (AZTI): Demersal resources management area. Iñaki Artetxe Responsible for monitoring the data collected in port Miren Garmendia (OPEGUI & OPESCAYA). Eusebio Arantzamendi: President of the Ondarroa Association. Josu Ezenarro: Secretary of the Getaria Association. Iñaki Zabaleta: The Bizkaya Federation.

Team members Koldo Arrese Dirección de Pesca y Xabier Berrojalbiz: Legal Department Acuicultura del Pais Mauri González: Fishing inspection Vasco Andoni Idoiaga: Fisheries structures

Place: Bilbao, Vizcaya

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 37

Thursday 4 th September 2014

Team members Laura Rodriguez (MSC) Hector Villa González: Assistant Director-General Maria del Hierro: Control and inspection MAGRAMA: Borja Carmona: Electronic logbook Subdirección General Jaime Mayordomo: Electronic logbook de Control e Ana Arteaga: Pelagics Inspección Juan Leston: control and inspection Ignacio Fontaneda: National Fishing Ground, European Union waters, and aquaculture.

Place: Madrid

The information obtained from people interviewed during the meetings with stakeholders was significantly wide-ranging and variable. Macarena García Silva, as team leader, introduced the MSC and the assessment process on the fishery at the start of each meeting. The assistants then presented themselves and the meeting got under way.

After the presentation, the MSC Principles experts asked pertinent questions about the queries arising after assessing the initial information and requested any other information or documentation that may help when scoring the fishery.

All the relevant information on stock status, ecosystem interactions, and fishery management practices was collected. The following main issues were discussed:

CLIENT • Detail on the fishing methods, bycatch species and rates and practice MAGRAMA • Fisheries management overall framework. • ICCAT recommendations. • Other management tools. • Scientific campaigns on the resources. • How the scientific studies are undertaken. • Harbour opperations. Departamento de • Collection of sales notes to send to Madrid. pesca y acuicultura • Inspection service (13 inspectors). Fish market inspections de Cantabria checking the landing volumes do not exceed the individual boat levels and size controls. The inspectors step up the controls with support from the Secretaría during the fishing season. • Traceability (sales note). AZTI • Scientific data on the stock. • Design and communication process behind the regulations • Technical assistance tasks • Monitoring of compliance and poaching • Fishery assessment in terms of sustainability • Levels of by-catch or retained species • Data Collection and Statistics MAGRAMA. Control • General management system: TAC and quotas. system • Control and surveillance system. • Sanction system and types of sanctions.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 38

• Species retained by the fishery. • The current regulation. • Registry of vessels. • Poaching control and monitoring actions • Studies on biomass, stock status • The profitability of the activity

4.3.2 Evaluation Techniques

Email was used for all assessment process communications to all fishery stakeholders, along with the public announcements via the MSC website. CAB contacted several stakeholders but they had no specific cause for concern about the impact of the fishery given its small scale and good reputation. Team members were involved searching for stakeholders, and environmental NGOs and scientific researchers in particular, which were felt to be the most appropriate way to make the public announcements.

After compiling and analysing all the relevant technical, written, and anecdotal information, the team scored the fishery regarding to “Performance Indicators and Scoring Guideposts” in the final tree. The assessment team held two scoring meetings by conference call.

In order for the fishery to achieve certification, none of the Performance Indicators can be scored under 60. In order to achieve a score of 80, all of the 60 scoring issues and every one of the 80 issues must be compliant, with each scoring issue supported with justification. In addition, the fishery must obtain a score of 80 or more in each of the MSC’s three Principles, which are based on the weighted average score for all Criteria and Sub-criteria under each Principle.

Table 7 Scoring elements Component Scoring elements Main/not Data - main deficient or not Retained species Engraulis encrasicolus Main Retained species Trachurus mediterraneus Not main Not Retained species Scomber japonicus Not main Not Retained species Boops boops Not main Not

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 39

5 Traceability

5.1 Eligibility Date

The target eligibility date is set 6 months before the PCDR publication date. The PCDR was published 10 December 2016 therefore the TED is 10 May 2016. The rationale for this date is based on the delay that the fishery has suffered due to a long harmonization process and significant modifications which led to a new version of the PCDR (V1). The fishery will have a significant consequence of not having sardine catches since the beginning of the landings before the certification date. The CAB informed the fishery that any fish harvested after the eligibility date and sold or stored as under-assessment fish shall be handled in conformity with relevant under-assessment product requirements in the MSC Chain of Custody standard.

This means that any fish caught by the fleet within the UoC following that date will be eligible to enter the chain of custody as certified product if and when certification is ultimately granted. At that time, the tracking, tracing, and segregation systems within the fishery were operating properly to ensure the sardine from the fishery under assessment comes from the ICES division VIIIa,b. The measures taken by the client to account for risks within the traceability of the fishery – and therefore generating confidence in the use of this date for target eligibility – are detailed in the rest of this section.

5.2 Traceability within the Fishery

5.2.1 A description of the tracking, tracing, and segregation systems within the fishery. An evaluation of the robustness of the traceability system The fleet being assessed usually fishes at night when sardine move up to the surface to spawn. The fishermen reach the landing points at dawn and start the offloading process.

The fishermen at the auction points included in the certification offload the catches daily. The market staff weighs and enter it as lots into the computer system. The lots are traced from their origin. The auction staff ensures the sardine weighing complies with the regulation.

European legislation is applicable to the first sale of fishing products, specifically Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1966/2006 regarding the information to be transmitted by entities or persons responsible for first sale or take-over. They have to be registered and authorised by Member States as responsible for the first sale of fishery products and shall transmit information required to be recorded in a sales note by electronic means to the competent authorities of the Member State in whose territory the first marketing takes place.

The transposition into Spanish legislation was Real Decreto 1822/2009 which regulates the first sale of fishing products, captured by European Union vessels, which land or unload in the national territory, as well as the first sales of fishing products captured by third country vessels that work in European Union waters. The regulation was amended by the Real Decreto 418/2015 .

These first sales for fishing products in Spain can be undertaken at points in authorised locations, and by auction, during which it is not possible to have second auctions, once the first has been adjudicated: a) Live, fresh, and refrigerated products: The first sale of fishing

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 40

products is to be undertaken in port auction points, through organisations certified and authorised to undertake the aforementioned activity.

The same regulation establishes the requisites for the establishments where the first sale occurs, in order to comply with the monitoring obligations in the EU regulation. The requisites are as follows:

a) Possess sufficient and adequate computer equipment for electronic gathering of all data within the required period for the transactions undertaken within them for their statistical monitoring and transmission to the competent body of the autonomous community and, if applicable, to the Government. b) Possess verified weighing systems for the characteristics of the fishery products being transacted. c) Publish the hours of operation and notify the first sales in advance, regardless of the location in which they occur.

The sales process continues with the labelled lots being put out to public auction. Any authorised buyer can participate in the public auctions at the fish market (by registering with the fish market and meeting the relevant legal requirements). An electronic Dutch auction system is used with buyers stopping it when they think the price is appropriate. The buyers select which lots they wish to take once the auction has been stopped. Any remaining unsold lots will be put back to auction until all the anchovies have been allocated (Figure 9).

The auction points have to issue an electronic document called a sales note, which must contain at least the following data:

a) Lot number. b) The commercial and scientific name of each species, as well as the Alfa-3 FAO code. c) Date and geographic area of capture. d) Identification of the unit of production. In the case of vessels of 10 or more metres it is also needed to indicate the fishing trip code. e) The size or weight of fresh fish products, along with the presentation and freshness, laying down common marketing standards for certain fishery products for the species it regulates. f) The quantities of each species sold and the price per kilo. g) Identification and the name and surname(s) or company name of the vendor and purchaser. h) The name of the ship owner or captain of the fishing vessel . i) The landing port and date, or location and date of the unload, or location and date of the import . j) Reference to the transport document, the take-over declaration, or the T2M document, DUA (Unique Customs Document). k) Fishing gear as appears in Annex III of the Reglamento (UE) Nº 1379/2013.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 41

Figure 9. Fish auction Cofradía de Laredo. Source: Luis Ambrosio

Figure 10. Example of two labels issued by the Cofradía de Bermeo and Cofradía de Laredo fish auction: details of the vessel (red rectangle); fish auction (green rectangle); ICES subdivision (orange rectangle). Source: Client

In addition to the previously explained sales note, the sales point generates a label that is attached to the fish until it is bought (Figure 10). The data on the label includes the vessel name, the zone of capture specifying ICES sub-division, the species, and the auction point.

The final step involves the fish auction billing the buyer for the product, given that they initially purchased the sardine to sell on to the buyers, whilst charging a commission to cover the facility costs. Product traceability is guaranteed throughout the process. (Figure 11).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 42

Figure 11 An example of a fish auction billing issued by the Cofradía de Getaria fish auction: name of the vessels (red rectangle); fish auction (green rectangle). Source: Cofradía de Getaria

The Directorate of the Autonomous Regions undertakes its monitoring responsibilities and duties in the port landing area and during the auction of the catch when it is first sold (fish markets). They may be there in an arbitrary capacity or to follow up specific complaints. Overall, they are responsible for collecting fish market sales notes, and both the Inspection Service and the SGP inspection and control services are responsible for controlling the landings and sizes.

5.2.2 An evaluation of whether vessels fish outside the unit of certification

The UoC covers an extensive area, ICES Subarea VIIIa,b,d and VII. However the fleet assessed operates mainly in Subarea VIIIb. The fleet offloads daily in the harbours. As such, it is unlikely vessels are operating in other areas.

In addition, there are many forces carrying out different control tasks and using effective tools with the fishery to record and report fishing activities as described in the PI 3.2.3. Moreover, the client has prepared a Protocol of action:

1. Delimit the fishing season from the 1st of January to the 30th of April and from the 1st of September to the 31st of December. 2. When the vessels direct their activity at sardine fishing zone VIIIa,b in that fishing trip, the trip runs from the moment the vessel gets out of the port till they return, they are not allow to fish in zone VIIIc. This condition is going to be communicated internally to all vessels. The auction point will announce the origin of the sardine before the sale. The vessels has to include the sardine fishing zone (subdivision) as they have been doing so far but the Producers Organization and Guild automatically have the logbook information to verify those areas where the sardine was caught 3. The tracking in the fishery that could be provided when required by stakeholders, auditors and MSC is the information covered in the logbook from each trip. The

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 43

timely information is accessible by the vessels and to OPEGUI & OPESCAYA by the use of an alternative logbook. 4. At the auction point the sardine area and ICES subdivision and the certification status will be clearly announced. 5. The label issued by the action point included in the Certificate clearly identifies the FAO zone and the ICES subdivision.

5.2.3 An evaluation of the opportunity for substituting certified fish for non-certified fish prior to and at the point of landing

Since the beginning of the fishery assessment, the CAB has considered the risk of substituting mixing certified / non-certified catch prior to point of landing. Given the proximity of the sardine stock from the ICES VIIIc area (suspended MSC fishery) to the coastal areas of the boats being evaluated, there is a potential risk of mixing sardine from a stock.

CAB took the following factors into account when evaluating:

1. It is compulsory for all certified boats to use an onboard electronic logbook. Among other data, these records and communicates the catches, zone of capture, species, and kilos offloaded to Central Government’s control and inspection centre on a daily basis.

2. On reaching the port, the boats are offloaded and they go to the auction points to sell the sardine, informing the auction manager of the zone of capture.

3. The auction point will inform from which stock the sardine is being sold, and will also inform the buyers.

4. The zone of capture will also appear in the sales note and in the fish auction label (Figure 10).

5. OPEGUI could check the zone of capture via the alternative DEA if necessary on a consignment of sardine sold from their associated boats.

The control system and traceability of the VIIIb sardine can be ensured using the set of tasks detailed above.

The scope of the certificate includes the main auction points of the Basque Country and the Cofradía de Laredo within the UoC (See 5.2.6). Consequently, certified fish from the vessels listed in Table 1 can only be sold through these sales points.

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 decrees that auction centres or other bodies or persons authorised by Member States, which are responsible for the first marketing of fishery products shall, upon first sale, submit a sales note to the competent authorities of the territory where the first marketing takes place. Article 19 of the same regulation requires Member States to create computerised databases and establish a validation system specifically including cross-checks and data verification.

Appendix (1), electronic information exchange format, states the message is in the form of a sales note (SAL) in which the following attributes need to be specified: • The start of the sales record • The vessel's Community fleet register number • The vessel’s call sign

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 44

• The vessel’s external identification • The country of registration • The name of vessel • The Sales Line Declaration (SLI): The date of the sale (YYYY-MM-DD); the country where the sale took place; the port code (PC) from a list at the EC website, specifying the location; the name of the auction centre, other body, or person selling the fish; the name of the body or person buying the fish; the sales contract reference number

As explained in point 5.2.1, the first auction point has to issue a sales note that has to include the landing data and owner, as well as the other information detailed in the same point. All the sardine containers have to be labelled with the same information as the sales notes as shown in Figure 11.

As such, once the risk of substituting a certified product for an uncertified product has been analysed, we consider the risk non-existent despite other vessels possibly unloading sardine at the auction points. The product is labelled at all times.

As certificate owners, they are very involved and committed to having the correct knowledge of the MSC requirements. In addition, the identification system is perfectly traceable, ensuring the origin of the fish from the vessel to the buyer.

Once the fishery has been certified the person responsible for sales in the auction point will have a list of the vessels included in the certification, which will also be available to the public (See Table 1 for the vessel list).

5.2.4 A description of at-sea catch processing

No processing is undertaken at-sea. All catches are landed for processing operations.

5.2.5 Details of trans-shipping use in the fishery

All catches are landed in the authorised harbours and sold in the fish auction. No trans- shipping is undertaken.

5.2.6 Details of the number and/or locations of landing points

Having regard to EC No 1966/2006 of 21 December 2006 on electronic recording and reporting of fishing activities and on means of remote sensing, the EC No 1077/2008 detailed the rules for the implementation of the regulation previously appointed.

Each Member State shall establish a list of authorised registered buyers, registered auctions, or other entities or persons that are responsible for the first sale of fishery products.

Fishing products regulated by Royal Decree 1822/2009 can only be unloaded in Spanish ports designated by the Government or autonomous community competent authorities, when involving autonomous community or state ports, and in the docks or locations designated by the port authorities.

For the purposes of the royal decree, the first sale is understood to be the first sale undertaken in the European Union when the product price is documented.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 45

The main ports in the Basque Country used to combine trade activities with fishing. However, the small ports have traditionally specialised in fishing, and inshore fishing in particular. Five ports are involved in the majority of the fishing: Guetaria, Ondárroa, Bermeo, Pasajes, and Fuenterrabía.

The landing ports and auction points also covered by the UC are: • The Basque Country: Bermeo, Lekeitio, Ondarroa, Getaria, Pasaia, Hondarribia . • Cantabria: Laredo.

See Figures 12 and 13.

Figure 12. Getaria Harbour. Source: Luis Ambrosio

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 46

Figure 13. Landing ports within the UC: The Basque Country & Laredo ports (Cantabria) Source: Google Maps

5.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody CAB used the previous information to establish the systems are appropriate, and as such, the fish and fish products from the fishery may enter into further certified chains of custody.

The scope of the certificate includes all vessels listed in Appendix 3 and the fish auction points identified in 5.2.6. The location of eligible landing points is shown in figure 16.

The fish auction points included are:

‹ Cofradía de Bermeo ‹ Cofradía de Lekeitio ‹ Cofradía de Ondarroa ‹ Cofradía de Getaria ‹ Cofradía de Pasaia ‹ Cofradía de Hondarribia ‹ Cofradía de Laredo

In addition, the following warehouses for storage (freezer) and distribution activities are included in the certificate of the fishery as part of the client group:

• Frigorífico Cofradía de Bermeo located in the fishing dock of Bermeo and owned by the Cofradía de Bermeo; • Frigoríficos Bermeo owned by Cofradía de Bermeo, Cofradía de Lekeitio, Cofradía de Ondarroa; • Arrankoba owned by Cofradía de Lekeitio and Cofradía de Ondarroa; • Congelados Sor y Mar. They are also certified for MSC Chain of Custody.

The change of ownership will start after the first sale at one of the seven auction points covered by the certificate. The client might use the cold storages appointed before to keep the sardine.

After the Cofradía issues the sales note before the next user, i.e. the company that purchases the fish, they will be required to have a valid chain of custody certificate whenever they want to market the product bought with an MSC certificate. FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 47

6 Evaluation Results

6.1 Principle Level Scores

Table 6.1: Final Principle Scores Final Principle Scores Principle Score Principle 1 – Target Species 81 Principle 2 – Ecosystem 86,3 Principle 3 – Management System 89 ,5

6.2 Summary of Scores

Principle Component PI No. Performance Indicator (PI) Score One Outcome 1.1.1 Stock status 91,5 1.1.2 Reference points 80 1.1.3 Stock rebuilding -.- Management 1.2.1 Harvest strategy 70 1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools 75 1.2.3 Information & monitoring 80 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 80 Two Retained species 2.1.1 Outcome 80 2.1.2 Management 90 2.1.3 Information 95 Bycatch species 2.2.1 Outcome 80 2.2.2 Management 80 2.2.3 Information 75 ETP species 2.3.1 Outcome 90 2.3.2 Management 85 2.3.3 Information 65 Habitats 2.4.1 Outcome 100 2.4.2 Management 95 2.4.3 Information 85 Ecosystem 2.5.1 Outcome 100 2.5.2 Management 90 2.5.3 Information 90 Three 3.1.1 Legal & customary framework 100 Governance and policy Consultation, roles & 3.1.2 responsibilities 100 3.1.3 Long term objectives 90 3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing 90 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 70 Fishery specific management system 3.2.2 Decision making processes 80 3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement 100 3.2.4 Research plan 90 Management performance 3.2.5 evaluation 80

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 48

6.3 Summary of Conditions

Condition Condition Performance Related to number Indicator previously raised condition? (Y/N/NA) By the second surveillance audit, evidence shall demonstrate that a harvest strategy is in place that is responsive to the state of the stock and 1 that the elements of the harvest strategy work 1.2.1 N together to ensure that total international catches of VIII/VII sardine are no higher than those advised by ICES. By the third surveillance audit, provide evidence that the management strategy outlined for the Spanish, French and Cornish fisheries has been implemented for the VIII/VII sardine stock, that 2 1.2.2 N there is well defined HCR which will reduce exploitation if there are indications that the stock is declining (as provided by ICES), such that catch levels are reduced as necessary. By the third surveillance, evidence must be presented to ensure that sufficient data continue 3 to be collected to detect to detect any increase in 2.2.3 N risk to main bycatch of commercial and non- commercial species. By the third surveillance, evidence must be presented to ensure that: : • Sufficient information is available to allow fishery related mortality and the impact of fishing 4 2.3.3 N to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species. • Information is sufficient to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts on ETP species. By the third surveillance audit, short and long- term objectives for the sardine fishery, which are consistent with achieving the outcomes 5 3.2.1 N expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, need to be explicitly included in the management of the fishery.

6.4 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement

Both the assessment team and the Certification Body, Bureau Veritas, agreed that, Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine fishery complies with MSC Principles and Criteria. Therefore, the recommendation reached is that the fishery should be recertified with three conditions according to the Principles and Criteria for Sustainable as set out by MSC.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 49

7 References

- Andrés M., Prellezo R., 2012. Measuring the adaptability of fleet segments to a fishing ban: the case of the Bay of Biscay anchovy fishery. Aquatic Living Resources 25: 205-14.

- COM(2009) 399 final. 2009/0112 (CNS): Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION establishing a long-term plan for the anchovy stock in the Bay of Biscay and the fisheries exploiting that stock.

- Carrera P. & Porteiro C., 2003. Stock dynamic of the Iberian sardine (Sardina pilchardus, W.) and its implication on the fishery off Galicia (NW Spain). Scientia Marina; 67Suppl. 1:245-258.

- Coll et al. 2015. An estimate of the total catch in the Spanish Mediterranean Sea andGulf of Cadiz regions (1950-2010). The University of British Columbia Working Paper Series Working Paper #2015 – 60.

- Goñi N, Peninon V, Arrizabalaga H, Uriarte A., 2012. Spatial and temporal variability of tuna predation upon juvenile anchovy in the Bay of Biscay. ICES CM 2012/I:04

- Ibaibarriaga, L., Fernández, C., Uriarte, A., and Roel, B. A., 2008. A two-stage biomass dynamic model for Bay of Biscay anchovy: a Bayesian approach. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 65: 191–205.

- Ibaibarriaga, L., Fernández, C., and Uriarte, A., 2011. Gaining information from commercial catch for a Bayesian two-stage biomass dynamic model: application to Bay of Biscay anchovy. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68: 1435–1446.

- ICES 2011. Report of the ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on Deep-water Ecology (WGDEC). 28 February–4 March. Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2011/ACOM:27. - ICES, 2013a. Management plan evaluation for sardine in Divisions VIIIc and IXa. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2013. ICES Advice, 2013. Book 7, Section 7.3.5.1.

- ICES, 2013b. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Pelagic Stocks (WKPELA 2013), 4–8 February 2013, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2013/ACOM:46. 483 pp.

- ICES, 2013c. Report of the Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and Sardine (WGHANSA), 21 - 26 June 2013, Bilbao, Spain. ICES CM 2013/ACOM:16. 685pp.

- ICES, 2014. Report of the Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy, and Sardine (WGHANSA), 20–25 June 2014, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark, ICES CM 2014/ACOM:16.

- ICES. 2015a. Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and Sardine (WGHANSA), Lisbon, Portugal, 24–29 June 2015, ICES CM 2015/ACOM:16.

- ICES 2015b. ICES Advisory Report 2015 Section 7.3.26 Sardine (Sardina

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 50

pilchardus) in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII (Bay of Biscay, Southern Celtic Seas and English Channel)

- ICES 2015c. Report of the ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on Deep-water Ecology (WGDEC). 16–20 February 2015. Horta, Azores, Portugal. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:27.

- ICES. 2016. Report of the Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and Sardine (WGHANSA), 24-29 June 2016, Lorient, France. ICES CM 2016/ACOM:17. 531 pp. Chapter 6 Sardine in VII and VIIIab.

- Lassalle G., Lobry J., Le Loc'h François, Bustamante P., Certain G., Delmas D., Dupuy C., Hily C., Labry C., Le Pape O., Marquis E., Petitgas P., Pusineri C., Ridoux V., Spitz J., Niquil N., 2011. Lower trophic levels and detrital biomass control the Bay of Biscay continental shelf food web: Implications for ecosystem management. Progress in Oceanography, 91 (4), p. 561-575. ISSN 0079-6611

- Lassalle, G., Gascuel, D., Le Loc'h, F., Lobry, J., Pierce, G. J., Ridoux, V., Santos, M. B., Spitz, J., and Niquil, N., 2012. An ecosystem approach for the assessment of fisheries impacts on marine top predators: the Bay of Biscay case study. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 69: 925–938.

- López, A., Pierce, G. J., Santos, M. B., Gracia, J. & Guerra, A. 2003. Fishery by catches of marine mammals in Galician waters: results from on-board observations and an interview survey of fishermen. Biological Conservation 111: 25-40. Available at: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/marfish/pdfs/Lopez2003.pdf

- Regulation (EU) no 1380/2013 of the European parliament and of the council of 11 December 2013 on the CFP.

- Perez N., Pereda, P., Uriarte, A., Trujillo, V., Olaso, I., & Lens, S., 1995. Discards of the Spanish fleet in ICES Divisions. Report of the EC Study Contract PEM/93/05 of DG XIV

- Perez N., Pereda, P., Uriarte, A., Trujillo, V., Olaso, I., & Lens, S., 1996. Descartes de la flota Española en el área del ICES. Datos y Resúmenes Instituto Español de Oceanografía nº2. 142 pp. (ISSN:1135-8483).

- STECF, 2008a. Report of the Meeting to inform the Commission on a long-term management plan for the stock of anchovy in the Bay of Biscay (ICES Sub-area VIII).

- STECF, 2008b. Working Group Report on the long term management of Bay of Biscay anchovy.

- STECF, 2009. 30th Plenary meeting report of the scientific, technical and economic committee for fisheries (plen-09-01) plenary meeting, 20-24 APRIL 2009, GALWAY Edited by John Casey & Hendrik Dörner. Galway.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 51

- STECF, 2013. Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) – Advice on the Harvest Control Rule and Evaluation of the Anchovy Plan COM(2009) 399 Final (STECF-13-24). 2013. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, EUR 26326 EN, JRC 86109, 71 pp.

- Stratoudakis Y., Coombs S., Halliday N., Conway D., Smyth T., Costas G., Franco C., Lago de Lanzós A., Bernal M., Silva A., Santos M. B., Alvarez P., Santos M., 2004. Sardine (Sardina pilchardus) spawning season in the North East Atlantic and relationships with sea surface temperature. ICES Document CM 2004/Q: 19. 19 pp.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 52

Appendix 1 Scoring and Rationales

The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low PI 1.1.1 probability of recruitment overfishing Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a It is likely that the stock It is highly likely that the There is a high degree of certainty is above the point where stock is above the point that the stock is above the point recruitment would be where recruitment would where recruitment would be impaired. be impaired. impaired. Guidepost Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF) NA (RBF) The sardine stock in ICES Division VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII has only been assessed by ICES in 2013. ICES advices on the basis of precautionary considerations based on biomass indices from two surveys, used as indicators of stock size, since the lack of catch composition and survey information in the Celtic seas and the English Channel impairs the possibility of performing an analytical assessment for the whole area. Nevertheless, the majority of the catches are from VIIIa,b and the level of fishing mortality should give a fair evaluation of the overall exploitation.

For the sardine stock, reference limit points are not described by Blim or Flim, and stock status in relation to target references points cannot be determined. The assessment team decided that it would be appropriate to use the RBF tool for the stock status outcome of the target species .

Firstly it was identified the main hazard arises from the direct impact of fishing, and direct capture of the target species was chosen as the worst plausible case to conduct the Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA) by the assessment team and stakeholders during the RBF meeting. Table 1.2.1.a (Appendix 1.2) presents the SICA results and rationales. According to data from reports and interviews with all the stakeholders involved in the fishery, the population size was selected as the most vulnerable subcomponent. The consequence score of this sub-component was equal to 2.

The team conducted the Productivity Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) using the “ MSC PSA worksheet for RBF ”. The results can be checked in Table 1.2.1 b (Appendix 2.1). In addition, as part of the review and harmonisation process with the southern Brittany and Cornish sardine Fisheries, relevant information became available to be included in the RBF. Moreover, all CABs had to take into account the rest of the fisheries that catches sardine as a target or bycatch species.

The overall score for PI 1.1.1 was allocated according to the rules in Table CC19 of the CR. We applied the PSA score (91,5). b The stock is at or There is a high degree of certainty fluctuating around its that the stock has been fluctuating target reference point. around its target reference point, or has been above its target

Guidepost reference point, over recent years. Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF)

See SIa) Justification References

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 53

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

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 91,5

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 54

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Generic limit and target Reference points are reference points are appropriate for the stock based on justifiable and and can be estimated. reasonable practice appropriate for the

Guidepost species category. Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF) As noted in the MSC Requirements, 1.1.2 is not scored when the RBF is triggered for 1.1.1. Use of the RBF for PI 1.1.1 implies risk-based reference points for PI 1.1.2, i.e. the limit reference point is expressed as the likelihood of recruitment being impaired by all fishing activities on the target stock. A default score of 80 is given. Justification b The limit reference point The limit reference point is set is set above the level at above the level at which there is which there is an an appreciable risk of impairing appreciable risk of reproductive capacity following impairing reproductive consideration of precautionary

Guidepost capacity. issues. Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF)

Justification c The target reference The target reference point is such point is such that the that the stock is maintained at a

stock is maintained at a level consistent with B MSY or some level consistent with B MSY measure or surrogate with similar or some measure or intent or outcome, or a higher surrogate with similar level, and takes into account intent or outcome. relevant precautionary issues such as the ecological role of the stock

Guidepost with a high degree of certainty. Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF)

Justification d For key low trophic level stocks, the target reference point takes into account the ecological role of the stock. Guidepost Met? NA (RBF)

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 55

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

Justification References OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 56

Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a PI 1.1.3 specified timeframe Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Where stocks are Where stocks are depleted, depleted rebuilding strategies are demonstrated to be strategies, which have a rebuilding stocks continuously and reasonable expectation there is strong evidence that of success, are in place. rebuilding will be complete within

Guidepost the specified timeframe. Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF) This PI is not scored where SICA/PSA is triggered for 1.1.1. Justification b A rebuilding timeframe A rebuilding timeframe is The shortest practicable is specified for the specified for the depleted rebuilding timeframe is specified depleted stock that is stock that is the shorter which does not exceed one the shorter of 30 years of 20 years or 2 times its generation time for the depleted or 3 times its generation generation time. For stock. time. For cases where 3 cases where 2 generations is less than 5 generations is less than 5 years, the rebuilding years, the rebuilding timeframe is up to 5 timeframe is up to 5 years. years. Guidepost Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF) NA (RBF)

Not applicable Justification c Monitoring is in place to There is evidence that determine whether the they are rebuilding rebuilding strategies are stocks, or it is highly likely effective in rebuilding based on simulation the stock within a modelling or previous specified timeframe. performance that they will be able to rebuild the stock within a specified

Guidepost timeframe. Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF)

Not applicable Justification References

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 57

Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a PI 1.1.3 specified timeframe NA OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: (RBF)

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 58

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is responsive expected to achieve responsive to the state of to the state of the stock and is stock management the stock and the designed to achieve stock objectives reflected in elements of the harvest management objectives reflected in the target and limit strategy work together the target and limit reference

reference points. towards achieving points. management objectives reflected in the target and limit reference

Guidepost points. Met? Y N N Sardine in Celtic Seas (VIIa, b, c, f, g, j, k), English Channel (VIId, VIIe, VIIh) and in Bay of Biscay (VIIIa, b, d) are considered by ICES to be a single-stock unit. The harvest strategy has to consider the overall performance and how the elements contribute to allow the management system to respond to the state of the whole stock. The MSC definition of a Harvest Strategy is the combination of monitoring, stock assessment, harvest control rules and management actions, which may include a management plan. Monitoring of stock status is considered under 1.2.3 to be adequate for management needs (score 80), but there is no analytical stock assessment and RBF has been used to assess stock status (1.2.4 default score 80). Harvest controls rules are considered under 1.2.2, and appropriate management actions are described for the Spanish, French and Cornish fisheries (see management strategies Commitments doc in Appendix 4). There is no explicit management plan, and the EC does not set a TAC for this stock.

However, a harvest strategy for sardine is implied under the CFP for all European stocks: to be maintained at levels that can support MSY. To help reach this goal there are specific management measures in place: a minimum landing size, technical gear and vessels specifications and limits, and closed areas. Whilst there are no reference points for this stock, advice provided by ICES is based on the precautionary approach, which can be inferred to aim for MSY and avoid limit reference levels (i.e. historically low SSB and an increase in F). SG60 is met.

SG80 requires that the harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock and the elements of the harvest strategy work together towards achieving management objectives reflected in the target and limit reference points. There is no analytical assessment of the

state of the stock, and no reference points, but ICES advice given against indices of stock abundance is that there is an increasing trend over the last five years in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and that current harvest rate is close to the long-term mean and is likely to be close to FMSY (ICES 2016). However, it is not certain that management responds to ICES advice in relation to the state of the stock, there is no TAC and landings in 2010 – 2014 were higher than the

Justification ICES advice for those years. SG80 is not met. b The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy may The performance of the harvest

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

Guidepost stocks at target levels. Met? Y Y N

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 59

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

The management strategy in place for managing sardine is likely to work. Fishing mortality, without a specific limit, is assessed by ICES likely to be at MSY levels. Minimum landing sizes provide a disincentive to catch and land juvenile fish, and fishing season closures limit fishing pressure on the sardine stock. SG60 is met.

ICES has given advice based on acoustic biomass and egg abundance indices from two surveys, PELGAS and BIOMAN respectively, from which a combined survey index of stock size is derived based on information from the Bay of Biscay (the main stock area). This indicates that stock abundance has shown an increasing trend over the last five years, whilst the 2013 and 2015 recruitments are the highest in the time-series (ICES 2016; Figure 7.6.23.1, top and bottom right panels). ICES estimates that the harvest rate is currently close to the long-term mean and is likely to be close to F MSY (ICES 2016; Figure 7.6.23.1, bottom left panel).” Whilst the harvest strategy may not have been fully tested, the evidence exists that it is achieving its objective, and SG80 is met.

SG100, which requires that the performance of the harvest strategy has been fully

evaluated and evidence exists to show that it is clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels, is not met because the performance of the harvest strategy has not been fully evaluated considering the whole stock (lack of catch composition and survey information in the Celtic seas and the English Channel means that there is currently no biomass or recruitment information for Subarea VII) and there are no explicit target levels. Therefore

Justification SG100 is not met. c Monitoring is in place that is expected to determine whether the harvest strategy is working. Guidepost Met? Y

Sardine in the Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay is dependent on the abundance of the incoming year class which is highly variable and largely dependent on environmental factors. Therefore the population needs to be closely monitored by fishery-independent research surveys. The stock in the Bay of Biscay is monitored by two independent surveys under the EU Data Collection Framework: the BIOMAN surveys (since 1987) and the acoustic PELGAS surveys (since 1989) (ICES, 2014). There is also a port sampling scheme in both Spain and France to collect biological information on landings (length, weights, sex, maturity and

otoliths). In the Celtic Sea and English Channel however, the stock has no biological sampling which prevent an analytical stock assessment for the whole stock to be performed (ICES, 2013) and the role of the VII component in the stock dynamics is largely unknown.. Nevertheless, ICES is able to give advice on the status of the stock since the stock major component is adequately surveyed and thus one can determine whether the harvest

Justification strategy is working. Therefore SG60 is met. d The harvest strategy is periodically reviewed and improved as necessary. Guidepost Met? N

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 60

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

The CFP is reviewed every 10 years, when an assessment is made of its effectiveness and

main shortcomings and these are improved in a reformed CFP. However, management of the sardine fishery is not explicit under the CFP (there is no EU TAC and no management plan) and SG 100 is not met. Justification EC. 2013. Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the CFP, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC. ICES. 2013. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Pelagic Stocks (WKPELA 2013), 4–8 February 2013, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2013/ACOM:46. 483 pp. ICES. 2014. ICES Advice 2014, Book 7. ICES. 2015a. Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and Sardine References (WGHANSA), Lisbon, Portugal, 24–29 June 2015, ICES CM 2015/ACOM:16. ICES. 2015b. Advice basis. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2015. ICES Advice 2015, Book 1, Section 1.2. ICES. 2016. Report of the Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and Sardine (WGHANSA), 24-29 June 2016, Lorient, France. ICES CM 2016/ACOM:17. 531 pp. Chapter 6 Sardine in VII and VIIIab. Appendix 4: French and Spanish management strategies Commitment; Cornish Sardine Management Association Commitment. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 1

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 61

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Generally understood Well defined harvest harvest rules are in place control rules are in place that are consistent with that are consistent with the harvest strategy and the harvest strategy and

which act to reduce the ensure that the exploitation rate as limit exploitation rate is reference points are reduced as limit approached. reference points are

Guidepost approached. Met? Y N There are no reference points and no TAC currently implemented for the sardine stock in Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay. Though the distribution of the sardine ‘stock’ extends beyond the area covered by the main fisheries (French and Spanish), these have a strategy which is intended to reduce the exploitation rate in line with ICES advice (precautionary in nature since no limit reference points are identified). From 2016 onwards the French, Spanish and Cornish fisheries have agreed to accept ICES recommendations each year in relation to the stock status and, working together with national scientists and the fishing sector, to ensure that the current management measures remain in force for the upcoming year, unless ICES advises that the trends in the sardine stock requires modification of exploitation rates. In which case, the stakeholders agree to adapt their management framework with respecting to ICES advice on allowed catches.

The following management measures were proposed and agreed per Country : For the Spanish fleet: - commit to set the average catch from the most recent three years of official ICES data (2012-2013-2014 = 16,222 tonnes for 2016) as a benchmark for the Spanish fishery sector. - limit the number of boats with access to this fishery. For Spain, these are Cantabria-North West (CNW) purse seine census boats, which are authorised to fish pelagic species in Divisions VIII a, b, d.

For the French fleet: currently there is a cap on vessel licenses (27) for the main fishery, with vessel quotas (not tradable) and daily catch limits. Decisions on overall catches are made on the basis of scientific advice based on the pre-season research survey abundance indicators and risk analysis.

For the Cornish fleet: there is also a cap on vessel licenses (maximum of 20 boats), and daily catch limits. CSMA members agree to closely analyse ICES annual assessments in relation to stock status together with CEFAS scientists. In the event the ICES recommendations require modifications on the exploitation of the resource, CSMA members will agree to adapt their management framework, respecting the scientific advice in order to maintain sustainable

catch limits. Additionally the CSMA will participate actively with scientific works to promote understanding of the sardine stocks.

In future, the Spanish, French and Cornish fleets have agreed to manage their overall annual catch (as necessary) together with effort controls to ensure that the total international

Justification catch does not exceed ICES recommendations.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 62

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

Management measures will be agreed by the CC Sur Pelagic Species Working Group, held each autumn, when scientists present the survey results and management measures are formally validated and agreed for the upcoming year. If ICES advice requires action, stakeholders will adapt management in their respective fisheries accordingly as stated in the Spanish, French and Cornish proposals.

Generally understood harvest rules are in place and consistent with the harvest strategy and will act to reduce the exploitation rate as limit reference points are approached (as ascertained by ICES). SG60 is met. However, these harvest control rules have not yet been implemented to the extent that it is possible to state that they ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached. SG80 is not met. A condition shall

be raised. b The selection of the The design of the harvest control harvest control rules rules takes into account a wide takes into account the range of uncertainties. main uncertainties. Guidepost Met? Y N

The main uncertainty is the lack of an analytical assessment for the whole sardine stock and,

in consequence, the lack of reference points. The HCR described in 1.2.2.a takes this into consideration, and the HCR outlined in 1.2.2.a above is designed to result in changes to annual catches according to ICES advice based on stock trends and catch recommendations that are applied in a precautionary manner, and SG80 is met. However, neither the assessment nor the HCR cover the whole sardine stock and its fisheries, and SG100 is not

Justification met. c There is some evidence Available evidence Evidence clearly shows that the that tools used to indicates that the tools in tools in use are effective in

implement harvest use are appropriate and achieving the exploitation levels control rules are effective in achieving the required under the harvest control appropriate and exploitation levels rules. effective in controlling required under the

Guidepost exploitation. harvest control rules. Met? Y Y N

There is evidence that the tools used in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules are appropriate and effective, since fishing mortality is assessed by ICES as likely to be at MSY and recent stock abundance trends are positive. The information used by ICES: commercial catches (international landings for Subarea VII and Divisions VIIIa,b,d; ages and length frequencies from catch sampling in Divisions VIIIa,b,d only); two survey indices in Divisions VIIIa,b,d (PELGAS (acoustic biomass), BIOMAN (egg counts)) and age compositions; provides evidence of stock trends and changes in exploitation levels. There is also information gathered through stakeholder’s interviews that landings of undersize sardine do not occur (or rarely). Effort limits (vessel numbers and seasons) and catch controls are the main tools used, and there is evidence indicating that these tools are

appropriate in achieving a sustainable fishery and thus SG60 and SG80 are met.

In the absence of an assessment that estimates exploitation levels on the whole sardine stock (ICES’ analysis only indicates “relative harvest rate), the evidences does not clearly shows that the tools in use are effective in achieving the exploitation levels required under

Justification the harvest control rules. SG100 is not met. French and Spanish management strategies Commitment issued by CCSur Pelagic Species References WG. Cornish Sardine Management Association Commitment.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 63

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

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 2

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 64

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Some relevant Sufficient relevant A comprehensive range of information related to information related to information (on stock structure, stock structure, stock stock structure, stock stock productivity, fleet productivity and fleet productivity, fleet composition, stock abundance, composition is available composition and other fishery removals and other

to support the harvest data is available to information such as environmental strategy. support the harvest information), including some that strategy. may not be directly related to the current harvest strategy, is

Guidepost available. Met? Y Y N The sardine stock is highly monitored in the Bay of Biscay. There are several sampling programmes and fishery independent surveys under the EU Data Collection Framework. There is a port sampling scheme to collect biological information on landings (length, sex, maturity and otoliths) carried out by AZTI and IFREMER. There are two fishery independent surveys: BIOMAN and PELGAS, carried out to estimate recruitment and stock biomass, and include environmental information. These programmes data are available to national and international scientific institutions, and are submitted annually to ICES, to the Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy, and Sardine (WGHANSA) to assess the sustainability of the stock. The official catch statistics (logbook information) is provided to the Spanish scientific institutions by MAGRAMA.

However, only the Bay of Biscay is sampled, while the stock range also includes the Celtic Sea and English Channel. Nevertheless, ICES is able to provide advice on stock status (although the lack of data impedes an analytical stock assessment) and therefore SG80 is met. To meet SG 100 is required to have more information such as information from other purse seine and trawl fisheries (sardine as by-catch) specially the subdivision where they

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

control rule. indicators are available assessment and management to and monitored with this uncertainty. sufficient frequency to support the harvest

Guidepost control rule. Met? Y Y N

ICES assessment is based on international landings data for Subarea VII and Divisions VIIIa,b,d, and the existing sampling programmes collect different level of information according to the requirements of the EU Data Collection Framework and provide the required information in the necessarily frequency. However, and even considering that landings are predominantly from the Bay of Biscay in recent years (>70%), the data collected is not representative of all the fisheries involved, as the Celtic Sea and English Channel is not sampled. Furthermore, discards are not routinely sampled, either by observers or fishers. Nevertheless, ICES is still able to provide advice on stock status (ICES, 2013, 2014). This comprehensive range of information is available and SG 80 is reached.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 65

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy

SG100 is not met because is necessary to improve in a better understanding of inherent uncertainties in the information and the robustness of assessment and management to this

uncertainty. For example, not all fisheries that catch sardine are sampled consistently trough the Data Collection Framework (ICES, 2013, 2014). Both Spanish and French sardine fisheries operating in the Bay of Biscay are biologically sampled. However, and even considering that landings are predominantly from the Bay of Biscay in recent years (>70%), the fisheries operating in the Celtic Sea and English Channel are not biologically sampled

Justification therefore SG100 in not met. c There is good information on all other fishery removals from the stock. Guidepost Met? y

In the PCDR the team scored SG80c negatively. However, after the harmonization meeting with the review of the stakeholder’s information (ICES& AZTI) and focusing on the guidance that makes reference to vessels outside or not covered by the UoC, SG80 can be met. There is good information on all fishery removals considering the landings and the monitoring in place for all fisheries. ICES 2015a provides estimates of sardine catches by all countries

Justification fishing in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII. Therefore SG80 is met ICES. 2013. ICES Advice 2013, Book 7. References ICES. 2014. ICES Advice 2014, Book 7. Information gathered during the audit visit. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 66

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a The assessment is The assessment is appropriate for appropriate for the stock the stock and for the harvest and for the harvest control rule and takes into control rule. account the major features relevant to the biology of the species and the nature of the

Guidepost fishery. Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF) Evaluation of criterion 1.1.1 using the RBF method automatically leads to a score of 80 for criterion 1.2.4 Justification b The assessment estimates stock status relative to reference points. Guidepost Met? NA (RBF)

Justification c The assessment The assessment takes The assessment takes into account identifies major sources uncertainty into account. uncertainty and is evaluating stock of uncertainty. status relative to reference points in a probabilistic way. Guidepost Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF)

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

Guidepost rigorously explored. Met? NA (RBF)

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 67

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status

Justification e The assessment of stock The assessment has been status is subject to peer internally and externally peer review. reviewed. Guidepost Met? NA (RBF) NA (RBF)

Justification References OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 68

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained PI 2.1.1 species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Main retained species Main retained species are There is a high degree of certainty

are likely to be within highly likely to be within that retained species are within biologically based limits biologically based limits biologically based limits and (if not, go to scoring (if not, go to scoring issue fluctuating around their target issue c below). c below). reference points. Guidepost Met? Y Y N When the vessels are targeting sardine from the 1st of January to the 30th of April and from the 1st of September to the 31st of December, the species retained by the gear are in average: anchovy (3.19%), Atlantic chub mackerel (2.8%), Atlantic mackerel (1.31%) and Atlantic horse mackerel (2.0%) See Table 5. Considering the MSC definition of main retained species, i.e. over 5% of the total catch, or which can be considered as vulnerable, or of particularly high value; only anchovy are considered as main retained species . However, the fishery catches represent on average 2010-2013 1.5% of total international anchovy stock catches. ICES evaluates the Bay of Biscay anchovy stock used is a two-stage Bayesian biomass dynamic model (CBBM) that provides the probability distribution for SSB, and thus the risk of SSB falling below Blim can be estimated directly. (ICES, 2014). In the latest assessment, the 2014 SSB is estimated at around 66,000 tonnes average (between 93000 and 47000 tonnes), which is three times more than Blim (21,000 tonnes), i.e. biomass under which recruitment is likely to be impaired. Even considering the lowest probabilistic range in the

estimates of the 2014 stock biomass, it is still double Blim. Furthermore, since the range does not reach Blim, the probability of SSB in 2014 being below Blim is zero. Stock biomass has been above Blim since 2010 and it is presently at historical high levels (ICES, 2014). However, there is a not high degree of certainty that all retained species are within biologically based limits and fluctuating around their target reference points. Therefore SG

Justification 100 is not met. b Target reference points are defined for retained species. Guidepost Met? N

Regarding target reference points, not all retained species have target reference points defined. ICES MSY approach for short-lived stocks is aimed at achieving a target biomass escapement (MSY Bescapement, the amount of biomass left to spawn), which is more robust against low SSB and recruitment failure than the precautionary approach Bpa (ICES, 2014). However, in the case of the Bay of Biscay anchovy, MSY Bescapement is no longer

provided. As the ICES assessment model provides the probability distributions for SSB, it is possible to estimate directly the risk of the SSB falling below Blim, which is ultimately the objective of any target reference point, i.e. minimize the risk of the stock being below a limit reference point. Furthermore, there is a target Harvest Rate of 0.3 when stock biomass is equal or above 33000 tonnes. This management target that has been proven to be

Justification precautionary under several scenarios (STECF, 2014).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 69

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained PI 2.1.1 species and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained species c If main retained species If main retained species are outside the limits are outside the limits there are measures in there is a partial strategy

place that are expected of demonstrably effective to ensure that the management measures fishery does not hinder in place such that the recovery and rebuilding fishery does not hinder

Guidepost of the depleted species. recovery and rebuilding. Met? Y Y

There are specific management measures to safeguard the Bay of Biscay anchovy stock. The fisheries are managed through a TAC and technical measures such as gear and vessels specifications, minimum landings size and closed areas. The EC proposed a long-term management plan in 2009. This plan is yet to be formally adopted by the EU due to administrative delays. Nevertheless, the plan has been used to establish the TAC between 1st July and 30th June from 2010 onwards, since the consecutive fishery closures between July 2005 and December 2009. The management plan follows a harvest control rule (HRC) that should ensure the exploitation of the anchovy at high yields, guarantee the stability of

the fishery and have a low risk of stock collapse (EC, 2009). The harvest strategy has been tested by STECF and has proven to be robust to low recruitment scenarios and limited changes in the quota uptake between semesters, and thus was deemed precautionary (STECF, 2013, 2014). These measures, associated to the fact that the fishery accounts for only 1.5% of international landings, are expected to prevent the fishery of causing the

Justification retained species to be outside biologically based limits or hindering their recovery. d If the status is poorly known there are measures or practices in place that are expected

to result in the fishery not causing the retained species to be outside biologically based limits

Guidepost or hindering recovery. Met? Y

Anchovy stock status is quantitatively assessed by ICES. Further, there are specific management measures to safeguard the anchovy stock. The fisheries targeting Bay of Biscay anchovy are managed through a TAC and technical measures such as gear and vessels specifications, minimum landings size and closed areas. The EC proposed a long-term management plan in 2009. This plan is yet to be formally adopted by the EU due to administrative delays. Nevertheless, the plan has been used to establish the TAC between 1st July and 30th June from 2010 onwards, since the consecutive fishery closures between July 2005 and December 2009. The management plan follows a harvest control rule (HRC) that should ensure the exploitation of the anchovy at high yields, guarantee the stability of

Justification retained species to be outside biologically based limits or hindering their recovery. References AZTI. 2014. Logbook information provided by AZTI. Unpublished results. EC, 2009; ICES, 2014; STECF: 2013, 2014 OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 70

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

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 71

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to PI 2.1.2 ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy in place for place, if necessary, that in place, if necessary, that managing retained species. are expected to maintain is expected to maintain the main retained the main retained species species at levels which at levels which are highly are highly likely to be likely to be within

within biologically based biologically based limits, limits, or to ensure the or to ensure the fishery fishery does not hinder does not hinder their their recovery and recovery and rebuilding.

Guidepost rebuilding. Met? Y Y N There is a strategy in place for managing main retained species that includes TACs (set for

several species annually), closed areas and seasons and minimum landings sizes, and these measures are likely to impact on all retained species catches. There is also a management plan implemented for anchovy, that is robust to robust to low recruitment scenarios and limited changes in the quota uptake between semesters, providing a long term management framework for the fishery. The team cannot conclude that there is a full

Justification strategy in place to all species. SG100 is not met. b The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high confidence considered likely to basis for confidence that that the strategy will work, based

work, based on plausible the partial strategy will on information directly about the argument (e.g., general work, based on some fishery and/or species involved. experience, theory or information directly comparison with similar about the fishery and/or

Guidepost fisheries/species). species involved. Met? Y Y N

There is confidence that the strategy in place for managing anchovy will work. The harvest strategy of the anchovy long-term management plan has been tested by STECF when it was originally developed using a deterministic models, and also after the introduction of a Bayesian dynamic model. In both cases, several different HCR and assumptions were considered and STECF concluded that the plan (STECF, 2013, 2014) based on both stock assessment models was precautionary. Furthermore, the harvest strategy included in the management plan has worked in the past by maintaining the fishery closed until stock recovered, and is presently maintaining a harvest rate that keeps the stock at high levels with zero probability of recruitment impairment. For other retained species managed by TACs, the TACs are, and have been in the past, set less than actual landings to limit fishing activity. In addition, with the introduction of the LO, TACs effectiveness will be strengthen if the LO is implemented at a significant level. However, the horse mackerel TAC has been overshooting in recent years, including the Spanish fleet. Fishing mortality, although is increasing in recent years for horse mackerel is associated to TACs increases and has diminished in the years before 2007. Minimum landing

sizes provide a disincentive to catch and land juvenile fish, and this is also the information team gathered at the audit visit. Furthermore, fishing season closures by limiting fishing pressure are also likely to reduce both species catches. The information refereed gives confidence that the partial strategy is working. SG80 is met. SG100 is not met as the team cannot conclude that the testing in place gives enough high

Justification confidence.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 72

There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to PI 2.1.2 ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species c There is some evidence There is clear evidence that the that the partial strategy is strategy is being implemented being implemented successfully. successfully. Guidepost Met? Y N

There is some evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully since there is

information that misreporting or underreporting does not occur (or rarely) and that the TACs limit fishing mortality. However, discarding does occur and while the LO may be strengthen this issue from 2015 onwards, it strongly dependents on high levels of at sea monitoring which are unlikely to be reached, at least in the short term. Nevertheless, for anchovy the management plan has been implemented successfully, as the fishery is now

Justification sustainable. SG100 is not met. d There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its overall objective. Guidepost Met? Y

SSB in 2014 for the Bay of Biscay anchovy stock is estimated at around 66,000 tonnes average (between 93,000 and 47,000 tonnes), which is three times more than Blim (21,000

tonnes), i.e. biomass under which recruitment is likely to be impaired. Even considering the lowest probabilistic range in the estimates of the 2014 stock biomass, it is still double Blim. Furthermore, since the range does not reach Blim, the probability of SSB in 2014 being below Blim is zero. Stock biomass has been above Blim since 2010 and it is presently at historical high levels (ICES, 2014). ICES results evidenced that the strategy is achieving the

Justification overall objective. SG100 is met. References ICES, 2014 STECF, 2013, 2014 OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 73

is available on the and some quantitative is available on the catch of all amount of main retained information are available retained species and the species taken by the on the amount of main consequences for the status of fishery. retained species taken by affected populations.

Guidepost the fishery. Met? Y Y Y The Bay of Biscay sardine purse-seine fishery is highly monitored. There are two port sampling programmes under the EU Data Collection Framework to collect biological information on landings (species, weight, length, sex, maturity and otoliths) carried out by IEO and AZTI. These programmes data are available to national and international scientific

institutions, and are submitted annually to ICES, to the Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy, and Sardine (WGHANSA) to assess the sustainability of the stocks. The official catch statistics (logbook information) is also collect by the Spanish national authorities. However, discards are not routinely sampled, either by observers, electronic monitoring or fishers, although they are considered negligible for all retained species. SG100

Justification is met. b Information is adequate Information is sufficient Information is sufficient to to qualitatively assess to estimate outcome quantitatively estimate outcome outcome status with status with respect to status with a high degree of respect to biologically biologically based limits. certainty.

Guidepost based limits. Met? Y Y Y

The information is required to be estimated sufficient to estimate the stock status of the retained species.

In relation to the main retained species (anchovy), there is information on landings and discards of anchovy at stock level, and therefore total predicted catch and stock status can be quantified to a high degree of certainty (ICES, 2014). For the rest of the retained species Atlantic chub mackerel, Atlantic mackerel and Atlantic horse mackerel which are subjected to the same monitoring and landing data system the team believes that the information of

Justification the fishery is sufficient to quantitative estimate the outcome of those retained species. c Information is adequate Information is adequate Information is adequate to support to support measures to to support a partial a strategy to manage retained manage main retained strategy to manage main species, and evaluate with a high species. retained species. degree of certainty whether the

Guidepost strategy is achieving its objective. Met? Y Y N

The EU Data Collection Framework sampling schemes provide information to support a strategy to manage the main retained species: anchovy. However, not all retained species have information on discards, which inhibits an evaluation if the strategy is achieving its objective. Justification

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 74

Information on the nature and extent of retained species is adequate to PI 2.1.3 determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage retained species d Sufficient data continue Monitoring of retained species is to be collected to detect conducted in sufficient detail to any increase in risk level assess ongoing mortalities to all (e.g. due to changes in retained species. the outcome indicator score or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the

Guidepost strategy) Met? Y Y

The EU Data Collection Framework continues to support the routine sampling programmes that collect information on catch, but also on fishing operations. Therefore these programmes would be able to detect any increase in risk level e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator score or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the strategy and provides data in sufficient detail to assess ongoing mortalities to all retained species. Justification References ICES. 2014

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 75

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the bycatch PI 2.2.1 species or species groups and does not hinder recovery of depleted bycatch species or species groups Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Main bycatch species are Main bycatch species are There is a high degree of certainty likely to be within highly likely to be within that bycatch species are within biologically based limits biologically based limits biologically based limits. (if not, go to scoring (if not, go to scoring issue

Guidepost issue b below). b below). Met? N, score b N, score b N In the MSC context, “main” bycatch species are identified as those species which constitute over 5% of the total catch, or which can be considered as vulnerable, and are discarded. In addition, the definition includes species out of scope such as seabirds (not ETPs).

In a 1994-1995 study of the discard pattern of the Spanish fisheries based on observers at sea programme, Perez et al., (1996) reported that the main discarded species by the purse- seine targeting mainly sardine and horse mackerel (autumn-winter sampling) in 1994 were: horse mackerel, sardine, Mediterranean horse mackerel (Trachurus mediterraneus), chub mackerel (Scomber colias) and bogue (Boops boops) in terms of frequency and weight, although only horse mackerel (6.5%) and sardine (6%) were discarded more than 5% of total catch. Other species that were also significantly although sporadically discarded were: mackerel, blue whiting and invertebrates such as cnidarios. The percentage of discards estimated depends on the inclusion of slippage i.e. the act of opening the gear and releasing the catch in the water before hauling the gear and bring the catch onboard, since 50% of discards occurred through slippage. The total % of catch discarded changes from between 19.7% to 29.8%, corresponding to 1800 t and 2700 t respectively, if slippage is included. Slippage was restricted to horse mackerel, sardine, anchovy and mackerel catches. The most abundant seabirds species in the Bay of Biscay are: gannets ( Sula bassana ), herring gull ( Larus argentatus ), black-backed gulls ( Larus focus and Larus miritimus ), kittiwakes ( Rissa tridactyla ) and auks (i.e. guillemot ( Uria aalge ), razorbills ( Alca torda ) and Atlantic puffins ( Fratercula arctica ) (Certain & Bretagnolle, 2008 in Lassalle et al., 2011). Nevertheless, there was no bycatch of seabirds reported in Perez et al., (1996) study by the purse-seine fishery. Furthermore, in the SAILKA project in 2013, 28 hauls were observed in normal fishing operations and again no bycatch of seabirds occurred (AZTI, personal communication).

The skippers of vessel interviewed described also catches of squid (likely Loligo sp. ) that are normally consumed by the crew and often sunfish Mola mola and blue shark Prionace glauca that are released alive. The blue shark is classified as Near Threatened by IUCN Red List but does not have any legal protection in European waters. In conclusion, only horse mackerel is considered further as a bycatch species for scoring this principle . ICES evaluates the stock in Divisions IIa, IVa, Vb, VIa, VIIa-c, e-k, and Subarea VIII (Western stock) annually. In its most recent advice, ICES concludes that SSB, which has varied between 0.65 and 1.72 million tonnes during 1995–2012, is estimated to be at 0.64 million tonnes in 2014, one of the lowest in the time series and puts the stock at almost Btrigger (0.63). Fishing mortality has been increasing since 2007 and is now above FMSY. Recruitment has been low from 2004 onwards. Since the 2014 stock biomass is the second lowest in the time series, and recruitment continues to be low, the stock is likely to be

Justification outside safe biological limits (ICES, 2013). Therefore SG60 is not met and go to scoring c.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 76

The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the bycatch PI 2.2.1 species or species groups and does not hinder recovery of depleted bycatch species or species groups Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 b If main bycatch species If main bycatch species are outside biologically are outside biologically based limits there are based limits there is a mitigation measures in partial strategy of

place that are expected demonstrably effective to ensure that the mitigation measures in fishery does not hinder place such that the recovery and rebuilding. fishery does not hinder

Guidepost recovery and rebuilding. Met? Y Y

The harvest strategy is implied under the CFP for all European stocks: to be maintained at levels that can support MSY. In addition, since 2008 a management plan for horse mackerel has been used to set the EU TAC. The management plan was initially deemed precautionary by ICES in the short term only, because some relevant scenarios were not evaluated. Further evaluation in 2013 suggests that, in its current configuration, the HCR is not robust to more than 2 years of very low recruitment (ICES, 2013). Considering that the horse mackerel western stock is experience overfishing and close to being overfished indicates that this strategy has not been responsive to stock status, as also indicated by ICES evaluation. However, the general management approach is likely to work in the long term as the reductions of the TACs, associated to a Landing Obligation, should lead to a limit on fishing mortality; the TACs have been set above scientific advice for the last 2 years. Furthermore, a revised management plan is currently under development (ICES, 2014) which is likely to take

into account periods of low recruitment in the HCR. Until this revised management plan is evaluated to be precautionary and used to set the TACs, the harvest strategy will not meet its objectives of preventing the main targeted fisheries of hindering stock recovery and rebuilding. However, since the fishery under assessment only contributes to 0.3% of the catches at stock level, it is the conclusion of the assessment team that the fishery will not

Justification hinder stock recovery and rebuilding. Therefore SG80 is met. c If the status is poorly known there are measures or practices in place that are expected

to result in the fishery not causing the bycatch species to be outside biologically based limits

Guidepost or hindering recovery. Met? Y

Horse mackerel stock status is quantitatively assessed by ICES. As stated above, there are specific management measures to safeguard the horse mackerel stock at the moment: a management plan, minimum landing size and closed areas. These measures, associated to the fact that the fishery accounts for only 0.3% of international landings, are nevertheless expected to prevent the fishery of causing the retained species to be outside biologically

Justification based limits or hindering their recovery. Reference s ICES 2013; Lassalle et al., 2011; erez at al., (1996)

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 77

There is a strategy in place for managing bycatch that is designed to ensure PI 2.2.2 the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to bycatch populations Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy in place for place, if necessary, that in place, if necessary, that managing and minimizing bycatch. are expected to maintain is expected to maintain the main bycatch species the main bycatch species at levels which are highly at levels which are highly

likely to be within likely to be within biologically based limits, biologically based limits, or to ensure the fishery or to ensure the fishery does not hinder their does not hinder their

Guidepost recovery and rebuilding. recovery and rebuilding. Met? Y Y N Since 2008 a management plan for horse mackerel has been used to set the EU TAC. The management plan was initially deemed precautionary by ICES in the short term only, because some relevant scenarios were not evaluated. Further evaluation in 2013 suggests that, in its current configuration, the HCR is not robust to more than 2 years of very low recruitment (ICES, 2013). Considering that the horse mackerel western stock is experience overfishing and close to being overfished indicates that this strategy has not been responsive to stock status, as also indicated by ICES evaluation. However, the general management approach is likely to work in the long term as the reductions of the TACs, associated to a Landing Obligation, should lead to a limit on fishing mortality, the TACs have been set above scientific advice for the last 2 years. Furthermore, a revised management plan is currently under development (ICES, 2014) which is likely to take into account periods of low recruitment in the HCR. Until this revised management plan is not evaluated to be precautionary and used to set the TACs, the harvest strategy will not meet its objectives of preventing the main targeted fisheries of hindering stock recovery and rebuilding. However, the horse mackerel catches that the purse-seine sardine fishery takes are negligible considering the size of the stock. The team considers that there is a partial strategy in place for managing and minimizing discards in general that includes closed areas and seasons and minimum landings sizes.

Furthermore, the Landing Obligation contemplated in the recent reformed CFP, that will start being implemented from 2015 onwards starting with pelagic fisheries, was included as it can be a powerful management tools to reduce discards. SG80 is reached for the fishery underassessment. However, the strategy as it is defined by MSC includes measures designed to manage the impact on the specific component (species). Therefore SG100 is not

Justification met for all the bycatch species. b The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high confidence considered likely to basis for confidence that that the strategy will work, based

work, based on plausible the partial strategy will on information directly about the argument (e.g. general work, based on some fishery and/or species involved. experience, theory or information directly comparison with similar about the fishery and/or

Guidepost fisheries/species). species involved. Met? Y Y N

The strategy adopted to minimize discards is based on past knowledge and studies that the

changes to fishing operations are likely to generally reduce discards, namely by avoidance of unwanted catch hotspots and not operating in shallower water where discards are more likely to occur. Discards of horse mackerel, and to a lesser degree sardine, are mainly due to low commercial value and that the catch size in under minimum landings size, therefore the

Justification avoidance strategy is likely to work.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 78

c There is some evidence There is clear evidence that the that the partial strategy is strategy is being implemented being implemented successfully. successfully. Guidepost Met? Y N

There is some evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully since there is

information that misreporting or underreporting does not occur (or rarely) and that the TACs limit fishing mortality. However, discarding does occur and while the LO may be strengthen this issue from 2015 onwards, it strongly dependents on high levels of at sea monitoring which are unlikely to be reached, at least in the short term. Furthermore, the management plan implemented for horse mackerel is not robust to very low recruitment

Justification scenarios as it is the present case in this stock. d There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its overall objective. Guidepost Met? N

Horse mackerel stock is being overfished since fishing mortality is above Fmsy, therefore the

strategy it not achieving its goal of reducing and maintaining the stock at MSY. Justification

References ICES 2013 Information gathered trough the site visit OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 79

Informa tion on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to determine PI 2.2.3 the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Qualitative information Qualitative information Accurate and verifiable information

is available on the and some quantitative is available on the catch of all amount of main bycatch information are available bycatch species and the species taken by the on the amount of main consequences for the status of fishery. bycatch species taken by affected populations.

Guidepost the fishery. Met? Y Y N Under the EU Data Collection Framework there is an obligation to monitor discard levels every three year for species were discards in the past were not assessed to be significant. However, the discarding practices of the sardine purse-seine fishery have not been regularly

reviewed. In fact the only observers at sea programme that collected detailed biological information on discards occurred only in 1996, 20 years ago and discard have seemingly only observed (not sampled) sporadically. Therefore, the discard rates estimate in the past provide a general insight on the selectivity of the gear and likely discards, but may not reflect present fishery activity and discard behavior, and thus only qualitative information is

Justification available on the amount of main bycatch species taken by the fishery. b Information is adequate Information is sufficient Information is sufficient to to broadly understand to estimate outcome quantitatively estimate outcome outcome status with status with respect to status with respect to biologically respect to biologically biologically based limits. based limits with a high degree of

Guidepost based limits certainty. Met? Y Y N

The status of horse mackerel is assessed annually by ICES, where an age-based analytical

assessment is carried out and stock status is determined in relation to biological reference points. However, there is lack of information on discards of horse mackerel at stock level, and although it not hinders a quantitative assessment of the stock status, total predicted catch cannot be quantified. Therefore SG100 is not met. Justification c Information is adequate Information is adequate Information is adequate to support to support measures to to support a partial a strategy to manage retained manage bycatch. strategy to manage main species, and evaluate with a high bycatch species. degree of certainty whether the

Guidepost strategy is achieving its objective. Met? Y Y N

Information is adequate to support measures to manage main bycatch species. As stated

above, historical discard information is available from the Bay of Biscay sardine purse-seine fishery which may be used to set up a management strategy such as under a Landing Obligation. Furthermore, horse mackerel is analytically assessed and future catches are forecasted following the HCR of the management plan, while the catches of the purse-seine sardine fishery are negligible considering the size of the stock. However, without monitoring

Justification at sea the strategy cannot be evaluated.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 80

Informa tion on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to determine PI 2.2.3 the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch d Sufficient data continue Monitoring of bycatch data is to be collected to detect conducted in sufficient detail to any increase in risk to assess ongoing mortalities to all main bycatch species bycatch species. (e.g. , due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectively of the

Guidepost strategy). Met? N N

The Bay of Biscay sardine purse-seine fishery has been monitored by observers at sea for

discards in the past. However, a routine and comprehensive monitoring at sea programme to collect information on discards does not exist in this fishery at the present time and therefore there is insufficient data to detect any increase in risk to main bycatch species. As a result SG80 is not met and a condition has been set. Justification

References ICES 2014 Information gathered trough the site visit OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 4

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 81

The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species PI 2.3.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and does not hinder recovery of ETP species Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Known effects of the The effects of the fishery There is a high degree of certainty fishery are likely to be are known and are highly that the effects of the fishery are

within limits of national likely to be within limits within limits of national and and international of national and international requirements for requirements for international protection of ETP species. protection of ETP requirements for

Guidepost species. protection of ETP species. Met? Y Y N The main ETP species that can possibly be impacted by purse-seine in the Bay of Biscay are marine mammals and turtles. The most abundant marine mammal species are: the common dolphin ( Delphinus delphis ), the striped dolphin ( Stenella coeruleoalba ), the bottlenose dolphin ( Tursiops truncatus ), the long-finned pilot whale ( Globicephala melas ) and the harbor porpoise ( Phocoena phocoena ) (Lassalle et al., 2011). Although there have been occasional interactions with dolphins and purse-seines, there has never been reports of an incident of marine mammal bycatch. In a 1994-1995 study of the discard pattern of the Spanish fisheries based on observers at sea programme, Perez et al., (1996) reported that there was no bycatch of marine mammals, marine reptiles or seabirds by the purse-seine fishery. Furthermore, in the SAILKA project in 2013, 28 hauls were observed in normal fishing operations and again no bycatch of marine mammals and turtles occurred (AZTI, personal communication). Regarding ETP fish species, the ones that can be found in coastal waters could potentially be caught by purse seiners. These are adult shad, salmon and sea trout that move towards coastal waters in the spring (shad) and in the summer/autumn (salmon and sea trout). Juveniles are found along the coast in spring (MSC sardine assessment). Both species of shad ( Alosa alosa and Alosa fallax ), as well as the Atlantic salmon, are considered to be vulnerable at European level and are included in Appendix III of the Berne Convention (1992) and in Appendices II and V of the Habitats Directive (1994). Nevertheless, there has been no reporting of catches of these species by purse-seines, and considering that the fleet operates mainly in offshore areas, the assessment team considers that the likelihood of catching one of this species is very low.

However, since the only observers at sea programme that collected information on discards and bycatch occurred only in 1996, 20 years ago, and since then the fishery was sampled sporadically, the information provides insight on the likely impacts of the fishery, but may not reflect present fishery activity. So the effects of the fishery are highly likely, but there is no certainty, to be within limits of national and international requirements for protection of

Justification ETP species

b Known direct effects are Direct effects are highly There is a high degree of unlikely to create unlikely to create confidence that there are no unacceptable impacts to unacceptable impacts to significant detrimental direct ETP species. ETP species. effects of the fishery on ETP

Guidepost species. Met? Y Y N

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 82

The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species PI 2.3.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and does not hinder recovery of ETP species Both AZTI and fishers accounts gathered during the site visit acknowledged that the direct

impact of the fishery on ETP species is very low. All parties interview assume some bycatch may sporadically occur but they are for the most part released alive, and are rare occurrences. Further, since the fishery operates offshore the likelihood of capturing coastal species is very low. However, without a monitoring at sea data that shows that ETP species bycatch are indeed rare, one cannot state with a high degree of confidence that that there

Justification are no significant detrimental direct effects of the fishery on ETP species. c Indirect effects have There is a high degree of been considered and are confidence that there are no thought to be unlikely to significant detrimental indirect create unacceptable effects of the fishery on ETP impacts. species. Guidepost Met? Y Y

AZTI acknowledged during the site visit that the indirect impact of the fishery on ETP species is very low. Furhermore, sardine is the preferential prey to several high level trophic predators such as tuna (Goñi et al., 2012) and seabirds, while in the Bay of Biscay ecosystem phytoplanktonic and zooplanktonic are the keystone species (Lassalle et al., 2011). Justification References Lassalle et al., 2011

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 83

The fishery has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: • Meet national and international requirements; PI 2.3.2 • Ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious harm to ETP species; • Ensure the fishery does not hinder recovery of ETP species; and • Minimise mortality of ETP species. Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a There are measures in There is a strategy in There is a comprehensive strategy place that minimise place for managing the in place for managing the fishery’s mortality of ETP species, fishery’s impact on ETP impact on ETP species, including and are expected to be species, including measures to minimise mortality, highly likely to achieve measures to minimise which is designed to achieve above national and mortality, which is national and international

international designed to be highly requirements for the protection of requirements for the likely to achieve national ETP species. protection of ETP and international species. requirements for the

Guidepost protection of ETP species. Met? Y Y N As stated above the main ETP species that could potentially be impacted by the purse-seine fishery are marine mammals. The following policy statements and regulation apply or are in force and relate to varying degrees to the protection of marine mammals in European waters: EC Regulation 812/2004 laying down measures concerning incidental catches of cetaceans, the EU Habitat Directive on the conservation of natural habitats and ASCOBANS (Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas). The EC Regulation 812/2004 obliges the use of deterrents (ex. pingers) in specific fisheries to avoid contact with cetaceans and also requires monitoring by observers of incidental catches in specific fisheries. The EU Habitats Directive also requires member states to undertake monitoring to determine the levels of incidental mortality for certain species. Finally, ASCOBANS aims to restore and/or maintain biological or management stocks of small cetaceans at the level they would reach when there is the lowest possible anthropogenic influence and proposes to reach these aims through coordinating and implementing conservation measures for small cetaceans. The Bay of Biscay sardine purse-seine fishery is not required to follow the provisions of EC Regulation 812/2004 described above since their impact is deemed low. In addition, any

marine mammal that is eventually caught in a purse-seine is usually released alive by slippage, and the contact with the gear is minimize by the fishers as this can damage the gear and cause substantial costs. Therefore the assessment team concludes that there is a strategy in place for managing the fishery’s impact on ETP species which is designed to be highly likely to achieve national and

Justification international requirements for the protection of ETP species. b The measures are There is an objective The strategy is mainly based on considered likely to basis for confidence that information directly about the

work, based on plausible the strategy will work, fishery and/or species involved, and argument (e.g. , general based on information a quantitative analysis supports experience, theory or directly about the fishery high confidence that the strategy comparison with similar and/or the species will work.

Guidepost fisheries/species). involved. Met? Y Y N

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 84

released alive by slippage, and the contact with the gear is minimize by the fishers as this can damage the gear and cause substantial costs. This information has been corroborated by the information provided by AZTI and the skipper interviewed during the site visit. However, there is no data available to support a quantitative analysis that the strategy is working.

Justification c There is evidence that There is clear evidence that the the strategy is being strategy is being implemented implemented successfully. successfully. Guidepost Met? Y N

None of the national and international organization contacted trough the assessment

process has stated that there is a problem with regard to the impact of purse-seine fisheries on ETP species. Based on information described previously directly about the fishery and the biology of the ETP species in the area, there is evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully. Justification d There is evidence that the strategy is achieving its objective. Guidepost Met? Y

As the capture of ETP species has been reported to be minimum to inexistent by Perez et

al.,(1996) and by all parties interviewed in the assessment process there is evidence that the strategy to minimize impact and mortality of ETP species by purse-seines in the Bay of Biscay is achieving its objective. Justification

References [List any references here]

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 85

Relevant information is collected to support the man agement of fishery impacts on ETP species, including: • PI 2.3.3 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 I ssue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Information is sufficient Sufficient information is Information is sufficient to

to qualitatively estimate available to allow fishery quantitatively estimate outcome the fishery related related mortality and the status of ETP species with a high mortality of ETP species. impact of fishing to be degree of certainty. quantitatively estimated

Guidepost for ETP species. Met? Y N N EC Regulation 812/2004 concerning the incidental catches of cetaceans in fisheries obliges the monitor of cetacean bycatches by several fisheries. Although some of its provisions are not applicable to purse-seine fisheries as the risk of catching a marine mammal is deemed low, the fishers are required to record and report all cetaceans incidental catches. Furthermore, the EU Habitats Directive also requires member states to undertake monitoring to determine the levels of incidental mortality for certain species. Under Article 12(4) of the Habitats Directive “Member States shall establish a system to monitor the incidental capture and killing of the animal species listed in Annex IV (a), where cetaceans are included. However, fishers are reluctant to report marine mammal by caught as they perceive this information will cause them problems with the control authorities. Top predators in the Bay of Biscay are, and continue, to be monitored by PELGAS survey,

while the information from the fishery is that no marine mammals have been caught in 1994-1995 based on observers at sea and no bycatch has been reported to the authorities. However, since a monitoring at sea programme to collect information on ETP species bycatch does not exist in this fishery at the present time, there is insufficient data for the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species. Therefore the SG80 is not

Justification met and a condition has been set. b Information is adequate Information is sufficient Accurate and verifiable information

to broadly understand to determine whether is available on the magnitude of all the impact of the fishery the fishery may be a impacts, mortalities and injuries on ETP species. threat to protection and and the consequences for the recovery of the ETP status of ETP species.

Guidepost species. Met? Y Y N

As stated before, any marine mammal that is eventually caught in a purse-seine is usually

released alive by slippage, and the contact with the gear is minimize by the fishers as this can damage the gear and cause substantial costs. Considering this information regarding the fishing operation, associated to the monitoring of top predators carried out by the PELGAS survey, there is sufficient to determine whether the fishery may be a threat to protection and recovery of the ETP species. However, accurate and verifiable information is not

Justification available at the present time so SG100 is not met. c Information is adequate Information is sufficient Information is adequate to support to support measures to to measure trends and a comprehensive strategy to

manage the impacts on support a full strategy to manage impacts, minimize ETP species. manage impacts on ETP mortality and injury of ETP species, species. and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is

Guidepost achieving its objectives. Met? Y N N

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 86

Relevant information is collected to support the man agement of fishery impacts on ETP species, including: • PI 2.3.3 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. The information available is adequate to support measures to manage the impacts on ETP

species. In addition, the PELGAS survey is likely to detect trends in top predator’s abundances. However, the information from the fishery is insufficient to measure trends, since it is only sporadically monitored for any contact with bycatch species, and to support a full strategy to manage impacts on ETP species. Justification

References EC Regulation 812/2004 EU Habitats Directive Information gathered at the site visit OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 65

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 5

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 87

The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure, PI 2.4.1 considered on a regional or bioregional basis, and function Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a The fishery is unlikely to The fishery is highly There is evidence that the fishery is

reduce habitat structure unlikely to reduce habitat highly unlikely to reduce habitat and function to a point structure and function to structure and function to a point where there would be a point where there where there would be serious or serious or irreversible would be serious or irreversible harm.

Guidepost harm. irreversible harm. Met? Y Y Y There is good information regarding the habitat characteristics of many areas of the European seas, through several international projects and integrated efforts (EUSeaMap, EMODnet, MeshAtlantic), which can provide predicted habitats for many areas including the Bay of Biscay. Although only 19% of the total EEZ area of the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Peninsula is mapped, most of the habitat mapping effort is located at 200 meters depths and shallower (Galparsoro et al., 2014). Since a large area of the Bay of Biscay is delimited by the 200 meters bathymetry, the percentage of seabed mapping coverage is significantly higher. In total, the Bay of Biscay encompasses 42 benthic habitats. Furthermore, there are several areas that have special protection in the Bay of Biscay and Cantabrian Sea deriving from OSPAR or Natura 2000 obligations. The main areas are Iroise Marine Park and Arcachon Basin Marine Park in France and El Cachucho Protected Area in Spain. These areas have been studied extensively and provided further knowledge on the seabed habitat of the Bay of Biscay. Since the fishery uses a gear designed to operate in mid-water and to catch pelagic species it is likely to have negligible impact on benthic habitats. The purse-seine used by the Spanish Bay of Biscay sardine fishery is large (80 meters depth by 550 meters length) but only rarely comes into to contact with the sea bottom as it can be damage by it, incurring significant costs for the fishers. Furthermore, the fishery operates usually over the same fishing grounds, over sandy bottoms and in offshore areas, areas that do not contain vulnerable

habitats such as cold-water coral reefs or sea fans, minimizing possible impacts in benthic communities. Finally, VMS data from the fishing fleet is available to the Spanish authorities and there is no evidence that fishing occurred in protected areas. In summary, there is evidence that the Spanish Bay of Biscay sardine purse-seine fishery is highly unlikely to reduce habitat structure and function to a point where there would be

Justification serious or irreversible harm. Information gathered at the site visit References http://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/default.aspx

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 88

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to habitat types Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy in place for

place, if necessary, that in place, if necessary, that managing the impact of the fishery are expected to achieve is expected to achieve on habitat types. the Habitat Outcome 80 the Habitat Outcome 80 level of performance. level of performance or

Guidepost above. Met? Y Y N There is a partial strategy to manage the fishery habitat impact. The fishery is managed through closed areas and seasons, among other management measures. Although these closures are not specific to protect habitat, they reduce the opportunity for the gear to enter into contact with the bottom and thus limits its impact. For the same reason, the MPAs established in the Bay of Biscay also contribute to minimize the fishery impact to the habitat. In addition, the fishing operation in itself is also considered to be a partial strategy for

managing the impact of the fishery on habitat types. The purse-seine only rarely comes into to contact with the sea bottom as it can be damage incurring significant costs for the fishers, which is a powerful incentive to minimize contact with the bottom. SG80 is met. However, the team considers that a full strategy should be designed to manage the impact on the ecosystem component specifically which is not the case and therefore SG100 is not

Justification met. b The measures are There is some objective Testing supports high confidence considered likely to basis for confidence that that the strategy will work, based

work, based on plausible the partial strategy will on information directly about the argument (e.g. general work, based on fishery and/or habitats involved. experience, theory or information directly comparison with similar about the fishery and/or

Guidepost fisheries/habitats). habitats involved. Met? Y Y Y

There is high confidence that the strategy will work based on the normal fishing operation

method of the fishery in question, but also on the effectiveness of closed areas and MPAs of restoring benthic habitats. SG100 is met. Justification c There is some evidence There is clear evidence that the that the partial strategy is strategy is being implemented being implemented successfully. successfully. Guidepost Met? Y Y

Through the VMS data and stakeholders interviews (inspection authorities, AZTI and fishers)

there is clear evidence that the fishery not only does not change considerably its fishing grounds, but also that the close areas and seasons and MAPs are being respected. SG100 is met. Justification

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 89

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to habitat types d There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its objective. Guidepost Met? Y

Through the VMS data and stakeholders interviews (inspection authorities, AZTI and fishers)

there is evidence that the fishery only very rarely goes in to contact with the sea bottom. Justification

References [List any references here]

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 90

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the PI 2.4.3 fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a There is basic The nature, distribution The distribution of habitat types is understanding of the and vulnerability of all known over their range, with

types and distribution of main habitat types in the particular attention to the main habitats in the area fishery are known at a occurrence of vulnerable habitat of the fishery. level of detail relevant to types. the scale and intensity of

Guidepost the fishery. Met? Y Y Y There is good information regarding the habitat characteristics of many areas of the European seas, through several international projects and integrated efforts (EUSeaMap, EMODnet, MeshAtlantic), which can provide predicted habitats for many areas including the Bay of Biscay. Although only 19% of the total EEZ area of the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Peninsula is mapped, most of the habitat mapping effort is located at 200 meters depths and shallower (Galparsoro et al., 2014). Since a large area of the Bay of Biscay is delimited by the 200 meters bathymetry, the percentage of seabed mapping coverage is significantly

higher. In total, the Bay of Biscay encompasses 42 benthic habitats. Furthermore, there are several areas that have special protection in the Bay of Biscay and Cantabrian Sea deriving from OSPAR or Natura 2000 obligations. The main areas are Iroise Marine Park and Arcachon Basin Marine Park in France and El Cachucho Protected Area in Spain. These areas have been studied extensively and provided further knowledge on the seabed habitat of the

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

of habitat with fishing information on the gear. spatial extent of interaction, and the timing and location of

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

There is sufficient data on the fishing operations, namely on effort, time and area fished trough VMS and catch data, to determine the impacts of the fishery on the habitat. There is also stakeholder information on seabed habitats where the fishing takes place. However, the impact of the fishery has not been fully quantified. Therefore, SG100 is not met. Justification c Sufficient data continue Changes in habitat distributions to be collected to detect over time are measured. any increase in risk to habitat (e.g. due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of

Guidepost the measures). Met? Y N

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 91

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the PI 2.4.3 fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types The spatial extent of the fishery continues to be monitored systematically from VMS data. The seabed habitat continues also to be monitored and mapped at a finer scale. However, the seabed habitat is not systematically monitored and therefore changes in habitat distributions over time will not be detected. Therefore SG100 is not met. Justification References EUSeaMap, EMODnet, MeshAtlantic.

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 92

The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key elements of PI 2.5.1 ecosystem structure and function Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a The fishery is unlikely to The fishery is highly There is evidence that the fishery is disrupt the key elements unlikely to disrupt the highly unlikely to disrupt the key

underlying ecosystem key elements underlying elements underlying ecosystem structure and function to ecosystem structure and structure and function to a point a point where there function to a point where where there would be a serious or would be a serious or there would be a serious irreversible harm.

Guidepost irreversible harm. or irreversible harm. Met? Y Y Y In the Bay of Biscay ecosystem sardine, together with anchovy, sprat, mackerel and horse mackerel, are the dominant low trophic level species, and as such they transfer a very large proportion of the total primary production through the lower part of the food web (Lassalle et al., 2011). Further, sardine is the preferential prey to several high level trophic predators such as tuna (Goñi et al., 2012) and seabirds, while in the Bay of Biscay ecosystem phytoplanktonic and zooplanktonic are the keystone species (Lassalle et al., 2011). Bottom- up processes play a significant role in the population dynamics of upper-trophic-levels and in the global structuring of this marine ecosystem. There is also a marked bottom-up control of small pelagic fish by mesozooplanktonic prey and not by their predators (Lassalle et al., 2011).

Considering the above, i.e. that the system is bottom-up controlled and detritus based, while the fishery is localized and through its normal operation have negligible impact on habitats and ETP species, with small quantities of species retained and discarded, there is clear evidence that the fishery is highly unlikely to disrupt the key elements underlying ecosystem structure and function to a point where there would be a serious or irreversible

Justification harm. References Lassalle et al., 2011

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 93

There are measures in place to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a There are measures in There is a partial strategy There is a strategy that consists of a place, if necessary. in place, if necessary. plan, in place. Guidepost Met? Y Y N

As stated above, there is a partial strategy in place to manage ETP, habitat and bycatch species, comprising of limitation of discards, closed areas, minimum landings sizes, and minimizing bycatch frequency and mortality, specifically by slippage. Limits on the size and scale of the fishery represent also an effective strategy restraining any other impacts from the fishery that would affect ecosystem structure and function. Justification b The measures take into The partial strategy takes The strategy, which consists of a account potential into account available plan, contains measures to address impacts of the fishery on information and is all main impacts of the fishery on key elements of the expected to restrain the ecosystem, and at least some of ecosystem. impacts of the fishery on these measures are in place. The the ecosystem so as to plan and measures are based on achieve the Ecosystem well-understood functional Outcome 80 level of relationships between the fishery performance. and the Components and elements of the ecosystem.

This plan provides for development of a full strategy that restrains impacts on the ecosystem to ensure the fishery does not cause

Guidepost serious or irreversible harm. Met? Y Y N

The partial strategy takes into account information on fishing locations, effort and fishing operations, but also on any possible bycatch, ETP species or habitats impacts and it is the opinion of the managers and the assessment team that the impact of the fishery will be restrain if necessary. Justification c The measures are The partial strategy is The measures are considered likely considered likely to considered likely to work, to work based on prior experience,

work, based on plausible based on plausible plausible argument or information argument (e.g., general argument (e.g., general directly from the experience, theory or experience, theory or fishery/ecosystems involved. comparison with similar comparison with similar

Guidepost fisheries/ecosystems). fisheries/ecosystems). Met? Y Y Y

It is the opinion of the managers and the assessment team based on the previous criteria

evaluation that the strategy is effective in avoiding serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function.

Justification

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 94

There are measures in place to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function d There is some evidence There is evidence that the that the measures measures are being implemented comprising the partial successfully. strategy are being implemented

Guidepost successfully. Met? Y Y

There is clear evidence from all stakeholders that the strategy of fishing efforts limits and

closed areas is implemented successfully. Justification

References information gathered during the site visit

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 95

There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the PI 2.5.3 ecosystem Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Information is adequate to Information is adequate to identify the key elements broadly understand the key

of the ecosystem (e.g., elements of the ecosystem. trophic structure and function, community composition, productivity

Guidepost pattern and biodiversity). Met? Y Y

Information is adequate to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem. Key elements include the trophic structure of the Bay of Biscay ecosystem such as key prey, predators and competitors; community composition, productivity patterns and characteristics of biodiversity. This information is collected and available through different scientific survey carried out in recent years and used by Lassalle et al., 2011 to

Justification model the food web in the Bay of Biscay continental shelf. b Main impacts of the fishery Main impacts of the fishery Main interactions between

on these key ecosystem on these key ecosystem the fishery and these elements can be inferred elements can be inferred ecosystem elements can from existing information, from existing information be inferred from existing and have not been and some have been information, and have

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

Main interactions between the fishery and these ecosystem elements can be inferred from existing information, and have been investigated. A number of studies have modelled the food web in the Bay of Biscay (Lassalle et al., 2011, 2012). Justification c The main functions of the The impacts of the fishery Components (i.e., target, on target, Bycatch, Bycatch, Retained and ETP Retained and ETP species species and Habitats) in the are identified and the main ecosystem are known. functions of these Components in the

Guidepost ecosystem are understood. Met? Y Y

The Bay of Biscay has been studied extensively, and as shown above, the main function of each component in the ecosystem is known and understood trough food web modeling (Lassalle et al., 2011). The main impact of the fishery on each component has been identified in PI 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4. Justification d Sufficient information is Sufficient information is available on the impacts of available on the impacts of the fishery on these the fishery on the Components to allow some Components and elements of the main consequences to allow the main for the ecosystem to be consequences for the

Guidepost inferred. ecosystem to be inferred.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 96

There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the PI 2.5.3 ecosystem Met? Y N

There is little up-to-date and quantitative information on discards and incidental catches of top predators. Although these effects are considered for the most part negligible, the impact of the fishery in all components cannot be inferred. Justification e Sufficient data continue to Information is sufficient to be collected to detect any support the development increase in risk level (e.g. , of strategies to manage due to changes in the ecosystem impacts. outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectiveness of the

Guidepost measures). Met? Y N

The monitoring programmes of the fishery and top predators and the environmental research of the Bay of Biscay continue. However, the lack of data on the fishery likely impact on unwanted catch precludes the development of strategies to manage ecosystem impacts. Justification

References Lassalle et al,.2011-2012

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 97

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

• Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep There is an effective national There is an effective There is an effective ost legal system and a framework national legal system and national legal system and for cooperation with other organised and effective binding procedures parties, where necessary, to cooperation with other governing cooperation with deliver management outcomes parties, where necessary, other parties which delivers consistent with MSC Principles 1 to deliver management management outcomes and 2 outcomes consistent with consistent with MSC MSC Principles 1 and 2. Principles 1 and 2. Met? Y Y Y Justific The EU is a Contracting Party to UNCLOS. In the national domain, Spain ratified the United ation Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1996, and adopted the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries in 1995. Spain also forms part of the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR). The fisheries in European waters are managed within the European Union CFP, with the last reform taking effect on 1 January 2014. Based on the general framework of the CFP, the EU establishes suitable management and control measures for each fishery operating in their waters, or implies the participation of boats with the European flag, or even EU citizens in fisheries in non-European waters. It is worth noting that the CFP is in accordance with the objectives of MSC principles 1 and 2.

The Spanish Government, through the SGP, part of the MAGRAMA is responsible for applying management measures to the national fisheries sector. The 2001 Fishing Law covers the directives of the European CFP, and adapts them to the specific circumstances of Spanish fishing sector. European fisheries management also involves taking decisions based on the best available scientific data. The EC receives advice from various scientific organizations. Also, in the event of data gaps, the EU has the means to fund studies and projects in the short, medium, and long term with the aim of rectifying the lack of data and, as such, fulfilling the CFP objectives. The Commission's scientific advisory bodies are the STECF and ICES. ICES provide scientific advice to the EU institutions and include stakeholders with observer status. For the EU level, the most important cooperation forum is the SWWAC or CCSur in Spanish, which brings together representatives of commercial interests and environmental and social NGOs.

Member states are also obliged to collect data on their fleets and, via national research organizations or in conjunction with organizations from other Countries; they carry out the research that will provide the basis for decision-making. Therefore, in Spain, the IEO, AZTI,

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 98

• Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. and CSIC, along with a range of universities and other regional research centres, undertake the research projects that form the essential aspects of fisheries management. Overall, the team considers that i) there is a coherent and effective European and Spanish national legal system, ii) there are binding procedures for cooperation at EU, national and local levels, and iii) the Spanish system delivers effective management of the fishery, consistent with P1 and P2, SG 100 is met. b Guidep The management system The management system The ost incorporates or is subject by law to a incorporates or is subject by law management mechanism for the resolution of to a transparent mechanism for system legal disputes arising within the the resolution of legal disputes incorporates or system. which is considered to be subject by law to effective in dealing with most a transparent issues and that is appropriate to mechanism for the context of the fishery. the resolution of legal disputes that is appropriate to the context of the fishery and has been tested and proven to be effective. Met? Y Y Y Justific At a European level, when the Commission considers the national authorities are not suitably ation compliant in their fishing governance, they first try to resolve issues through consultations, or in certain circumstances, they can either temporarily cancel access to the EFF until the issue has been resolved, or reduce quotas, which can be deducted from future quotas, or in extreme cases, the Commission can place the Member State in question before the Court of Justice of the EU. At a national level, the Spanish legal system is used as the main mechanism to resolve legal disputes. When it comes to fishing infractions, the disciplinary procedures will be invariably opened as a result of the resolution adopted to that effect by the Delegate of the Regional Government in the Spanish Autonomous Region in question. The procedures will be initiated: a) on initiative of the Government Delegate; b) through an order from a higher authority; c) by petition of the Director General de Recursos Pesqueros y Acuicultura, or other sea fishing authorities or bodies; d) as a result of a request against any action or conduct that could constitute a violation;

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 99

• Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. e) as a result of a procedure initiated by sea fishing inspectors or other governmental employees or agents.

The management system has to apply a transparent mechanism for resolving legal disputes by law. The sea fishing disciplinary procedures will be undertaken in accordance with the principle of transparency in the procedures. To those effects, the interested parties will have the right to receive updated data on the current status of their procedures, and to access and obtain copies of the relevant documents. In the same way, and prior to the hearing, the interested parties could present allegations and provide documents they consider relevant. Access to documents related to the concluded disciplinary procedures is governed by the contents of article 37 of Law 30 of 26 November.

With the aim of ensuring a completely transparent procedure and the efficacy of the government itself, and to also ensure the due defense of the accused and the interests of all the other parties that may be affected, each initiated disciplinary procedure will follow a systematic course, successively incorporating all the documents, statements, acts, administrative applications, notifications, and other appropriate procedures in the correct order. A procedure initiated as such will be completed and will remain the responsibility of the competent body throughout. The fishermen or industry representatives can use the entire legal process. This transparent mechanism for resolving legal disputes is considered effective in dealing with most issues in the context of fisheries. Even though some weaknesses have been detected, including the complexity of the procedure, the geographical spread and diversity of the inspectors, and the insufficient regulation of the provisional measures during disciplinary procedures. The management system incorporates or subject by law to a transparent mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes that is appropriate to the context of the fishery and has been tested and proven to be effective, therefore SG100 is met .

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 100

• Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. d Guidep The management system has a The management system has a The management ost mechanism to generally respect mechanism to observe the legal system has a the legal rights created explicitly or rights created explicitly or mechanism to established by custom of people established by custom of formally commit to dependent on fishing for food or people dependent on fishing for the legal rights livelihood in a manner consistent food or livelihood in a manner created explicitly or with the objectives of MSC consistent with the objectives established by Principles 1 and 2. of MSC Principles 1 and 2. custom of people dependent on fishing for food and livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. Met? Y Y Y

Justific Via the CFP, the EU management system creates, respects, and ensures legal rights, which are ation expressly created or established for the practices of people dependent on fishing for their food or livelihood in a manner consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2 objectives. Spain retains ownership of the national quota, however at all stages and all actors such as the PO have procedures that bind them to ‘formally commit’ to the customary rights of fishers. SG100 is met. FAO Council 1993.The Agreement for the Establishment of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. Hundred and Fifth Session in Rome on 25 November 1993. http://www.iotc.org/English/info/mission.php

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 (UNCLOS). http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf

FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries adopted in the FAO Conference 1995. http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/v9878e/v9878e00.HTM References The United Nations 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 (in force as from 11 December 2001): http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_fish_stocks.ht m

REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 101

• Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC.

LAW 3/2001, of 26 March, of National Maritime Fishing

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE 100

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 102

The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to interested and affected parties. PI 3.1.2 The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant parties Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep Organisations and individuals Organisations and individuals Organisations and individuals ost involved in the management involved in the management involved in the management process have been identified. process have been identified. process have been identified. Functions, roles and Functions, roles and Functions, roles and responsibilities are generally responsibilities are explicitly responsibilities are explicitly understood. defined and well understood defined and well understood for key areas of responsibility for all areas of responsibility and interaction. and interaction. Met? Y Y Y Justific The EU fisheries management system has tools available for all the involved parties to be represented ation and consulted during the decision-making processes. As such, the Advisory Councils are organizations directed by interested parties that provide recommendations on fishery management to both the EC and the EU countries, which can include advice on socio-economic and conservation aspects, as well as the simplification of the guidelines. They discuss issues affecting the sector, and the issues and possible solutions are conveyed to the EU Fisheries Commission. The SWWAC covers the Atlantic fisheries from southern Europe, including the Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine fishery, and has the following missions: - To propose recommendations to the EU and the Member States resulting from a consensus between the fisheries sector and civil organizations. - To respond to the range of consultations launched by the EU (communications, Regulation proposals...). The SWWAC brings together 2/3 of the representatives of the fishing sector (fishermen, ship owners, producer and processor organizations, and fish market organizations) from five Member States (Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands). The remaining 1/3 of its members are from civil society (aquaculture, consumer associations, environmental NGOs, fishermen's wives, and recreational fishing).

In addition, on the national level, Spanish fishermen are grouped locally and regionally into associations and are represented nationally by fishing federations or the large fisheries associations. Fisheries federations and associations are usually proactively involved in forums and sector meetings when it comes to putting forward and working on the solutions to issues alongside the regional, national, or European governments.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 103

• Industry Representation: National Federation of Fishermen Cofradías www.fncp.eu/, Producers Organizations, Spanish Federation of Fishing Shipowners, Spanish Federation of Fisheries Organizations www.feope.com, Spanish Federation of Fisheries Associations. • Industry / NGO / Scientific liaison: Sectorial Social Dialogue Committee on Sea Fisheries, SWWAC, National Advisory Committee for the Fishery Sector.

Based on the above, it can be concluded that the roles and functions of all the players involved in fisheries are clear, well defined, and understood by all parties. Therefore SG100 is met . b Guidep The management system The management system The management system ost includes consultation processes includes consultation processes includes consultation processes that obtain relevant information that regularly seek and accept that regularly seek and accept from the main affected parties, relevant information, including relevant information, including including local knowledge, to local knowledge. The local knowledge. The inform the management system. management system management system demonstrates consideration of demonstrates consideration of the information obtained. the information and explains how it is used or not used. Met? Y Y Y

Justific The Management system includes consultation processes that provide relevant data on the status of ation the fisheries via technical and scientific knowledge from all the involved parties, including local knowledge from fishermen and all parts of society that wish to take part. The Reform of the CFP, approved in 2013, which forms the basis for fisheries management in the European Union, was undertaken using an open consultation process with all interested parties and civil society so they could forward their concerns and provide their knowledge with the aim of reaching the best consensus on the management tool between all parties. The consultation mechanisms are usually used for decision-making, which affect the various interested parties for each fishery. The European Union Advisory Councils are the main tool for conveying the concerns and issues of the fisheries sector to the European Commission, as well as industry fisheries management proposals for consideration. Local fishermen are involved in the SWWAC.

The management system means all interested parties can express opinions and proposals via consultation mechanisms or specific forums. However, whether these opinions are accepted as commitments by the competent government during decision-making is less clear, although it is not mandatory. Therefore, the management system demonstrates consideration of the information obtained. The management system includes consultation processes that regularly seek and accept relevant information, including local knowledge. The management system demonstrates consideration of the information obtained and explains how the information is used or not used. SG 100 is met .

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 104

There are consultation processes that allow all interested parties effective involvement, based on different mechanisms of representation. The EU Advisory Councils are one of the main mechanisms, but at a national level, fishermen's associations and federations represent fishermen in the different forums and consultation mechanisms, whether general in nature or specific to each fishery.

The CFP Reform process allowed all interested parties, including civil society, to provide their comments to the Green Paper on Fishing in Europe that formed the basis for the new CFP. Justific On a national level, the Spanish government regularly meets with the sector to tackle shared interest ation issues and learn of their opinions on the issues that affect their activity. There are different levels of consultation that embrace all the interested and affected parties in fisheries management, and include:

• the National Advisory Committee for the Fishery Sector • the EFF Monitoring Committee • the Spanish Technology Platform on Fisheries and Aquaculture • the IEO Advisory Board

The CAMA of the MAGRAMA was conceived as a forum where environmental NGOs and players in the fishing sector have the opportunity to discuss environmental issues, including those related to the health of the seas and the current issues, and where action measures are proposed to try to improve the identified negative aspects. Fishing activity related aspects are discussed in CAMA.

Both in the UE and national scope SG 100 is met . Regulation (EU) no 1380/2013 of the European parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC LAW 3/2001, of 26 March, of National Maritime Fishing.

Council Decision 2004/585/EC of 19 July 2004 establishing Regional Advisory Councils under the References Common Fisheries Policy

2007/222/EC: Commission Decision of 4 April 2007 declaring operational the Regional Advisory Council for the south-western waters under the common fisheries policy

Council Regulation (EC) No 768/2005 of 26 April 2005 establishing a Community Fisheries Control Agency and amending Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 105

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 106

The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision-making that are PI 3.1.3 consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria, and incorporates the precautionary approach Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep Long-term objectives to guide Clear long-term objectives that guide Clear long-term objectives ost decision-making, consistent decision-making, consistent with that guide decision- with the MSC Principles and MSC Principles and Criteria and the making, consistent with Criteria and the precautionary precautionary approach are explicit MSC Principles and Criteria approach, are implicit within within management policy. and the precautionary management policy approach, are explicit within and required by management policy. Met? Y Y Partial The main objective of the CFP is to ensure high, long term yields of all stocks in 2015 if possible, and by 2020 at the latest. A range of control and management actions are being used to that end, including fishing effort regulation, access to waters, technical measures such as minimum sizes or gear selectivity, and the imposition of TACs and quotas on most of the fisheries.

Currently, almost all the stocks and important fishing grounds in EU waters are managed using multiannual plans (currently 11), which establish the objective of stock management in terms of fish mortality and size. Some plans also establish detailed and specific route maps to achieve the objective, or include fishing effort limits to complement the total allowable catches (TAC) and specific control regulations. Although a system of TACs and quotas for the stock of sardine being evaluated has not yet been implemented, the tendency of the Commission is that given improving scientific knowledge of fisheries management, efficient measures are launched based on the specific needs of each fishery. The multiannual plans will include the maximum sustainable yield objective and a deadline in which to achieve it, the measures to apply for compulsory landings and, among other things, guarantees to apply corrective measures if necessary, and a review of the clauses. Technical measures can also be included.

The Conference of the Parties relating to the Convention on Biological Diversity of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the biodiversity objectives adopted by the European Council in 2010, Justification considers the sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources should be based on a precautionary approach, which derives not only from the precautionary principle referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 191(2) of the Treaty, but also the best scientific evidence available. In order to achieve the Good Environmental Status of the waters by 2020, each Member State such as Spain is required to develop a strategy for its marine waters (or Marine Strategy).

In addition, the Natura 2000 framework (under the Habitats and Birds Directives) aims to protect ETP species and habitats through specific management plans that include fishing activities

On the basis of the foregoing, and given that this performance indicator deals mainly with the high or broad management policy, the team conclude that the CFP has a comprehensive and explicit set of objectives consistent with MSC Principles that are required by the management system and address the precautionary approach (SG80 is met). However, if we consider the national level to score SG100 and in particular the overall objectives of Spanish fisheries policy encapsulated in the National Fishery Law document (2014), the precautionary approach is not required. Therefore a partial score of SG90 is given. References Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 107

The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision-making that are PI 3.1.3 consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria, and incorporates the precautionary approach on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC

Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive)

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 108

PI 3.1.4 The management system provides economic and social incentives for sustainable fishing and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep The management system The management system provides The management ost provides for incentives that are for incentives that are consistent system provides for consistent with achieving the with achieving the outcomes incentives that are outcomes expressed by MSC expressed by MSC Principles 1 and consistent with Principles 1 and 2. 2, and seeks to ensure that achieving the outcomes perverse incentives do not arise. expressed by MSC Principles 1 and 2, and explicitly considers incentives in a regular review of management policy or procedures to ensure they do not contribute to unsustainable fishing practices. Met? Y Y Partial Justific The objective of the CFP is to undertake sustainable exploitation of live aquatic resources and ation aquaculture in the context of sustainable development, whilst taking a balanced approach to the environmental, economic, and social aspects.

Since the 2002 review of the CFP, the subsidies contributing to unsustainable fishing have been stopped. Direct grants or funding to increase capacity, exportation, or compensate for low yields are no longer available. Using the new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), EU structural funding to the fishing sector provides special financial support for the measures that contribute to promote sustainable fishing from an environmental and efficient use of resources, and an innovative, competitive, and knowledge based standpoint, which as such, achieves the results expressed in MSC Principles 1 and 2.

The specific objectives of the EMFF include: a) the limitation of fisheries impact on the marine environment, which would include avoiding and reducing unwanted catches to a minimum; b) the protection and recovery of biodiversity and aquatic ecosystems; c) the balance between fishing capacity and available fishing possibilities; d) the improvement and provision of scientific knowledge, as well as improvements in collecting and managing data; No harmful subsidies currently contribute to unsustainable fishing practices within the European Union fisheries framework.

The CFP currently in force established that Member States must promote responsible fishing, offering incentives to operators that fish using the least damaging techniques to the environment and provide the highest benefits to society. The CFP expects the criteria for allocating fishing opportunities for Member States to be transparent and objective, and to provide incentives, even

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 109

PI 3.1.4 The management system provides economic and social incentives for sustainable fishing and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing financial in nature, if the boats use selective fishing gear or fishing techniques with a lower environmental impact, such as low energy consumption or causing less damage to the habitat. However, these incentives are currently unclear. For example, the system of quota allocation creates uncertainties for fishers and weak sense of stewardship of the resources which does not act as a positive incentive. A 90% increase in the quota in one year followed by a 70% reduction in the following year does not contribute to the long term planning of fisher activities.

Therefore, the team agree that the management system provides for incentives that are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC Principles 1 and 2, but we cannot confirm that the incentives are explicitly considered at least for the fleet into consideration. Even though, the risk of perverse incentives was reviewed at EU level as part of the review and reform of the CFP, they are not regularly reviewed to ensure they do not contribute to unsustainable fishing practices. In conclusion, a partial scoring of 90 was allocated. Regulation (EU) no 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC LAW 3/2001, of 26 March, of National Maritime Fishing Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on References the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF). EU Regulations 508/2014, Regulation 1380/2013 Ernst and Young, et al. 2011. Interim evaluation of the European Fisheries Fund (2007-2013) Synthesis of the 26 national evaluation. Review of EU fisheries subsidies: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/divers/join/2013/513980/IPOL- PECH_DV%282013%29513980_EN.pdf and information at http://cfp- reformwatch.eu/2009/12/the-new-reform/

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 110

The fishery has clear, specific objectives designed to achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s PI 3.2.1 Principles 1 and 2 Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep Objectives, which are broadly Short and long-term objectives, Well defined and measurable ost consistent with achieving the which are consistent with short and long-term objectives, outcomes expressed by MSC’s achieving the outcomes which are demonstrably consistent Principles 1 and 2, are implicit expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 with achieving the outcomes within the fishery’s management and 2, are explicit within the expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 system fishery’s management system. and 2, are explicit within the fishery’s management system. Met? Y Partial N Justific As pointed out by ICES, there are no management objectives for this stock and there is no TAC. Whilst ation there are no reference points for this stock, advice provided by ICES is based on the precautionary approach, which can be inferred to aim for MSY and avoid limit reference levels (i.e. historically low SSB and an increase in F).

On the basis of its EU shared fishery dimension, CFP has the objective of maintaining all commercially exploited stocks at a level consistent with MSY applies, even in the absence of a management plan included in article 34.

The fisheries targeting northern sardine are managed through technical measures such as gear and vessels specifications, minimum landings size and closed areas as mentioned earlier in this document. At a national level (Spain), there is a purse seine census boats which limit the number of boats with access to this fishery. They also need an authorization to fish pelagic species in Divisions VIII a, b, d. In regard to Principle 2, limiting the sardine catch by fishing controls has the benefit of limiting impacts on non-target species (retained, discarded and ETP), that ecosystem impacts are therefore limited, and there are no habitat impacts.

Therefore, the team can state that implicit objectives are broadly consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. SG60 is met.

As explain in PIs 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 the harvest strategy and harvest control rules have to consider the overall performance and how the elements contribute to allowing the management system to respond to the state of the whole stock. The French, Spanish and Cornish fisheries agree to accept ICES recommendations each year in relation to the stock status and, working together with national scientists and the fishing sector, to ensure that the current management measures remain in force for the upcoming year, unless ICES advises that the trends in the sardine stock requires modification of exploitation rates. In which case, the stakeholders agree to adapt their management framework with respecting to ICES advice on allowed catches as recorded in the Commitment (Appendix 3).

The Commitment mentioned include short and long term explicit objectives in regard to Principle 1 but the team understands that is a declaration of intent that such measures will be implemented to the future of the sardine management. Therefore, the fishery scores 70 because there are not explicit within the fishery’s management system in the EU and National policy. In addition, Even though P2 outcome and management all scored at least 80, the fishery does not have explicit objectives for all the elements of Principle 2. References

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 111

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

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 5

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 112

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making processes that result PI 3.2.2 in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under assessment. Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidepo There are some decision-making There are established decision- st processes in place that result in making processes that result in measures and strategies to measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific achieve the fishery-specific objectives. objectives. Met? Y Y Justificat The management of EU fisheries is based on scientific advice on biological and economic issues. ion Through the application of the CFP, the EU has set quantifiable long-term objectives to achieve and / or maintain secure levels of fish stocks in European waters, as well as the necessary measures to achieve those levels. As such, the annual TAC is part of a set of management tools within the framework of a multi-annual strategy to manage fisheries in the form of Management Plans. The EU has established decision making process. Firstly, the scientific council is one of the main tools for decision-making on fisheries of the EC. ICES conduct and coordinate research into the marine ecosystems of the North Atlantic. The STECF was set up to advise the Commission on fisheries management. ICES provide advice to several governments and regional fisheries management organizations, including the EU. In addition, provides knowledge of its scientific assessments of the main European fisheries and information is considered as a basis for establishing TACs and quotas or, if necessary, to close a fishery. However, a system of TACs and quotas is yet to be applied to the sardine stock being evaluated. In relation to the scientific information and advice, the Spanish scientific institution (IEO and AZTI) delivers information and follows ICES advice. Secondly, the Advisory Councils are established by Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 and detailed rules on the functioning of them are established by the Regulation 2015/242. The Advisory Councils contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the CFP and may submit recommendations and suggestions to the Commission and to the Member States concerned on matters relating to the management of fisheries. In relation to the fishery under assessment, the SWWAC Advisory Council members work together to find agreements in the management of the sardine fishery among other species. Even though, a formal management plan is not in place for the fishery, the decision-making process has resulted in agreed measures and strategy to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. The Commitment from the Spanish, French and Cornish clients serve as an example. SG80 is met. b Guidepo Decision-making processes Decision-making processes Decision-making processes st respond to serious issues respond to serious and other respond to all issues identified identified in relevant important issues identified in in relevant research, research, monitoring, relevant research, monitoring, monitoring, evaluation and evaluation and consultation, evaluation and consultation, in a consultation, in a transparent, in a transparent, timely and transparent, timely and adaptive timely and adaptive manner adaptive manner and take manner and take account of the and take account of the wider some account of the wider wider implications of decisions. implications of decisions. implications of decisions. Met? Y Y N

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 113

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making processes that result PI 3.2.2 in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under assessment. Justificat The decision-making process can be considered to respond to requirements for this indicator, ion integrating the scientific knowledge, the monitoring, the evaluation, and the consultation processes of the interested parties through the use of the ICES scientific council and its integrated advisory structure comprised of the STECF /SWWAC/ European Commission and ACFA. The outcomes of these activities are considered when taking decisions on fisheries management. However, the team does not consider that the system including at national level respond to all issues adaptively or timely. SG100 is not met. c Guidepo Decision-making processes use st the precautionary approach and are based on best available information. Met? Y

Justificat All the EU management plans are based on a precautionary approach that aims to ensure the ion fishing is sustainable and reduces its impact on the marine environment to a minimum. The Commission's proposals are always in line with the CFP, which clearly establishes the commitment to the precautionary approach. Also, via the IEO Basic Fishing Data National Programme including the monitoring of landings and catch control with onboard logbooks, the scientific data for this fishery should be considered good for decision-making based on scientific advice. SG80 is met. d Guidepo Some information on fishery Information on fishery Formal reporting to all st performance and performance and management interested stakeholders provides management action is action is available on request, comprehensive information on generally available on and explanations are provided fishery performance and request to stakeholders. for any actions or lack of action management actions and associated with findings and describes how the management relevant recommendations system responded to findings emerging from research, and relevant recommendations monitoring, evaluation and emerging from research, review activity. monitoring, evaluation and review activity. Met? Y Y N

Justificat Broadly speaking, all the interested parties can generally access the relevant information on the ion status of the fisheries in the EU and Spanish context, when it comes to both technical and administrative management, as well as the available scientific data. ICES can be consulted for the annual stock assessment results and it is also possible to access the STECF and ACFA reports and recommendations. The outcomes of the deliberations of the EU Fisheries Commission are also available via their communications and regulations. All the reports, regulations, and recommendations on the European fisheries are analyzed and discussed in the CCRs, and in the SWWAC for this specific fishery, meaning all interested parties have access to most of the available data. The Spanish Government regularly convenes the sector to inform them of the resolutions and changes that affect or may affect the sector, and they work hand in hand to find the best solution. This also means that the Government has first-hand knowledge of the sector's worries and

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 114

In relation to landings the data from the VMS system is transmitted from the boats to the SGP Control Centre. This data could have been useful on occasion to help the corresponding departments in the relevant Autonomous Regions maintain better control over the fishery. However, this data cannot always be obtained quickly in order to take more effective action. Information is available on the entire performance of the fishery but there is not always a formal reporting but is available on request. On this basis, the team considered that SG80 is met but not SG100. e Guidepo Although the management The management system or The management system or st authority or fishery may be fishery is attempting to comply fishery acts proactively to subject to continuing court in a timely fashion with judicial avoid legal disputes or rapidly challenges, it is not indicating a decisions arising from any legal implements judicial decisions disrespect or defiance of the challenges. arising from legal challenges. law by repeatedly violating the same law or regulation necessary for the sustainability for the fishery. Met? Y Y N

Justificat The specific management system for this fishery does not explicitly consider mechanisms to resolve ion disputes or implement legal rulings, given that they are resolved within a wider framework both at European and national level. As such, at EU level, the issues must initially be resolved through consultations, or access to the EFF can be temporarily suspended until the problem is resolved in certain circumstances. In the event fishing quotas are surpassed, they may be deducted from future quotas or in extreme cases, the Commission may place the Member State in question before the Court of Justice of the EU. At a national level, the Spanish legal system is used as the main mechanism to resolve legal disputes. When it comes to fishing infractions, the disciplinary procedures will be invariably opened as a result of the resolution adopted to that effect by the Delegate of the Regional Government in the Spanish Autonomous Region in question. With the aim of ensuring a completely transparent procedure and the efficacy of the government itself, and to also ensure the due defense of the accused and the interests of all the other parties that may be affected, each initiated disciplinary procedure follows a systematic course, successively incorporating all the documents, statements, acts, administrative applications, notifications, and other appropriate procedures in the correct order and timely fashion. SG80 is met. To meet SG100 the management system shall act proactively to avoid legal disputes. Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No References 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC LAW 3/2001, of 26 March, of National Maritime Fishing

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 115

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 116

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s management measures are PI 3.2.3 enforced and complied with Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep Monitoring, control and A monitoring, control and A comprehensive monitoring, ost surveillance mechanisms surveillance system has been control and surveillance system has exist, are implemented in implemented in the fishery been implemented in the fishery the fishery under under assessment and has under assessment and has assessment and there is a demonstrated an ability to demonstrated a consistent ability reasonable expectation that enforce relevant management to enforce relevant management they are effective. measures, strategies and/or measures, strategies and/or rules. rules. Met? Y Y Y The EU Member States are responsible for complying with the agreed regulations within the CFP framework at an EU level. The EFCA was set up in 2007. Its goal is to coordinate the fisheries inspection and control operational activities of Member States, and provide assistance to the Member States in their application of the CFP. Their commitment has been strengthened by the publication of the new EU control regulation, which took effect on 1 January 2010, with the main aim to promote compliance of the current regulation in accordance with the rules of the CFP (Regulation nº 1224/2009).

In addition, since Regulation (EC) Nº 1077/2008 took effect in 2008, laying down detailed rules on electronic recording and reporting of fishing activities and on remote sensing methods, it has become compulsory to use an Onboard Electronic Logbook (OEL) on most fishing boats, through which the data on each boat's catch is reported to the Control Centers. In Spain, the control center is the CSP , within the Subdirección de Control e Inspección as part of the SGP, therefore is the competent authority for MCS activities both in sea and on land, which coordinates the different activities in this area, occasionally supported by the Autonomous Regions. The CSP is active 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Over 2,000 boats are controlled from CSP MAGRAMA which is the major fisheries control center in Europe. The data provided relates to: • Daily OEL. For ships> 15 m in electronic form. • VMS data, sent on a daily basis whether or not vessels are operating. They have to send at least one message a day even if they are not fishing. Other information to be completed by the fleet includes the Declaration of landing and notice of entry into port. Therefore the MAGRAMA receives real time data, which gives them an almost immediate reaction capability. The control system has implemented a system of alarms that are active in the areas where you cannot fish, either because they are protected areas, areas of special permission, or for other reasons. The OEL data, sent via one message a day, provides almost immediate catch control. This data can be used to control the use of fishing quotas, among other issues.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 117

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s management measures are PI 3.2.3 enforced and complied with Justific In addition, boats over 15 m long are obliged to use so-called blue or VMS boxes, which allow the ation boat to be monitored every two hours, indicating its precise position and the nature of the activity being undertaken at the time (fishing, sailing, etc.).

A very high number of forces carry out the different control tasks (the number is confidential), and belong to different law enforcement bodies: SEPRONA, the Civil Guard, the Navy, and Customs. Each of them have their own area of competence. They mainly use airplanes and vessels to undertake control measures on both land and sea. Finally, there is also the Autonomous Regions which essentially coordinates with the SGP the opening/closing of the pelagic fisheries and the sending of sales notes for the cross-check with the OEL. For example in the Basque Country, the sardine is subject to very exhaustive control, with a lot of interaction between both local and SGP inspectors. There are 14 inspectors (7 in Guipúzcoa and 7 in Vizcaya) and there is a specific inspection program for the sardine. Overall, the monitoring and control system in this fishery is strong and demonstrates a consistent ability to enforce. SG100 is met. b Guidep Sanctions to deal with non- Sanctions to deal with non- Sanctions to deal with non- ost compliance exist and there compliance exist, are compliance exist, are consistently is some evidence that they consistently applied and applied and demonstrably provide are applied. thought to provide effective effective deterrence. deterrence. Met? Y Y Y

Justific As noted above, the Spanish system allows for either administrative or legal sanctions, or both. The ation sanction system in Spain is clearly developed in the Fisheries Law. The Regional Government Delegate of the Spanish Autonomous Region in which the allegedly offensive behavior occurred is responsible for deciding on the convenience of initiating a disciplinary procedure in light of the facts presented in the corresponding infraction report prepared by the fishing inspectors. In addition, the agriculture and fishing division personnel from the Government's delegate office should prepare the disciplinary procedures, and once the preliminary hearing has been undertaken (in accordance with Royal Decree 1398/1993), they will present the proposal for resolution, which will be sent with the file to the SGP in the event of serious or very serious infractions. In the event of minor infractions, the Government delegate will decide on the appropriate fine / sanction. Article 102 of the Spanish Government Maritime Fishing Law dictates the applicable quantities for each type of sanction, establishing a distinction between those classified as minor, serious, and very serious. In the event of an infraction, the competent authorities of the Member State will, without delay and in compliance with the procedure in the national legislation, notify the Member State of which the accused is a citizen, of criminal proceedings or any other measures taken, as well as any definitive legal decision relating to the infraction. The overall system is said to be effective in the area because the agencies involved collaborate closely and work with the vessels. There is no past record of sanctions for this fishery overall, although special cases can occur through surpassing catches by 10%, surpassing landing quotas, or OEL errors. The team considered that sanctions appear to be consistently applied at several levels, and given that non-compliance in the fishery is low, they demonstrably provide effective deterrence. SG100 is met.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 118

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s management measures are PI 3.2.3 enforced and complied with c Guidep Fishers are generally thought Some evidence exists to There is a high degree of ost to comply with the demonstrate fishers comply with confidence that fishers management system for the the management system under comply with the management fishery under assessment, assessment, including, when system under assessment, including, when required, required, providing information of including, providing providing information of importance to the effective information of importance to importance to the effective management of the fishery. the effective management of management of the fishery. the fishery. Met? Y Y Y

Justific As noted above, all the evidence suggests that compliance is good and that vessels provide ation information on catches and activities in a timely manner. d Guidep There is no evidence of systematic ost non-compliance. Met? Y

Justific There is no evidence of systematic non-compliance in this fishery. Based on the MCS team's meetings ation with both Central and Autonomous Region Governments, there have been hardly any infractions, and all the interested parties are aware of the current regulations, and current management measures.

Council Regulation (EC) n° 1224/2009, of 20 November 2009, establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy Commission Regulation (EC) Nº 1077/2008 of 3 November 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) no 1966/2006 on electronic recording and reporting of fishing activities and on means of remote sensing and repealing Regulation (EC) nº 1566/2007 Order ARM/3145/2009, of 19 November, regulating the implementation of the registry and electronic reporting of data from the activity of Spanish fishing boats

References Council Regulation (EC) nº 768/2005 of 26 April 2005 establishing a Community Fisheries Control Agency and amending Regulation (EEC) nº 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION of 19 December 2012 establishing a specific control and inspection programme for pelagic fisheries in the Western Waters of the North East Atlantic (2012/807/EU) COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 404/2011 of 8 April 2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) no 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 119

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

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Guidep Research is undertaken, as A research plan provides the A comprehensive research plan ost required, to achieve the management system with a provides the management system objectives consistent with strategic approach to research with a coherent and strategic MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. and reliable and timely approach to research across P1, P2 information sufficient to achieve and P3, and reliable and timely the objectives consistent with information sufficient to achieve MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. the objectives consistent with MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. Met? Y Y N Justific ICES is the researcher center where stock assessment results are shared, management priorities are ation identified and MS research activities are coordinated. For the sardine there is absence of a formal stock assessment. However, the purse seine sardine fishery nonetheless benefits from a shared research plan with the Bay of Biscay anchovy. An annual pre-recruit biological research cruise, involving Principle 1, has been at the core of the national research plan, providing the management system with a strategic approach for research, and enough reliable and timely information to achieve the objectives consistent with MSC’s Principle 1. This research plan is seems appropriate for the scale and intensity of the fishery and is capable of meeting the information needs of the national (AZTI-IEO) and European (ICES) supervising authorities. The available scientific data essentially comes from two ICES working groups on this fishery: • ICES Working Group on Anchovy and Sardine and Southern Horse Mackerel ( WGHANSA) • Working Group on Acoustic and Egg Surveys for Sardine and Anchovy in ICES Areas VIII and IX (WGACEGG) The ICES sets up working groups based on the need for scientific data identified by the delegates from the different member states, as well as when required by other interested parties. The research is undertaken around the specific requisites, which generally come from the working group's recommendations on assessment of the relevant stocks. Scientists from the most important scientific institutions involved in fishery and marine research in each country participate in the ICES. When it comes to Spain and this fishery in particular, these are essentially scientists from the IEO and AZTI. In addition, the EU occasionally funds other organizations’ research, such as universities, (e.g. through the EU) to complement the scientific understanding of interest for the fishery and the related ecosystem. Further research on P2 does exist at ICES and National levels; surveys for the assessment of anchovy main retained stocks, and ecosystem models, including on the effect of climate change on small pelagic species (see P2). From 2015/2016, ICES will systematically complement its advice on stock assessment with ecosystem considerations. These mechanisms illustrate that P1 & P2 aspects are addressed in a strategic manner in what equates to a research plan. That plan does provide the management system with timely information in order to achieve P1 & 2 objectives. On this basis, SG80 is met. There is no strategic approach on research including P3 issues, SG 100 is not met. b Guidep Research results are available to Research results are Research plan and results are ost interested parties. disseminated to all interested disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion. parties in a timely fashion and are widely and publicly available.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 120

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

Met? Y Y Y

Justific The ICES working groups annual reports are (publicly) available online to all interested parties. ation The ICES reports are an essential part of decision-making and are distributed to all the interested parties prior to discussion meetings in order for Member States to develop their strategies with respect to requesting annual fishing allocations. The different national scientific groups working in the sardine fisheries (AZTI, IEO) periodically publish studies based on the data collected during the campaigns, or on catch data, which help to better understand the behavior of this species. The scientific information is presented to the fishery sector and other stakeholders such as the SWWAC and active participation of the vessels are discussed to organise the following year’s research activities. SG100 is met. ICES, 2014a and 2015. WGHANSA reports and 2014b. Advice for 2015, Bay of Biscay and Atlantic Iberian waters Sardine in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII

Council Regulation (EC) nº 199/2008 of 25 February 2008 concerning the establishment of a Community framework for the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector References and support for scientific advice regarding the Common Fisheries Policy.

REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 121

There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific PI 3.2.5 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 a Guidep The fishery has in place The fishery has in place The fishery has in place ost mechanisms to evaluate some mechanisms to evaluate key parts mechanisms to evaluate parts of the management of the management system all parts of the system. management system. Met? Y Y N Justific At a European Union level, the Regulation on data collection 199/2008, establishes a framework for ation the collection, management and use of data in the fisheries sector and support for scientific advice regarding the CFP. The main aims of this Regulation are: - The collection and management of biological, technical, environmental and socio- economic data relating to the fisheries sector within the framework of multi-annual programs; - The use of data relating to the fisheries sector in the framework of the CFP for scientific analysis purposes. Under the terms of the Regulation, each Member State must implement a national program to collect biological and economical data on their fisheries. The EC periodically collects this data on the Member States, in aggregated form, for analysis by independent experts. The Spanish National Program is coordinated by the IEO and the SGP. The data obtained is used to feed into the CFP. The data is collected in the following areas: • Commercial fishing data on catches and efforts • Economic fishing data • Scientific study data • Biological data The Spanish IEO has a key role in ICES' work, and is the official Spanish representative in both this organization and the working groups, and as such, contributes with resources and knowledge. Provides to the SGP the following information: the status of the fishery resources where the Spanish fleet operates; the fishing possibilities in the new area; the maintenance and improvement of coastal areas; the areas appropriate for the establishment of marine reserves or of aquaculture interest; and related issues. It also informs about issues involving marine pollution and environmental protection. In addition, AZTI-Tecnalia, part of the Basque Government, undertakes research in the Basque fisheries with collaboration from the sector and the main European research centers, within the framework of international organizations such as ICCAT, IOTC, ICES/CIEM, NAFO, STECF, etc. Their involvement is to prepare scientific advice on the different levels of fishery resource exploitation so the respective political authorities can establish the appropriate management measures to ensure the activity remains sustainable. AZTI monitors all the landings in the Basque Country, they check control the fish market data with the data in the logbook. National coordination meetings are held twice a year during which data from scientific centres with delegated competencies is shared. These essentially include: AZTI, IEO, ICES, and CSIC.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 122

There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific PI 3.2.5 management system against its objectives There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system Annual oceanographic campaigns are undertaken to assess the status of the small pelagic populations in the Cantabrian sea and the results are incorporated into the management plan. These campaigns are: • The goal of the Bioman scientific campaign is to evaluate the anchovy, sardine, and horse mackarel stock in the Bay of Biscay at the end of spring, and it is undertaken by AZTI. The estimation from this campaign serves as a reference for the ICES working group. • The PELGAS campaigns, undertaken by the French research institute, IFREMER, with the main objective of estimating the biomass of small pelagics, including sardine, is available in spring to approach the fishery assessment as required by the EU and to study how the entire pelagic ecosystem functions to understand the interactions between the anchovy and its environment.

The team considered that SG80 is met, but that SG100 might not be met on an on-going basis in relation to all parts of the overall management system for the sardine whole stock. b Guidep The fishery-specific The fishery-specific management The fishery-specific ost management system is system is subject to regular internal management system is subject to occasional and occasional external review. subject to regular internal and internal review. external review. Met? Y Y N Justific ICES Scientific advice and resulting management measures are subject to regular internal ation (benchmark) and periodic external review by STECF. Overall, the system has multiple sources of both internal and external review, covering all the significant aspects of the system – however, not all external reviews can be described as 'regular'. SG100 is not met References

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80

CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 123

Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs Table 1.2.1.a: Principle 1 Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA) Performance Indicator Risk-causing activities Spatial Temporal Intensity of Relevant Consequence MSC Score scale of scale of activity subcomponents score activity activity Target species outcome: Fishing activities from all Sardina pilchardus pilchardus fisheries including: Population size 2 80 Direct capture Reproductive

capacity 3 4 4 Age/size/sex

structure

Geographic range

Rationale for selecting worst The sardine stock in ICES Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Sub-area VII is targeted by several international purse-seine and pelagic trawl fisheries plausible case scenario using the appropriate small-meshed nets, and discards are considered by ICES to be negligible. There is very little unobserved mortality due to slipping or gear loss (the gears used are not selective) and sardine by catch in other fisheries is relatively minor. The main fishery targeting this sardine stock is the French purse seine fleet (with a few pelagic trawlers), operating mostly in Division VIIIa in the second half of the year, although English and Dutch boats also target sardine in the Channel. In Division VIIIb the main fishery is the Spanish purse seine fleet operating mainly in autumn.

The sardine stock in ICES Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Sub-area VII was assessed by ICES in 2015. The lack of catch age composition and survey information in the Celtic seas and the English Channel impairs the possibility of performing an analytical assessment, and the 2015 assessment used the ICES framework for category 3 stocks. The PELGAS (acoustic biomass) and BIOMAN (egg counts) survey indices were used as a combined index of stock development and advice was provided based on a comparison of the two latest index values with the three preceding values: these indicated that the combined survey index has increased by more than 20%. Though the stock status relative to possible reference points is unknown, the exploitation rate on the stock is considered to be stable and close to FMSY.

No TAC or management plan is yet defined for the stock, although technical management measures such as minimum landings size, minimum mesh size and closed areas are applied. It was agreed by all stakeholders, and the team, that Direct Capture is the activity relating to the fishery that poses the most risk to the target stock.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 124

Rationale for Spatial scale of The MSC CR requires that the greatest spatial extent shall be used to determine the spatial scale score for the activities relevant to the activity scoring element within the PI under consideration (Table CC8). For Principle 1, the spatial scale of fishing activity is based on the percentage of the total range of the sardine stock that overlaps with all fishing activity affecting the stock. Even though the Spanish fleet focuses their activity in Division VIIIb, the spatial scale was calculated for the total range of the stock and its overlap with the fishing activity and official landings reported to ICES and presented in the last ICES WGHANSA Report (ICES 2015). The assessment team together with AZTI and other stakeholders allocated a spatial score percentage that was published in the PCDR and FR. The results were agreed with the harmonized fisheries (Cornish and Brittany). The northern sardine stock is distributed throughout ICES Divisions VIIIa,b (See surveys: WGACEGG2014, PELGAS and BIOMAN in ICES CM 2014 / SSGESST: 21) and in ICES Sub-area VII (chiefly Divisions VII d, e, f, g and h:), although it is difficult to determine the actual distribution at any particular time. Though the formal stock area definition of ICES includes Division VIIId, this is marginal and occupied by a negligible amount of sardine (see Figure 2), so Division VIIId has not been taken into account for the assessment of the percentage of area overlap of the fisheries with the area occupied by the stock. The PELTIC2011 survey noted sardine in Divisions VIIe,f (WGACEGG11 ICES CM 2011 / SSGESST20) and, since 2012, sardines have been regularly seen the Autumn survey in this area (ICES CM 2013 WGACEGG 2013 / SSGESST: 20). The first step was to calculate the occupancy of all the fishing activities in the ICES rectangles per ICES division. An indication of the spatial scale of activity was derived from a weighted average of the % of occupation over the different areas (weighted to the size of the areas). On this basis, the FR published 8th December 2015 concluded that the spatial scale range for all fisheries was between 24-34% of the whole sardine stock distribution in ICES Divisions VIIIa,b and subarea VII. Therefore a score 4 was reached. Following the first publication of the Final Report, the team also carried out a review of the RBF outcomes together with the team members and scientific stakeholders (AZTI and IFREMER) of the harmonized sardine fisheries, taking into account other fisheries that catch sardines as the target species or as by-catch. The following maps were used to facilitate the counting of the rectangles and the percentages allocated to each ICES division.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 125

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1-2-3-4 Lat. 35 53 Latitude Codes 34 33 52 32 31 51 30 VIIg VIIf 29 50 28 VIId 27 VIIe 49 26 VIIh 25 48 24 23 VIIIa 47 22 21 46 20 19 VIIIb 45 18 17 44 16 VIIIc 15 43 14 13 42 12 11 41 10 Long. Codes D9 E0 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 F0 F1 F2 F3 The rectangles were calculated considering the percentage of land and sea. For example, if a rectangle is occupied half by land and half by sea the percentage of the rectangle counts as 0,5. Following this methodology the results were: Longitude

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1-2-3-4 Lat. 35 53 Latitude Codes 34 33 52 32 0,3 0,9 1 0,9 0,2 31 1 1 1 1 0,9 0,4 51 30 1 1 1 1 0,25 0,2 0,2 0,4 0,5 0,7 0,7 Size of ICES Divisions VIIIa 14,8 VIIe 13,8 VIId 8,08 29 1 1 1 0,6 0,6 0,8 1 1 1 1 0,33 50 28 1 1 1 1 1 1 10,7510,4 in squares units VIIIb 8,26 VIIf 4,35 VIIg 12,1 27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0,33 0,3 49 VIIfe 18,2 VIIh 14 26 1 1 1 1 0,75 0,25 0,8 0,4 25 1 1 1 1 0,5 48 VIIgh 26,1 24 1 1 1 0,9 0,4 0,05 23 1 1 1 0,7 47 TOTAL: 75,4 22 1 1 0,9 0,1 21 1 1 1 0,7 46 20 1 1 0,9 19 1 0,9 45 18 1 0,85 17 0,8 44 16 0,66 15 0,15 43 14 13 42 12 11 41 10 Long. Codes D9 E0 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 F0 F1 F2 F3

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 126

The team had several meetings with scientific experts in order to decide the areal overlap for all the fisheries impacting the stock. In addition the ICES WGHANSA REPORT 2015 was used as reference for catches and fleet distribution. Again, Division VIIId was judged to be only marginally occupied by a negligible amount of sardine and was not taken into account in this assessment. Sub-area VIII The Spanish fishery takes place mainly during March and April and in the fourth quarter of the year. Spanish vessels are purse-seines from the Basque Country which operate mostly in Division VIIIb. Spain occupies 2/3 of ICES Division VIIIb. A substantial part of the French catch originates from Divisions VIIh and VIIe, but these catches have been assigned to Division VIIIa due to their very concentrated location at the boundary between VIIIa, VIIh and VIIe. Following consultation with IFREMER and considering that some catches from other fleets such as the Dutch declared their catches in Division VIIIa, we used the maximum range for VIIIa with a total areal overlap of 6,78/14,75, which approximates to 1/2 of ICES Division VIIIa. The Cornish team informed us that the UK fisheries do not fish in Sub-area VIII. Subarea VII Most of the catches are concentrated close to or in the English Channel (Divisions VIId, e, f). Historically, the highest landings were made by France and the Netherlands, but UK participation has increased to become the majority in the last two years. The information available from other countries operating in that area was extracted from 2014 catches and gathered by the teams during the RBF consultation. In 2014, the catches were 6,311 t. Landings by the French fishery represent over 50% if the international catches in Sub-area VII, whilst the Netherlands fishery in this area appears to be concentrated in Division VIId (not confirmed by the Netherlands). German and Denmark stakeholders confirmed that their sardine catches (normally as a small by-catch) are in VIId. As the percentage occupied in Division VIId is not well known, all teams decided to be precautionary and used the maximum range to calculate the areal overlap (3.43/8,08). The Cornish fishery team confirmed that the fleet fished in Divisions VIIe and f (mainly VIIe), on a small scale and within 6 nautical miles of the coast. Stakeholders agreed that the UK fishery occupies between 15% and 27% of Divisions VIIef. Only French fisheries occupy Divisions VIIgh, but to a small extent, so the fishing overlap is 3.8% (1/26,1). The spatial scale of the activity estimated by this exercise is recorded in the following table: VIIIb VIIIa VIId VIIef VIIgh TOTAL PERCENTAGE Rectangles area 8,26 14,75 8,08 18,18 26,1 75,37 100% Overlapping area (Maximum) 5,26 6,8 3,43 4,95 1 21,44 28% Following Table CC8 from Annex CC Requirements the final score for the overal spatial scale is 3 (16-30%) . Rationale for Temporal scale In scoring the temporal scale of activities that potentially cause an impact on sardine, the highest temporal frequency for the of activity relevant activities shall be used to determine the score (Table CC9 ). All stakeholders agreed that the the Spanish purse seiners fish for sardine on approximately 80 days in a year, and changes to other target species during the rest of the year. This indicates <100 days: score = 3. If we considered the rest of the European fleet that takes sardine at other times, though in seasonal fisheries, the final score would be 4 (100-200 days/year) . Rationale for Intensity of In scoring intensity, the spatial and temporal scale of the sardine fishery, its nature and extent should be taken into account. In activity this case we are considering the direct impacts of the Spanish, French, Dutch and Cornish fisheries on the sardine population. It was concluded that there is major detection of this fishing activity at a broad spatial scale (Spanish and French fisheries = intensity score of 4), with moderate local detection (Danish and Cornish fisheries = intensity score of 3).

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 127

The final decision was the more precautionary score of 4 Major Level (Table CC10 ). Rationale for choosing most The team, in consensus with the stakeholders, identified the most vulnerable sub-component of the scoring element as vulnerable sub-component population size (Table CCR 3), given the sardine’s short life history (spawning at 1 year old) and the observations that recruitment variability is the main cause of fluctuations in abundance, and scored the consequence of the activity on that subcomponent. It is possible to assess changes to population size through proxies provided by ICES based on survey indices (see ICES 2015), and through speaking with stakeholders. Though reproductive capacity can be impacted in small pelagic stocks by changes in population size, no scientific institutions (international and national) have given indications that reproductive capacity of the sardine stock is at risk. Because the fishery is unselective, any effect on age, size or sex structure would be completely obscured by the observed fluctuations in year-class strength. Similarly, given the known variations in the distribution of the sardine population, the fishery has no effect on its geographic range. Rationale for Consequence The most vulnerable subcomponent of the scoring element is population size, for which any change is unlikely to be detectable score against the background variability for this sardine population (which appears not to be heavily exploited, is short lived and has high recruitment variability). Though it may be possible to detect changes in the size or growth rate, there is no scientific evidence for this. A consequence score of 2 was given, based on the fact that ICES concludes that harvest rate is currently close to the long-term mean and is likely to be close to F MSY , the combined stock size indicator index for Divisions VIIIa,b,d shows an increasing trend over the last five years, and recruitment indices for 2013 and 2015 are the highest in the time- series.

Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) A Productivity-Susceptibility Analysis (PSA) is required for Principle 1 (MSC CR Figure CC1). Table 1.2.1b represents an MSC PSA Worksheet for RBF to calculate PSA scores for sardine.

For productivity, the biological productivity parameters were obtained from ICES HAWG Reports and Fish base, and checked to be correct with scientific members of HAWG. In scoring susceptibility, the team used the information provided by the stakeholder meetings and from their own knowledge of fisheries for small pelagic species.

Table 1.2.1.b PSA Principle 1 Rationale Table PI 1.1.1 Stock Status Productivity Rationale Scores Average age at maturity 1 year 1 (<5 years) Average maximum age 7-8 years 1 (<10 years) Fecundity >20.000 eggs per year 1 (>20,000 eggs per

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 128

year) Average maximum size 24 cm 1 (<100 cm) Average size at maturity 14-17 cm average size at maturity 1 (<40 cm ) Reproductive strategy Broadcast spawner 1 Trophic level 3.1 2 (2.75-3.25) http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00176/28741/27280.pdf Total Productivity (average) 1.14 Susceptibility Rationale Scores Area Overlap The Areal overlap result considered the distribution of fishing effort directed at sardines and the distribution of the stock. The process and the allocation for the score allocation 2 carried out by the team and the other CABS are explained in the comments against SICA spatial scale. The chart below highlights the areas where the fishing activity takes place. Longitude

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1-2-3-4 Lat. 35 53 Latitude Codes 34 33 52 32 0,3 0,9 1 0,9 0,2 31 1 1 1 1 0,9 0,4 51 30 1 1 1 1 0,25 0,2 0,2 0,4 0,5 0,7 0,7 29 1 1 1 0,6 0,6 0,8 1 1 1 1 0,33 50 28 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0,75 1 0,4 27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0,33 0,3 49 26 1 1 1 1 0,75 0,25 0,8 0,4 25 1 1 1 1 0,5 48 24 1 1 1 0,9 0,4 0,05 23 1 1 1 0,7 47 22 1 1 0,9 0,1 21 1 1 1 0,7 46 20 1 1 0,9 19 1 0,9 45 18 1 0,85 17 0,8 44 16 0,66 15 0,15 43 14 13 42 12 11 41 10 Long. Codes D9 E0 E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 F0 F1 F2 F3 The teams agreed on a medium susceptibility score because the percentage is 10-30% of overlap. Therefore the score is 2 . Vertical Overlap The Vertical Overlap is defined as the position of the stock/species within the water 3 column relative to the fishing gear, and the scoring takes account of the combined vertical overlap between all fishing gears impacting the stock. In the case of sardine, the main gears purse seine and pelagic trawl are operated so as to encapsulate a high

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 129

proportion of the school or layer’s vertical extent in the water column, and there is a high probability of encounter. Score 3 . Selectivity of the gears The Spanish and French purse seine fisheries use acoustics and general fishery knowledge to determine whether to set on a school, and have the ability to slip the catch if the fish are not of the right size, or species composition. AZTI research has demonstrated for purse seiners that a high percentage of sardines survive slipping, so this acts as a selectivity behavior of the fishing gear to avoid undesirable sizes. As a result (and probably due to the areas and timing of the fishery), fish under the size at maturity are rarely or regularly caught depending upon the year or the fishery (so criteria a. Individuals < size at maturity are rarely caught scores 1 or 2) and individuals under half the size maturity are not caught at all (hence b. Individuals < half the size at maturity can escape or avoid gear, i.e. b scores 2). For the last five years the Spanish purse seine fleet in VIIIb captured on average 7.7% in numbers of sardine below 17cm (i.e. below the maximum size to reach maturity), whilst the French purse seine fishery caught on average 19.8% in numbers of sardine below 17cm. Neither fishery caught sardines smaller than 8 cm (i.e. smaller than half the size at maturity). So the score for both purse seine fisheries is 2.

As the ratio is unknown for the French and Dutch pelagic trawl fisheries, a precautionary score of 3 was applied.

The Cornish fishery uses purse seines that are smaller and shallower than used in the Spanish and French fisheries (they are actually “ring nets”), which enables the captain to better judge whether to bring the catch on-board. Because they do not have the ability to sort on-board and have limited hold space, they have to be more selective about the catches size/quality/species composition. The Cornish gillnets are selective for sardines by virtue of the mesh size, but the gear is left in the water for up to 20 hours, and may also catch other species such as herring.

Final Selectivity scores : Spain French French Cornish Cornish Dutch purse purse seine Pelagic purse gillnets trawl seine trawl seine

2 2 3 1 2 3

Post-capture mortality If captured, sardines have a low chance that it will be released in condition that would 3 permit subsequent survival, chiefly because most catches are brought on board and landed and slipping is rare. The result of the harmonization process was to award a score of 3.

FR V1 | Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine 130

This led to an overall score for the PSA of 2.19. Requirement CC2.4.2.2.1- c RBF Requirement for PI 1.1.1 informs that if there are several fishing method in the area you have to evaluate each one and if the quantitative catches are known, the weight of each fishery has to be calculated and the total is used to confirm the final value of the PSA score. This value is used to confirm the SG category into which the fishery fails. We awarded the PSA score 91,5 based on the RBF methodology (See RBF Worksheet).

RBF Worksheet for PI 1.1.1

Risk MSC Category scoring PI GEAR_TYPE (1.1.1) PSA Score MSC Score Name guidepost Average age at maturity at age Average maxAverage age Fecundity maxAverage size sizeAverage Maturity at Reproductive strategy (fishbase) Trophic level Productivity Total (average) Availability Encounterability Selectivity Post-capturemortality (multiplicative) Total Catch(tons) (1.1.1) (1.1.1) Weighting Total Weighted average Weigted plot PSA on Color 1.1.1 Spanish purse seine 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 2 3 1,88 21295,00 0,47 0,881 1,87 2,19 91,5 Low >80 1.1.1 French purse seine 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 2 3 1,88 17017,20 0,38 0,704 1.1.1 French pelagic traw l 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 3 3 2,33 1890,80 0,04 0,097 1.1.1 Cornish purse seine 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 1 3 1,43 3593,00 0,08 0,113 1.1.1 Cornish gillnets 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 2 3 1,88 296,00 0,01 0,012 1.1.1 Denmark pelagic (as trial or accident) 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 3 3 2,33 953,00 0,02 0,049 1.1.1 Netherland traw l (as bycatch) 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 3 3 2,33 249,00 0,01 0,013 1.1.1 German midw ater traw l 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1,14 2 3 3 3 2,33 18,00 0,00 0,001

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 131

Appendix 1.3 Conditions Condition 1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place.

1.2.1 SG80a.- Harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock and the elements of the harvest strategy work together towards achieving management objectives reflected in the target and limit reference points Score 70 Sardine in Celtic Seas (VIIa, b, c, f, g, j, k), English Channel (VIId, VIIe, VIIh) and in Bay of Biscay (VIIIa, b, d) are considered by ICES to be a single-stock unit. The harvest strategy has to consider the overall performance and how the elements contribute to allowing the management system to respond to the state of the whole stock.

SG80 requires that the harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock and the elements of the harvest strategy work together towards achieving Rationale management objectives reflected in the target and limit reference points. There is no analytical assessment of the state of the stock, and no reference points, but ICES advice is given against indices of stock abundance that show an increasing trend over the last five years and a current harvest rate around the long-term mean and likely to be close to F MSY . However, it is not certain that management responds to ICES advice in relation to the state of the stock, there is no TAC and landings 2010 – 2014 were higher than the most recent ICES advice. Therefore it is clear that all three fisheries (Spanish, French and Cornish) will have to ensure that the aggregated international catch is in line with ICES advice. SG80 is not met. By the second surveillance audit, evidence shall demonstrate that a harvest Condition strategy is in place that is responsive to the state of the stock and that the elements of the harvest strategy work together to ensure that total international catches of VIII/VII sardine are no higher than those advised by ICES. By the first annual audit there is documented evidence from the client that the sardine fisheries certified (Spanish, French and Cornish) have taken steps to support the development of a comprehensive harvest strategy. No changes to score anticipated at this stage.

Year 2. The three fisheries shall demonstrate that the total international catches of sub-Areas VII/VIII sardine are no higher than those advised by ICES and, Milestones therefore, reflect the state of the stock. Consequently, the team could conclude that the harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock and the elements of the harvest strategy work together towards achieving management objectives reflected in the target and limit reference points. Score: 80.

Year 3. The fisheries shall continue to demonstrate that the harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock and the policy changes agreed in 2016 have been formally accepted by the relevant Managers, with clear evidence of the implementation of the agreed harvest control rules. Score 80 Year 1: Set up a working group between the French, Spanish and Cornish fisheries to develop a harvest strategy in order to bring catches within levels consistent with ICES advice. Discuss the development of a long term management plan for the Sardine fishery in Areas VII, & VIIIa,b,d in conjunction with the French and Spanish. Discuss with CSMA members about the Client action plan implementation of harvest control rules.

Year 2: Meet at least once a year in order to work together in the mentioned working group with the other stakeholders of the fishery and the scientist with the objective of increasing the knowledge of the fishery and helping to develop a proposal of a harvest control strategy.

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 132

Year 3: Implement harvest control strategy, monitor ICES advice, and amend harvest control rules as necessary to ensure that they are in line with ICES advice. To achieve this outcome, the three certified clients (South Brittany, Bay of Biscay and Cornwall MSC fishery) engaged with the scientists (who work in collaboration with their peers within the ICES system), in collaboration with SWW AC pelagic species working group. The assessment team consulted with Consultation on the Spanish fishery management Entity which was informed by the client and in condition conformity with the action plan.

See letter from CC-Sud (SWW AC in English), Management Strategy Commitments and letter from the client to the MAGRAMA (Appendix 4).

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 133

Condition 2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place

1.2.2 SG80a- Well defined harvest control rules are in place that are consistent with the harvest strategy and ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached. Score 75 There are no reference points and no TAC currently implemented for the sardine stock in Celtic Sea and Bay of Biscay. Though the distribution of the sardine ‘stock’ extends beyond the area covered by the main fisheries (French and Spanish), these have a strategy which is intended to reduce the exploitation rate in line with ICES advice (precautionary in nature since no limit reference points are identified). The French, Spanish and Cornish fisheries agree to accept ICES recommendations each year in relation to the stock status and, working together with national scientists and the fishing sector, to ensure that the current management measures remain in force for the upcoming year, Rationale unless ICES advises that the trends in the sardine stock requires modification of exploitation rates. In which case, the stakeholders agree to adapt their management framework with respecting to ICES advice on allowed catches (See Appendix 3).

Although the harvest rules are consistent with the harvest strategy and will act to reduce the exploitation rate as limit reference points are approached (as ascertained by ICES), they are not well defined and have not yet been implemented to the extent that it is possible to state that they ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as limit reference points are approached. SG80 is not met. By the third surveillance audit, provide evidence that the management strategy outlined for the Spanish, French and Cornish fisheries has been implemented Condition for the VIII/VII sardine stock, that there is well defined HCR which will reduce

exploitation if there are indications that the stock is declining (as provided by ICES), such that catch levels are reduced as necessary. By the first annual audit there is documented evidence that the sardine fisheries certified are working together and have taken steps to support the development of well-defined HCR. No changes to score anticipated at this stage.

Year 2. The client shall demonstrate that the proposed HCRs are agreed and Milestones have been incorporated in a common framework to be approved in the following year.

Year 3. The fishery shall demonstrate that the harvest control rules agreed are consistent with a harvest strategy responsive to the state of the stock and the agreement signed in 2016 have been formally accepted and implemented by the relevant Stakeholders. Score: 80 Year 1: Working group set up with the French and Cornish as outlined in the action plan for 1.2.1: Through the working group draft well defined HCR’s for the French, Spanish and Cornish fisheries to manage the fishing effort within ICES Client action plan recommendations.

Years 2 & 3: As laid out in CAP for 1.2.1: the CSMA will introduce harvest control rules, developed in conjunction with the French and Cornish, to limit catches in line with ICES advice. To achieve this outcome, the three certified clients (South Brittany, Bay of Biscay and Cornwall MSC fishery) engaged with the scientists (who work in collaboration with their peers within the ICES system), in collaboration with Consultation on SWW AC pelagic species working group. The assessment team consulted with condition the Spanish fishery management Entity which was informed by the client and in conformity with the action plan. See letter from CC-Sud (SWW AC in English), Management Strategy Commitments and letter from the client to the MAGRAMA (Appendix 4).

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 134

Condition 3 Information on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch.

2.2.3 SG80d- Sufficient data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk to main bycatch species (e.g., due to changes in the outcome indicator scores or the operation of the fishery or the effectively of the strategy). Score 75 This PI assesses if the information on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch.

Rationale The Bay of Biscay anchovy purse-seine fishery has been monitored by observers at sea in the past. However, a routine and comprehensive monitoring at sea programme to collect information on discards and incidental catches does not exist in this fishery at the present time, and therefore there is insufficient data to detect any increase in risk to main bycatch species. SG80d is not met. By the third surveillance, evidence must be presented to ensure that sufficient Condition data continue to be collected to detect any increase in risk to main bycatch of commercial and non-commercial species. Year 1. The fishery shall demonstrate that a monitoring programme is being planned to record bycatch of commercial and non-commercial species. No changes to score anticipated at this stage. Milestones Year 2. The fishery shall demonstrate that vessels are engaged in the

monitoring programme. No changes to score anticipated at this stage. Year 3. Have available summarised data from first year of recording of bycatch (commercial and non-commercial). Score: 80 The client will formulate a code of conduct in which it commits the vessels associated to the certification to record the bycatch incidences and the incidental catches of ETP species in an ad-hoc created form to be filled on a daily basis, as follows: i. All the species discarded, including slipping incidences, with their approximate weight. ii. Any interaction with ETP species, with the numbers per species. The monitoring on the filled forms will be made by the different local fishermen organizations (Cofradías) in the fish markets. Collection and Verification of the form being filled will be made on weekly basis by the respective Cofradía. From the third year onwards: Annual reports on the incidence of general bycatch and on ETP species will be prepared and made available to the certifier in order to be analyzed in the annual audits to determine if the information on Client action plan bycatch is sufficient to determine the risk posed by the fishery. IN addition, the client will require to the organizations in charge of the implementation of National Plans (SGPESCA or Basque Government and scientific institutes) for the monitoring of their fishing activities through an on board observer sampling program to assess the amount of bycatch, including slipping incidences and rough quantitative estimates, with a minimum frequency of one every two years, beginning in 2015, so that the results should be available during the following year after the sampling program. Actions 1st year. The following information will be presented in the first audit: • Code of Conduct as adopted

• Letter or minutes of the meeting where the client transmits to the vessels listed in the unit of certification the need to collect accurate information on bycatch and interaction with ETP species, in accordance with the code of conduct drawn up and along with instructions on how to

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 135

collect this information in the ad-hoc created forms.

• Letter sent to the SGP / Basque Government ot to scientific bodies (AZTI, IEO) to request the bycatch monitoring through a monitoring program with observers, along with the reply obtained from the institutes contacted.

Actions 2nd year. The following information will be presented in the second audit • Records on the implementation of the monitoring system of the bycatch and interaction with ETP species, as filled forms or sampling activity report by provinces

• Follow up of the letter sent to the competent bodies on the National monitoring system and of the triggered actions.

Actions 3rd year. The following information will be presented in the thrids audit: • Report on the bycatch coming from the analysis of the data collected in the ad-hoc created forms.

• Conditioned to a positive reply of an authoritative body, the client will ask the institute for a Report on the results of the observers’ survey program on by catch and ETP species of his fishery. Other wise and a new request will be submitted every year to the authoritative bodies for such on board monitoring system of theirs bycatch practices.

• Once the information on bycatch collected by the fleet is available, the need of a monitoring of their fishing activities through an on board observer sampling program will be assessed. The on-going activities will be carried out by the client. However, the client is Consultation on going to work with AZTI as the research Institute. See letter from AZTI condition (Appendix 4).

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 136

Condition 4 Relevant information is collected to support the management of fishery 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. 2.3.3

SG80a- Sufficient information is available to allow fishery related mortality and the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species.

SG80c- Information is sufficient to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts on ETP species. Score 65 This PI assesses the information collected to support the management of the fishery impacts on ETP species. The information should support the development of the management strategy, the assessment of the effectiveness of the management strategy; and the determination of the outcome status of ETP species.

Top predators in the Bay of Biscay are, and continue, to be monitored by Rationale PELGAS survey, while the information from the fishery is that no marine mammals have been caught in 1994-1995 based on observers at sea and no bycatch has been reported to the authorities. However, since a monitoring at sea programme to collect information on ETP species bycatch does not exist in this fishery at the present time, there is insufficient data for the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species, to measure trends and to support a full strategy to manage impacts on ETP species.

Therefore the SG80 is not met and a condition has been set. By the third surveillance, evidence must be presented to ensure that: : • Sufficient information is available to allow fishery related mortality and Condition the impact of fishing to be quantitatively estimated for ETP species.

• Information is sufficient to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts on ETP species. Year 1. The fishery shall demonstrate that a monitoring programme is being planned to record by-catch of ETP species. No changes to score anticipated at this stage. Year 2. The fishery shall demonstrate that vessels are engaged in the Milestones monitoring programme. No changes to score anticipated at this stage.

Year 3. Have available summarised data from first and second year of recording of interactions with ETP species. The fishery must demonstrated that sufficient information is available to measure trends and support a full strategy to manage impacts on ETP species. Score: 80 The same action plan proposed to meet the former condition on PI 2.2.3 should Client action plan satisfy current condition on PI 2.3.3, as everything was designed to cope with

bycatch and ETP species with the same procedures. The on-going activities will be carried out by the client. However, the client is Consultation on going to work with AZTI as the research Institute. See letter from AZTI condition (Appendix 4).

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 137

Condition 5 The fishery has clear, specific objectives designed to achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2

3.2.1 SG80a- Short and long-term objectives, which are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery’s management system. Score 70 As pointed out by ICES, there are no management objectives for this stock and there is no TAC. Whilst there are no reference points for this stock, advice provided by ICES is based on the precautionary approach, which can be inferred to aim for MSY and avoid limit reference levels (i.e. historically low SSB and an increase in F). On the basis of its EU shared fishery dimension, CFP has the objective of maintaining all commercially exploited stocks at a level consistent with MSY applies, even in the absence of a management plan. The fisheries targeting northern sardine are managed through technical measures such as gear and vessels specifications, minimum landings size and closed areas. At a national level (Spain), there is a purse seine census boats which limit the number of boats with access to this fishery. They also need an authorization to fish pelagic species in Divisions VIII a, b, d. In regard to Principle 2, limiting the sardine catch by fishing controls has the benefit of limiting impacts on non-target species (retained, discarded and ETP), that ecosystem impacts are therefore limited, and there are no habitat impacts. Therefore, the team can state that implicit objectives are broadly consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. SG60 is met. Rationale As explain in PIs 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 the harvest strategy and harvest control rules

has to consider the overall performance and how the elements contribute to allowing the management system to respond to the state of the whole stock. The French, Spanish and Cornish fisheries agree to accept ICES recommendations each year in relation to the stock status and, working together with national scientists and the fishing sector, to ensure that the current management measures remain in force for the upcoming year, unless ICES advises that the trends in the sardine stock requires modification of exploitation rates. In which case, the stakeholders agree to adapt their management framework with respecting to ICES advice on allowed catches as recorded in the Commitment (Appendix 4). The Commitment mentioned include short and long term explicit objectives in regard to Principle 1 but the team understands that is a declaration of intent that such measures will be implemented to the future of the sardine management. Therefore, the Spanish fishery scores 70 because those objectives are not formally included in the fishery’s management system in the EU and National policy. In addition, Even though P2 outcome and management all scored at least 80 the fishery does not have explicit objectives for all the elements of Principle 2. By the third surveillance audit, short and long-term objectives for the sardine Condition fishery, which are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, need to be explicitly included in the management of the fishery. By the first annual audit there is documented evidence that the sardine fisheries certified are working together and had taken steps to Partner meetings to discuss management objectives. No changes to score anticipated at this stage.

Year 2. The fishery shall demonstrate that some objectives for P1 are consistent Milestones with a harvest strategy and harvest control rules agreed in condition 1 and

condition 2. In addition, the fishery shall design specific objectives to achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2.

Year 3. Explicit short-term and long term objectives consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and Principle 2 should be

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 138

explicitly defined and agreed. Score 3.2.1: 80 The client will propose and agree with the vessels listed in the unit of certification a statement of principles and objectives for the certified fishery for an environmentally friendly use of the sea ecosystem in agreement with MSC Principles 1 and 2 and consistent with the Spanish environmental policy.

In order to achieve those objectives a code of conduct for sustainable fishing practices will be elaborated aiming at minimizing the impacts on the serval ecosystem components such as bycatch species or ETP species. In order to assess the relative performance of the objectives, a monitoring system of the interaction of the fishery with the sea ecosystem components will be included. Therefore, this code of conduct will commit the subscribers to record the bycatch incidences and the incidental catches of ETP species in an ad-hoc created form to be filled on a daily basis, as follows: • All the species discarded with their approximate weight. • Any interaction with ETP species, with the numbers per species. The monitoring on the filled forms will be made by the different local fishermen organizations (Cofradías) in the fish markets. Collection and Verification of the form being filled will be made on weekly basis by the respective Cofradía.

In each audit, the association will present the progression of the scientific work and the definition of short term and long term objectives. The short term objectives are the objectives presented in the common management strategy commitment (Appendix 4): stabilize the exploitation to the level of the most recent period as included on Conditions PI 1.2.1 and PI 1.2.2. In the work of the long term management plan, the objectives will be agreed with Scientists to be Client action plan consistent with the harvest strategy and control rules (Conditions PI 1.2.1 and PI

1.2.2.).

Actions 1st year. The following information will be presented in the first audit: • Statement of principles and objectives agreed by the associated fishermen, containing the short and long term fishery specific objectives that are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC Principles 1 and 2. This will include the Code of Conduct adopted. • Letter or minutes of the meeting where the client transmits to the vessels listed in the unit of certification the need to collect accurate information on bycatch and interaction with ETP species, in accordance with the code of conduct drawn up and along with instructions on how to collect this information in the ad-hoc created forms. • The participation in forums and meetings to discuss the appropriateness of the objectives based on the information recorded by the fleet might be presented to the team to demonstrate their commitment. • The association will present the progression of the definition of short term and long term objectives in the reflection of the long term plan.

Actions 2nd year. The following information will be presented in the second audit: • Report of the degree of fulfilment of the bycatch and ecosystem interaction form by associated vessels. • Evidence of the work made advancing in a proposal of HCR together with French and Cornish fishermen and scientist.

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 139

Actions 3rd year. The following information will be presented in the third audit: • Summary report on the bycatch and ETP interactions from analysis of the bycatch and ecosystem interaction forms. • In event that potential impacts are detected, this information will be promoted along with the SWW AC, Member States and scientific fishery advice community, in order to define clear objectives on how to mitigate these impacts. • Evidence of the work done on the definition and implementation of short term and long term objectives. The short term objectives are the objectives presented in the common management strategy commitment as included on Conditions PI 1.2.1 and PI 1.2.2. To achieve this outcome, the three certified clients (South Brittany, Bay of Biscay and Cornwall MSC fishery) engaged with the scientists (who work in collaboration with their peers within the ICES system), in collaboration with SWW AC pelagic species working group. The assessment team consulted with Consultation on the Spanish fishery management Entity which was informed by the client and in condition conformity with the action plan.

See letter from CC-Sud (SWW AC in English), Management Strategy Commitments and letter from the client to the MAGRAMA (Appendix 4).

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 140

Appendix 2. Peer Review Reports

As it was explained in the Executive Summary this report contains 2 Peer reviews stages. The first two reviews (Appendix 2.1) were carried out in July 2015, and the comments were taken into account in the updated assessment report presented here.

Appendix 2.1 Peer review reports from July 2015

Peer Review 1 .- Overall Opinion Has the assessment team arrived at an Yes Conformity Assessment Body appropriate conclusion based on the evidence Response presented in the assessment report? Justification: The comments and findings from the The conclusion is that the Cantabrian purse seine reviewer have been taken into sardine fishery complies with MSC Principles and account in the specific sections Criteria subject to an agreed action plan to meet the referred. Conditions. This conclusion is challenged based on reservations with the scoring of 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, see specific comments in the Table below. Concerning 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 the issue is whether there is a management strategy implemented that regulates bycatch, the discard ban adopted under the CFP is not yet implemented? 3.2.5 may be scored too pessimistic? The stock is reasonably well surveyed through landing statistics, logbooks, biological sampling and two surveys. The biological sampling and the surveys however only cover part of the stock area, ie Division VIIIb and not Subarea VII. ICES finds that the available information is sufficient to provide a trend-based advice. The fishery is not subject to a management plan nor a harvest control rule but the current assessment suggest that the stock is exploited around MSY (F~M) and on that basis the current management (closed areas, minimum landing size etc) seems to be sufficient to assure a sustainable fishery in accordance with PI 1. The fishery is using purse seine with little by-catch and no impact on ETP species nor habitat nor ecosystem. The management system is the standard EU-national system although no TAC has been implemented.

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes Conformity Assessment Body appropriately written to achieve the SG80 Response outcome within the specified timeframe? Justification: The CAB has set seven conditions for certification with respect to the Performance Indicators 1.2.1; 1.2.2; 1.2.3; 2.2.3; 2.3.3; 3.2.1 & 3.2.2. These are all relevant.

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 141

General Comments on the Assessment Report (optional)

1. The use of the Risk-Based Framework is not clear. The application is not mentioned in the Executive summary nor in the Assessment Methodology section 4.2 which actually informs “After the stakeholder consultation process, the assessment team decided to use the Default Assessment tree for all performance indicators”. However the Risk-Based Framework was used for PI 1.1.1 . CAB answer: specific mention regarding the RBF has been mentioned in the Executive summary and section 4.2. 2. WGHANSA (Working Group of Hake, Anchovies and Sardines) and UC, see section 3.1 (Unit of Certification) are missing from the acronym list. In the following review UoC is used as acronym for ‘Unit of Certification’. CAB answer: Ok, both acronyms were added in the Glossary section. 3. The UoC is defined as (section 3.1) Target species : Common sardine - Sardina pilchardus pilchardus Stock : North Atlantic sardine, from the southern Bay of Biscay to the North Sea and the English Channel, excluding the Mediterranean Sea. Description from ICES: Sardine in Celtic Seas (VIIabcfgjk), English Channel (VIId, VIIe, VIIh) and in Bay of Biscay (VIIIabd) Fishing area : The fishery takes place only in the geographical region VIIIb. Fishing method : Purse Seine (ring net) fishing, by the vessels members of the several organizations: Cofradia San Martin de Laredo, Federación de Cofradias de Pescadores de Guipuzcoa y Federación de Pescadores de Bizkaia.Association. (List in Appendix 3). Fisheries management authority : Fishing activities are managed by the European Union, Spanish Government and Government of Country Basque and Cantabria.

This implies that only trips with sardines as target species are covered by UoC. It is noted that the definition does not include a fishing season although the report informs that fishery takes place in April-May and during the fourth quarter. There are catches of sardines as by-catch in other fisheries and the UoC does not describe how the sardine trips are distinguished from trips by the same boats targeting other species or whether all sardines taken by the 58 purse seiners will be covered by the certificate? . Section 3.3 informs:

“The Basque purse-seiner fleet is a multispecies fleet that traditionally distributes its activity across three seasons: the mackerel season (from approximately February to May), the anchovy season (from approximately April to June) and the tuna season (from approximately June to November). Nevertheless, some fisheries overlap for certain periods of the year. The fleet also targets coastal species such as sardine, horse mackerel and chub mackerel, among others, during the tuna season. In the second semester the majority of the vessels change fishing gear from purse seine to bait boat, and to a lesser extent to trolling gear, to catch albacore and bluefin tuna (Andrés & Prellezo, 2012).”

CAB answer: The UoC has been clarified (point 3.3.). The UoC includes the sardine targeted by 59 vessels (client group) even though the fleet fishes this sardine as target or is part of the retained catches when they are fishing for other species as anchovy. The impact of the activity for the sardine stock has been assessed by the team.

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 142

In this way we cannot mislead the differences when we talk about target species for the fleet and target species of the Unit of assessment.

Tables 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 (misnamed as 0.4.1 and 0.4.2) in Section 3.4.1 are compared and as noted by the authors the comparison shows that the sardine fishery has a very different catch composition from other landings. However, the report does not inform on how these sardine trips (87.3 % of the total number of landings according to the text) have been selected, based on landing composition? The difference between data in Tables 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 together with the information that Table 3.4.2 includes 87.3% of the landings suggests that the remaining 12% of landings must in total be much bigger than the sardine landings or that the 87.3% are of landings during the ‘sardine season’?

CAB answer: Firstly the Tables of all the document were re-named. The fishing trips were selected based on the presence of sardine in the catches, even if these were relatively low, since there was no scientific basis to use a specific sardine catch threshold to identify what a targeted sardine fishing trip (AZTI, pers. comm.). However, 90% of fishing trips with sardine present in the catch, have more than 500 kg of sardine, which is a fair indication that the presence of sardine is a good indicator of a sardine targeted fishery (even if in some trips they actually catch more another species). 87.3% is the % of sardine of the total landings of the sardine fishery, as stated in the table legend. Nevertheless, this was made clearer.

It is proposed that the UoC is clarified on how trips targeting sardines are distinguished from other landings. CAB answer: See answer above.

4. Identification of key Low Trophic Level (LTL) stocks (CB2.3.13). Lassalle et al 2011 and Lasalle et al 2012 are in some place spelled Lassalle et al, presumably ’Lassalle’ is correct as given in the Reference list. Although agreeing with the conclusion the argumentation should be closely related to the criteria defined in CR, The MSC criteria are quoted below. a. It is one of the species types listed in Box CB1 and in its adult life cycle phase the stock holds a key role in the ecosystem, such that it meets at least two of the following sub-criteria i, ii and iii. MSC Criteria Comment i. a large proportion of the trophic The energy transfer is not critically connections in the ecosystem involve this dependent on sardines and only a stock, leading to significant predator minor part of the energy transfer is dependency; through the sardine stock ii. a large volume of energy passing between The energy transfer is not critically lower and higher trophic levels passes dependent on sardines and only a through this stock; minor part of the energy transfer is through the sardine stock iii. there are few other species at this trophic There are numerous fish species that level through which energy can be takes part in the energy transfer transmitted from lower to higher trophic levels, such that a high proportion of the total energy passing between lower and higher trophic levels passes through this stock (i.e. the ecosystem is ‘wasp-waisted’).

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 143

c.ii. In providing rationales against the key LTL sub-criteria (CB2.3.13ai- iii), teams shall document the choice of spatial scale and provide reasonable justification for the choice. (see the table above)

4. The presentation of the stock assessment is largely based on the trawl-acoustic survey PELGAS while the egg survey BIOMAN is hardly mentioned. The BIOMAN survey is referred to in the scoring Table. CAB answer: The presentation of the stock assessment is largely based on the trawl-acoustic survey PELGAS while the egg survey BIOMAN is hardly mentioned. The BIOMAN survey is referred to in the scoring Table. Further information on the BIOMAN results regarding 2014 was also added. 5. Section 3.5 The description of the organisation of the Spanish administration is superfluous and is not used anywhere in the scoring. This section should be better focused on the sardine fishery which apparently is not managed under the standard model as there is no TAC and the fishery is regulated by technical measures and closed areas. The information about this section is enough to explain the Spanish administration, also there is more specific information in each table. 6. ‘Table 4.3.1. Scoring elements’ is not referred to in the text and the relevance is not clear. The outcomes of the scoring elements have been done in the scoring tables (Appendix 1).

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 144

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

1.1.1 See RBF N/A RBF applied se separate comment below the Scoring Table

1.1.2 See RBF N/A Default score 80 for RBF 1.1.1.

1.1.3 N/A N/A N/A

1.2.1 The information that is Yes Yes, Condition 1 Purse seining is based on searching and therefore the The assessment team has specific for the sardine catch efficiency may not reflect stock size, ie that concluded that 1.2.1b 80 score has been presented but catches decreases with stock decline, see FAO is reached because F is low not put in the context of http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/X6858E/X6858E04.htm and one can argue that is also the general knowlegde of It is not clear that 1.2.1.b80 is fulfilled although sustainable, although as the purse seine effort and it 1.2.1.b.60 may be. There are no target or limit reviewer notes there are no relation to stock size reference points defined explicitly for this stock The explicit reference points for management approach is based on technical this stock. measures and as such are not part of the usual CFP model based on TACs. The report argues that F=M is a proxy for F MSY . The HCR (Technical measures) is not responsive to stock changes.

1.2.2 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 2 1.2.2.a Comment on the French license limitations is We agree with the reviewer. irrelevant as the UoC is the Spanish fishery. The The comment was deleted. strategy is open ended and limitations on the number of licences are required

Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery: PCDR V1 Page 145 of 216

1.2.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 3

1.2.4 N/A Default score 80. RBF applied

2.1.1 Yes Yes N/A

2.1.2 Yes Yes N/A

2.1.3 Yes Yes N/A

2.2.1 Yes No, N/A Several of the comments under 2.2.1.b seem The assessment team irrelevant as the 2.2.1 are concerned with by-catch disagrees as discards of the that is discarded or otherwise not landed. These main discarded species, horse discards are not regulated by TACs on species TACs mackerel is regulated by a are confined to landings. The key argument seems to TACs since the Landing be that the discards are minimal relative to the Obigation is in force since landings in the target fisheries for anchovy, horse January 2015 (even if it has mackerel etc.. not been followed). 2.2.1.a Larus maritimus misspelled as L. miritimus

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 146 of 216

2.2.2 Yes No, N/A The landing obligation is in the pipeline but not The assessment team implemented and it is not clear when this will be disagrees as the LO is in force implemented for the sardine fishery. From the from January 2015 to all information presented the only element that could be pelagic TAC species, although conceived at such a strategy is the closeusre of it may have not been certain areas.Please clarify the strategy aimed at implemented yet. restricting discards and slippage.

2.2.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 4

2.3.1 Yes Yes N/A

2.3.2 Yes Yes N/A

2.3.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 5

2.4.1 Yes Yes N/A

2.4.2 Yes Yes N/A

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 147 of 216

2.4.3 Yes Yes N/A

2.5.1 Yes Yes N/A

2.5.2 Yes Yes N/A

2.5.3 Yes Yes N/A

3.1.1 Yes Yes N/A

3.1.2 Yes Yes N/A

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 148 of 216

3.1.3 Yes Yes N/A The new CFP (2014) concerning Managemnt Plans It is considering that the CFP are not yet implemented (2014) is the tool of reference for the management of the fishery. Even is not effective implementation of all sections yet. The fact that no specific to certain fisheries MP are implemented It is because the fishery was approved a few time ago.

3.1.4 Yes Yes N/A

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 149 of 216

3.2.1 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 6 3.2.1.a reference to UK and Frenxh fisheries suggests The Action plan was agreed that a condition is required. The milestones should be between the assessment team on the client obligations (year 2&3), e.g. and the client after consulting with AZTI and the AC South - By the first audit the client should demonstrate (adivsory council). progress with development of the management plan. The presentation should We think that the milestones include evidence that the client have taken set by the team are steps to promote this plan in forums and reasonable and achievable. meetings and provided information and/or Therefore we would like to data from the fishery as needed for the keep the condition as staid in development of the plan. the CAB version.

- By the second audit, the client should present a specific management plan for the fishery and evidence that the plan has been approved.

- By the third audit the client should demonstrate that the plan has been effectively implemented

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 150 of 216

3.2.2 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 7 The milestone should inform on the client obligations, The Action plan was agreed e.g. between the assessment team - By the first annual audit, the client should and the client after consulting demonstrate that all parties involved in the with AZTI and the AC South management of the fishery are working to develop (adivsory council). decision-making processes for this fishery. The plan should be consistent with the MSC principles. The We think that the milestones client should present evidence of his work to set by the team are encourage this plan in forums and meetings involved reasonable and achievable. and of his support, if requested, by providing Therefore we would like to information and/or data from the fishery. keep the condition as staid in - By the second annual the client should present the the CAB version. decision making processes of the fishery provide evidence that it has been approved by all involved in the fishery and that the approved plan is consistent with the MSC principles. - By the third annual audit, the client should provide evidence on the effective implementation of decision- making processes and that it has resulted in approved measures and strategies achieving the fishery-specific objective and that these objectives are consistent with the MSC principles

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 151 of 216

3.2.3 Yes Yes N/A The paragraph on the JMP on western pelagics is irrelevant as noted in the text. It is not explicitly stated which of the rules apply to the sardine boats, presumably all. The sentence ‘there are no sanctions…’ should presumably be read as “there was full compliance and therefore noone was fined or other penalties applied”

3.2.4 Yes Yes N/A

3.2.5 Yes Yes N/A

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 152 of 216

PI Does the report Are the RBF Justification: Conformity clearly explain risk scores Assessment Please support your answers by how the process well- Body referring to specific scoring issues used to referenced? Response: and any relevant documentation determine risk Yes/No where possible. Please attach using the RBF additional pages if necessary. led to the stated outcome? Yes/No In scoring the spatial overlap and 1.1.1 We were not the intensity of the activity VMS able to information would have been useful access the apparently these data were not information. used/not available. VMS data would have been required not only for the Spanish but also the French and UK sardine fleets. As these data apparently were not available the approach is acceptable.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

Peer Review 2.- Overal Opinion Has the assessment team arrived at an appropriate Yes /No Conformity Assessment conclusion based on the evidence presented in the Body Response assessment report? The conclusion is that the Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine fishery The expert considers that complies with MSC Principles and Criteria subject to an agreed action the definition of retained plan to meet the Conditions. species is well defined However, it is considered that there has been a misunderstanding when because when you follow the assessors’ team have identified “main retained species” in this the guideline and the requirements of MSC you fishery. According to my knowledge when identifying these species, the define the species for each assessors’ team should have used percentages of total annual retained fishery. The sardine fishery catch by the Spanish purse-seine vessels (which is shown in table 3.4.1) is different as the anchovy instead of no the percentage of total retained catch when the vessels are fishery so the target specifically targeting sardine. It means that PI 2.1.1 Retained species species is sardine and you should be re-assessed including four main retained species (>5%): may define these species anchovy, horse mackerel, Atlantic mackerel and chub mackerel. It also with your target species in affects to section 2.2.1 By-catch species. the area, so with the UoC Justification: defined. Fishing season is When defining the purse seine sardine fishery certification unit in this not necessary . report, the CAB used the following elements: target species, stock, On the other hand ETP species in the area are not fishing area, fishing method and fisheries management authority but damaged. Area and the there was not included any reference to “fishing season” for this species. distribution of these species The report also informs that fishery takes place in April-May and during is not the same that in the fourth quarter of the year but it is also reported that “the fishing gear Portugal or France. and the operations used to catch sardine and anchovy are similar” and “some fisheries overlap for certain periods of the year” (including the sardine fishery). The CAB clarified that “the UoC certified is the sardine of the 58 vessels even though the fleet fishes this sardine as target or retained when they are fishing for other species as anchovy”. Thus, it is clear that if the client awards the MSC certification, it will be used all the year around. It is therefore considered that when identifying “main retained species”, the assessors’ team should have used percentages of total annual retained catch by the Spanish purse-seine vessels (which is shown in table 3.4.1) instead of no the percentage of total retained catch when the vessels are specifically targeting sardine. It means that PI 2.1.1 Retained species should be re-assessed including four main retained species (>5%): anchovy, horse mackerel, Atlantic mackerel and chub mackerel. It also affects to section 2.2.1 By-catch species. Previous MSC sardine assessments for Portugal and France (the last one carried out by the same CAB) have been also checked and in both assessments the percentages used to calculate the “main retained species” in the fishery are annual catch percentages resulting in three main retained species (chub mackerel, horse mackerel and anchovy) for the Portuguese sardine purse seine fishery and two main retained species for the Southern Brittany’s purse seine sardine fishery.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes Conformity Assessme nt Body appropriately written to achieve the SG80 Response outcome within the specified timeframe? Justification: The client will have 5 years to establish The CAB has set seven conditions for certification with this condition. Before the end of the five respect to the Performance Indicators 1.2.1; 1.2.2; 1.2.3; year fishery certification period the 2.2.3; 2.3.3; 3.2.1 & 3.2.2. These are all relevant. fishery must demonstrated that good information is available on all other However, the condition number 3 for P.I. 1.2.3 “The fishery removals from the stock. Many information is available now and some client is required to promote and support the collection of research project are starting to sampling information on all other fishery removals from the stock, the areas which we proposed here. namely on the fisheries operating in the Celtic Sea and There several members countries English Channel” seems to be difficult to meet. The two interested on develop a complete other MSC certified fisheries in these areas (VII and VIII) information and data in whole area. get a score of 90 for this P.I. and it is understood that will be very difficult to engage local fishermen and managers from these areas to get a proper sampling program if they consider that it already exists or it is not necessary.

Do you think the client action plan is sufficient Yes Conformity Assessment Body to close the conditions raised? Response Justification: In the first surveillance the client need to It seems that client action plan obliges the client to take complete the conditions, just in case the action within the first certification period to remedy the conditions specified another options. deficiencies identified during the assessment process.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

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

1.1.1 See RBF N/A

1.1.2 See RBF N/A

1.1.3 N/A N/A N/A

1.2.1 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 1

1.2.2 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 2

1.2.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 3

1.2.4 See RBF N/A

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 156 of 216

2.1.1 This section This section needs N/A As a main fishing session for the sardine The expert considers that the needs to be to be reassessed purse seine fishery was not designated definition of retained species is well reassessed by the CAB when the UoC was defined, it defined because when you follow the is considered that there has been a guideline and the requirements of misunderstanding when the assessors’ MSC. Org you define the species for team have identified “main retained each fishery. The sardine fishery is species” in this fishery. According to my different as the anchovy fishery so knowledge when identifying these the target species is sardine and you species, the assessors’ team should may define these species with your have used percentages of total annual target species in the area, so with the retained catch by the Spanish purse- UoC defined. Fishing season is not seine vessels (which is shown in table necessary. 3.4.1) instead of the percentage of total On the other hand ETP species in retained catch when the vessels are the area are not damaged. Area and specifically targeting sardine. It means the distribution of these species is that PI 2.1. “Retained species” should be not the same that in Portugal or re-assessed including four main retained France. species (>5%): anchovy, horse mackerel, Atlantic mackerel and chub mackerel. It also affects to section 2.2. “By-catch” species.

2.1.2 This section This section needs N/A See my comments in 2.1.1 See comments above needs to be to be reassessed reassessed

2.1.3 This section This section needs N/A See my comments in 2.1.1 See comments above needs to be to be reassessed reassessed

2.2.1 This section This section needs N/A See my comments in 2.1.1 needs to be to be reassessed reassessed

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 157 of 216

2.2.2 This section This section needs N/A needs to be to be reassessed reassessed

2.2.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 4

2.3.1 Yes No N/A It is considered that the information provided by the assessors’ team in regard to the lack of by-catch of cetacean species in the fishery (Perez et al. 1996 report and the SAILKA project which covered just 28 hauls) fails to prove that “The effects of the fishery are known” as the SG80 states. Justification: Although there is not specific information about this fishery, in Portugal where the use of pingers has been tested and a set of best practice operational guidelines (Manuals of Good Practices) have been developed for several fisheries (including purse seining), 244 common dolphins (Delphinus delphis ) were reported as a bycatch in a purse-seine fishery for small pelagic fish off Portugal in 2013 (ICES WGBYC 2014). Moreover, a study based on inquiries undertook in Galicia (López et al. 2003) showed that 764 Common Dolphins and 53 Bottlenose Dolphins were captured in different fishing gears over a year (130 of them caught by the Galician purse-seine fishery).

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 158 of 216

2.3.1 Although, it is true that the Bay of Biscay Continue sardine purse-seine fishery is not required to follow the provisions of EC Regulation 812/2004 since their impact on ETP species is deemed low, other similar fisheries in the area have reported by-catch of these species. Common dolphin is distributed in the area of this fishery and it seems that the Spanish purse-seine fishery has not developed any mitigation measure to avoid the bycatch of this species. Moreover, Spain has not provided information about bycatch species for ANY fishery to the European Commission since 2010. Therefore, it is though that more information is necessary to support your score.

2.3.2 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score.

2.3.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 5 The rationale supports the given score.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 159 of 216

2.4.1 Yes Yes N/A As you do not include a map for the VMS data (page 25), it is difficult to know where exactly this fishery occurs. However, as the main catches are taken from VIIIb, it is understood that the sardine fishery overlaps with the anchovy one. In the ICES WGDEC report 2011 (Figure 28, page 35) some maps that identified vulnerable habitats in the area where the sardine fishery occurs are shown. It would be fine to include this information/maps here (or in the introduction section). All the protected areas listed in the justification section (El Cachucho, Iroise marine park, etc), although within the Bay of Biscay, seem to be out of VIIIb. Probably it is true that “Since the fishery uses a gear designed to operate in mid- water and to catch pelagic species it is likely to have negligible impact on benthic habitats”. However, at the beginning of the report when listing the weaknesses of the fishery, the assessors’ team stated: “the impacts on habitats are not truly understood”. I am not sure if you refer to habitats or ecosystem. However, if really the impacts on habitats for the fishery are not truly understood, it seems that a score of 100 for PI 2.4.1 (or 2.5.1) is too high

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 160 of 216

2.4.2 No No N/A In SI_a and SI_c the assessors’ team states: “The fishery is managed through closed areas and seasons, among other management measures”. You have used the same statement to justify your score in some PI 2.1.2, 2.2.2. However, although you included some information about the consecutive fishery closures between July 2005 and December 2009, I can not find any other reference to closed areas or seasons for the fishery in the introduction section of the report (according to ICES WGHANSA 2014 a bilateral agreement between Spain and France included a fishing ban from December 2013 to February 2014). It is considered that more information about these closures should be included in this section. Anyway, I can not see a real relationship between these closures and the impact on the habitat.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 161 of 216

2.4.2 In this section you continue: “For the Continue same reason, the MPAs established in the Bay of Biscay also contribute to minimize the fishery impact to the habitat”. The ICES 2013 WGDEC report states that: “Only one small area (in the Bay of Biscay), situated in the southeastern part (Cap Breton canyon), is closed to bottom trawling, because of the high densities of deep-sea seapen and burrowing megafauna communities” and empashized that “the area would benefit from protective measures from bottom contact fishing”. Therefore, are the MPAs established in the area really effective to protect the habitat? Due to these inconsistencies it is understood that a score of 95 is too high for this P.I.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 162 of 216

2.4.3 No No N/A According to the assessors’ team in SI_a The area where the fishing activities SG100 (The distribution of habitat types are developed are more superficial, is known over their range, with particular the canyons and VMEs are deep attention to the occurrence of vulnerable areas that can not be affected with thi habitat types) is met. However, the ICES fihery because the bottom are 2011/2013 WGDEC reports highlighted completely protected versus that although the Bay of Biscay is an fishing.Then the MPA establish important area for VMEs due to its protect the area versus this activity rugged topography and high habitat and is close to others fishing that can heterogeneity, with over 130 deep affect the area. So, the information to canyons and interfluves, it is difficult to justify SG95 is enough. make the determination of appropriate closure zones without more detailed and concise information on the distribution of VMEs in canyons along the whole margin. It is therefore understood that the information about VMEs in the area is far from being totally known.

2.5.1 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score. Please see my comments in the last paragraph of 2.4.1.

2.5.2 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score.

2.5.3 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 163 of 216

3.1.1 Yes Yes N/A Scoring issue b. The last sentence in the Corrections in the text have been justification: “This transparent done by the expert. mechanism for resolving legal disputes is considered effective in dealing with most issues in the context of fisheries, although some weaknesses have been detected, including the complexity of the procedure, the geographical spread and diversity of the inspectors, and the insufficient regulation of the provisional measures during disciplinary procedures” seems to indicate that SG100 is not met. It is proposed to review the justifications.

3.1.2 Yes No N/A Scoring issue b. The last sentence in the At this point it is determined as the justification: “However, whether these consultation process and if it is called opinions are accepted as commitments subsequently used. In this sense it is by the competent government during clearly SG100 because the phrase decision-making is less clear, although it referred to the reviewer is not against is not mandatory” seems to indicate that the guideline for this score. SG100 is not met. Although the consultation process in European fisheries has improved in the last years and the management system includes consultation processes (first condition/sentence of the SG100), if the management system accepts and demonstrates consideration of this information and explains how it is used (second condition of the SG100) is unclear. It is therefore considered that this PI should not be scored as 100.

3.1.3 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 164 of 216

3.1.4 Yes No N/A The last sentence in the scoring issue a The team scored partially (SG90) but “a 90% increase in the quota in one year the rational did not make direct followed by a 70% reduction in the reference to the scoring issue. The following year does not contribute to the explanation why the score was partial long term planning of fisher activities” was modified. refers to the sardine stock?. You stated: “However, these incentives are currently unclear and are not regularly reviewed yet, of course. For example, the system of quota allocation creates uncertainties for fishers and weak sense of stewardship of the resources which does not act as a positive incentive”. Therefore, it is unclear why SG 100 is partially met.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 165 of 216

3.2.1 Yes No Yes, Condition 6 It is unclear why SG80 is partially met. Corrections in the table have The assessment team states: “there are been done by the expert. no explicitly defined and specific short and long-term management objectives for the purse seine sardine fishery. There is no specific management plan for the ICES VIIIb area sardines” and that: “France and the UK have established specific management measures for this fishery, which have led to other fisheries sardines stock having passed the MSC certification” but “Spain is yet to establish a specific management plan, even though the species is captured regularly and has become a complement to the Bay of Biscay anchovy fleet”. The SOUTHERN BRITTANY’S PURSE SEINE SARDINE FISHERY assessed by Bureau veritas got a score of 60 in this section. Why is the score for the Bay of Biscay purse-seine fishery higher if the fishery specific objectives seem to be weaker? It is proposed to review the justifications.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 166 of 216

3.2.2 Yes No Yes, Condition 7 In SI_a the assessors’ team states: In this case is considered to have “Given there are specific management specific management measures for measures from countries that share the the same stock, its management same stock (France and UK) and the already has some tools that are improvement in scientific knowledge in being applied and therefore must be recent years, we consider the PI does taken into account when scoring. The not achieve SG80 but rather SG70”. It is fact that the fishery under probably true that if there are proper assessment does not have these management measures in other tools prevented from reaching the fisheries, the stock will benefit and its SG80 but should be considered score in P1 will be higher. However, is global stock for existing concrete the score for the specific management measures. Therefore the SG70 section in the Bay of Biscay sardine should be kept. purse seine fishery improving just because there are other fisheries which As a result of the harmonization have a proper management? It is process the assessment team has proposed to review the justifications. re-scored this PI and the condition was not raised. See Table PI 3.2.2 for the rationale.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 167 of 216

3.2.3 Yes Yes N/A As a general rule I would not state that Given the seasonal condition of monitoring, control and surveillance in sardine fishery (which is utilized to Spain meets the SG100, especially if a the maximum during the fishing system of onboard observers has not season) and strict control of landings been implemented for this fishery. there is overfishing sardine and However, as the assessors’ team has anchovy as may occur in the checked that (“in the Basque Country, Mediterranean according to the the sardine is subject to very exhaustive reviewer's comment. control, with a lot of interaction between both local and Secretaría de Pesca In section D, the reviewer is correct inspectors”), it is considered that the in his assessment given that there is rationale supports the given score. no management plan for sardines. However, although I do not have specific The new reaction must be: information about this particular fishery, There is no evidence of systematic please check in Coll et al. 2015 for non-compliance in this fishery. Based unreported catches in the Spanish on the MCS team's meetings with sardine/anchovy purse seine fishery in both Central and Autonomous the Mediterranean Sea. I am quite sure Region Governments, there have that recent closures have improved been hardly any infractions in this compliance in this fisheries but again fishery, and all the interested parties SG100 is considered too high. Are not are aware of the current regulations, there not any unreported catch in this and particularly the allocated quotas fishery? and current management measures. Scoring issue d: “there have been hardly any infractions since the Management Plan was put into place”. This management plan refers to the sardine stock?.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 168 of 216

3.2.4 Yes No N/A The research plan cited in this guidepost According to the consideration of the refers to principle 1 and 2. However, all reviewer should I will include the the assessors’ team rationale for this P.I. following in justification. All these refers to Principle 1. It is unclear how the campaigns and studies allow not only current research plan meets SG80 establish the status of the stock of regarding to P2. It is proposed to review sardine in accordance with Principle the justifications. 1 of the MSC but also allow a better understanding of the pelagic ecosystem of the Cantabrian and therefore also achieves the objectives referetes MSC Principle 2.

3.2.5 Yes No n/a The rationale supports the given score. No response needed.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 169 of 216

Any Other Comments Comments Conformity Assessmen t Body Response Page 6/7. At the beginning of the report strengths and weakness of the fishery are listed. In the strengths section is stated: “The impact of purse-seine on the seabed is small”; and in the weaknesses section is stated: “the impacts on habitats are not truly understood”. These two CAB answer: sentences seem to be a bit contradictory. The second one refers to the ecosystem? • List of weaknesses re-organized • Corrections in the reference of the UK fleet were Page 7. The list of weaknesses is clearly disorganized (e.g: Recruitment is noted twice, once done. at the midpoint and another one at the end of the list. Moreover the list is not ordered by • The scoring elements table has to be included as part principle). of the MSC full assessment template. However the information was not well recorded. Modification was Page 11. At the end of the page is stated: “A total of 90% of the catches are taken by purse done. seiners while the remaining 10% is reported by pelagic trawlers (mainly pair trawlers) (Figure • Corrected mentions to anchovy in the report. 1)” (2013 ICES WGHANSA). In 2014 ICES WGHANSA this information is clearer and this • Editing mistakes were corrected. percentage of catches seems to refer to the French fleet but there is not specific information • A map was added. See Figure 3: Source: Logbook about the Spanish fleet. Figure 1 shows the fishing area for the Basque fleet but it does not data information for 2014 from SGPESCA produced corresponds to the sentence stated above. by J. Castro –IEO- pers. communication • References were included. In Page 15 is stated that: “Catch are mainly taken by France and Spain in areas VIIIabd and by France in area VII”. Historically highest landings were made by France and the Netherlands, but the participation of the UK increased to become the majority in the last two years. This information needs to be corrected/clarified.

Page 25. “VMS data from the fishing fleet is available to the Spanish authorities and there is no evidence that fishing occurred in protected areas”. In the report for the Cantabrian Sea purse seine anchovy fishery the assessor team included a map in this section showing where the fishery occurs. If this information for the sardine fishery is available, it would be useful to include it here.

Page 36. The scoring element table in this page what means?

Page 39/41/42. Last paragraphs in pages 39 and 41 and first paragraph in page 42 talk about anchovy when the species assessed in this report is sardine.

Page 40. The first paragraph of section 5.2.3 seems to be repeated.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 170 of 216

Page 63. Scomber japonicus needs to be changed to Scomber colias

Some reference sections for P1 and P2 in the scoring table (appendix 1) need to be completed.

References used to support my review (not included in your report).

Coll et al. 2015. An estimate of the total catch in the Spanish Mediterranean Sea and Gulf of Cadiz regions (1950-2010). The University of British Columbia Working Paper Series Working Paper #2015 – 60.

ICES/NAFO WGDEC REPORT 2015. Report of the ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on Deep-water Ecology (WGDEC). 16–20 February 2015. Horta, Azores, Portugal. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:27. Available at: http://ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2015/WG DEC/WGDEC_2015_FINAL.pdf

ICES WGDEC REPORT 2011. Report of the ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on Deep- water Ecology (WGDEC). 28 February–4 March. Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2011/ACOM:27.

López, A., Pierce, G. J., Santos, M. B., Gracia, J. & Guerra, A. 2003. Fishery by-catches of marine mammals in Galician waters: results from on-board observations and an interview survey of fishermen. Biological Conservation 111: 25-40. Available at: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/marfish/pdfs/Lopez2003.pdf

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 171 of 216

Appendix 2.2 Peer review reports from October 2016

Peer Reviewer 1.- Overall opinion Has the assessment team arrived at an Yes Conformity Assessment Body appropriate conclusion based on the evidence Response presented in the assessment report? The use of RBF is debatable. There is a significant amount of The team triggered the use of the RBF data available from the fishery as well as from the surveys. following the MSC criteria set in Table However as there is no assessment (crucial data for Subarea AC2 (MSC Certification Requirements VII missing) the use can be justified. V1.3). The reference points are not ICES applied its category 3 framework for these sardines. The defined for this stock. PELGAS and BIOMAN indices were used as a combined survey index of stock development. The stock status relative to possible reference points is unknown. The exploitation on the stock is considered to be stable and close to F MSY . The assessment is not possible because of missing data concerning the fisheries for sardine in area VII.

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes Conformity Assessment Body appropriately written to achieve the SG80 Response outcome within the specified timeframe? The conditions are relevant however, as argued in the detailed The MSC Certification Requirements review condition 1 & 2 should be merged and should relate to 27.11.1.1 establishes that every PI that 1.2.2. Likewise Conditions 3 and 4 are likely to be resolved receives a score less than 80 shall have together. The condition on 3.2.1 will be resolved based on a their own distinct condition associated precise HCR which should include the fishery specific with it. objectives (partly meeting condition 5). In relation to condition 3.2.1 we agree with the reviewer. For this reason the CAB mentioned in the condition the reference to condition 1 and condition 2

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

The action plans can be expected to lead to None is necessary. SG80+ scoring within the 4 years of audit.

General Comments on the Assessment Report The scoring is weak on defining a partial strategy / strategy for the by-catch species, see comments on PI 2.2.1-2.2.3. The report section 3.4.2 records that sea birds are not caught. The sea birds are forgotten in the justifications. The justification in PI 2.2.1-2.2.3 is focused on horse mackerel while other species are forgotten although it is recorded that there are a series of minor by-catch species, See Table 5, PRD V1 It seems strange that 2.2.3d fails (insufficient data) while 2.2.1 does not how can the outcome be judges if the information is insufficient?

CAB answer: The assessment team has reviewed all the peer review observations. See comments on 2.1.3; 2.2.3 and 2.3.3.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

References ICES 2015. ICES Advisory Report 2015 Section 7.3.26 Sardine (Sardina pilchardus) in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII (Bay of Biscay, Southern Celtic Seas and English Channel) ICES. 2016. Report of the Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and Sardine (WGHANSA), 24-29 June 2016, Lorient, France. ICES CM 2016/ACOM:17. 531 pp. Chapter 6 Sardine in VII and VIIIab.

CAB answer: The references were added

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

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

1.1.1 YES YES NA Parameters checked and found to be well None is necessary founded

1.1.2 RBF used. None is necessary

1.1.3 Not Relevant. The stock is not depleted None is necessary

1.2.1 YES NO Condition 1 There is a harvest strategy laid down in the The key point here is that SG80 For 1.2.1a It can be No EU CFP and this strategy works atempt to requires that the elements of the argued that SG 80 achieve the management objectives reflected harvest strategy work together towards is met at the in reference points. ICES (June 2015 advice achieving management objectives strategic level but section 7.3.26.1) consider s that the stock is reflected in the target and limit not on the HCR at a high level (above PRI) and around MSY reference points. We have argued that level (1.2.2). and applies the category 3 framework which there are no reference points, and that follow survey results and therefore total international landings in 2010– responsive to stock status. However, there is 2014 (no update for 2015) were higher no explicit HCR which is scored at 1.2.2, see than the ICES advice for those years. below. Hence, we consider that SG80 is not It seems strange to score 1.2.1a at SG60 met. and 1.2.1.b.at SG80 and 1.2.1d at SG100 both assume that there is a harvest strategy. For 1.2.1b we have strengthened the evidence that the harvest strategy (as it stands) is achieving its objectives, 1.2.1d stands. Continue ….

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 174 of 216

1.2.1 In relation to the need of the condition, (continue…) the team believes is necessary to ensure that the planned HCR is in place from 2017 onwards so that the three sardine fisheries certified (Spanish, French and Cornish) have clearly taken steps to develop a comprehensive harvest strategy, including demonstration that the total international catches of VIII/VII sardine are no higher than those advised by ICES (in lieu of a formal TAC or management plan).

1.2.2 YES YES YES There is no well defined HCR in place See comments against 1.2.1 above. Condition 1 and 2 although the application of the category 3 The MSC Certification Requirements should be merged constitute such a HCR, however, the 27.11.1.1 establishes that every PI framework does not include reduction of the that receives a score less than 80 shall exploitation rate if stock abundance is have their own distinct condition reduced below a trigger point associated with it.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 175 of 216

1.2.3 YES YES YES Data on Subarea VII is required to establish ICES (2016) notes that the advice is Condition 3 an assessment and even if the stock remain based solely on information from the to be assessed based on Category 3 Bay of Biscay, and that the lack of framework the lack on information on the catch composition and survey fishery in VII is a serious drawback. information in the Celtic seas and the English Channel impairs the possibility of performing an analytical assessment for the whole area. There is no suggestion that biological or survey data for VII are essential to giving advice on stock trends and sustainable catches, since these are clearly shown by data from the main stock area in VIII plus landings data from VII.

The CAB did not open a Condition in PI 1.2.3 because the score is 80.

1.2.4 RBF used for PI 1.1.1 None is necessary

2.1.1 YES YES N/A The argument for considering anchovy as a None is necessary ‘main retained species’ is its high value There is a well-defined management plan for anchovy that is used but not adopted

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 176 of 216

2.1.2 YES YES N/A Only anchovy as main retained species None is necessary

2.1.3 YES NO N/A 2.1.3.b SG 100 is not met. The PI refers to all The assessment team accepts the retained species while the justification only peer reviewer comment that the refers to anchovy (the main retained rationale as written did not include the species). For several of the other retained minor retained species. The species, anchovy (3.19%), Atlantic chub assessment team has modified the mackerel (2.8%), Atlantic mackerel (1.31%) rationale to include them. However, and Atlantic horse mackerel (2.0%) the the team has kept the score of SG100 information is ot sufficient to quantitatively because the quantitative information estimate outcoume , furthermore there is no from the fishery is sufficient to biologically based limits’ defined for several estimate the outcome of all the of these species and it is doubtful whether retained species. SG 80 is met.

2.2.1 YES YES The report section 3.4.2. records that seabird The assessment team agrees with the are no caught in the purse seine fishery. This comment of the peer reviewer. Table might be useful to include this information in PI 2.2.1 already include the reference the justification. cited by the peer reviewer in the third paragraph.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 177 of 216

2.2.2 YES NO 2.2.2a SG 100 is not met, The justification The assessment team accepts the refers to horse mackerel and the discard peer review comment. The ban. There is no reference to a strategy or assessment team has drafted the measures beyond the discard ban which may justification for SG80 (met) and SG100 not prevent by-catch only ensures that these (not met) focussing on the difference are landed. The strategy should apply to the between partial strategy and strategy. purse seine fishery as managing and The score was changed in minimising bycatch. accordance.

2.2.3 YES YES 2.2.3b Are there biologically based limits The assessment team understand that available for the by-catch species? it would be preferable to use BLIM and FLIM as biologically based limits, but proxies are acceptable, depending on the information that is available and nature of the ecosystem feature of concern (for example, percent of an area impacted by a fishery).

The assessment team scored less than 80 because the information for some of the minor species are not sufficient to quantitatively estimate the outcome.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 178 of 216

2.3.1 YES YES None is necessary

2.3.2 YES YES None is necessary

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 179 of 216

2.3.3 YES YES YES It seems strange that 2.2.3d fails (insufficient The peer reviewer has included the Condition 3 (here data) while 2.2.1 does not how can the comment on the incorrect PI. called 4) outcome be judges if the information is However, the answer can be used for insufficient? both of them. The requirements in the Information PIs are framed in terms of information adequacy. The P2 species information PIs such as 2.2.3 should address the information base for the management of the bycatch species. The information and monitoring required in these PIs is intended to include that which is needed to determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage these species. Based on this, the team conclude that the monitoring of the fishery is insufficient and therefore SG80 is not met. On the other hand PI 2.2.1 (outcome) assess the current status of each component and whether the fishery is posing a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the component or hindering its recovery.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 180 of 216

The assessment team has reviewed the tables and considers that the aplication of the rationales was done in accordance to the explanation above reffered.

2.4.1 YES YES YES The justification should identify which are the The peer reviewer information is not Condition 4 (here ETP species considered, the following text related to habitat. A condition was not called 5) also for the other PI 2.4.x becomes unclear oppened for habitat. The assessment because it is not obvious what is considered. team has included a table (Table 6) The v2.0 may be a help in identifying which with the ETP species in the general are these species., reference to international part of the document (Section 3.4.3). and national redlists and annexes in conventions and agreement might be helpful The FCR (V 2.0) has included and extensive ETP clasiffication compared to previous Certification Requirements version (V 1.3).

2.4.2 YES NO Purse seine has no bottom contact and it The team considers that a full strategy seems strange to require a ‘strategy .. for should be designed to manage the managing .. the impact on habitat types’. impact on the ecosystem component The fishing gear is in itself the strategy. SG specifically which is not the case and 100 is met therefore SG100 is not met.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 181 of 216

2.4.3 YES YES 2.4.3.b SG 100 although formally correct one The assessment team has reviewed may wonder if it is reasonable to require that 2.4.3 b and c to clarify and remove the a study be done on the bottom impact by a information which has created gear that do not touch the bottom? confusion. Justificaton for 2.4.3c makes one wonder Does sampling in port inform on the habitats? The justification should refer explicitly which surveys/programmes/projects inform on the seabed (both biotic and abiotic) structures

2.5.1 YES YES None is necessary

2.5.2 YES YES None is necessary

2.5.3 YES YES None is necessary

3.1.1 YES YES None is necessary

3.1.2 YES YES None is necessary

3.1.3 Yes Yes None is necessary

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 182 of 216

3.1.4 YES YES None is necessary

3.2.1 YES YES YES. Condition 5 The correction is made. (here called 3)

3.2.2 YES YES None is necessary

3.2.3 YES YES None is necessary

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 183 of 216

3.2.4 YES YES 3.2.4.a It appears strange that the research SG80 asks for a research plan that plan is only discussed at the ICES level while provides the management system with national priorities are not discussed and not a strategic approach to research and referred to. This is particular clear in the reliable and timely information discussion of research pertinent to PI 2 sufficient to achieve the objectives issues. consistent with MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. Essentialy, ICES does do this, as is explained in the table comments, along with national research initiatives. So the reviewer is wrong. However, There may not be an actual Research Plan, just a general strategy to make sure that all the fishery and biological knowledge that is need for stock assessment and management (e.g. through the data collection regulation and EU-funded projects). This has been a problem for scoring in many fisheries.

3.2.5 YES YES None is necessary

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 184 of 216

Risk-Based Framework: Performance Does the report Are the RBF risk Justification: Conformity Assessment Body Response: Indicator clearly explain scores well- Please support your answers by referring to specific how the process referenced? scoring issues and any relevant documentation where used to Yes/No possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary. determine risk using the RBF led to the stated outcome? Yes/No 1.1.1 YES YES The choice to use RBF for this fishery is debatable The team triggered the use of the RBF there is substantial information available including following the MSC criteria set in Table AC2 data from several surveys and the ICES advice is (MSC Certification Requirements V1.3). The based on trends in some of these surveys. reference points are not defined for this However, there is no assessment because the stock. fishery on sardines in Subarea VII is not documented beyond catch data. For this reason the use of RBF can be justified

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 185 of 216

Second Peer Review.- Overall Opinion Has the assessment team arrived at an Yes /No Conformity Assessment Body appropriate conclusion based on the evidence Response presented in the assessment report? The conclusion is that the Bay of Biscay purse seine None is necessary sardine fishery complies with MSC Principles and Criteria subject to an agreed action plan to meet the Conditions. Justification: It is considered that rationales for P1 have improved from the previous version and the UoC has been correctly defined with the inclusion of the fishing season.

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes Conformity Assessment Body appropriately written to achieve the SG80 Response outcome within the specified timeframe? Justification: None is necessary The CAB has set five conditions for certification with respect to the Performance Indicators 1.2.1; 1.2.2; 2.2.3; 2.3.3 & 3.2.1. These are all relevant.

Conditions number 1.2.3 and 3.2.2 have been removed from the previous version because score 80 is achieved.

Do you think the client action plan is sufficient Yes Conformity Assessment Body to close the conditions raised? Response Justification: At the beginning of the action plan The client action plan obliges the client to take action the client made reference to the within the first certification period to remedy the short and long term objectives (see deficiencies identified during the assessment process. paragraph 5). However, the peer reviewer is right and the modification However, for condition 5 (PI 3.2.1), the milestone set by was requested to the client. the CAB for year 3 states “Explicit short-term and long term objectives consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and Principle 2 should be explicitly defined and agreed”. The rationale used in the Client action plan for year 3 seems to be a bit general and it doesn’t clear states that short and long- term objectives will be already defined at that time.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

1.1.1 See RBF N/A None is necessary Stock status

1.1.2 See RBF N/A None is necessary Reference points

1.1.3 N/A N/A N/A None is necessary Depletion

1.2.1 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 1 The rationale supports the given score None is necessary

1.2.2 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 2 The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Harvest Control rule

1.2.3 Yes Yes Yes The previous condition for this performance None is necessary Information indicator has been removed, score 80 is meet due to the harmonization process

1.2.4 See RBF N/A None is necessary Assessment

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 187 of 216

2.1.1 Yes Yes N/A The UoC has been correctly defined with the None is necessary Retained inclusion of the fishing season. Therefore, species my previous concerns for PI 2.1.1 and 2.2.1. do not longer apply.

2.1.2 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Strategy for managing retained species

2.1.3 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Information on nature and extent of retained species

2.2.1 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Risk to bycatch species

2.2.2 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary By-catch

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 188 of 216

2.2.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 3 The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Information on amounts of bycatch

2.3.1 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary ETP species

2.3.2 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary ETP precautionary management strategies

2.3.3 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 4 The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Relevant information

2.4.1 Yes Yes N/A Since the fishery uses a gear designed to None is necessary Habitat operate in mid-water and to catch pelagic structure species it is likely to have negligible impact on benthic habitats

2.4.2 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Strategy

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 189 of 216

2.4.3 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Information

2.5.1 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Ecosystem impact on key elements

2.5.2 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score. None is necessary Measures

2.5.3 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score. None is necessary Knowledge

3.1.1 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Management system

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 190 of 216

3.1.2 Yes No N/A Scoring issue b: The rationale provided This PI was harmonized with the French Consultation does not address the SG100 level in that and Cornish sardine fisheries. We do process there is no evidence provided to demonstrate not agree with the reviewer. At that the management system demonstrates European level, local fishermen together consideration of the information obtained and with other stakeholders are involved in explains how the information is used or not the advisory councils where consultation used. Moreover, in appendix 3 the CABs process takes place. response to a stakeholder submission refering to this scoring issue states: “there Appendix 3 was published in the first was a mistake, SG100 was not reached and version of the PCDR (July 2015). The editing mistake was corrected. The score Executive Summary of this PCDR (V1) reaches SG80”. Therefore, it is unclear why explains that the scoring results of the this performance indicator has been scored fishery have changed due mainly to again as 100. harmonization agreements.

3.1.3 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score. None is necessary Management long-term objectives

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 191 of 216

3.1.4 Yes No N/A I consider that it is still unclear which aspects The team considers that the Economic and of SG 100 are partially met management system provides Social incentives that are consistent with incentives for achieving the outcomes expressed by sustainable MSC Principles 1 and 2, but are not fisheries. explicitly considered. In addition, the Subsidies incentives are not regularly reviewed to ensure they do not contribute to unsustainable fishing practices.

3.2.1 Yes Yes Yes, Condition 5 The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Objectives for fishery

3.2.2 Yes No Yes The rationale supports the given score. The None is necessary Decision previous condition for this performance making indicator has been removed, score 80 is processes achieved.

3.2.3 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary MCS

3.2.4 Yes Yes N/A The rationale supports the given score None is necessary Research plan

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 192 of 216

3.2.5 Yes Yes n/a The rationale supports the given score. None is necessary Monitoring and evaluating performance of the fishery- specific management system

Any Other Comments

Comments Conformity Assessment Body Response Page 6/7. The list of strengths and weaknesses seems to be clearer than in the We agree with the reviewer. The stock assessment Section was clearly re- previous report. written to avoid misunderstanding specifying the information used before and at the moment of writing this PCDR V1. Page 12. The information provided in page 12 about the number of vessels targeting sardine in ICES VIII has not been found in ICES WGHANSA 2014. Is that reference All the comments and modifications proposed were done in the report. correct?

Page 19. It seems that the ICES advice for the years 2016/2017 (ICES 2015a) HAS been consulted by the assessors’ team. Therefore, it should be interesting to update the ICES catch recommendations for these years (33065 tonnes) (third paragraph).

Page 20. Something seems to be missing in the following paragraph: “The boats registered in the North-East Cantabrian National Fishing Grounds, and which comply

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 193 of 216

with Order AAA/1307/2013, of 1 July, establishing a management plan for registered boats in the North-East Cantabrian National fishing grounds”.

Page 40. The Real Decreto 1822/2009 which regulated the first sale of fishing products in Spain was amended in 2015 by the new Real Decreto 418/2015.

Page 43. “When the vessels direct their activity at sardine fishing zone IIIab in that fishing trip”…IIIab refers to VIIIab?

Page 44. The paragraph “The scope of the certificate includes the main auction points of the Basque Country and the Cofradía de Laredo within the UC (See 5.2.6). Consequently, certified fish from the vessels listed in Appendix 3 can only be sold through these sales points” is repeated twice. Page 165. As a response to a stakeholder the CAB states that condition 3.2.1 has been removed and 3.2.2 reviewed. There is a mistake, it is condition 3.2.2 which has been removed.

For reports using the Risk-Based Framework: Performance Does the report Are the RBF risk Justification: Conformity Assessment Body Response: Indicator clearly explain scores well- Please support your answers by referring to specific how the process referenced? scoring issues and any relevant documentation where used to Yes/No possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary. determine risk using the RBF led to the stated outcome? Yes/No The RBF process seems to be well documented and None is necessary 1.1.1 Yes explained. The score for the trophic level of sardine has been corrected from the previous report.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 194 of 216

The rationale supports the given score. None is necessary 1.1.2 Yes

The rationale supports the given score. None is necessary 1.2.4 Yes

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 195 of 216

Appendix 3. Stakeholder submissions

During the first period of thirty days for public comments (September 2015), the MSC sent the following Technical oversight on Compliance with the scheme requirements.

Ref Type Page Requirement Reference Details PI Conformity assessment body response 16395 Minor 498 and CR-CF1.2 Fisheries assessment The report does not conform We agree with the MSC. The report does not others v.1.3 reports shall conform with with the template. fully conform with the MSC Full assessment the template "MSC Full - Page numbering seems template due to editing mistakes. Assessment Reporting incorrect (e.g. Appendix 1.3 - All the details identified by the MSC TO were Template" found at Conditions - re-starts again in corrected. http://www.msc.org/documen page 50) ts/schemedocuments. - Table in section 6.3 - Summary of Conditions – does not conform the template (e.g. conditions wording is missing). - Scoring and rationales for PIs 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3 and 1.2.4 are missing in Appendix 1 (the team inserted a note, asking for looking 1.1.1, 1.1.2 and 1.2.4 PIs at Appendix 2, where in fact is found the section for Peer Review Reports). The MSC suggest in any case conform the report to the template.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 196 of 216

Ref Type Page Requirement Reference Details PI Conformity assessment body response 16396 Major 50 CR-27.11.1 The CAB shall set one The condition does not specifically address the 3.2.1, Conditions were reviewed to (incorrect v.1.2 or more auditable and narrative of SG80. Additionally, the focus on the 3.2.2, address the narrative of the SG. page verifiable conditions for client here seems out of place. 1.2.1, Condition 3.2.1 was removed but numerati continuing certification if PI 3.2.1. The condition for this PI is not 1.2.2 Condition 3.2.2 was reviewed and on) the fishery achieves a measurable in so far as an outcome to be now follow the narrative of the SGs. score of less than 80 but achieved. At present, the condition states that The team has re-write the condition more than 60 for any “The client is required to work actively to in order to comply with the MSC individual PI. achieve...” comment. - PI 3.2.2. As per 3.2.1, the focus on the client The tables were divided for each PI within the condition seems out of place. (1.2.1 & 1.2.2). The team leader - PI 1.2.1 and P1.2.2. First at all, the team did followed the same structure (2 PIs in not one table) of the overlapping follow the requirement to use separate tables for fisheries (Cornwall and Brittany). each condition, so it is unclear which is the Both conditions and milestones were specific condition for PI1.2.1 and which for 1.2.2 modified following the narrative of ; or if meant to be a single condition for two the SGs. different Pis, in which case it would not be The team would like to highlight that appropriate (CR27.11.1 The CAB shall set one the conditions and milestones or more auditable and verifiable conditions for followed similar steps and tasks continuing certification if the fishery achieves a established in 2010 by the score of less than 80 but more than 60 for any overlapping fisheries. individual PI). And, as above, the condition requires the client "to promote and support a well-defined harvest control rule, consistent with the harvest strategy..." which does not specifically address the narrative of SG80 for this condition. Additionally, the focus on the client here seems out of place. 16397 Major 86, 89. CR-27.10.6.1 Rationale shall be PI 3.1.1. Scoring issue b: The rationale provided 3.1.1, 3.1.1: The assessment team 106 v.1.3 presented to support the does not address the SG100 level in that there is 3.1.2, considers there is transparent team’s no evidence provided to demonstrate that the 3.2.5 mechanism for resolving legal conclusion mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes disputes is considered effective in has been tested and proven to be effective. dealing with most issues in the Additional information is required to justify the context of fisheries. Even though score of 100 for this PI. some weaknesses have been - PI 3.1.2. scoring issue b: The final sentence of detected, including the complexity of the rationale seems to contradict the SG100 the procedure, the geographical Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 language that “The management system spread and diversity of the Page 197 of 216

demonstrates consideration of the information inspectors, and the insufficient and explains how it is used or not used.” regulation of the provisional - PI 3.2.5; Scoring issue a: The rationale measures during disciplinary presented only addresses aspects of Principle 1. procedures. All these rules confirm As such, it is not clear that the fishery evaluates that the management system “key parts” of the management system, as incorporates or subject by law to a required at the SG80 level. transparent mechanism for the Furthermore, it is not clear how the fishery meets resolution of legal disputes that is the SG80 level for this PI as the rationale states appropriate to the context of the that “no specific evaluation systems have been fishery and has been tested and designed for this fishery.” proven to be effective, therefore SG100 is met. 3.1.2: there was a mistake, SG100 was not reached and editing mistake was corrected. The score reaches SG80. 3.2.5: The following explanation “no specific evaluation systems have been designed for this fishery,” is more related with SG100 than SG80. The team discussed this PI with the stakeholders (ICES &AZTI) before making a decision on whether the fishery has mechanisms to evaluate key parts of the management system. We reach consensus in scoring SG80. Moreover the Cornwall and South Brittany fishery reach the same score in their initial assessment. 16398 Major 92 CR-27.10.6.2 The rationale shall make - PI 3.1.4: As noted by Peer Reviewer 2, 3.1.4 The team scored partially (SG90) v.1.3 direct reference to every information contained in the rationale does not but the rational did not make direct scoring issue and address why a partial score of 90 was given for reference to the scoring issue. The whether or not it is fully this PI. Further information is required to explanation why the score was met specifically address which aspects of SG100 are partial was modified in the scoring partially met. table and in the Peer Reviewer answer. 16399 Major 58 CR-27.10.5.3 27.10.5 The team shall PI 2.1.1: None of the scoring issues at SG100 2.1.1 There was an editing mistake. The v.1.3 score individual PIs. are met. table was corrected. SG 80 is 27.10.5.3 If all of the However a 90 score, instead of 80, has been reached but no SG100. Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 198 of 216

SG80 scoring issues are given. met, the PI must achieve at least an 80 score and the team shall assess each of the scoring issues at the SG100 level. a. If not all of the SG100 scoring issues are met the PI shall be given an intermediate score (85, 90 or 95) reflecting overall performance against the different SG100 scoring issues. i. Award 90 where performance against the scoring issues is mid- way between SG80 and SG100 (some scoring issues are fully met and some are not fully met); and ii. Award 95 when performance against the scoring issues is almost at SG100 most scoring issues are fully met but a few are not fully met); and iii. Award 85 when performance against the scoring issues is slightly above SG80 (a few scoring issues are fully met but most are not fully met). iv. If all of the SG100 scoring issues

16400 Major 56, 63 CR-CB3.1.2 The team shall consider Horse mackerel seems to be considered for the 2.1.1, We understand the reasons that v.1.3 each P2 species within asessment and scoring in both retained species 2.1.2, caused the confusion. The expert only one of the Retained component (e.g. not all retained species are 2.1.3, made reference to main retained Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 199 of 216

species, Bycatch within 2.2.1, species although he was providing species or ETP species safe biological limits (ex. horse mackerel)) and 2.2.2, an overview of the purse seine components. bycatch component (e.g. "significant discards 2.2.3 operation by listing all the species over 5% of total catch, and therefore, for retained by the gear from the fleet precautionary reasons, is going to be considered under assessment. The expert further as the main bycatch species"). The MSC subsequently explained the MSC suggest the team to clearly specify and justify definition for retained species and which species which are assessed under retain considered only anchovy as main species and which under bycatch components. retained species. We clarify the information in the table. Horse mackerel element was considered and assessed in the bycatch table. In PI 2.2.1 the rational was explained. 16401 Major 20 CR-CB3.5.2 The team shall The team has defined which species are 2.2.1, The assessment team analysed with v.1.3 determine and justify considered ‘main’ based on the percentages 2.2.2, the client and the main scientific which species are obtained when the (58) vessels are targeting 2.2.3, stakeholder (AZTI) the comment considered 'main' and sardine specifically. 2.3.1, concerning the UoC. which are not According to this only anchovy (3.6%) (as 2.3.2, The CAB prepared a Variation vulnerable or of particularly high value) was 2.3.3 Request to include the fishing eventually considered further for scoring this season. A more precise definition principle. However, as the team recognizes, the with the inclusion of the fishing fishery under assessment targets a variety of season will be useful to accurately species depending on the season and area: specify the unit of assessment of the sardine ( Sardina pilchardus ), anchovy ( Engraulis fishery. encrasicolus ), horse mackerel ( Trachurus The scientific literature sets that the trachurus ), Atlantic chub (Scomber colias) Spanish fishery takes place mainly and mackerel (Scomber scombrus), with all during February and April and in the species representing more than 5% of the total fourth quarter of the year. Therefore, catch of this fishery per year. the fishing season where the fleet Although there is not specific requirement to under assessment direct their specify (to include) the fishing season within (as activity at the sardine areas VIIIba part of) the UoC, Guidance in G7.4.7 – G7.4.9 are restricted from the 1st of January states “Sufficient information should thus be to the 30th of April and from the 1st provided to fully define the scope of the fishery of September to the 31st of that is to be assessed. In some fisheries, for December. The UoC was changed example, further information may be given on in accordance. the specific fishing seasons and/or areas that Moreover, the assessment team has are included. Section 3.1 set the UoC as the re-assessed the list and percentages sardine caught by the 58 purse seine vessels of all retained and by-catch species Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 200 of 216

(client group), with no specification of fishing for the fishing season identified season. As is stands, unless otherwise specified, above. The updated of the the assessment should cover the impact of the information has been done in the fishery for the whole year, and percentages for respective references (Section 3.4 the definition of the “main” species should be and Tables). calculated accordingly (total catch). Moreover, catch percentages for defining main species should be based on the full fleet (UoA), not just the 58 vessels in the current UoC. Any retained/bycatch data and impacts should clearly relate to the catches in the specified season (either selected months or year). And, as a consequence of it, any sardine which happens to be caught in other months not considered would not be eligible for logo use. 16403 Major 33 CR-CI3.2.3 According to section 3.1 the stock for this UoC is We understand the reasons that v.1.3 defined as “North Atlantic sardine, from the caused the confusion. The southern Bay of Biscay to the North Sea and the paragraph highlighted by the MSC English Channel, excluding the Mediterranean does not make sense and is not Sea”, which is the same, according to their CAB correct. than the one for the “Southern Brittany´s purse The team has re-write the seine sardine fishery” and the “Cornwall Sardine information in section 4.1. The 3 Fishery”. However, the team has not coordinated fisheries were in contact since the or conducted discussions with the teams of the beginning. Indeed, a conference call other CABs (as the two other fisheries did in was carried out after the PCDR in previous assessment, back in 2010, when order to harmonize the scoring of certified, and agreed that the stock was the Principle 1 and, if necessary, same) to ensure that the assessments did not Principle 3. draw inconsistent conclusions with respect to Regarding the RBF for the PI 1.1.1 target stock status. The team says in page 34 the PSA result is not the same as that “the Cantabrian purse seine sardine fishery the certified fisheries because at that was analysed to harmonize with both but the time the other fisheries did not skills about the stocks and the data available to consider all the fisheries impacting determinate the conservation of the stock in area the whole stock. However the aim of VII are insufficient for harmonisation, meaning the last meeting between the 3 we had to use a RBF following the MSC criteria”. fisheries was to agree on the SICA The MSC does not fully understand this and PSA score for the stock explanation but understand that requirement to outcome. Therefore, the harmonize is still required. We note that, for harmonization has been done at this example, a 95 score in PI1.1.1 is given for this point in time. Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 201 of 216

fishery, whereas a 80 was given for the Brittany (1891, during its SA in 2014) 16405 Major 51, 52 CR-27.10.6.1 Rationale shall be P1.2.1: Scoring issue b. The team concludes 1.2.1b: From our point of view the v.1.3 presented to support the that there is evidence that the harvest strategy is assessment team included in their team’s conclusion achieving its objective. However not enough rational accurate information as information is provided supporting this evidences. Furthermore, F is low "evidence" and the estimation of fishing P1.2.1: Scoring issue d, requires that the harvest mortality is likely to be at Fmsy strategy is periodically reviewed and improved based in ICES references. To as necessary. The team refers to the revision of conclude, the score has been the CFP as the justification for meeting the harmonized with the other certified SG100. However, no information on harvest fisheries. strategies specific for this fishery is given no 1.2.1d: The assessment team indication of which part of them are periodically considered that stock assessment reviewed. We also note that scores differ from and the review of Fmsy from the those found in other assessments of fisheries stock under assessment is enough targeting the same sardine stock (Cornwall and justification to reach SG100 in this Southern Brittany assessments) PI. To conclude, the score has been harmonized with the other certified fisheries. 16406 Guida 11, 42 CR-27.10.6.1 27.12.1 The CAB shall The report should clarify whether vessels in the nce v1.3 determine if the systems UoC fish outside of the UoC, and especially In order to be more accurate the of tracking and tracing in whether they fish in sub-area VIIIc which is not team has detailed and improved the the fishery are sufficient part of the UoC but is geographically located information by clarifying the UoC to make sure all fish and between the UoC fishing areas and the landing and included in point 5.2.2 the fish products identified ports. This is an important point for traceability specific Protocol of action set by the and sold as certified by but is not clear from 3.1 (pg 11, "Fishing takes client. the fishery originate from place mainly in the geographical region VIIIb the certified fishery. The though occasionally catches may originate from CAB shall consider the VIIId or VIIIa) and 5.2.2 (pg 42, "The UoC covers following points and their an extensive area ICES Subarea VIIIabd and associated risk for the VII, however the fleet assessed operates mainly integrity of certified in VIIIb"). If the vessels do not fish in VIIIc, this products: 27.12.1.2 The should be clearly stated. possibility of vessels fishing outside of the unit of certification. 16407 Minor 40-46 CR-27.12.1.3 27.12.1 The CAB shall The traceability systems and processes in the In order to be more accurate the v.1.3 determine if the systems fishery at no point specify the FAO sub-area of team has detailed and improved the

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 202 of 216

of tracking and tracing in catch. FAO Area 27 (Atlantic, northeast) includes information by clarifying the UoC the fishery are sufficient certified (VIIIb) and non-certified (VIIIc) sub- and included in point 5.2.2 the to make sure all fish and areas, in which different sardine sticks exist. Fish specific Protocol of action set by the fish products identified needs to be identified by the sub-area it was client. The vessels record in their and sold as certified by caught in at all steps (harvest, transport, sale at logbook the ICES sub-division. the fishery originate from auction etc), and segregated at each step, to All the auction points within the the certified fishery. The ensure it originated from the UoC. For example, assessment of the fishery are CAB shall consider the the sub-area of harvest could be documented in identifying in their labels the ICES following points and their records such as log books, sales notes and sub-division at the point of sales. associated risk for the product labels. The information has been detailed in integrity of certified Section 5. See Figure 10 for products: 27.12.1.3 The examples. opportunity of substitution of certified with noncertified fish prior to or at landing fraudulent claims from within and outside ther certified fishery.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 203 of 216

MSC Technical Oversight sent during the PCDR (V1) period published on November 2016.

Main Sub Page Grade Requireme Oversight Description PI CAB Comment ID ID Reference nt Version 21026 25767 62 Minor CR- PI 1.2.2. scoring issue a: It is not clear whether the 1.2.2 The key paragraph here is “In future, the 27.10.6.1 implementation of generally understood HCR Spanish, French and Cornish fleets have v1.3 between the three coastal states (France, Spain, agreed to manage their overall annual Cornwall) will have the ability to reduce the catch (as necessary) together with effort exploitation rate across the entire stock. E.g. The controls to ensure that the total assessment team states in PI 1.2.3 scoring issue a, international catch does not exceed ICES that landings within the Bay of Biscay are >70% of recommendations.” This is intended to the sardine stock. It is not clear if this 70% comes include consideration of all catches of from only the French, Spanish and Cornish fisheries sardine (not just the Spanish, French and and whether this forms the only stock component Cornish fleets’), and we have now inserted covered by the HCR, as there would presumably be “total” to make this clear. The point is that 30% of the catch not covered. Spain, France and Cornwall will have a good idea of other countries’ catches, and Additionally, as guidance, the scoring language on can then factor this into their own controls SG60 scoring issue a would read better as"Generally to ensure that the ICES advice is not understood harvest control rules are in place…." exceeded.

The text has been amended to say “Generally understood harvest control rules”, as necessary.

21026 25768 63 Major CR- PI 1.2.2. scoring issue b: Although the HCR is based 1.2.2 The assessment team made a mistake. The 27.10.6.1 off survey data collected by ICES, the rationale is not rationale should read “ The main uncertainty v1.3 clear about how the HCR takes into account the main is the lack of an analytical assessment for uncertainties associated with a lack of analytical the whole sardine stock and, in assessment (e.g. sensitivies around recruitment, consequence, the lack of reference points. movement, biological characteristics). The HCR described in 1.2.2.a takes this into consideration, and the HCR outlined in Additionally, as stated in the body of the report, the 1.2.2.a above is designed to result in information that informs the stock assessment is changes to annual catches according to 'based solely on information from the Bay of Biscay.' ICES advice based on stock trends and Therefore, information from other areas of the stock catch recommendations that are applied in are presumably absent, indicating some main a precautionary manner, and SG80 is met. uncertainties are unknown. However, neither the assessment nor the

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 204 of 216

HCR cover the whole sardine stock and its fisheries, and SG100 is not met ”. The rationale was modified accordingly.

We note that management advice provided by ICES is based on the precautionary approach and the ICES framework for category 3 stocks (ICES 2012). This can be inferred to aim for MSY and avoid limit reference levels (i.e. historically low SSB and an increase in F). ICES advice in catch is given against indices of stock abundance (there is an increasing trend over the last five years in Divisions VIIIa,b,d), and ICES estimates that the current harvest rate is likely to be close to FMSY (ICES 2016). We consider that this is sufficiently informed, and precautionary, to take account of the main uncertainties. 21026 25769 132 Guidance CR- Condition for PI 1.2.1: The condition states that the 1.2.1 In relation to the milestones the 27.11.1.4 SG80 level will be reached by the 2nd surveillance assessment team considered that the v1.3 audit. However, the milestones for this condition go condition could be met for the second year until the 3rd year of certification. and rescore 80. However, the milestones for years 2 and 3 are not properly drafted Additionally, this condition does not currently include and lead to confusion. reference to the harvest strategy being 'responsive to the state of the stock.' This is required to match the The condition was modified accordingly to scoring language at SG80. the second paragraph of the MSC comment and the milestones for year 2 and 3 were reviewed and modified. 21026 25774 66 Major CR- PI 1.2.3. Scoring issue c: The score at SG80 differs 1.2.3 The Report of the ICES Working Group on 27.10.6.1 from a previous scoring for this stock. At present, the Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and v1.3 rationale does not justify the score as it is not clear Sardine (WGHANSA), ICES CM what the "good information on all fishery removals" is 2015/ACOM:16, provides estimates of comprised of. sardine catches by all countries fishing in Divisions VIIIa,b,d and Subarea VII.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 205 of 216

21026 25778 69-81 Major CR- Principle 2: The MSC requires that each P2 species 2.2.1, A similar comment was raised in the first CB3.1.2 is considered within only of the Retained species, 2.2.2, MSC TO (Ref 16400). The explanation v1.3 Bycatch species or ETP species components. Horse 2.2.3, given was the following: “ the expert made mackerel is assessed as both a minor retained 2.3.1, reference to main retained species species and a main bycatch species within Principle 2.3.2, although she was providing an overview of 2. 2.3.3 the purse seine operation by listing all the species retained by the gear from the fleet under assessment. The expert subsequently explained the MSC definition for retained species and considered only anchovy as main retained species. We clarify the information in the table. Horse mackerel element was considered and assessed in the by-catch table. In PI 2.2.1 the rational was explained .” 21026 25779 83, 93 Guidance CR- PI2.3.1 scoring issue c and PI2.5.1 scoring issue a: 2.3.1, We agree with the MSC. The reference to 27.10.6.1 Reference is made to anchovy fishery when in fact 2.5.1 anchovy was changed to sardine. The v1.3 the fishery under assessment is a sardine fishery. information of both species is the same. 21026 25781 40 Minor CR-27.6.1 In Section 5.1 which explains the choice of the Target The CAB discussed with the MSC the v1.3 Eligibility Date of 2 October 2015, reference is made situation of the TED. The agreement to a variation request relevant to the TED and a reached is to set the TED 6 months before hyperlink provided to the response. However, the link the PCDR publication date which follows does not work and as its stands the suggested date the Requirement 27.6 (V1.3). The PCDR is not compatible with any of the provisions under was published 10 December 2016 therefore 27.6.1 namely, that the date is more than 6 months the TED is 10 May 2016. The inclusion of before the date of this PCDR (November 2016), or the new TED and rationale has been added the certification date. Please provide adequate in the Traceability section. information about the variation request and response which may help a better understanding of the proposed date.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 206 of 216

21026 25782 43 Guidance CR- In Section 5.2.2 under point 2, it is stated that "When To ensure that sardines from different 27.12.1.2 the vessels direct their activity at sardine fishing zone ICES areas are not mixed the fleet under v1.3 VIIIa,b in that fishing trip, the trip runs from the assessment has established a binding moment the vessel gets out of the port till they return, Protocol for all the vessels included in the they couldn't fish in zone VIIIc." There is the certificate. As a solution the vessels will not possibility that this sentence may be confusing when be allowed to fish in zone VIIIc if they have read together with the sentence in the opening announced in advance that they were going paragraph "As such, it is unlikely vessels are to direct their activity to sardine fishing zone operating in other areas." VIIIa,b.

Could you therefore please clarify that the choice of We have replaced the word “couldn’t” by word "couldn't" under point 2 is intentional - i.e. it is “will not be allowed”. no possible for them. Or do you perhaps mean "shouldn't"? 21026 25783 47 Guidance CR- In Section 5.3 in the listing of warehouse for freezer Conservas Ortiz was mentioned because 27.12.2.1 storage facilities, the name Conservas Ortiz is is one of the partners of the warehouse. We v1.3 mentioned but unlike all other sites included here it is have eliminated the reference to Conservas not one of the named landing or auction points, nor is Ortiz because it is not part of the certificate is identified as a site with MSC Chain of Custody and it is confusing. Certification - compare with Congelados Sor y Mar where this is specifically stated. 21026 25784 135-137 Minor CR-27.11.3 Consultation on conditions 3 and 4: It is not clear if All the conditions were consulted with AZTI v1.3 the CAB consulted AZTI. as the main scientific entity in the Basque Country. Indeed, the fleet have been working with them from a long time. The activities described in the action plans will be supported by AZTI.

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1 Page 207 of 216

Appendix 4 Support for Client Action Plan

French and Spanish common management strategy Commitment

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

Cornish Management Strategy Commitment

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

Letter CCS as evidence to meet the condition

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

Letter from the client to the Spanish fishing Administration

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1

Letter from AZTI supporting the Action Plan of the fishery

Bay of Biscay purse seine sardine: FR V1