LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

MSC SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES CERTIFICATION

Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Final Report

March 2019

Client: Sociedad Nacional de Pesca (SONAPESCA) Assessment Conducted by: Giuseppe Scarcella, Jim Andrews, Paul Knapman On behalf of Lloyd’s Register

MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Assessment Data Sheet

Conformity Assessment Address Lloyd’s Register Body (CAB) details 6 Redheughs Rigg Edinburgh EH12 9DQ Phone/Fax 0131 335 6662 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Polly Burns

Client details Address SONAPESCA Calle Barros Errazuriz 1954, Providencia, Santiago, Región Metropolitana, Chile Phone/Fax (56) 225960690 Email [email protected] Contact name(s) Rodrigo Zamora Gomez

Assessment Team Team Leader & P3 Assessor Paul Knapman P1 Assessor Giuseppe Scarcella P2 Assessor Jim Andrews

Copyright © 2019 by Lloyd’s Register All rights reserved. No portion of this report may be reproduced in any manner for use by any other MSC Conformity Assessment Body without the express written permission of Lloyd’s Register, and subject to such conditions specified by Lloyd’s Register in any such permission.

Page 2 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Contents Assessment Data Sheet ...... 2 List of Figures ...... 6 Table of Tables ...... 8 Glossary...... 10 1 Executive Summary ...... 11 2 Authorship and Peer Reviewers ...... 15 Assessment Team ...... 15 Peer Reviewers ...... 16 RBF Training ...... 17 3 Description of the Fishery ...... 18 Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA) and scope of certification sought ...... 18 UoA and proposed Unit of Certification (UoC) ...... 18 Final UoC(s) ...... 18 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and Catch Data ...... 19 Overview of the fishery ...... 19 History of the fishery ...... 19 Fishing method ...... 25 Principle one: Target species background ...... 26 3.5.1. Global distribution and depth range ...... 27 3.5.2 Biological characteristics ...... 30 3.5.3 Role of species in the ecosystem ...... 33 3.5.4 Stock status and harvest control rules ...... 38 Conservation and management measures ...... 43 Principle Two: Ecosystem Background ...... 46 Non-target species (Primary, Secondary and ETP species) ...... 46 Habitats ...... 67 Ecosystems ...... 77 Principle Three: Management System Background...... 85 Area of operation of the UoA ...... 85 Jurisdiction ...... 85 Legal and policy framework ...... 86 Resolution of Disputes ...... 89 Respect for Rights ...... 90 Consultation, roles and responsibilities ...... 90 Long-term objectives ...... 94 Fishery specific objectives ...... 95 Decision making ...... 100 Compliance and enforcement ...... 101

Page 3 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Monitoring and management performance evaluation ...... 104 4 Evaluation Procedure ...... 105 Harmonised Fishery Assessment ...... 105 Previous assessments ...... 106 Evaluation processes and techniques ...... 106 Consultations and site visit...... 106 Evaluation Techniques ...... 108 Risk Based Framework (RBF) ...... 110 5 Traceability ...... 110 Eligibility date ...... 110 Traceability within the fishery ...... 110 Vessels fishing outside the UoCs ...... 111 At sea processing ...... 111 Transhipping ...... 111 Eligibility to enter further chains of custody ...... 111 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practicably Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further Chains of Custody ...... 112 6 Evaluation Results ...... 113 Principle Level Scores ...... 113 Summary of PI Level Scores ...... 113 Summary of Conditions ...... 114 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement ...... 115 7 References ...... 116 Principle 1 ...... 116 Principle 2 ...... 121 Principle 3 ...... 126 Appendix 1: Assessment tree ...... 129 MSC Principles & Criteria ...... 129 Appendix 2: Scoring and Rationales ...... 132 Performance Indicator Scores and Rationale ...... 132 Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.1 – Stock status ...... 132 Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.2 – Stock rebuilding ...... 134 Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.1 – Harvest strategy ...... 135 Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.2 – Harvest control rules and tools ...... 139 Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.3 – Information and monitoring ...... 142 Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.4 – Assessment of stock status ...... 145 Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.1 – Primary species outcome ...... 148 Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.2 – Primary species management strategy ...... 150 Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.3 – Primary species information ...... 153 Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.1 – Secondary species outcome ...... 155

Page 4 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.2 – Secondary species management strategy ...... 159 Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.3 – Secondary species information ...... 163 Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.1 – ETP species outcome ...... 165 Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.2 – ETP species management strategy ...... 169 Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.3 – ETP species information ...... 173 Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.1 – Habitats outcome ...... 175 Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.2 – Habitats management strategy ...... 179 Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.3 – Habitats information ...... 184 Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.1 – Ecosystem outcome ...... 187 Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.2 – Ecosystem management strategy ...... 188 Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.3 – Ecosystem information ...... 192 Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.1 – Legal and/or customary framework ...... 196 Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.2 – Consultation, roles and responsibilities ...... 202 Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.3 – Long term objectives ...... 206 Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.1 – Fishery-specific objectives ...... 208 Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.2 – Decision-making processes ...... 211 Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.3 – Compliance and enforcement ...... 217 Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.4 – Monitoring and management performance evaluation 222 Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs ...... 225 Appendix 1.3 Conditions ...... 229 Condition 1 ...... 229 Condition 2 ...... 231 Condition 3 ...... 233 Condition 4 ...... 235 Condition 5 ...... 236 Condition 6 ...... 240 Condition 7 ...... 242 Appendix 2 Peer Review Reports...... 245 Peer Reviewer A ...... 245 Peer Reviewer B ...... 280 Appendix 3 Stakeholder submissions ...... 302 Submissions to PCDR ...... 400 Appendix 4 Letters of Support for Client Action Plans ...... 401 Appendix 5 Surveillance Frequency ...... 404 Appendix 6 Objections Process ...... 405

Page 5 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

List of Figures Figure 1. Administrative boundaries and marine ecoregions in Chile. The Roman numerals and names are given for administrative regions on land. (Advanced Conservation Strategies 2011) ...... 21 Figure 2. VMS Records of fishing activity in the jack mackerel fishery for 2014 and 2014 (SPRFMO 2016) ...... 22 Figure 3. VMS Records of fishing activity in the jack mackerel fishery for 2016 and 2017 (SPRFMO 2017a) ...... 23 Figure 4. Landings of jack mackerel (in 1,000 tonnes) from the Chilean EEZ and adjacent high seas between 1970 and 2017 (Source: SPRFMO https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/2018- COMM6/COMM6-INF03-Data-Submitted-to-the-Secretariat.pdf) ...... 24 Figure 5: SPRFMO Convention Management Area ...... 24 Figure 6. Schematic of a purse seine fishing operation ...... 26 Figure 7. Distribution of jack mackerel in the high seas in the South Pacific ...... 29 Figure 8. Flow diagram representing the food web in the upwelling system of central Chile (33° S to 39° S), year 1992. Q = consumption (t km-2 year-1); P =production (year-1)...... 34 Figure 9. Predicted Trophic Position (TP) at 11.7º S (Vinciguerria, mackerel, squat lobster, anchoveta, Humboldt / jumbo squid, jack mackerel, Peruvian booby, guanay, fur seal) and 7.5º S (euphausiids, myctophid, Vinciguerria, anchoveta, jumbo squid, mackerel, hake and squat lobster)...... 35 Figure 10. Simplified food web of the southern region of the Humboldt Current System, centered on the key stone euphausiid Euphausia mucronata (A) during a period of high biomass of jack mackerel (B) during a period of low biomass of jack mackerel. Arrow thickness indicates relative flow of biomass between components. 36 Figure 11. Simplified food web of the northern region of the Humboldt Current System, centred on the keystone euphausiids, (Euphausia mucronate) (A) during a period of high biomass of anchovy (Engraulis ringens), (B) during a period of low biomass of anchovy. Arrow thickness indicates relative flow of biomass between components...... 37 Figure 12. Stock assessment outputs of Chilean jack mackerel (SPRFMO, 2017a)...... 39 Figure 13. Kobe plot of Chilean jack mackerel. Mod 1 = current evaluation; Mod 0 = 2016 evaluation (IFOP, 2017)...... 40 Figure 14. A comparison of the percentage frequency in length of jack mackerel in the Chilean industrial purse seine fishery in 2016 and 2018 (IFOP, 2017) ...... 45 Figure 15. Purse seine hauls with and without discard activity (legend in image) for the industrial jack mackerel fleet during the 2015-2016 period with landfall in the VIII Region. Data from scientific observers. (IFOP 2017) ...... 48 Figure 16. Proportion of retained catch (CR, pale shading) and discarded catch (CD, dark shading) in the industrial jack mackerel fishery from 2015-16 estimated by (a) scientific observers across 3 regions; and (b) self-reporting (showing maximum and minimum estimates). (IFOP 2017) ...... 48 Figure 17. Proportion of species (as percentage of total catch) making up 1% or more of the catch in purse seine nets fishing for (from left) artisanal sardine & anchovy (ART S.A.); industrial sardine & anchovy (IND S.A.); and the UoA fishery, industrial jack mackerel (IND J). Pale green shading indicates jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi); dark green indicates caballa (Scomber japonicus). Data from observer trips. (IFOP 2017) ...... 50 Figure 18. Proportion of species making up less than 1% of the total catch (as a proportion of this component of catch) in purse seine nets fishing for (from left) artisanal sardine & anchovy (ART S.A.); industrial sardine & anchovy (IND S.A.); and the UoA fishery, industrial jack mackerel (IND J). The non-target species listed for the IND J fishery are: red (pez medusa / blue fathead, Cubiceps caeruleus); pink (jibia / Humboldt squid, Dosidicus gigas); dark grey (sierra / snoek, Thyrsites atun); and pale purple (jellyfish). Data from observer trips. (IFOP 2017) ...... 51

Page 6 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 19. Distribution map for the South American Sea Lion, Otaria byronia (syn. Otaria flavescens). (IUCN 2015) ...... 57 Figure 20. Distribution map for the Black browed albatross, Thalassarche melanophris. (IUCN 2017) ...... 58 Figure 21. Distribution of the Peruvian pelican, Pelecanus thagus. (IUCN 2016a)...... 59 Figure 22. Distribution map for the grey-headed albatross, Thalassarche chrysostoma. (IUCN 2016b) ...... 60 Figure 23. Distribution of the pink footed shearwater, Ardenna creatopus. (IUCN 2016c). . 61 Figure 24. Maps showing the movements of satellite-tagged A. creatopus individuals off the Chilean coast relative to the location of (right) shark and (left) Ilo dolphinfish fishery zone, considered to represent the main conservation risks. (Mangel et al. 2006) ...... 62 Figure 25. Distribution of the sooty shearwater, Ardenna grisea. (IUCN 2016d)...... 63 Figure 26. Distribution of the white chinned petrel, Procellaria aequinoctialis. (IUCN 2016e) ...... 64 Figure 27. Distribution of the leatherback turtle, Dermochelys coriacea. (IUCN 2013a) . 65 Figure 28. Distribution of the wandering albatross, Diomedea exulans. (IUCN 2016f) ... 66 Figure 29. Definitions of pelagic habitats. The uppermost 200 m are the “epipelagic zone”. (Wikipedia 2018b)...... 68 Figure 30. Map of EBSAs in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. Numbers on the map relate to text in this report. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018g) ...... 71 Figure 31. Map showing the location of marine parks and reserves in Chile. Inset shows details of Juan Fernandez Islands MPAs. (Plotted by assessment team using data from SUBPESCA (SUBPESCA 2018))...... 72 Figure 32. SERNAPESCA public information for the Nazca-Desventuradas Marine Park created in 2016 (SPRFMO 2016)...... 73 Figure 33. Map showing main upwelling regions in Chile. Principal upwelling centres in black dots, other sites with frequent upwelling indicated with grey dots, coastal stretches with occasional upwelling shown as thick black line. (Thiel et al. 2007) ...... 77 Figure 34. Overview of the surface currents in the eastern South Pacific that influence the north-central Chilean coast, showing the West Wind Drift (WWD), the main flow of the Humbolt Current (HC), the Cape Horn Current (CHC), the Chile Coastal Current (CCC), the Peru Coastal Current (PCC), the Peru-Chile Counter Current (PCCC) and the South Equatorial Current (SEC) (Thiel et al. 2007)...... 78 Figure 35. Simplified food web in the Humboldt Current System off northern and Central Chile. Size of boxes indicates relative proportions of ecosystem elements. Grey arrows show mortality due to fishing. (Thiel et al. 2007) ...... 79 Figure 36. Conceptual model describing the annual cycle of dominant zooplankton species in the coastal upwelling areas off Chile. Upper panel shows two phases: growth of the population in spring-summer; and decay following the peak in diatom bloom. The key feature in the collapse is the rise of the oxygen minimum zone. (Thiel et al. 2007) ...... 80 Figure 37. Diagram illustrating the feeding behaviour of jack mackerel in response to diurnal migrations of prey items into and out of the oxygen minimum zone (OMZ). Positions of prey items (zooplankton and mesopelagic fish) in the water column are shown as grey bands; positions of jack mackerel shown as grey patches. (Thiel et al. 2007) ...... 80 Figure 38. Images of recent (March 2018) satellite images showing (top) Sea Surface Temperature and (bottom) Chlorophyll a concentrations. (NASA Earth Observatory 2018) 81 Figure 39. Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies in the Pacific Ocean associated with a strong El Niño event November 2015. (Carlowicz and Schollaert Uz 2017) ...... 82 Figure 40. Oceanic Niño Index (ONI) for the period 1992-2017. (SPRFMO 2017a) ...... 83 Figure 41. Total annual landings for the five most important pelagic species caught by the Chilean purse seine fleet during the time period 1980–2005 in the respective fisheries units; grey dots represent Fisheries Unit I–II, open dots Fisheries Unit III–IV, grey triangles Fisheries Unit V–IX, and open triangles Fisheries Unit X–XII. Top panel shows strength of the El Niño Southern Oscillation for each year. (Thiel et al. 2007)...... 84

Page 7 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 42: Graphic summarising MSC Principles and Performance Indicators (Source: Marine Stewardship Council 2016) ...... 129

Table of Tables Table 1. TAC and Catch Data ...... 19 Table 2. Number of purse seiners catching jack mackerel in the Chilean EEZ and SPRFMO area between 2012 and July 2016 (SPRFMO, https://www.sprfmo.int/data/trachurus- murphyi-fishery/2017-t-murphyi-fishery/) ...... 25 Table 3. Advised and reported catches of Chilean jack mackerel. (* = preliminary data.) .... 41 Table 4. Allocations of jack mackerel to SPRFMO Contracting Members and CNCP in 2018 as referred to in CMM 01-2018...... 44 Table 5: Summary of extent of observer trips (OC) and self-reporting (Autorreporte) aboard industrial Jack mackerel (IND J.) vessels landing to Region VIII in 2015-16. Data show total estimated catch (Ŷh) (tonnes) with standard deviation (DS) and coefficient of variance (CV). N° VM are number of trips monitored, with proportion of all trips shown in brackets; N° VT is the total number of trips that took place during the period observed. (IFOP 2017) ...... 47 Table 6. Frequency of records of non-target species in jack mackerel purse seine hauls (“lances”) from: (a) 2015 observer trips; (b) 2016 observer trips; and (c) self-reporting trips from 2015-16. (IFOP 2017) ...... 49 Table 7. Records of number of birds, mammals and marine reptiles recorded by scientific observers in the jack mackerel purse seine fishery from January 2015-December 2016. (IFOP 2017) ...... 52 Table 8. Estimate of annual level of interactions and mortality for the Chilean jack mackerel fleet (calculated by assessors using data from Table 5 and Table 7)...... 55 Table 9. Review of the status of the “out of scope” species recorded by IFOP observers on- board jack mackerel industrial purse seine vessels between 2015-2016 with respect to MSC criteria for identifying ETP species. Highlighting indicates where criterion is met; species underlined are those for which mortalities were recorded by IFOP observers...... 56 Table 10. Analysis of catch composition from the jack mackerel purse seine fishery with respect to MSC criteria determining which Principle 2 component is applicable to each species. ETP species are highlighted...... 66 Table 11. List of marine reserves and marine parks, including location, extent and habitat features in the Chilean EEZ. Hyperlinks to relevant decrees are provided (SERNAPESCA 2018b) ...... 74 Table 12. Examples of action plans from the jack mackerel FMP (translated from the Jack Mackerel FMP http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/articles-99235_documento.pdf ...... 97 Table 13. MSC certified and in-assessment fisheries that overlap with the Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel Fishery and scores that have been assigned for their “Governance and Policy” component of Principle 3. The jack mackerel scores are included as the last entry in the table...... 105 Table 14. Scoring elements...... 109 Table 15. The ports of landing where jack mackerel is landed by the client group vessels 110 Table 16. Traceability factors within the fishery ...... 111 Table 17. Principle Scores ...... 113 Table 18. Summary of PI level scores ...... 113

Page 8 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 19 Summary of Conditions ...... 114 Table 20. SICA Scoring Template for PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem...... 226 Table 21. Conditions ...... 229

Page 9 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Glossary

CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort CCW Cold Coastal Waters CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CMM Conservation and Management Measure (made under the SPRFMO Convention) CNCPs Cooperating Non-Contracting Parties EBSA Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Area EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone ENSO El Niño Southern Oscillation ETP Endangered, Threatened and Protected Species FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation HCR Harvest Control Rule HCS Humboldt Current System IFOP Instituto de Fomento Pequero (Fisheries Development Institute) IUU Illegal, Unreported or Unregulated LTL Low Trophic level M Natural mortality MACL Maximum Allowable Catch Limits ONI Oceanic Niño Index PDO Pacific Decadal Oscillation PI Performance Indicator SI Scoring Issue RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organisation RSW Refrigerated Salt Water SEREMI Secretarías Regionales Ministeriales del Medio Ambiente SERNAPESCA Servicio Nacional de Pesca y Acuicultura (National Fisheries and Aquaculture Service) SPRFMO South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation SST Sea Surface Temperature SUBPESCA Subsecretaría de Pesca y Acuicultura (Undersecretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture) SSW Subtropical Surface Water TAC Total Allowable Catch UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

Page 10 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

1 Executive Summary This report provides details of the MSC assessment process for the Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel Fishery for SONAPESCA (http://www.sonapesca.cl). The assessment process began on 1st February 2018 and was concluded (to be determined at a later date). A comprehensive programme of stakeholder consultations was carried out as part of this assessment, complemented by a full and thorough review of relevant literature and data sources. A rigorous assessment of the wide ranging MSC Principles and Criteria was undertaken by the assessment team and a detailed and fully referenced scoring rationale is provided in the assessment tree provided in “Appendix 2: Scoring and Rationales” of this report. The Eligibility Date for this assessment is the date of publication of the Public Comment Draft Report (PCDR) – 29th January 2019. The assessment team for this fishery assessment comprised of Paul Knapman, who was the team leader and primary MSC Principle 3 specialist; Giuseppe Scarcella, who was primarily responsible for evaluation of MSC Principle 1 and Jim Andrews who was primarily responsible for evaluation of MSC Principle 2. Paul MacIntyre was the traceability expert advisor.

The fishery being assessed is described as:

Species: Jack Mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) Stock: Chilean Jack Mackerel Geographical area: Chilean EEZ (Regions III-X & XIV) and international waters Harvest method: Purse seine Client Group: SONAPESCA Other Eligible Fishers: Chilean industrial purse seiners licensed to fish Chilean jack mackerel in regions III-X and XIV and international waters

Client fishery strengths • The jack mackerel stock has recovered from a low point in 2011 and there is a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the point at which recruitment may be impaired (PRI).

• The harvest strategy is responsive to the stock and has been fully tested and evaluated using a Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) approach.

• The fishery has a low-level interaction with non-target species (i.e., primary, secondary and Endangered, Threatened and Protected (ETP) species) and no interaction with sea-bed habitats.

• There is strong international cooperation with respect to the management of the fishery through the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO).

• Chile has the largest proportion of the quota from the global stock and has committed to adopt conservation and management measures set by SPRFMO.

Page 11 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Client fishery weaknesses • The Chilean fishery has not yet completed its research into the extent and causes of discarding and so a discard plan that incorporates conservation measures and new technologies has not yet been implemented.

• The harvest control rules are not well enough defined or described to articulate to what extent exploitation might be reduced if biomass decreases toward or below the PRI.

• There are no regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise unwanted catch of main secondary species or ETP species.

• There is a lack of evidence of: o established decision-making process at the fishery specific level; o the timeliness of decision-making, particularly with respect to managing discarding in the fishery; and, o explanation of action or lack of action, associated with findings and recommendations emerging from research, monitoring and evaluation.

• The monitoring, control and surveillance system has not proven itself to be effective in managing discarding.

• The management system is not subject to occasional external review.

Determination » On completion of the assessment and scoring process, the assessment team concluded that the fishery should be certified for a period of 5 years, subject to annual surveillance audits. The MSC Principle-level scores are set out in the table below.

Overall weighted Principle-level scores Score Principle 1 – Target Species 84.2

Principle 2 – Ecosystem 85.0

Principle 3 - Management 86.5

Conditions & Recommendations A number of criteria which contribute to the overall assessment score, scored less than the unconditional pass mark, and therefore trigger a binding condition to be placed on the fishery, which must be addressed in a specified timeframe (within the 5 year lifespan of the certificate). Full explanation of these conditions is provided in “Appendix 1.3 Conditions” of the report, but in summary, these conditions are:

Condition Condition Performance number Indicator The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and 1 practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related 1.2.1 (f) mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock and they are implemented as appropriate.

Page 12 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Condition Condition Performance number Indicator The client shall ensure by the fourth surveillance audit that there are well defined HCRs in place that ensure that the 2 exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and 1.2.2 (a) they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related 3 2.2.2 (e) mortality of unwanted catch of main secondary species and evidence shall be presented to show that they are implemented as appropriate. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and 4 practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related 2.3.2 (e) mortality of ETP species and evidence shall be presented to show that they are implemented as appropriate. The client shall ensure by the second surveillance audit that: • There are established decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery- specific objectives. • Decision-making processes respond to serious and other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, 3.2.2 5 timely and adaptive manner and take account of the (a) (b) (d) wider implications of decisions. • Information on the fishery’s performance and management action is available on request, and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit that the monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) system has 6 been implemented in the fishery and has demonstrated an 3.2.3 (a) ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit that 7 the fishery-specific management system is subject to 3.2.4 (b) regular internal and occasional external review.

For interested readers, the report also provides background to the target species and fishery covered by the assessment, the wider impacts of the fishery and the management regime, supported by full details of the assessment team, a full list of references used and details of the stakeholder consultation process.

Lloyd’s Register confirm that this fishery is within scope.

Page 13 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

All of the links and referenced websites used in this report were in use and current at the time of writing.

Page 14 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

2 Authorship and Peer Reviewers Assessment Team All team members listed below have completed all requisite training and signed all relevant forms for assessment team membership on this fishery. Assessment team leader: Paul Knapman Primarily responsible in this assessment for Principle 3 (P3). Paul is an independent consultant based in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. Paul began his career in fisheries nearly 30 years ago as a fisheries officer in the UK, responsible for the enforcement of UK and EU fisheries regulations. He then worked with the UK government’s nature conservation advisors (1993-2001), as their Fisheries Programme Manager, responsible for establishing and developing an extensive programme of work with fisheries managers, scientists, the fishing industry and ENGOs, researching the effects of fishing and integrating nature conservation requirements into national and European fisheries policy and legislation. Between 2001-2004 he was Head of the largest inshore fisheries management organisation in England, with responsibility for managing an extensive area of inshore fisheries on the North Sea coast. The organisations responsibilities and roles included: stock assessments; setting and ensuring compliance with allowable catches; developing and applying regional fisheries regulations; the development and implementation of fisheries management plans; acting as the lead authority for the largest marine protected area in England. In 2004, Paul moved to Canada and established his own consultancy providing analysis, advisory and developmental work on fisheries management policy in Canada and Europe. He helped draft the management plan for one of Canada’s first marine protected areas, undertook an extensive review on IUU fishing in the Baltic Sea and was appointed as rapporteur to the European Commission’s Baltic Sea Regional Advisory Council. In 2008, Paul joined Moody Marine as their Americas Regional Manager, with responsibility for managing and developing their regional MSC business. He became General Manager of the business in 2012. Paul has been involved as a lead assessor, team member and technical advisor/reviewer for more than 50 different fisheries in the MSC programme. He returned to fisheries consultancy in 2015. Further CV details are available on request to the CAB.

Expert team member: Giuseppe Scarcella Primarily responsible in this assessment for Principle 1 (P1). Giuseppe is an experienced fishery scientist and population analyst and modeller, with wide knowledge and experience in the assessment of demersal stocks. He holds a first degree in Marine Biology and Oceanography (110/110) from the Unversità Politecnica delle Marche, and a Ph.D. in marine Ecology and Biology from the same university, based on a thesis "Age and growth of two rockfish in the Adriatic Sea". After his degree he was offered a job as project scientist in several research programs about the structure and composition of fish assemblage in artificial reefs, off-shore platform and other artificial habitats in the Italian Research Council – Institute of Marine Science of Ancona (CNR-ISMAR). During the years of employment at CNR-ISMAR he has gained experience in benthic ecology, statistical analyses of fish assemblages’ evolution in artificial habitats, fisheries ecology and impacts of fishing activities, stock assessment, otolith analysis, population dynamic and fisheries management. During the same years he attended courses of uni-multivariate statistics and stock assessment. He is also actively participating in the scientific advice process of FAO GFCM in the Mediterranean Sea. At the moment he is member of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries for the European Commission (STECF).

Page 15 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

He is author and co-author of more than 30 scientific paper peer reviewed journals and more than 150 national and international technical reports, most of them focused on the evolution of fish assemblages in artificial habitats and stock assessment of demersal species. For some years now, Giuseppe has been working in fisheries certification applying the MSC standard for sustainable fisheries, currently concentrating on Principle 1 of the Standard. Giuseppe is also a trained and experienced team leader (MSC v2.0). Further CV details are available on request to the CAB. Expert team member: Jim Andrews Primarily responsible in this assessment for Principle 2 (P2) and the Risk Based Framework (RBF). Jim has over 20 years’ experience working in marine fisheries and environmental management. His previous experience includes running the North Western and North Wales Sea Fisheries Committee as its Chief Executive from 2001 to 2005, and previously working as the SFC's Marine Environment Liaison Officer. During this time, he was responsible for the regulation, management and assessment of inshore finfish and shellfish stocks along a 1,500 km coastline. He has an extensive practical knowledge of both fisheries and environmental management and enforcement under UK and EC legislation. Jim has formal legal training & qualifications, with a special interest in the policy, governance and management of fisheries impacts on marine ecosystems. He has worked as an assessor and lead assessor on more than 20 MSC certifications within the UK, in Europe and in India since 2007. In 2008, he worked with the MSC and WWF on one of the pilot assessments using the MSC Risk Based Assessment Framework. Jim has carried out numerous MSC Chain of Custody assessments within the UK. Further CV details are available on request to the CAB.

Expert advisor: Paul Macintyre Paul started working in the Aquaculture sector in 1975, managing salmon farms and processing factories for a large multi-national before transferring in 1990 to aquaculture audit and inspection. During the last 25 years Paul has carried out over 3,000 audits and inspections of aquaculture and fish processing operations across the UK salmon and trout industry and internationally in the cod, tilapia and shrimp aquaculture sectors. Paul's primary interest is salmonids however his role as Aquaculture Director with Acoura Marine (Lloyd’s Register) has involved him in the development and trial audit of a number of new aquaculture and agricultural standards. Paul is a qualified Lead Assessor and approved to audit BRC, MSC / ASC Chain of Custody, GlobalGAP, Organic Aquaculture, Freedom Food, Label Rouge, Best Aquaculture Practices, ASC Salmon and Friend of the Sea. Paul also audits to UK and French retailer standards. Further CV details are available on request to the CAB. Peer Reviewers The MSC’s Peer Review College compiled a shortlist of potential peer reviewers to undertake the peer review for this fishery. Two peer reviewers will be selected from the following list:-

• Geoff Tingley • Gonzalo Macho • Juan Vilata • Kristin Kleisner

A summary of their experience and qualifications is given below. Further details of their experience is available on request by e-mail to the MSC Peer Review College ([email protected]).

Page 16 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

RBF Training Jim Andrews has been fully trained in the use of the MSC’s Risk Based Framework (RBF). RBF was used in this assessment.

Page 17 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

3 Description of the Fishery Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA) and scope of certification sought Lloyd’s Register confirm that the UoA is within scope of the MSC standard, i.e. the fishery does not operate under a controversial unilateral exemption to an international agreement, use destructive fishing practices, target amphibians, birds, reptiles or mammals and is not overwhelmed by dispute. UoA and proposed Unit of Certification (UoC) The UoA is defined as the specific aspect of the fishery the CAB and its assessment team evaluate during an MSC fishery assessment:

Species: Jack Mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) (Common names used for Trachurus murphyi (Nichols 1920) include: Chilean jack mackerel, jack mackerel, jurel, horse makerel, Inca scad. In this report it is referred to as, Trachurus murphyi, Chilean jack mackerel or jack mackerel. Stock: Chile Jack Mackerel Geographical area: Chilean EEZ (Regions III-X & XIV) and international waters Harvest method: Purse seine Client Group: SONAPESCA Other Eligible Fishers: Chilean industrial purse seiners licensed to fish Chilean jack mackerel in regions III-X and XIV and international waters

This UoA was used as it is compliant with client wishes for assessment coverage and in full conformity with MSC criteria.

The proposed Unit of Certification (UoC) is the part of the UoA that is covered by the MSC certificate, if the assessment is successful. The UoC may subsequently be expanded up to the limit defined by the UoA, through the addition of other eligible fishers, via the mechanism of certificate sharing. The proposed UoC for this fishery is:

Species: Jack Mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) Stock: Chilean Jack Mackerel Geographical area: Chilean EEZ (Regions III-X & XIV) and international waters Harvest method: Purse seine Client Group: SONAPESCA Other Eligible Fishers: Chilean industrial purse seiners licensed to fish Chilean jack mackerel in regions III-X and XIV and international waters

Final UoC(s) (PCR ONLY)

Page 18 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The final Unit of Certification for this fishery is as defined below. This has not changed throughout the process. Alternatively provide rationale for why this has changed.

Species: Stock: Geographical area: Harvest method: Client Group: Other Eligible Fishers:

Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and Catch Data Table 1. TAC and Catch Data

TAC Year 2018 Amount 517,582 tonnes UoA share of TAC Year 2018 Amount 371,887 tonnes UoC share of total Year 2017 Amount 241,113 tonnes TAC Total green weight Year (most recent) 2017 Amount 233,570 tonnes catch by UoC Year (second most 2017 Amount 234, 365 tonnes recent)

Overview of the fishery The following text has been adapted from various sources including, the Chilean jack mackerel “Species Profile” found on the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO) website (https://www.sprfmo.int/science/species-profiles/), The SUBPESCA website (http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-article-831.html), the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) website (http://www.fao.org/fishery/species/2309/en) and information provided by the client.

History of the fishery The Chilean fisheries are described in terms of “artisanal” and “industrial”. The difference is related to vessel size and capacity volume and, as a result, are subject to different administrative requirements. The industrial sector is ≥ 18 m overall length, with a capacity of ≥ 80 m3. This fleet sector has access from 5 nautical miles (nm) to international waters beyond the 200 nm Chilean Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The artisanal fleet are broken into two length categories: ≤ 15 m and 15 - < 18 m, with a capacity of < 80 m3. They have access within and outside 5 nm. The large-scale industrial jack mackerel fishery is considered to have been established in the early 1950s by Chile and Peru with international interest, particularly from the USSR developing in the 1970s. The Chilean jack mackerel industrial fleet are distributed in two main fishing areas: The Northern - The area extending from Chile’s northern border south to parallel 26º 03’ S, described as Administrative Regions XV, I and II (see Figure 1). The fleet operates almost exclusively in Chile’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), rarely fishing in international waters. The season starts early in the calendar year (Figure 2 and Figure 3) and while jack mackerel may be targeted they are largely taken as a bycatch in the anchovy fishery.

Page 19 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The Central-South – The area described as Administrative Regions X - III and XIV (see Figure 1). The fleet operates in Chile’s EEZ as well as in the adjacent international waters (high seas) The season starts later in the year as the larger jack mackerel move south (Figure 2 and Figure 3) and offshore. The fleets target jack mackerel. This is the fishery that is being evaluated in this MSC assessment. An increase in the jack mackerel stock in the mid-1970s gave rise to the large-scale development of the fishery and by 1979, jack mackerel was the biggest fishery in Chile with fishing concentrated mainly in the south, Bio Bio and Valparaiso being the two main areas of fleet investment. Other stocks such as Chilean hake, southern hake, hoki and southern blue whiting were also targeted. The industrial fleet (≥ 18 m overall length, with a capacity of ≥ 80 m3) grew to approximately 500 vessels. The catches were mainly utilised for human consumption (canned product) and also fishmeal. From 1985 up to 1995, Chilean landings showed a sustained increase and reached a national maximum of 4,400,000 tonnes in 1995. However, a significant reduction in the recruitment of jack mackerel in the late 1980s, together with simultaneous increase in landings gave rise to major over-exploitation of the stock. Jack mackerel catches began to decrease due to a combination of over-fishing and a strong "El Niño1" event and resulted in the fishery being reduce significantly. In 1999, Chile reported catches of 1.4 million tonnes (see Figure 4). In 1991, the Fisheries Act was introduced in Chile, and regulations stemming from the Act played an important role in decreasing catches between 1997 – 2000. However, the new regulatory framework was not effective at managing the over-capacity of the fleet. In order to address this the Chilean government introduced a revised Fisheries Act in 2002. It established new quota allocations through the “límites máximos de captura por armador” which, translated means, “maximum allowable catch limits per ship owner” (MACL). In 2002, Chilean vessels began fishing jack mackerel in international waters. In 2003 and 2004, 32% and 28% of the jack mackerel catch, respectively, was taken outside Chile’s EEZ. The fishing activity of Russian, Chinese, Dutch and South Korean vessels in international waters accounted for up to 18% of the total catch. In an effort to reduce this fishing, Chile introduced restrictions on landings by foreign vessels (primarily, Russian, Chinese, South Korean and European Union) into Chilean ports in 2003, unless they had been using fishing rules similar to those used in Chile. The continued high level of fishing effort led to a reduction in the biomass of about 63% from 2006 to 2011. In 2011, the Chilean jack mackerel landings were 500,000 tonnes; a 40% decline compared to the previous year and, in 2012, the Chilean quota was reduced to 252,000 tonnes. This was 40% higher than the scientific recommendation. In 2006, Australia, Chile and New Zealand initiated a process of consultations to enable states to cooperate in addressing the international conservation and management of fishery resources and protection of marine biodiversity in high seas areas of the South Pacific. The process resulted in a series of international meetings and a decision to establish a regional fisheries management organisation with the ongoing responsibility for this task. In 2012, the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO) Convention entered into force (Figure 5). In 2013, Chile introduced a new Fisheries Law which consented to adopt SPRFMO established Total Allowable Catch (TAC) limits and Conservation and Management Measures (CMM) within the Chilean EEZ and establish and fix the proportion of quota for the industrial and artisanal fleets for 20 years.

1 The term El Niño refers to the large-scale ocean-atmosphere climate interaction linked to a periodic warming in sea surface temperatures across the central and east-central Equatorial Pacific this can disrupt the migration and breeding habits of the main pelagic fish species https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ninonina.html also see section 3.6.3.1.2 of this report

Page 20 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 1. Administrative boundaries and marine ecoregions in Chile. The Roman numerals and names are given for administrative regions on land. (Advanced Conservation Strategies 2011)

Page 21 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 2. VMS Records of fishing activity in the jack mackerel fishery for 2014 and 2014 (SPRFMO 2016)

Page 22 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 3. VMS Records of fishing activity in the jack mackerel fishery for 2016 and 2017 (SPRFMO 2017a)

Page 23 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 4. Landings of jack mackerel (in 1,000 tonnes) from the Chilean EEZ and adjacent high seas between 1970 and 2017 (Source: SPRFMO https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/2018-COMM6/COMM6-INF03-Data-Submitted-to-the- Secretariat.pdf)

Figure 5: SPRFMO Convention Management Area

Page 24 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

(Source: https://www.sprfmo.int/about/illustrative-map-of-sprfmo-area/)

In 2013, SPRFMO set a catch limit of 360,000 tonnes and had commitment from Contracting Members to limit the total tonnage of their active vessels to pre-agreed levels established between 2007 – 2009. Chile received a quota share of 237,551 tonnes. In 2018, the total jack mackerel quota was 517,582 tonnes. Chile received a quota share of 371,887 tonnes (64.5638 % of the total quota). Table 2 shows the Chilean data provided to SPRFMO that indicates that the total number of industrial vessels fishing jack mackerel in 2016 (provisional) was 71 compared to 97 registered in 2012. The estimated number of artisanal fishers active in the jack mackerel fishery in 2016 was 1,209 (FMP, 2017).

Table 2. Number of purse seiners catching jack mackerel in the Chilean EEZ and SPRFMO area between 2012 and July 2016 (SPRFMO, https://www.sprfmo.int/data/trachurus-murphyi-fishery/2017-t-murphyi-fishery/)

Hold capacity (m3) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

0 – 300 0 1 0 1 1

300 – 600 60 60 60 59 43

600 – 900 8 8 6 6 6

900 – 1200 6 6 5 3 1

1200 – 1500 9 8 5 7 6

1500 – 1800 9 9 8 9 9

1800 – 2100 5 4 4 4 5

97 96 88 89 71

Fishing method The main fishing gear used to catch jack mackerel is the purse seine. The fishing vessel sets the purse seine by using a sea anchor or a small boat (a “skiff”) and steaming around a shoal of fish while paying out the net (Figure 6). The headline of the net is buoyed and the foot rope is weighted and has a “purse-line” attached to it. Once the shoal is encircled the purse line is hauled and the net creates a bag, or purse, within which the fish are caught. The purse-line and net are hauled and, as the bag comes alongside the vessel the fish are pumped aboard using a fish/water separator and into refrigerated salt water (RSW) tanks. Development in materials and equipment has meant the purse seine nets can be 1,750 m long and 200 m deep. The fishing operation can take place during the day or at night. In the northern jack mackerel fishery, the industrial purse seiners tend to be the “American” type while, in the central-south the “Nordic” type is more common. The American type vessels have the bridge and accommodation forward, with the power block (the main winch used to haul the net) on a derrick from the mast abaft the deckhouse. The Nordic purse seiners have the bridge and accommodation aft, with the power block usually located on the starboard side of the bridge. The difference in vessel design is related to the difference in weather and sea conditions commonly encountered in the north and south (R. Zamorra, pers. comm.).

Page 25 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 6. Schematic of a purse seine fishing operation (Source: https://kids.britannica.com/students/article/fisheries/274327/200765-toc)

Principle one: Target species background The following paragraphs are taken from the documents and information available in the SPRFMO, IFOP and SERNAPESCA websites. Common names used for Trachurus murphyi (Nichols 1920) include: Chilean jack mackerel, jack mackerel, jurel, horse makerel, Inca scad. In this report it is referred to as, Trachurus murphyi, Chilean jack mackerel or jack mackerel. From mitochondrial DNA sequencing T. murphyi has been identified as a distinct species (Poulin et al. 2004). Some earlier biological summaries have assumed synonymy with T. symmetricus and incorporated information from Californian studies of that species, which may therefore be misleading. Jack mackerel is widespread throughout the South Pacific, from the shelf adjacent to Ecuador, Peru, and Chile; throughout the oceanic waters along the Subtropical Convergence Zone; in the New Zealand EEZ south of about 34º S; and, in south-eastern waters of the Australian EEZ. Jack mackerel are predominantly caught by purse seine and midwater trawl. Jack mackerel has become a particularly important commercial species attracting international attention since the 1970s. There have been a number of competing stock structure hypotheses, and up to four and more separate stocks have been suggested: a Chilean stock which is a straddling stock with respect to the high seas; a Peruvian stock which is also a straddling stock with respect to the high seas; a central Pacific stock which exists solely in the high seas; and, a southwest Pacific stock which exist solely in the high seas and, New Zealand-Australian stock which straddles the high seas and both the New Zealand and Australian EEZs. Four alternative working stock structure hypotheses for jack mackerel were

Page 26 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

developed at the Jack Mackerel Stock Structure and Assessment Workshop in Santiago in 2008 (SPRFMO 2008) concerning the relationship between stocks of jack mackerel found in the area extending westwards from Chile out to about 120° W, and the relationship between Peruvian and Chilean stocks of jack mackerel. The four working hypothesis identified in SPRFMO (2008) are: 1) Jack mackerel caught off the coasts of Peru and Chile each constitute separate stocks which straddle the high seas; 2) Jack mackerel caught off the coasts of Peru and Chile constitute a single shared stock which straddles the high seas; 3) Jack mackerel caught off the Chilean area constitute a single straddling stock extending from the coast out to about 120° W; and, 4) Jack mackerel caught off the Chilean area constitute separate straddling and high seas stocks. Although it has been recognized that further collaborative research is required to confirm and/or clarify these hypotheses and provide a basis for effective management regimes, recent research shows differences in the reproductive patterns, growth rates and other characteristics of jack mackerel in Peru and in central- southern Chile which are consistent with that of separate stocks (Hypothesis 1 above). Since the start of the fishery by Chile in 1950 the majority (~75%) of the global catch has been taken by Chilean vessels predominantly within its EEZ. During the period 1978-1991 the fleet of the former USSR took an accumulated catch of ~13 million tonnes in the high seas area. Prior to 2002 most of the Chilean catch of jack mackerel was taken within its EEZ, but between 2003 and 2011 the percentage of Chilean catches taken outside the EEZ has fluctuated between a minimum of 9% in 2006 and a maximum of 58% in 2008, with only 2% in 2012. The maximum recorded Chilean catch was 4,400,193 tonnes in 1995, all taken within its EEZ. The maximum Chilean catch from the high seas within the South Pacific region was 519,738 t in 2008. In recent years Chile, Peru and other flag states including Belize, China, Cook Islands, Faroe Islands, EC, Republic of Korea, Russia, Ukraine and Vanuatu have taken catches on the high seas in the South Pacific region. In Peru, there are landing records of jack mackerel since 1907 (Coker 1907, 1910) with continuous statistics since 1939. Annual catches were low, although increasing from 10 to a few hundred tonnes per year prior to 1963 (Tilic 1963). Since then catches had a steep increase, to 129,211 t in 1974, to 504,992 t in 1977 and a maximum recorded catch of 723,733 t in 2001, all taken within the Peruvian EEZ. Since 2002, the Peruvian annual landings of jack mackerel have been lower and have fluctuated within a maximum of 277,568 t in 2006 and a minimum of 58,075 t in 2010. Most of these Peruvian catches have been made within its EEZ except for 2010 when up to 70% was caught in the high seas. In 2012 Peru caught 174,069 t, 97% of which were taken within its EEZ. At the western extent of the species range the catches are much smaller. New Zealand catches of jack mackerel reach a maximum of 26,386 t in 1996 but have declined to less than 4,000 t in recent years. The biology of jack mackerel is reasonably well known and biological productivity is believed to be medium, with first spawning length at 20 – 25cm, moderate fecundity, fairly rapid growth and a maximum age of at least 35 years (New Zealand estimation), Annual replacement yields are moderately high. Jack mackerel is at present the most important straddling fish species being exploited in the South Pacific both within areas under national jurisdiction, where national regulations apply, as well as in the high seas where, since the adoption of the Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fishery Resources in the South Pacific Ocean in April 2010, fisheries are being regulated under the aegis of the SPRFMO.

3.5.1. Global distribution and depth range The jack mackerel is distributed throughout the south eastern Pacific, both inside EEZs and on the high sea, ranging from the Galapagos Islands and south of Ecuador in the north to southern Chile. The species ranges from South America in the east to Australia and New

Page 27 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Zealand in the west (Evseenko 1987, Serra 1991a, Elizarov et al. 1993; Kotenev et al., 2006) (see Figure 7). Serra (1991a) summarised depths for aggregations of jack mackerel and Guzman et al. (1983) used hydroacoustic equipment to record the species down to 250 m off the coast of northern Chile. In central and southern Chilean waters, Bahamonde (1978) described it as occurring down to 300 m; and, Japanese trawlers have recorded it to depths of 300 m beyond the Chilean EEZ (Anon 1984, Anon 1985). Cordova et al. (1998) described a diurnal vertical migratory behaviour, with fish being found deeper during the day (50-180 m) than at night (10 - 40 m). Regarding the presence of jack mackerel along the Peruvian coast, fishery records from 1907 (Coker, 1907, 1910) confirmed by more recent statistics (Ñiquen et al., 2013) show that jack mackerel always has had a wide distribution along the Peruvian coast, with regular recorded landings from Paita (05º S) to Mollendo (17º S). Furthermore, various archeological studies have also shown that jack mackerel was already known to, and was captured along the whole Peruvian coast by ancient Peruvians since the Holocene, 6,000 to 10,000 years ago (Csirke, 2013). There are, however indications that the overall abundance and availability of jack mackerel along the Peruvian coast has had large mid- to long-term fluctuations (Csirke et al., 2013; Dioses, 2013a, Espino, 2013; Flores et al., 2013;). In fact, after a period of apparent low abundance in the 1950s and 1960s, following the El Niño 1972 and particularly between 1976 and 1979 the distribution areas of jack mackerel expanded, suggesting a displacement of their concentrations towards the southern part of the Peruvian coast (south of the 10° S), with further expansions during El Niño 1982-83 (Zuta et al., 1983). Icochea et al. (1988) describe a very coastal distribution of the main jack mackerel concentrations being targeted by a pelagic trawl fleet in Peruvian waters during 1983 (an El Niño year), followed by a wider distribution reaching as far as 150 miles offshore during the cooler conditions of 1984. Data from the same fleet shows that the vertical distribution of jack mackerel has had significant vertical movements from the surface to depths of 350 m (Dioses and Ñiquen, 1988). Using more updated information Dioses (2013a) describes three patterns in the vertical distribution and depth of jack mackerel schools and catches associated with varying environmental conditions: schools are distributed between 100 and 200 m deep and catches are high and do not vary much between day and night during strong events of El Niño; schools are distributed between 0 and 75 m deep and fishing is shallower and farther offshore when strong upwelling occurs; and, during warmer conditions due to the strengthening of the southern extension of the Cromwell current schools have a wider vertical distribution, between 0 and 300 m deep, and main catches are closer to the coast, deeper during daylight and shallower at night. As noted by Ñiquen et al (2013), the monthly catches of jack mackerel by the Peruvian industrial and artisanal fleets before 2002 were higher in the northern part of Peru (Mancora- Chimbote, 04-09º S) while after 2002 the catches were higher in the southern-central zone (Huacho-Ilo, 11-18º S), except for 2006 and 2012 when the fleet also operated in the north. They also note that fishing activities for jack mackerel in Peru take place from very close to the coast to as far as 200 nm offshore, with a more coastal distribution during warm periods.

Page 28 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 7. Distribution of jack mackerel in the high seas in the South Pacific

Elizarov et al. (1993) coined the phrase “jack mackerel belt” to describe the distribution of T. murphyi across the South Pacific (Figure 7). The jack mackerel belt is described as having a north-south breadth of “10 to 15 degrees” across “the southern sub region of the southeast Pacific Ocean (SEPO) and southwest Pacific Ocean (SWPO)”, which varies with season as “spawning groups concentrate mainly in the north of 40º S in spring and summer and south of 40º S in autumn and winter to feed”. Following the strong increase in its abundance from the early 1970s, jack mackerel expanded its distribution toward the west and crossed the Pacific Ocean along the West Wind Drift, reaching New Zealand waters in the early to mid-1980s (Bailey 1989, Serra 1991a, Elizarov et al. 1993, and Taylor 2002). In Peru, the preferred habitat for jack mackerel is defined by the highly productive oceanic front formed by the Cold Coastal Waters (CCW) and the Subtropical Surface Water (SSW), which influences the abundance and horizontal and vertical distribution of jack mackerel schools and other pelagic species such as chub mackerel / caballa Scomber japonicus in the water column with temperatures ranging between 14 °C and 20 °C (Dioses et al 1989, Dioses 2013a). In Peru, during El Niño, jack mackerel and other pelagic species are concentrated under a strong and deep thermocline. Jack mackerel catches occur at depths greater than 100 m, at temperatures of 15 - 20° C and salinity between 35.0 to 35.1 ups and oxygen concentrations greater than 1 ml / L. Under these conditions the catches tend to be high and do not vary significantly during the day due to reduced distribution range of schools. In this case, the resource is more accessible and vulnerable to trawl fleet (Dioses 2013a). After El Niño, the isotherms greater than 15° C are much shallower as they approach the coast, with salinity higher than 34.95 ups, and oxygen of 1-3 ml / L. The catches are more

Page 29 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

superficial and oceanic, fluctuating with oceanic front extension. In this case, the line of 1.0 ml / L of oxygen is located about 50 m deep, which explains the presence of surface schools of jack mackerel and their absence at greater depths. The resource is more accessible to the purse seine fleet (Dioses 2013a). When South Extension Cromwell Current intensifies, jack mackerel is captured at depths greater than 100 m during the day and near the surface at night. Catches reach higher values in the day because at night is more dispersed in the surface due to the scattering of their food. In this case, it is more vulnerable to the trawl fleet during the day and to the purse seine fleet during the night (Dioses 2013a). Noticeable changes in the distribution, availability and abundance of jack mackerel have been reported in Peru, particularly over the period 1983-2013. These changes correspond to inter- decadal and inter-annual changes in environmental conditions, including those due to the strong El Niño event in 1997-98 (Ñiquen and Peña 2008, Espino 2013, Gutiérrez et al. 2008, Flores 2013, Dioses 2013a). These changes have produced shifts in the distribution of catches from between 4 and 9º S (1997-2001) to between 10 and 18º S (2002-2013) and have been attributed to a combination of changes in the environmental conditions and changed food availability (Espinoza et al. 2008, Gutiérrez et al. 2008, Ñiquen et al 2013, Alegre et al 2013). Acoustic surveys off the central coast of Chile since 1991 have found that since 2003 there have been important changes in the distribution of main biomass of jack mackerel which has become more distant from the coast (Cordova et al. 2008). Off New Zealand, catches of jack mackerel initially appeared around the Chatham Islands in 1984-85, showed a westward expansion from 1986-87 to 1994-95 as catches increased, and then contracted eastward to 2006-07 as catches declined (Penney and Taylor 2008). Jack mackerel are also found within the Australian and Ecuadorian EEZs. A large increase in abundance over the 20 years to 1991 has been reported (Serra 1991a and 1991b, Elizarov et al. 1993), which is considered to be the cause of its large present distribution. Serra (1991a) also described a seasonal migration between coastal and oceanic waters for the Chilean subpopulation, and related this to, “reproductive and trophic processes”, stating that, “this migration forms a pattern which determines the seasonal availability of the resource in the coastal and oceanic fisheries and establishes an important factor for stock assessment.” In Chilean fisheries waters, large jack mackerel tend to be distributed toward the south. A similar tendency for larger fish in southern waters is also seen in New Zealand fisheries waters (Taylor in prep.). Russian researchers detected several geographically isolated groupings of jack mackerel within the species belt; these groupings were attached to zones having stable hydrological conditions. Each one makes circular seasonal migrations (Chur et al., 1984; Kotenev et al., 2006; Soldat et al., 2008). In oceanic waters, beyond 120º W, Elizarov et al. (1993) described a migratory pattern whereby jack mackerel move from productive, cold southern waters, northward into subtropical waters where they spawn, and then return. Young of the year of the Chilean stock moved eastwards, arriving on the shelf and beginning to recruit into the fishery at age 2.

3.5.2 Biological characteristics

Morphology: body elongate and slightly compressed. Enlarged, scute-like scales on primary lateral line. Termination of dorsal accessory lateral line below 2nd to 5th soft ray of dorsal fin. Pectoral fin tip extending to be above the two detached spines anterior to the anal fin. Eye moderate size with well-developed adipose eyelid. Posterior margin of upper jaw below anterior margin of eye. Jaws vomer, palatine, and tongue bearing minute teeth (Kawahara et al. 1988).

Page 30 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Colour when fresh: dark blue dorsal body, silver-white ventrally; upper posterior margin of opercula bear a black spot; pale pelvic fins; caudal, pectoral, and dorsal fins dusky; anal fin pale in the front, dusky in the rear. Several authors have described jack mackerel to be an indeterminate batch spawner, based on histological studies and on the oocyte-size-frequency-distribution (OSFD) of reproductively active females, and their “presence over a long temporal extension of seven to nine months per year” (Dioses et al. 1989, George 1995, Oyarzún et al. 1998, Perea et al 2013). This conclusion is supported by evidence from Evseenko (1987) and Bailey (1989) who state that jack mackerel spawns wherever environmental conditions are suitable. The suitable environmental conditions seem to be water warmer than 15º C, with highest densities having been found in waters of 16 – 19º C, and low current (less than 15 cm.s-1) (Evseenko 1987, Nuñez et al. 2004). Jack mackerel spawns in austral spring and summer, with the main spawning season from October to December (Serra 1983 and 1991a, Elizarov et al. 1993, Oyarzún et al. 1998, and Perea et al 2013) and it spawns throughout its whole distribution range. Santander and Flores (1983) and Dioses et al (1989) described jack mackerel spawning in Peru as mainly occurring between 14º 00’ S and 18º 30’ S. However, more recent analyses by Ayon and Correa (2013) show that between 1966 and 2010 jack mackerel larvae were present (and therefore spawning occurred) every year along the whole Peruvian coast, with clear year to year north-south shifts in the centres of higher larvae abundance associated with shifts in environmental conditions. The annual mean larvae densities for the positive stations in the period 1966-2010 estimated by Ayon and Correa (2013) ranged from 3 to 1131 larvae/m2, with a median of 21 larvae/m2, noting that while the frequency and abundance of larvae has been variable there has been no particular trend for the 56 years of observations. However, they describe important changes with time in the spatial larvae distribution. From 1960 to 1979 jack mackerel larvae were present particularly in the southern part of Peru, while during the period 1980-1989 there was a wide distribution along the whole Peruvian coast, with higher densities north of Punta Falsa (6º S). Later on, during the period 1990-1999 the main larvae distribution areas were to the north of 16º S, with an expansion toward the south between 2000 and 2010. The centers of gravity of the larvae spatial distribution per year also showed some important differences in the distribution by latitude and distance from the coast, with three clear periods: the first one between 1966 and 1978 with main larvae concentrations between 14° S and 18º S closer to the coast; the second between 1979 and 1994 more to the north, between 4° S and 14º S, and more offshore; and, the third one between 1995 and 2010, with the centers of gravity located in an intermediate position between the other two (Ayon and Correa 2013). In Peru, the spawning areas are limited by the cold coast water (salinities lower than 35,0 ups) and subsurface water (salinities higher than de 35,1 ups), with temperatures above 18º C and oxygen content around 5,0 mL/L. In these water columns the spawning schools of jack mackerel tend to be located at depths between 10 and 80 m, with an ideal salinity of 34.9 to 35.1 ups and an oxygen content from 3.0 to 5.0 mL/L (Dioses, 2013a). On the other hand, the main spawning ground of the Chilean subpopulation is off central Chile in coastal waters and extending beyond 200 miles of the EEZ to about 93º W (Serra 1991b, Nuñez et al. 2004, and Arcos et al. 2005). An additional area of spawning has been recorded in the area between 105° E and 125° E (Kotenev et al 2006). The results of 85 seasonal surveys of eggs and larvae between 1981 and 2007 off northern Chile (north of 24º S) found that egg and larva density peaked in winter-spring, with a greater concentration towards the southern part of this area (Braun and Valenzuela 2008). Annual surveys of the distribution of early developmental stages of jack mackerel between 1999 and 2007, in waters off central Chile, found that most spawning was centered between 33 and 38º S and from 82 to 92º W (Núñez et al. 2008). Higher densities of eggs and larvae were associated with water temperatures of 16-18º C, moderate winds (4-8 m s-1), a low turbulence index (< 100 m3 s-3), and slower current speeds (< 15 cm s-1) (Núñez et al. 2008).

Page 31 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

This supports the view that spawning occurs along the subtropical convergence, between the southern and northern limits (42 ºS and 36 ºS). The western center of the spawning occurs within 130º W to 155º W and 35º S to 40º S (Elizarov et al. 1993). According to Oyarzún and Gacitua (2002) and Oliva et al. (1995), 10–15% of females spawn each day during the period of most intensive spawning, meaning that the average female spawns every 7–10 days at this time. In Chile, the mean length at first spawning has been described at 22 cm (Marcelo Oliva, Instituto de Investigaciones Oceanológicas, Universidad de Antofagasta, Chile, pers. comm.) and 23 cm fork-length (FL) (Basten & Contreras 1978), and more recently is considered to be 25 cm FL, but the size at first maturity has been reported to vary between 21.6 and 30 cm FL among different areas (Cubillos et al. 2008). The length at first maturity of jack mackerel in Peru was first estimated as 25 cm FL by Abramov and Kotylar (1980) and 23 cm total length (21 cm FL) by Dioses et al. (1989). More recently, Perea et al (2013) analyzed information from 1967 to 2012 and estimated a total length at first maturity of 26.5 cm, with no significant changes over observed period. They also confirmed that in Peru jack mackerel has a single relatively extended spawning period with a maximum in November each year, showing that for the more than four decades of observations jack mackerel has spawned regularly every year in Peruvian waters. They also noted that the reproductive activity of jack mackerel has a greater variability off Peru and the spawning period has peaks of lesser magnitude but extend longer than observed in the spawning occurring off Chile. Perea et al (2013) also report that the highest frequency of months with high gonadosomatic index (GSI) are observed during the period 1986-1998, while in the previous years (1967-1985) there were fewer months with relatively high GSI, and this frequency has been even lower from 1999 to-date. Several papers have been published describing jack mackerel growth functions. Cubillos et al. (1998) summarised 22 studies. Jack mackerel can be described as having a moderate growth rate. In Chile, ages are estimated using transversely sectioned otoliths. The maximum recorded age is 19 years, which contrasts strongly with the maximum age of 35 years estimated in New Zealand and the maximum age reading of 11 years reported in Peru. Some of the difference in these estimates can be explained by New Zealand specimens being larger, and therefore older, than those taken in Chile, as would be expected for an animal near the extreme of its range. However, some of the difference may be the result of differing ageing methodologies used in the two countries - counts of whole otoliths are used in Chile, whereas counts from embedded, sectioned otoliths are used in New Zealand. The method used to estimate ages for jack mackerel in Chile have been validated using the bomb radiocarbon method (Ojeda et al. 2008). In Peru, the age and growth of jack mackerel has been determined by the direct reading and measuring of annual growth rings in whole otoliths (Dioses 2013b) and have been confirmed by independent observations through the reading of micro-increments or daily rings in otoliths (Goycochea et al., 2013) and length frequency analysis of commercial and research survey catches (Diaz, 2013). The growth parameters estimated by Dioses (2013b) are L∞ = 80.77cm, W∞ = 3744.10 gr., K = 0.155/year, and t0 = -0.356. The same author tested the validity of the methodology being used by checking the growing similarity between rings (whose growth decreases with the formation of a new ring) and the monthly variation of otolith marginal increment, while Goycochea et al. (2013) and Diaz (2013) obtained very similar results using independent methods and different sources of data. Kochkin (1994) sampled specimens from both the South West Pacific Ocean (SWPO) and the South East Pacific Ocean (SEPO) between 1983 and 1990 and investigated growth using otoliths and length frequencies. His estimated von Bertalanffy relationship was Lt = 74.2405[1 -0.1109(t + 0.8113) – e ], and he determined Lmax to be 0.943L∞.

Page 32 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Gili et al. (1996) investigated growth using otoliths sampled from the central Chile fishery. Their estimates of growth parameters were: K = 0.094; L∞ = 70.8 cm FL; and t0 = -0.896. Natural mortality has been estimated to be in the range of 0.30 to 0.22 y-1 based on size composition data (Cubillos et al. 2008). The Chilean assessment model uses a value of 0.23 y-1 for all age groups (Canales and Serra, 2008) Natural mortality for jack mackerel in Peru has been estimated as M = 0.31 per year, based on the growth parameters of the von Bertalanffy growth function and other traits of the jack mackerel life cycle in Peru.

3.5.3 Role of species in the ecosystem

Jack mackerel is a generalist feeder capable of utilising a wide range of prey species (Konchina, 1979) and may be acting as an energy flow channel from primary producers to top predators. However, its wide range of prey species shows that it is not restricted to this role. As the “bloom” event in the early to mid-1990s indicated (4.4 M t were taken in the Chilean fishery in 1995), which coincided with a peak in aerial sightings records in New Zealand waters (P.R. Taylor, NIWA, New Zealand, unpublished data), population size of jack mackerel can be extremely high. Little is known about its predators, though Bailey (1987) tentatively identified juvenile jack mackerel from the stomachs of albacore tuna (Thunnus alalunga) taken in the central South Pacific (36º S to 42º S and 148º W to 165º W). It has also been found in the stomach contents of swordfish off the Chilean coast (M. Donoso, IFOP, Chile, pers. comm.). Generally, it can be expected that its predators will be similar to those of other carangid mackerels and will include tunas, billfish, and sharks. As a consequence of the large size of the jack mackerel and its important role as both predator and prey, this species is likely an important node in Pacific Ocean predator-prey networks. Depletion of the jack mackerel would likely cause unpredictable, substantial and enduring changes in the abundances of its predators and prey, which may not be easily reversible by reduction of fishing mortality. However, anchovy is considered according to the MSC criteria, as a low trophic level (LTL) species due to its life history, i.e., feeds on plankton, short lived, rapid growth, early maturing, high fecundity, small body size and forms dense schools. Jack mackerel is not considered a MSC “key” LTL stock. Although it has an important role in the South Pacific pelagic ecosystem, other species, such as anchovy and sardine are the dominant LTL species in the area and as such transfer a very large proportion of the total primary production through the higher part of the food web (Figure 8); Neira and Arancibia, 2004). Although jack mackerel is the preferential prey to several high level trophic predators such as other pelagic fish and demersal fish, in the South Pacific ecosystem anchovy and sardine are the keystone species, according to Neira and Arancibia, 2004. Bottom-up processes play a significant role in the population dynamics of upper-trophic-levels and in the global structuring of this marine ecosystem. Moreover, Espinoza et al. (2017) studied the northern Humboldt Current system off Peru, one of the most productive world marine regions. The approach used in the study combined both long-term and specific studies on emblematic species such as anchoveta, and sardine Sardinops sagax and a more inclusive analysis considering the 'global' food web in the recent years (2008 – 2012) using stable isotope analysis. According to the results observed in this research, Chilean jack mackerel trophic position is higher (4) than those from Hückstädt et al. (2007) in Chile (3.4) and Miller et al. (2010) in California (T. symmetricus): 3.6 (Figure 8).

Page 33 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 8. Flow diagram representing the food web in the upwelling system of central Chile (33° S to 39° S), year 1992. Q = consumption (t km-2 year-1); P =production (year-1).

Page 34 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 9. Predicted Trophic Position (TP) at 11.7º S (Vinciguerria, mackerel, squat lobster, anchoveta, Humboldt / jumbo squid, jack mackerel, Peruvian booby, guanay, fur seal) and 7.5º S (euphausiids, myctophid, Vinciguerria, anchoveta, jumbo squid, mackerel, hake and squat lobster).

The diet of jack mackerel off central Chile (34-39° S) indicates a striking dependence on Euphausia mucronata prey (average of 75% of stomach content in weight; Antezana, 2010). The fishing season off central Chile extended from austral fall (March–April) and continued at least until the end of austral winter (September). The average daily ration of jack mackerel was 17.4 g, which is equivalent to 2.3% of fish body weight per day. The total E. mucronata consumed in 1991 by the landed population of fish (3.7 million tons yr−1) amounted to 23.2 million tons yr−1. The total estimated population of jack mackerel that year (17.6 million tons) would have consumed ca. 110.2 million tons of E. mucronata. Based on stomach contents, consumption of E. mucronata by other nektonic predators off Chile and off Peru is also outstanding. In Antezana (2010), two separate food webs within the HCS are identified, according to hydrography and zoogeography (Brinton, 1962): a northern food web (off central Peru) between 10° and 14° S (Figure 9), and a southern food web (off central Chile) between 34° and 38° S (Figure 10).

Page 35 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 10. Simplified food web of the southern region of the Humboldt Current System, centered on the key stone euphausiid Euphausia mucronata (A) during a period of high biomass of jack mackerel (B) during a period of low biomass of jack mackerel. Arrow thickness indicates relative flow of biomass between components.

Page 36 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 11. Simplified food web of the northern region of the Humboldt Current System, centred on the keystone euphausiids, (Euphausia mucronate) (A) during a period of high biomass of anchovy (Engraulis ringens), (B) during a period of low biomass of anchovy. Arrow thickness indicates relative flow of biomass between components.

MSC FCR Guidance v 2.0, does not list jack mackerel in Box SA1 and in its adult life cycle phase does not completely meet the SA 2.2.9b.i criteria, being usually bigger than 30 cm long as adult, showing mean age at maturity higher than 2 years and showing a maximum age higher than 10 years (http://www.fishbase.se/summary/367). Moreover, taking into account the available literature (Neira and Arancibia, 2004; Antezana, 2010; Espinoza et al., 2017) it is not unquestionable that a large proportion of the trophic connections in the ecosystem involve this stock, leading to significant predator dependency and a large volume of energy passing between lower and higher trophic levels passes through this stock.

Page 37 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

3.5.4 Stock status and harvest control rules Since 2010, a joint jack mackerel stock assessment has been conducted, including fisheries independent and dependent data from each fishing country in a statistical catch-at-age model performed by the SPRFMO Scientific Committee (SC). The models consider the two working hypotheses on stock structure: 1) two separate stocks, Peruvian/northern stock and Chilean/southern stock which straddle the high seas; 2) a single shared stock which straddles the high seas. Hypothesis 2 has been used as the basis for the advice, as it results in more conservative catch levels (SPRFMO, 2014, 2015,2016a). Peru and Chile have adopted the stock assessment model used by the SPRFMO to assess the jack mackerel resource within their jurisdictional waters: Peru’s Instituto del Mar del Perú (IMARPE) has not made publicly available the last two years assessment reports; Chile’s Instituto de Fomento Pesquero (IFOP) report is available upon request. The 2017 IFOP report (IFOP, 2017) results and suggestions were considered in the SPRFMO’s 5th Scientific Committee meeting. A benchmark assessment was conducted in 2016 (SPRFMO, 2016b), including sensitivity runs using alternative model configurations, evaluating the sample size of the data sources used in the assessment, new fisheries selectivity settings to reduce the number of parameters to be estimated in the assessment models, and evaluating whether rescaling natural mortality to reflect higher mortality at younger ages. Also, the incremental addition of updated 2015 and new 2016 data was evaluated. Over 18 alternative model configurations were tested to evaluate consistency of the model (SPRFMO, 2016b). Besides population structure, another main source of uncertainty is ageing estimates of jack mackerel (SPRFMO, 2016b). There is a need for independent abundance indicators, since the evaluation model is mainly based on the catch per unit effort (CPUE) of the south central Chile fleet and the Chinese vessels CPUE (IFOP, 2016). As an alternative approach, an analysis of Peruvian acoustic activities aboard fishing vessels was conducted. The acoustic data is useful to assess data of several species of fish and squids, and of macro zooplankton; as well to detect the upper limit of minimum oxygen zone; internal waves and other physical structures; the vertical migration of fish and plankton; and calculate the volume of the pelagic habitat. The goal of this project is to advance toward an Ecosystem-Based Approach (SPRFMO 2016b). Scientific recommendations combine data and decisions of experts of each fishing country in the SC, based on the joint assessment results. Since 2011, an advised Total Allowable Catch (TAC) has been proposed for the whole stock (SPRFMO, 2016b). Medium and long-term projections were run from the selected model under varying recruitment (average from 1970-2013 or from 2000-2013) and productivity scenarios. Based on application of the adopted rebuilding plan for jack mackerel (SPRFMO 2014 and assuming a lower productivity regime, recommended catches for 2017 should be at or below 493,000 tonnes under the one stock hypothesis (SPRFMO 2016b), similarly in 2018 catches should be below 493,000 tonnes under the one stock hypothesis (SPRFMO 2017a). The SC recommended age validation work continue to be pursued, as analysis and validation of juvenile growth is a key information gap, for this, a tagging experiment was suggested. As well, the SC recommended supporting the fishery dependent acoustic initiative and suggested the design of a joint synoptic survey using data collected along the normal tracks of properly equipped and calibrated fishing vessels (SPRFMO 2016b). The provisional biomass target is 5,500,000 tonnes (SPRFMO, 2014; 2015), 31% of the unfished level (SPRFMO, 2014). A sustainable exploitation of the jack mackerel population in the short-term is associated with an FMSY around 0.14. Under more optimistic recruitment scenarios, sustainable exploitation can be associated with an FMSY around 0.21 under the single stock hypothesis (SPRFMO, 2015). No discussions on reference points were reported from the 5th Scientific Committee meeting (SPRFMO 2017a).

Page 38 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Dynamic values of FMSY and BMSY are estimated annually, in 2017 BMSY is 5,198,000 tonnes, and FMSY is 0.197 (SPRFMO 2017a). Conditions for the jack mackerel stock in its entire distribution range in the southeast Pacific shows a continued recovery since the time-series low in 2010 and increasing trend. Current fishing mortality (=0.07) is estimated to be well below candidate FMSY levels. The SSB in 2017 has been estimated as 5,294 kt with a CV of 0.119. Therefore higher than the BMSY (Figure 12 and Figure 13). The 2017 update assessment has resulted in an upward revision in SSB relative to the 2016 estimates due to updated data presented. Recruitment in the most recent years shows signs of stronger incoming year-classes although the information is highly uncertain. Environmental conditions (e.g., strong El Niño 2015-2016) likely affects jack mackerel distribution and thus age-specific vulnerability to surveys and fisheries. This may have affected the Chilean northern acoustic survey and those conducted in Peruvian waters. The effect of such environmental changes in the overall population productivity is unclear (SPRFMO 2016a, b; 2017a). Landings in 2017 are preliminary estimated at 402,000 tonnes (SPRFMO 2017b). According to the data available and from the information gathered during the site visit discards of Chilean jack mackerel is negligible. In Table 1 are the recent reported annual catches and TACs.

Figure 12. Stock assessment outputs of Chilean jack mackerel (SPRFMO, 2017a).

Page 39 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 13. Kobe plot of Chilean jack mackerel. Mod 1 = current evaluation; Mod 0 = 2016 evaluation (IFOP, 2017).

A biomass limit reference point below which recruitment is impaired is not explicitly estimated by SPRFMO. However according to the IFOP (2017) report such value is around 50% of BMSY. Ensuring sustainable exploitation of the jack mackerel stock is of core interest to the SPRFMO. Due to overexploitation, combined with an apparent shift in productivity of the stock, population biomass was estimated to be well below the biomass level which would achieve MSY. In order to rebuild the stock and fishery towards sustainable targets, the SPRFMO requested an evaluation of a proposed harvest control rule (HCR) and if possible, to design and evaluate alternatives. The SPRFMO proposed HCR aims to fish the jack mackerel stock at FMSY whenever stock biomass reaches BMSY or above. Below that level, the plan should ensure that jack mackerel biomass increases from year to year. Other HCRs, already in place for small pelagic fish, aim to keep a stock at or above a certain biomass threshold or to fish a stock at constant fishing mortalities. Often, in these HCRs biomass or fishing mortality trigger points are used in its design. At these trigger points, the management procedure changes. An example of such a trigger point is BMSY in the SPRFMO proposed HCR. Above this trigger point, the maximum TAC is set according to a fishing mortality equalling FMSY. Below this point, the proposed fishing mortality may be reduced. In Hintzen et al. (2014) a variety of HCRs based on

Page 40 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

preferences expressed in two stakeholder consultation meetings were tested. Within this variety, some HCRs made use of such trigger points too, where the value of these trigger points are informed by proposed reference points. Hence, the reference points provided guidance on potential designs of HCRs.

Table 3. Advised and reported catches of Chilean jack mackerel. (* = preliminary data.)

Year Advised Maximum Reported Catch Catch 2008 1,472,631 2009 1,283,474 2010 726,573 2011 711,783 634,580 2012 520,000 454,774 2013 441,000 353,123 2014 440,000 395,085 2015 460,000 394,212 2016 460,000 388,575 2017 493,000 402,050*

A commonly used approach to test the performance of HCRs consists of simulating the mid to long-term developments of a stock under a certain TAC setting regime / HCR. The simulations should represent plausible true stock dynamics, and take into account the various sources of uncertainty in the assessment and in the management system. A range of diagnostics can then be calculated from the output of the simulation, which can be used to describe the performance of any given HCR. The SPRFMO requested a review of the provisional HCR (Rebuilding Plan) adopted by the 2nd meeting of the SPRFMO and evaluate potential other plans. To this end a management strategy evaluation (MSE) tool was developed for jack mackerel which uses the most recent stock assessment data from which to condition an operating model. For simplicity, a single- stock hypothesis was selected. The SPRFMO requested a review and evaluation of their proposed Rebuilding and Conservation plan by: • Implementing a default HCR following the guidelines specified below; • Develop an operating model to test the performance of this HCR under unknown and uncertain conditions/realities; • Alternative HCRs can be entertained to set annual catch limits to evaluate as part of the rebuilding plan; and, • Propose performance statistics which will enable the Commission to evaluate this and other HCRs. Furthermore, SPRFMO requested reporting on performance statistics on: 1. The rate of biomass growth during a certain time frame 2. Expected catch and catch variability 3. Risks of biomass decline, and 4. Expected time to reach X% of unfished SSB (a proxy representing 80% of BMSY) For illustration purposes, a number of HCR designs were constructed and evaluated using the MSE framework that implemented HCRs in a simulation framework taking uncertain conditions on stock dynamics, fisheries and TAC setting procedure into account. The performance statistics requested by the Commission provide no exact guidance on implementation. To show the performance of different HCRs however, choices by the authors were made

Page 41 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

regarding the way of calculating performance statistics. It is in the end up to stakeholder discretion to decide on the most appropriate performance statistics. The estimation of reference points inside the assessment model runs is an easy and elegant way to track changes in FMSY or BMSY on a yearly basis. However, in this instance, the differences between 2013 values and the estimated values in the 10 years before that time, are markedly different, while productivity hasn’t changed considerably in this period. Fisheries selectivity does vary by year but not to a large extend in the most recent period. It is therefore unclear why 2013 values differ to such an extent from the most recent 10 year period. It is advisable to investigate the estimation in more depth prior to advising on reference points. The 26 HCR designs evaluated show marked differences in performance between them. In the short term, especially scenarios associated with low fishing mortality (Ftarget = 0.05 and Btarget = 6,000,000 t), result in a rapid rebuilding of the stock towards BMSY. Under these scenarios however, estimated fishing mortality is lower than F2013 and catches in the medium to long term are lower than the catches reported in 2013. These two HCR types are the only ones that succeed in rebuilding the stock above BMSY under the low recruitment scenario. The sloping control rules result in a build-up of SSB to around 4,000,000 t, being harvested with an average fishing mortality between 0.11 and 0.20 with associated catches between 500 – 800,000 t. The catches are among the highest of all HCRs tested. Under none of the sloping rules however will SSB rebuild, with certainty, to above BMSY in the medium term (low recruitment regime). Under the high-recruitment regime however, the risk of staying below BMSY is much lower and catches increase to levels well above twice MSY in the long term. The productivity rules are associated with the highest catch levels among all HCRs tested, either under the low or high recruitment scenarios. Under none of the productivity rules however will SSB rebuild to above BMSY under the low recruitment regime. Under the higher recruitment regime, catch variability is average compared to other HCRs. The allocation rule, though not specifically a HCR, shows lower SSB and lower catches compared to the similar FMSY and F0.14 runs. The catch stability is significantly higher under the allocation schemes. The comparison of the Ftarget and allocation HCRs is difficult however as the contribution of each fleet to the total fishing mortality changes over time with changes in SSB. Under the anticipated increase of SSB, the northern and south/central Chilean fishery will decline and the catches of the offshore fleet, primarily targeting adults, will go up. Therefore, the fishing pressure on juveniles decreases and may be the reason for a greater increase in SSB under the allocation HCR runs. As the forecast model does not take this shift into account, the risk to overexploitation increases. The rebuilding plan adopted by the SPRFMO shows a moderate increase in SSB compared to the other runs with moderate catches being 1 – 1.25x as large as the 2014 proposed catch. The estimated catch variability under the Commission plan is well outside the variability seen in other HCRs. This may be due to alternations of nearly closing a fishery to allowing a substantial catch due to a sudden appearance of recruits. The alternative SPRFMO plans score better on this performance statistic with variability in between years up to 15 – 25%. Under both alternative plans, SSB is able to rebuild to values close to BMSY under the low recruitment scenario, thereby being associated with moderate to low catches when compared to the other HCRs. Under the long-term recruitment scenario, the alternative plans stand out in terms of anticipated increase in SSB, above twice BMSY. This HCR is also being associated with among the lowest catches reported. The original Commission proposed plan scores on average on nearly all performance statistics evaluated, compared to the other HCRs.

Page 42 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Conservation and management measures Compliance with SPRFMO Conservation and Management Measures (CMM) that are applicable to the jack mackerel fisheries is good, although the late reporting of vessels which have participated in fishing activities in the Convention Area or late submission of compliance reports by some SPRFMO Contracting Members and Cooperating Non-Contracting Parties (CNCPs) have been noted (SPRFMO 2018), A list of vessels conducting illegal, unreported or unregulated (IUU) activities was adopted at the 3rd SPRFMO Commission meeting in 2015 and has continued to be published on an annual basis. In all cases, the list refers to fishing in the SPRFMO Convention Area without authorisation (SPRFMO, 2016a; SPRFMO 2018). There are no estimates of IUU catch potential contribution, but it is unlikely that the sum of reported catches and the IUU volumes compromise the overall TAC. There is a specific CMM for the jack mackerel fisheries which is revised each year (the current one being, CMM 01-2018). It applies to vessels flagged to Members and CNCPs fishing for jack mackerel in the Convention Area. Chile has also given consent to apply the CMM in its own national jurisdiction, in accordance with Article 20(4)(a)(iii) of the SPRFMO Convention. The CMM 01-2018 sets the TAC of jack mackerel in the Convention Area and the agreed percentage allocations and quotas for each Member and CNCPs – these have been set and agreed for the period 2018 to 2021. In the event that a Member or CNCP reaches 70% of its catch limit, the SPRFMO Secretariat is required to be notified by the Member or CNCP, with a copy to all other Members and CNCPs, and, that Member or CNCP is required to close the fishery for its flagged vessels when the total catch of its flagged vessels is reached and notify the Executive Secretary of the date of the closure. Members and CNCPs can adopt measures limiting vessels flying their flag and fishing for jack mackerel in the Convention Area to catches less than the limits set by SPRFMO. In this instance, the Secretariat must be notified by the end of the calendar. A Member or CNCP may transfer all or part of its catch entitlement to another Member or CNCP. Before the transferred fishing takes place, the transferring Member or CNCP are required to notify the Executive Secretary for circulation to Members and CNCPs. The CMM 01-2018 also states the data collection system for jack mackerel. Members and CNCPs participating are required report in an electronic format the monthly catches of their flagged vessels to the Secretariat, in accordance with CMM 02-2018 (Data Standards) and using templates prepared by the Secretariat and available on the SPRFMO website. Every month the Secretariat circulates monthly catches, aggregated by flag State, to all Members and CNCPs. The Secretariat also collates and verifies the annual catch reports submitted by Members and CNCPs against the submitted data (tow-by-tow in the case of trawlers, and set by set or trip by trip in the case of purse seine fishing vessels). The Secretariat informs Members and CNCPs of the outcome of the verification exercise and any possible discrepancies. CMM 01-2018 includes effort management, stating that Members and CNCPs operating in the fishery shall limit the total gross tonnage (GT) of vessels flying their flag to the total tonnage of their flagged vessels that were engaged in the jack mackerel fisheries in the reference period 2007 or 2008 or 2009. The GT for each Member and CNCP are set out in a table within CMM 01-2018. Members and CNCPs participating in the jack mackerel fisheries are required to implement a vessel monitoring system (VMS), in accordance with CMM 06-2018 (VMS) and, provide a list of vessels they have authorised to fish in the Convention Area, in accordance with CMM 05- 2016 (Record of Vessels). They are also required notify the Secretariat of the vessels that are actively fishing or engaged in transhipment in the Convention Area each month. The Secretariat maintains and publishes a list of the vessels on the SPRFMO website.

Page 43 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

In order to facilitate the work of the SC, Members and CNCPs are required to provide their annual national compliance reports and observer data 1 month in advance of the SC meeting. The SC undertake their analysis, assessment of stock status and recovery and provision of advice, in accordance with the SC Multiannual workplan agreed by the Commission. Until the Commission adopts an Observer Programme, in accordance with Article 28 of the Convention, all Members and CNCPs participating in the jack mackerel fishery are required to ensure a minimum of 10% scientific observer coverage of trips for trawlers and purse seiners flying their flag and ensure that such observers collect and report data, as described in CMM 02-2018 (Data Standards). In the case of the flagged vessels of a Member or CNCP undertaking no more than 2 trips in total, the 10% observer coverage shall be calculated by reference to active fishing days for trawlers and sets for purse seine vessels. In recognition of the special requirements of developing States, in particular small island developing States and territories and possessions in the region, Members and CNCPs are urged to provide financial, scientific and technical assistance, where available, to enhance the ability of those developing States and territories and possessions to implement the CMM. CMM 01 is reviewed by the Commission each year. The review takes into account the latest advice of the SC and the Compliance and Technical Committee, and the extent to which this CMM, CMM 1.01 (Trachurus murphyi, 2013), CMM 2.01 (Trachurus murphyi, 2014), CMM 3.01 (Trachurus murphyi; 2015), CMM 4.01 (Trachurus murphyi, 2016) and CMM 01-2017 (Trachurus murphyi) as well as the Interim Measures for pelagic fisheries of 2007, as amended in 2009, 2011 and 2012, have been complied with.

Table 4. Allocations of jack mackerel to SPRFMO Contracting Members and CNCP in 2018 as referred to in CMM 01-2018.

Member / CNCP Percentage Tonnage Chile 64.5638 371,887 China 6.3477 36,563 Cook Islands 0 0 Cuba 0.2231 1,285 Ecuador 0.2391 1,377 European Union 6.1086 35,186 Faroe Islands 1.1087 6,386 Korea 1.2822 7,385 Peru 2.0284 11,684 Russian Federation 3.2825 18,907 Vanuatu 4.6738 26,921 Total 100.0000 517,582

In Chile, the data collection system is carried out by the IFOP (Instituto de Fomento Pequero). IFOP is responsible for collecting relevant data on both the artisanal and industrial jack mackerel fisheries, in particular, length, ageing, maturity and stomach contents. The Chilean jack mackerel does not have a formal Minimum Landing Size (MLS), however IFOP annual reports have selected the length of 26 cm (fork length) as a biological minimum landing size. According to the data available from IFOP (2017; Figure 14) the amount of undersized/juvenile fish diminished from 2015 to 2016. However, such fish is not discarded at sea but landed and processed as fish meal. The IFOP is currently developing three discard programmes for demersal and pelagic fisheries. The first one is called “Research Program

Page 44 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Discard and Incidental Catch Fishing 2014”, which serves demersal fisheries, shellfish, hake and hoki. The second “scientific observer program 2014”, which serves discarding in purse seine fisheries of anchovy and sardine taking place between Regions V and X, both in the industrial and artisanal fleet. The third “scientific observer program 2016”, which serves discarding in purse seine fisheries of jack mackerel, both in the industrial and artisanal fleet.

Figure 14. A comparison of the percentage frequency in length of jack mackerel in the Chilean industrial purse seine fishery in 2016 and 2018 (IFOP, 2017)

Page 45 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Principle Two: Ecosystem Background

Principle 2 (also referred to as P2) of the MSC standard states that:

Fishing operations should allow for the maintenance of the structure, productivity, function and diversity of the ecosystem (including habitat and associated dependent ecologically related species) on which the fishery depends.

The information presented in this section is provided to support the rationale set out for the Principle 2 Performance Indicators. Principle 2 of the MSC Standard has 5 components: • Retained non-target species • Bycatch species (discarded non-target species) • Endangered, Threatened or Protected (ETP) species • Habitats • Ecosystems

With the introduction of MSC FCR v 2.0, the cumulative impact on Principle 2 components of other MSC-certified fisheries within the UoA has to be taken into account. For instance, if there are other MSC-certified fisheries within the UoA that catch the same non-target species and impact the same habitats and ecosystems as the fishery under assessment, the cumulative impact of all of the MSC-certified fisheries has to be taken into account2.

This section considers the information available about the potential effect of the fishery on each of these Principle 2 components in turn. We also describe the information available about the status of the components and the management arrangements that are in place to mitigate or regulate adverse impacts.

Non-target species (Primary, Secondary and ETP species) This section of the report considers the interaction between the fishery and non-target species: the primary, secondary and “ETP” species listed above. The approach adopted is to look at the data available about catch composition in the fishery, and then to assign any non-target species to an appropriate MSC component.

3.6.1.1 Catch composition The composition of fishing vessel catches in Chile has been subject to careful scrutiny in the past few years, following a revision of the main national fisheries legislation in Chile in 2013 (the Ley General de Pesca y Acuicultura (LGPA, the General Law on Fisheries and Aquaculture), (LGPA 1991, 2013). One of the key changes introduced with this legislation was the requirement to introduce discard reduction plans for commercial fisheries.

IFOP established both an observer programme and discard self-sampling programme for the Chilean pelagic fisheries in 2014 to gather data to inform the production of these discard reduction plans. Information about this work is available on the IFOP website (IFOP 2018). A report of the findings of the observer and self-sampling research carried out between January 2015 and December 2016 was published in 2017 (IFOP 2017).

The objective of this study of catch composition was set out as:-

General Objective Develop a scientific observation program to strengthen and complement temporarily the coverage and results of the Discard and Incidental Catch Fisheries Research

2 Fisheries that have already been certified do not have to consider cumulative impacts of any newly certified UoA until the first surveillance audit following certification of the new fishery.

Page 46 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Program, contributing in the compilation of the technical background that will be used in the Preparation of a Discard Reduction Plan for both the target species, the accompanying fauna and the incidental capture of fish in the pelagic fisheries and in this way to advance the collection of information to allow the application of an ecosystem based approach to fisheries management. (IFOP 2017)

The study defined a further 8 objectives, which were aimed at both developing and standardising methods for monitoring catch composition; gathering and analysing the information on catches; developing proposals for alternative management measures; and raising awareness of the new legislation on discard reduction and the Discard Reduction Plans due to be developed and introduced under the revised LGPA.

The results that are relevant to the Chilean jack mackerel fishery under assessment are summarised below.

The observer programme for the Chilean Jack mackerel fishery examined the activities of vessels fishing from Region VIII (see Figure 1). A total of 74 observer trips aboard industrial Jack mackerel vessels took place in 2015 and 2016, covering 5.7% of the fishing trips (1,291). Over the same period the fleet reported catches for over 560 trips (Table 5).

Table 5: Summary of extent of observer trips (OC) and self-reporting (Autorreporte) aboard industrial Jack mackerel (IND J.) vessels landing to Region VIII in 2015-16. Data show total estimated catch (Ŷh) (tonnes) with standard deviation (DS) and coefficient of variance (CV). N° VM are number of trips monitored, with proportion of all trips shown in brackets; N° VT is the total number of trips that took place during the period observed. (IFOP 2017)

The spatial and seasonal characteristics of discarding recorded on observer trips are illustrated in Figure 15. These show a lower incidence of discarding in the offshore areas in the period between April – September than during the period from October-March, when fishing took place closer to the shore.

Both the observer programme and the self-reporting programme recorded a low level of discarding when measured as a proportion of total catch. In 2015 a discarding rate of around 1% was reported by both the observers and the self-reporting programme; in 2016 the observers reported a discarding rate of just over 6% whilst the self-reporting programme showed no significant change in the discarding rate (Figure 16).

Page 47 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 15. Purse seine hauls with and without discard activity (legend in image) for the industrial jack mackerel fleet during the 2015-2016 period with landfall in the VIII Region. Data from scientific observers. (IFOP 2017)

(a) Observer Records (b) Self-reporting

Figure 16. Proportion of retained catch (CR, pale shading) and discarded catch (CD, dark shading) in the industrial jack mackerel fishery from 2015-16 estimated by (a) scientific observers across 3 regions; and (b) self-reporting (showing maximum and minimum estimates). (IFOP 2017)

Page 48 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The frequency of interactions with both the target species and non-target species (measured as the proportion of purse seine hauls when a species was recorded) is shown in Table 6. Both observer records and self-reported data are shown here, and show a similar overall rate of encounters, with caballa / chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus) being the most frequently observed non-target species.

The composition of the catch recorded by observers is summarised in Figure 17 (species making up more than 1% of the catch) & Figure 18 (species making up less than 1% of the catch). IFOP report that caballa made up 1.4% of the total catch in 2015 and 2.3% in 2016.

Table 6. Frequency of records of non-target species in jack mackerel purse seine hauls (“lances”) from: (a) 2015 observer trips; (b) 2016 observer trips; and (c) self- reporting trips from 2015-16. (IFOP 2017) (a) 2015 Observer records

(b) 2016 Observer records

(c) 2015-16 self-reporting

Page 49 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 17. Proportion of species (as percentage of total catch) making up 1% or more of the catch in purse seine nets fishing for (from left) artisanal sardine & anchovy (ART S.A.); industrial sardine & anchovy (IND S.A.); and the UoA fishery, industrial jack mackerel (IND J). Pale green shading indicates jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi); dark green indicates caballa (Scomber japonicus). Data from observer trips. (IFOP 2017)

Page 50 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 18. Proportion of species making up less than 1% of the total catch (as a proportion of this component of catch) in purse seine nets fishing for (from left) artisanal sardine & anchovy (ART S.A.); industrial sardine & anchovy (IND S.A.); and the UoA fishery, industrial jack mackerel (IND J). The non-target species listed for the IND J fishery are: red (pez medusa / blue fathead, Cubiceps caeruleus); pink (jibia / Humboldt squid, Dosidicus gigas); dark grey (sierra / snoek, Thyrsites atun); and pale purple (jellyfish). Data from observer trips. (IFOP 2017)

One of the objectives of the observer programme was to quantify and evaluate the bycatch of birds, mammal and marine reptiles. The results of these observations are shown in Table 7. The species most frequently observed in the purse seine nets was the South American sea lion (Otaria flavescens). The sea lions are reported to actively prey upon fish from within the purse seine net and then to jump out of the net as it is recovered; hence the very low mortality rate (4 individuals) compared to observations of 1,228 individuals in net hauls over this period. A similar style of interaction is reported for pelicans (Pelecanus thagus), though the mortality rate is higher (3 individuals out of 98 observations).

Page 51 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 7. Records of number of birds, mammals and marine reptiles recorded by scientific observers in the jack mackerel purse seine fishery from January 2015- December 2016. (IFOP 2017)

These data describe the catch composition in the jack mackerel purse-seine fishery. The next section considers how this information is classified with respect to the MSC Standard.

3.6.1.2 Classifying the catch Under the MSC Standard, any non-target species in the catch may need to be evaluated in one of three Performance Indicators: as Primary, Secondary, or ETP species

3.6.1.2.1 Definitions The MSC Fisheries Certification Requirements (FCR) v.2.0 (Marine Stewardship Council 2014) distinguish two categories of non-target species in the catch from a fishery:-

• “Primary” species are defined as those species that are in scope but not target (P1) species “where management tools and measures are in place, intended to achieve stock management objectives reflected in either limit or target reference points”. (FCR at SA3.1.3).

• “Secondary” species are then defined by the MSC as fish/shellfish species that do not meet the definition of ‘primary’ species, or species that are “out of scope” of the program but where the definition of endangered, threatened or protected (ETP) species is not applicable (FCR at SA3.1.1).

For primary and secondary species, a ‘main’ designation is then given where either:-

SA3.4.2 A species shall be considered ‘main’ if: SA3.4.2.1 The catch of a species by the UoA comprises 5% or more by weight of the total catch of all species by the UoA, or;

Page 52 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

SA3.4.2.2 The species is classified as ‘Less resilient’ and the catch of the species by the UoA comprises 2% or more by weight of the total catch of all species by the UoA. a. Teams shall use one or both of the following criteria to determine whether a species should be classified as ‘Less resilient’ i. The productivity of the species indicates that it is intrinsically of low resilience, for instance, if determined by the productivity part of a PSA that it has a score equivalent to low or medium productivity; or ii. Even if its intrinsic resilience is high, the existing knowledge of the species indicates that its resilience has been lowered due to anthropogenic or natural changes to its life-history. SA3.4.3 In the case where individuals are released alive they shall not contribute to the definition of ‘main’. a. Teams shall provide strong scientific evidence of a very low post-capture mortality SA3.4.4 In cases where a species does not meet the designated weight thresholds of 5% or 2% as defined in SA3.4.2.1 and SA3.4.2.2, the assessment team shall still classify a species as main if the total catch of the UoA is exceptionally large, such that even small catch proportions of a P2 species significantly impact the affected stocks/populations. MSC FCR v2.0

The purpose of this section of the report is to review the information available about non-target catches in the fishery so that the “primary” and “secondary” species can be identified; and then to establish which of these species are “main”.

3.6.1.2.2 Primary and Secondary species The IFOP observer programme identified six “in scope” species in the catch of jack mackerel purse seine vessels (see Table 6) over the period 2015 – 2016, these are summarised below:

Table 8: List of “in scope” species recorded in the catch of UoA jack mackerel purse seine vessels between 2015-16.

Species Local / Common name Scientific name Caballa / Chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus) Sierra / Snoek (Thyrsites atun) Jibia / Humboldt squid (Dosidicus gigas) Merluza común / South Pacific hake (Merluccius gayi gayi) Merluza de cola / Patagonian grenadier (Macroronus magellanicus) Pez medusa / Blue flathead (Cubiceps caeruleus)

Although a stock assessment has been carried out by SPRFMO for the Humboldt squid (Dosidicus gigas), and some reference points have been proposed by scientists, these have not yet been adopted as management measures or harvest control rules. There are, accordingly, no primary species in the catch. These species are therefore considered to be secondary species.

Page 53 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

3.6.1.3 “Out of scope” species The MSC consider “out of scope” species to be amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. Under the MSC Fisheries Certification Requirements, these “out of scope” species may be assessed as either ETP species if they meet certain criteria concerning their protection by national or international laws; or as secondary species if these laws do not apply to them.

The IFOP observer programme provided quantitative information on the interaction between the jack mackerel purse seine fishery and “out of scope” species (see Table 7). This section of the report reviews this information and assigns an appropriate category to each “out of scope” species” recorded. A brief summary of the status of each ETP species and each species for which mortalities have been recorded is presented here.

3.6.1.3.1 Information Information about interactions between the fishery and non-target species (of fish, birds, mammals and reptiles) has been gathered by an IFOP observer programme (IFOP 2017).

The level of interactions recorded by IFOP scientific observers with birds, mammals and reptiles is shown in Table 7. Using these data and the information about the level of observer coverage (Table 5) it is possible to arrive at an estimate of the overall level of interaction between the jack mackerel purse seine fleet and these species. This estimate is shown in Table 9.

Interactions were recorded with 11 “out of scope” species. Incidents causing mortality were recorded for 5 species: South American sea lion (Otaria flavescens); Peruvian pelican (Pelecanus thagus); pink-footed shearwater (Ardenna creatopus); sooty shearwater (Ardenna grisea); and a single unidentified northern storm petrel (family Hydrobatidae).

The significance of these interactions for the species concerned can be considered by “raising” these data to the fleet level. The observer programme covered 5.7% of jack mackerel fishing trips in 2015-16. This figure enables the annual mortality for the fleet to be estimated (see Table 9).

Page 54 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 9. Estimate of annual level of interactions and mortality for the Chilean jack mackerel fleet (calculated by assessors using data from Table 5 and Table 7).

Observer data3 Estimate for fleet (p.a.)4 Common name Species Interactions Mortality Interactions Mortality Otaria flavescens South American sea lion 1,228 4 10,712 35 Larus dominicanus Kelp gull 224 - 1,954 - Thalassarche melanophris Black-browed albatross 214 - 1,867 - Pelecanus thagus Peruvian pelican 95 3 829 26 Thalassarche spp. Albatross species 61 - 532 - Thalassarche chrysostoma Grey-headed albatross 28 - 244 - Ardenna creatopus Pink-footed shearwater 13 13 113 113 Daption capense Cape Petrel 8 - 70 - Procellaria aequinoctialis White chinned petrel 7 - 61 - Ardenna grisea Sooty shearwater 1 1 9 9 Dermochelys coriacea Leatherback turtle 1 - 9 - Hydrobatidae Northern storm petrel 1 1 9 9 Diomedea exulans Wandering albatross 1 - 9 -

3.6.1.3.2 Status as ETP Species ETP species are defined by the MSC (FCR v 2.0 SA3.1.5), as species that are:

i) Recognised by national ETP legislation, ii) Listed on Appendix I of Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) (unless it can be shown that the particular stock of the CITES listed species impacted by the UoA under assessment is not endangered), iii) Listed in any binding agreements concluded under the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), or iv) Classified as ‘out of scope’ (amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals) that are listed in the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Redlist as vulnerable (VU), endangered (EN) or critically endangered (CE).

The Chilean national legislation for protecting marine species is reviewed in section 3.6.1.3.2 of this report. Lists of nationally protected species are maintained by SEREMI and SERNAPESCA (SEREMI 2018a, 2018b, SERNAPESCA 2018a).

CITES maintains a list of species in its appendices (CITES 2018); and the Convention on Migratory Species lists the relevant binding agreements (CMS 2018).

The species that were recorded by scientific observers in the IFOP study have been assessed against the MSC criteria for determining ETP species and the lists of species identified here. The result of this review is shown in Table 10 below.

3 These data copied from Table 7 4 Calculated by team using data from Table 5 indicating that observers were present on 74 out of 1,291 jack mackerel fishing trips in 2015-16 (5.7% of trips).

Page 55 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 10. Review of the status of the “out of scope” species recorded by IFOP observers on- board jack mackerel industrial purse seine vessels between 2015-2016 with respect to MSC criteria for identifying Endangered Threatened and Protected (ETP) species. Highlighting indicates where the ETP criteria are met; species underlined are those for which mortalities were recorded by IFOP observers.

CITES Listed in CMS IUCN Species Common name National Legislation5 Appendix I6 Agreements7 Classification Otaria flavescens South American sea LC No Least Concern lion Larus dominicanus Kelp gull - No Least Concern Thalassarche Black-browed albatross LC No ACAP Annex 1 Least Concern melanophris (Preocupacion menor) Pelecanus thagus Peruvian pelican - No Near Threatened Thalassarche spp. Albatross species NA No ACAP Annex 1 N/A Thalassarche Grey-headed albatross NT No ACAP Annex 1 Endangered chrysostoma (Casi amanazada) Ardenna creatopus Pink-footed - No ACAP Annex 1 Vulnerable shearwater Daption capense Cape Petrel - No Least Concern Procellaria White chinned petrel - No ACAP Annex 1 Vulnerable aequinoctialis Ardenna grisea Sooty shearwater - No Near Threatened Dermochelys Leatherback turtle CR Yes Vulnerable coriacea (En peligro critico) Hydrobatidae Northern storm petrel N/A No N/A Diomedea exulans Wandering albatross - No ACAP Annex 1 Vulnerable

On the basis of this review, seven of the “out of scope” species meet the MSC criteria for ETP species. Mortalities were observed for two ETP species (South American sea lion (Otaria flavescens) and Sooty shearwater (Ardenna creatopus)) by observers between January 2015 and December 2016. Mortalities were recorded for a further 3 non-ETP “out of scope” species.

3.6.1.3.3 Status of “out of scope” species The status of all of the out of scope species that were either recorded as being killed by the fishery or identified as ETP species is considered briefly below.

3.6.1.3.3.1 South American Sea Lion (Otaria flavescens / O. byronia) On a taxonomic note, the Otaria flavescens (Shaw, 1800) is a synonym for Otaria byronia (de Blainville, 1820). This latter name is preferred by the IUCN (IUCN 2015), however, the species name O. flavescens has been used in the IFOP report and in other Chilean reports, and is therefore used here for consistency with the UoA.

The IUCN report that O. flavescens is the most abundant marine mammal occurring along the southern part of South America, with a range extending from northern Peru on the west coast to southern Brazil on the east coast (Figure 19). The Chilean population is reported to be increasing in northern areas, with population trends uncertain for central and southern Chile; the overall Chilean population is however reported to be “increasing steadily” (IUCN 2015).

5 Sources: Secretarías Regionales Ministeriales del Medio Ambiente (SEREMI) (SEREMI 2018a, 2018b) 6 (CITES 2018) 7 Sources: CMS website (Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 2018) Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) website (ACAP 2018);

Page 56 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The population in central Chile (between regions V and X) is reported to be over 16,000 animals (IFOP 2017).

Figure 19. Distribution map for the South American Sea Lion, Otaria byronia (syn. Otaria flavescens). (IUCN 2015)

There are no sea lions of the genus Otaria (i.e. O. byronia or its synoyms) listed in the CITES appendices.

This species is considered under Chilean legislation to be of “Least Concern” which qualifies it as an “ETP” species (see Table 10).

3.6.1.3.3.2 Black browed albatross (Thalassarche melanophris) This species is not listed in CITES appendices. IUCN report its status a “least concern” (IUCN 2017). It is listed in the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP 2018).

This species has a range that extends throughout the southern hemisphere (Figure 20). The total global breeding population is estimated at around 700,000 pairs, with 72% located in the Falkland Islands, 19% in Chile and 8% in South Georgia. The main fishing threat to this species is considered to arise from longline fisheries (IUCN 2017).

Page 57 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 20. Distribution map for the Black browed albatross, Thalassarche melanophris. (IUCN 2017)

This species is considered to be ETP because it is listed as “Least Concern” in Chilean legislation, and is also listed in ACAP.

3.6.1.3.3.3 Peruvian pelican (Pelecanus thagus) This species is not listed in CITES appendices. IUCN report its status as “near threatened” (IUCN 2016a).

Pelecanus thagus is restricted in its distribution to the coast of central Peru and Chile (Figure 21). The more recent population estimate is at around 100,000 – 1,000,000 individuals. The population is considered to be badly affected by El Niño events which affect the abundance and distribution of anchoveta (Engraulis ringens) which are its main prey. The current population trend is reported to be increasing (IUCN 2016a, Birdlife 2018).

This species is not considered to be an “ETP” species (see Table 10).

Page 58 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 21. Distribution of the Peruvian pelican, Pelecanus thagus. (IUCN 2016a).

3.6.1.3.3.4 Grey headed albatross (Thalassarche chrysostoma) This species is not listed in CITES appendices. IUCN report its status as “endangered” (IUCN 2016b) and it is considered “Near Threatened” in Chile (SEREMI 2018b). It is listed in the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP 2018).

This species has a circumpolar distribution (see Figure 22). The population is considered to be endangered because of the decline observed at South Georgia, where approximately half of the global population breeds. The major driver of decline is considered to be longline fisheries. There are currently thought to be around 98,600 breeding pairs of this species, with around 18,000 pairs in Chile in 2015. The total adult population is estimated at around 250,000 birds (IUCN 2016b),

Page 59 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 22. Distribution map for the grey-headed albatross, Thalassarche chrysostoma. (IUCN 2016b)

This species is considered to be ETP because it is listed as “Endangered” by IUCN, “Near Threatened” in Chilean legislation, and is also listed in ACAP.

3.6.1.3.3.5 Pink-footed shearwater (Ardenna creatopus) This species is not listed in CITES appendices. IUCN report its status as “vulnerable” (IUCN 2016c). It is listed in the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP 2018).

Although they have quite a wide distribution in the eastern Pacific (Figure 23), pink footed shearwaters have a very small breeding range, limited to Robinson Crusoe and Santa Clara in the Juan Fernandez Islands, and also on Isla Mocha off the coast of Arauco, Chile. There are estimated to be about 30,000 breeding pairs on these sites, indicating a population of around 100,000 – 150,000 individuals. The main threats to this species have arisen from the introduction of non-native species (such as the cats, dogs, rats and rabbits); chick harvesting on Isla Mocha; and entanglement in fishing gear. (IUCN 2016c).

Conservation actions have been taken to protect pink footed shearwaters, and are summarised in the IUCN report. The Juan Fernández Islands were designated as a national park in 1935 (protected from 1967) and a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve in 1977. The Chilean government began a habitat restoration programme in 1997 that concluded in 2003 and the islands have been nominated for World Heritage listing. The distribution of colonies on Robinson Crusoe and Santa Clara was determined in 2002-2006 and resurveyed in 2016 while Mocha was surveyed in 2009 and again in 2016. The colony on Mocha is within a national reserve, which has had a management plan since 1998 and two reserve guards.

Page 60 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Harvesting of chicks is illegal under Chilean law although this was unenforced until 2011. Since 2011, the park guards have worked with the federal police to enforce the prohibition on chick harvesting.

Since the 2001-02 breeding season, annual monitoring of reproductive success and predation rates has been carried out in the Juan Fernández Archipelago by Oikonos Ecosystem Knowledge. Threats to the population have been evaluated, and conservation actions such as the construction of fences to exclude cattle and predatory mammals from colonies and the restoration of colonies through planting of native plant species within protective enclosures. Satellite and GPS tracking has been used to determine foraging areas of breeding birds from both Juan Fernández and Mocha, migratory routes and wintering areas and potential interactions with fisheries. At-sea observer programmes have been used to monitor bycatch around Mocha, in small-scale Peruvian fisheries and on some commercial fisheries in Chile. Community-based education and conservation programmes have been underway since 2002 on Robinson Crusoe Island and since 2010 on Isla Mocha (IUCN 2016c)

Figure 23. Distribution of the pink footed shearwater, Ardenna creatopus. (IUCN 2016c).

The interactions between A. creatopus and fisheries in the eastern Pacific have been examined (Mangel et al. 2006). This study considered data from satellite-tagged birds, and an assessment of the level of interaction with fishing vessels (determined by interviews with vessel skippers). The greatest overlap with a particular fishery was with the driftnet fishery operating from the port of Salaverry, Peru. A map showing the distribution of satellite-tagged A. creatopus relative to the fisheries in Chile that were considered to present the highest risk (shark and Ilo dolphinfish longline fisheries) is presented at Figure 24. The report notes an

Page 61 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

annual bycatch of around 1,000 birds in the coastal gill net fishery around Isla Mocha; it also considers that the purse-seine fisheries for sardines and anchovies in Chile are potential sources of mortality.

Figure 24. Maps showing the movements of satellite-tagged A. creatopus individuals off the Chilean coast relative to the location of (right) shark and (left) Ilo dolphinfish fishery zone, considered to represent the main conservation risks. (Mangel et al. 2006)

This species is considered to be “ETP” (see Table 10): it is listed in Annex 1 of the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels); and considered by the IUCN to be “Vulnerable”.

3.6.1.3.3.6 Sooty shearwater (Ardenna grisea) Sooty shearwater are listed as “near threatened” by the IUCN (IUCN 2016d). This species is not listed by CITES.

The sooty shearwater has a wide distribution (Figure 25), with a global population estimated at over 20,000,000 individuals. The abundance is reported to be declining. The main threats to sooty shearwater are listed as harvesting of young birds (“muttonbirding”); and potentially longline, trawl and gill net fisheries. Rat predation on eggs and chicks has been reporting, although the impact is unknown. Climate change may also be affecting the population (IUCN 2016d).

This species is not considered to be “ETP” (see Table 10).

Page 62 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 25. Distribution of the sooty shearwater, Ardenna grisea. (IUCN 2016d).

3.6.1.3.3.7 White chinned petrel (Procellaria aequintoctalis) White chinned petrels are listed as “Vulnerable” by the IUCN (IUCN 2016e). This species is not listed by CITES. It is listed in the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP 2018).

The IUCN report that white chinned petrels have a circumpolar distribution (Figure 26). The population is estimated to be around 3 million birds, with breeding colonies located on the islands in the Southern Ocean. The main threats to this species are considered to be longline fisheries and predation by rats at some breeding sites (IUCN 2016e).

Page 63 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 26. Distribution of the white chinned petrel, Procellaria aequinoctialis. (IUCN 2016e)

This species is considered to be “ETP” (see Table 10): it is listed in Annex 1 of the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels); and, considered by the IUCN to be “Vulnerable”.

3.6.1.3.3.8 Leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) The leatherback turtle is listed in CITES Appendix I and its status is considered by the IUCN to be Vulnerable at the global level and Critically Endangered in the Eastern Pacific (IUCN 2013a, 2013b, CITES 2018)

Leatherback turtle are a single species globally, with seven regional management units which are biologically and geographically distinct sub-populations (see Figure 27). The East Pacific population is estimated at 633 individuals. The main threats to leatherback turtles are considered to be the loss of breeding sites and bycatch in fisheries (IUCN 2013b).

Page 64 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 27. Distribution of the leatherback turtle, Dermochelys coriacea. (IUCN 2013a)

This species is considered to be “ETP” (see Table 10): it is listed in CITES Appendix I; and consider by the IUCN to be “Vulnerable”.

3.6.1.3.3.9 Wandering albatross, (Diomedea exulans) The wandering albatross is considered by the IUCN to be Vulnerable (IUCN 2016f) and is listed in the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP 2018).

The total annual breeding population of wandering albatross is estimated at 8,500 pairs, equivalent to around 28,000 individuals. The main threats are considered to be longline fisheries and also predation on chicks by introduced species (such as cats and mice).

Page 65 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 28. Distribution of the wandering albatross, Diomedea exulans. (IUCN 2016f)

The wandering albatross is considered to be an ETP species because of its IUCN “Vulnerable” status and its listing in ACAP.

3.6.1.4 Summary Following the analysis of catch composition from the IFOP scientific observer programme with respect to MSC requirements, the catch composition is set out in Table 11.

Table 11. Analysis of catch composition from the jack mackerel purse seine fishery with respect to MSC criteria determining which Principle 2 component is applicable to each species. ETP species are highlighted.

Species Local / Proportion “In Reference Protected Component Common of catch scope?” points by ETP name set? legislation?

Scomber Cabbla / <5% Yes No No Secondary - japonicus chub Minor mackerel Dosidicus Humboldt <5% Yes No No Secondary - gigas squid Minor Cubiceps Blue flathead <5% Yes No No Secondary - caeruleus Minor Thyrsites atun Snoek <5% Yes No No Secondary - Minor

Page 66 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Species Local / Proportion “In Reference Protected Component Common of catch scope?” points by ETP name set? legislation?

Merluccius South Pacific <5% Yes No No Secondary - gayi gayi hake Minor

Macrorunus Patagonian <5% Yes No No Secondary - megallanicus grenadier Minor Otaria South <5% No NA Yes ETP flavescens American sea lion Larus Kelp gull <5% No NA No Secondary - dominicanus Main Thalassarche Black- <5% No NA Yes ETP melanophris browed albatross Pelecanus Peruvian <5% No NA No Secondary - thagus pelican Main Thalassarche Albatross <5% No NA No Secondary - spp. species Main Thalassarche Grey-headed <5% No NA Yes ETP chrysostoma albatross Ardenna Pink-footed <5% No NA Yes ETP creatopus shearwater Daption Cape Petrel <5% No NA No Secondary - capense Main Procellaria White <5% No NA Yes ETP aequinoctialis chinned petrel Ardenna Sooty <5% No NA No Secondary - grisea shearwater Main Dermochelys Leatherback <5% No NA Yes ETP coriacea turtle Diomedea Northern <5% No NA Yes ETP exulans storm petrel

Habitats

3.6.2.1 Definitions The MSC FCR v 2.0 requires that the interaction of the fishery is assessed with regard to two different types of habitat:- • Commonly encountered marine habitats are defined by the MSC as “…a habitat that regularly comes into contact with the gear used by the UoA…” (FCR at SA3.13.3.1) • Vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) “…shall be defined as is done in paragraph 42 subparagraphs (i)-(v) of the FAO Guidelines…” (i.e., that they have uniqueness or rarity, functional significance, fragility, life history traits that make recovery difficult, and/or structural complexity) (FCR at SA3.13.3.2 & GSA3.13.3.2).

Page 67 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The purpose of this section of the report is to identify which marine habitats that occur in the Unit of Assessment could be impacted by the fishery, and to briefly summarise the information available about these habitats and the potential impacts of the fishery on them.

3.6.2.2 Marine habitats and the UoA The jack mackerel purse seine fishery uses purse seine nets. Jack mackerel are a pelagic fish which live in the upper part of the water column. The nets used in the fishery under assessment may fish to a depth of up to 200 m. The nets are designed only for use in the water column, and not for contact with the seabed.

The jack mackerel fishery is therefore confined to the “epipelagic habitat” – the uppermost 200 m of the water column, often called the “sunlit zone”, where most of the ocean’s primary production takes place. The extent of this and other pelagic habitats is shown in Figure 29.

Figure 29. Definitions of pelagic habitats. The uppermost 200 m are the “epipelagic zone”. (Wikipedia 2018b).

There are no indications of any interactions between the fishery and benthic habitats. The gear is not designed for interaction with the seabed, and the industrial fleet operate offshore in waters typically more than 400 m deep. Gear loss is reported to be very rare.

Information is available about the distribution and character of benthic habitats in Chilean waters, which are determined by a range of environmental factors including methane seeps and low oxygen concentrations (Sellanes et al. 2010). Information from marine surveys has been used to identify areas that are now protected as marine parks and reserves (Yanez et al. 2009).

Page 68 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

3.6.2.2.1 Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas Several “Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas” (EBSAs) have been identified in the Eastern Tropical and Temperate Pacific by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

EBSAs are areas that meet CBD criteria that are very similar to FAO Guidelines referred to by the MSC in SA3.13.3.2 & GSA3.13.3.2 in its definition of Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems. The criteria that are used to identify EBSAs by the CBD are:- • Uniqueness or rarity • Special importance for life-history stages of species • Importance for threatened, endangered or declining species and/or habitats • Vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity, or slow recovery • Biological productivity • Biological diversity • Naturalness (Convention on Biological Diversity 2012)

The locations of Eastern Pacific EBSAs are illustrated in Figure 30. The descriptions provided by the CBD for the EBSAs located within the UoA are provided below8:-

1. Dorsal de Nazca y de Salas y Gómez (Salas y Gómez and Nazca Ridges) The area is a biological hotspot, with one of the highest levels of marine biological endemism (41.2% in fishes and 46.3% in invertebrates) in the world. It is considered a stepping stone for some marine mammals (e.g., blue whale), and it has been identified as a foraging area for leatherback turtle. In addition, it has been described as a recruitment and nursery area for swordfish and a breeding zone for Chilean jack mackerel, an overexploited species. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018a)

2. Sistema de Surgencia de la Corriente de Humboldt en el Norte de Chile (Northern Chile Humboldt Current Upwelling System) The coastal upwelling region of northern Chile between 21° and 24°S includes the El Loa river area, the coastal upwelling Center of Mejillones Peninsula and surrounding areas. Both El Loa river zone and Mejillones Peninsula are well known sites of strong biological activity driven by upwelling and within which both pelagic and benthic communities become concentrated, giving rise to important spawning and nursery areas for fishes, crustacean and mollusk species. In the region, diversity becomes increased as the upwelling process can be intermittently present throughout the year. Continuity of upwelling provides nutrients and hence the flourishing of the large variety of phytoplankton with extremely short life cycles, and the consequence of this wide spectrum lower trophic level gives the opportunity to evolution of higher diversity of subsequent trophic levels. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018b)

3. Sistema de Surgencia de la Corriente de Humboldt en Chile Central (Central Chile Humboldt Current Upwelling System) The Central HCS upwelling system includes an important wind driven upwelling center located in its southern boundary, four bays of different size and orientation with respect to the coastline that constitute a larger bay, several islands of different size and a couple of seamounts, and a topography and current driven upwelling center in its northern boundary. The system is highly productive because the upwelling events

8 Paragraph numbers below relate to numbered areas in Figure 30.

Page 69 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

occur all year round, the bays associated provide areas of recruitment for several species, combining the high productivity with areas with less intensity of the currents. Within the area there are habitats for several resident populations of endangered birds and marine mammals’ species. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018c).

4. Montes submarinos en el Cordón de Juan Fernández (Seamounts in the Juan Fernandez Islands) The seamounts constitute vulnerable marine ecosystems of great ecological and biological importance. 118 mountains have been identified and characterized in the different EEZs of Chile. Additionally, in the Juan Fernández 1 and 2 mountains (JF1, JF2), oceanographic and biological information (phytoplankton, zooplankton, invertebrates and exploratory fishing with various gears) has been collected. Historical information indicates that JF1 and JF2 have captured a total of 82 species, highlighting the presence of black corals in lobster traps. Underwater photographs of mountains JF1 and JF2 have characteristics attributable to the impact of bottom trawls. The fishing effort has been made mostly in JF2 (4,667 km dragged). The monthly fishing effort increased considerably during 2002, 2003 and 2005, reaching values over 500 km dragged, modifying the spatial structure of the aggregations of resources in the mountain. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018d)

5. Sistema de Surgencia de la Corriente de Humboldt en el Sur de Chile (Southern Chile Humboldt Current Upwelling System) The central/southern region off Chile between 35 and 38° S exhibits extremely high primary production values (>10 g C m2 d). This region is characterized by strong seasonal upwelling, with intensive events taking place during the austral spring and summer period, along a relatively wide continental shelf (>50 km) interrupted by submarine canyons. Over the continental shelf, extended periods of hypoxia affect the benthic environment and this condition promotes the development of high biomasses, in the form of mats, of the giant bacterium Thioploca. The high productivity of this ecosystem exhibits a strong inter-annual variability related to the ENSO cycle causing uncertainty in the sustainability of the resources derived from this ecosystem and in the potential ecosystem responses to ongoing climate change. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018e)

6. Convergencia de la Deriva del Oeste (West Wind Drift Convergence) The area proposed, covering pelagic through deep-ocean zones between, 41.5°S and 47°S off the coast of Chile (including fjords and channels and the offshore area up to 200 km from the coastline), comprises an intricate array of inner seas, archipelagos, channels, and fjords stretching some 600 linear km and enclosing roughly 10,700 km of convoluted and protected shoreline. This region (also termed as being part of the “roaring forties”) has been classified as one of ‘main concerns’ within the process of setting geographic priorities for marine conservation in Latin America and the Caribbean. Partly belonging to the Cold-temperate South America Province, and also known as Chiloense Ecoregion. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018f)

Page 70 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

1. 2.

3. 4. 5.

6.

Figure 30. Map of EBSAs in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. Numbers on the map relate to text in this report. (Convention on Biological Diversity 2018g)

3.6.2.2.2 Habitat management The overall management regime for protecting marine habitats and ecosystems within the Chilean EEZ and in the SPRFMO Convention area is summarised in section 3.6.3 of this report. Some specific measures and strategies relating to marine habitats are described below.

The CBD proposals for EBSAs were considered by SPRFMO at a Scientific Committee meeting in 2015 (SPRFMO 2015a). SPRFMO has subsequently agreed and implemented CMM 03-2018, which restricts the use of benthic fishing gear in areas where there are VMEs (SPRFMO 2015b, 2018b).

The Chilean Government has established a network of marine parks and marine reserves within the Chilean EEZ. Information about these marine parks and reserves is available on the SERNAPESCA website (SERNAPESCA 2018b).

There are more than 50 Marine Protected Areas (MPA) within the Chilean EEZ (Atlas of Marine Protection 2018). Many of these are coastal and lie outside the area fished by the UoA, but they also include 5 Marine Reserves and 7 Marine Parks that are within the UoA. The current extent of the network is shown in Figure 31 and the Marine Parks and Reserves are listed in Table 12. They include the vast Nazca-Desventuradas Marine Reserve, which is a 300,000 km² no-take zone (Figure 32), and which was the largest MPA in all of the Americas

Page 71 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

at the time of its designation in 2016 (National Geographic News, 2015). Since 2010, Chile has designated more than 400,000 square miles (over 1,000,000 km²) of its EEZ as marine parks where all extractive activities are prohibited (National Geographic News 2017). This is equivalent to more than 25% of the Chilean EEZ9.

The Servicio Nacional de Pesca y Acuicultura (National Fisheries and Aquaculture Service, SERNAPESCA) is responsible for the management of Marine Parks and Reserves (SERNAPESCA 2018b).

Figure 31. Map showing the location of marine parks and reserves in Chile. Inset shows details of Juan Fernandez Islands MPAs. (Plotted by assessment team using data from SUBPESCA (SUBPESCA 2018)).

9 The Chilean EEZ is reported to cover 3,645,769 km² (Atlas of Marine Protection 2018)

Page 72 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 32. SERNAPESCA public information for the Nazca-Desventuradas Marine Park created in 2016 (SPRFMO 2016).

Page 73 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 12. List of marine reserves and marine parks, including location, extent and habitat features in the Chilean EEZ. Hyperlinks to relevant decrees are provided (SERNAPESCA 2018b)

Type of Name Locality Region Extent Habitat features Legislative protection Decree Number

Reserva La Rinconada La Rinconada Antofagasta 33,161 (Ha) Ostión del Norte (Argopecten 522/1997 Marina purpuratus) [Scallop]

Isla Chañaral Isla Chañaral Atacama 2,894 (Ha) Loco (Chilean abalone), Lapa 150/2005 (sea urchin), Erizo, Lessonia, Delfín Nariz de Botella, Chungungo Bottlenose Dolphin, Pingüino de Humboldt (Humboldt Penguin)

Islas Choros y Islas Choros y Coquimbo 3,863 (Ha) Loco (Chilean abalone), Lapa 151/2005 Damas Damas (sea urchin), Erizo, Lessonia, Delfín Nariz de Botella, Chungungo Bottlenose Dolphin, Pingüino de Humboldt (Humboldt Penguin)

Pullinque Estero de Los Lagos 740 (Ha) Ostra Chilena [Chilean Oyster] 133/2003 Quetalmahue

Page 74 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Type of Name Locality Region Extent Habitat features Legislative protection Decree Number

Putemún Estero de Los Lagos 751 (Ha) Choro Zapato [mussel, 134/2003 Castro Choromytilus chorus]

2 Parque Motu Motiro Hiva Islas Salas y Valparaíso 150,000 (Km ) Ecosistemas marinos, montes 235/2010 Marino Gómez submarinos, biota acuática propia del área protegida [Marine ecosystems, seamounts, aquatic biota characteristic of the protected area.]

Francisco Isla Carlos III Magallanes 1,506 (Ha) Ballena jorobada, Pingüino 276/2003 Coloane Magallanes, Lobo marino común [Humpback Whale, Magellanic Penguin, Common Fur Seal]

2 Nazca- Islas San Valparaíso 300,035 (Km ) Ecosistemas marinos, montes 5/2016 Desventuradas Ambrosio y submarinos y los componentes San Félix de la biota acuática propia del área protegida. [Marine ecosystems, seamounts, aquatic biota characteristic of the protected area.]

Page 75 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Type of Name Locality Region Extent Habitat features Legislative protection Decree Number

2 Parque Marino Archipiélago Valparaíso 1,078 (km ) Ecosistemas marinos y 10/2016 "Montes de Juan biodiversidad de montes Submarinos Fernández submarinos Crusoe y Selkirk" [Marine ecosystems, and biodiversity of seamounts.]

Red de Parques Archipiélago Valparaíso 3,450 (km2) Ecosistemas y biodiversidad del Marinos: "Lobería de Juan área intermareal y submareal Selkirk", "El Fernández costera Arenal", "Tierra [Ecosystems and biodiversity of Blanca" y "El the intertidal and coastal subtidal Palillo areas.]

Page 76 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Ecosystems To score the ecosystem PIs, it is useful (but not an explicit MSC requirement) to define the ecosystem within which the fishery operates. The MSC does, though, require the ‘key ecosystem elements’ to be defined, and describes them as:- “the features of an ecosystem considered as being most crucial to giving the ecosystem its characteristic nature and dynamics, and are considered relative to the scale and intensity of the UoA; they are features most crucial to maintaining the integrity of its structure and functions and the key determinants of the ecosystem resilience and productivity” FCR v 2.0 at SA3.16.3 The purpose of this section of the report is to identify these key ecosystem elements within the UoA and to review the information available about the potential interactions of the fishery with these elements.

3.6.3.1 Ecosystem elements in the UoA The overall character of the ecosystem in the UoA is determined by the Humboldt Current System (HCS). The HCS establishes a cold coastal ecosystem with high biological productivity and variable conditions as a result of coastal upwelling in equatorial areas (see Figure 33 and Figure 34). This ecosystem is well studied and understood (Thiel et al. 2007).

Figure 33. Map showing main upwelling regions in Chile. Principal upwelling centres in black dots, other sites with frequent upwelling indicated with grey dots, coastal stretches with occasional upwelling shown as thick black line. (Thiel et al. 2007)

Page 77 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 34. Overview of the surface currents in the eastern South Pacific that influence the north-central Chilean coast, showing the West Wind Drift (WWD), the main flow of the Humbolt Current (HC), the Cape Horn Current (CHC), the Chile Coastal Current (CCC), the Peru Coastal Current (PCC), the Peru-Chile Counter Current (PCCC) and the South Equatorial Current (SEC) (Thiel et al. 2007).

3.6.3.1.1 Ecosystem structure & function The Humboldt Current System (HCS) provides the basis for the main food web that is found off the Chilean Coast. The cold, nutrient rich waters of the Humboldt Current support a large phytoplankton biomass, which are the main primary producers within this food web. Zooplankton consume these phytoplankton which are then in turn consumed by fish.

Most fish predators in the HCS are non-specialists, which feed opportunistically on a wide range of different prey items. Sardines and anchovy consume small food particles (mainly phytoplankton and copepods), with the anchovy able to consume larger food items than sardines. Anchovy are more specialised on large zooplankton, while sardines consume a wide range of food items from phytoplankton to small zooplankton. Jack mackerel prey on copepods, euphausids, sardines and anchovies and benthic resources (Medina and Arancibia 2002). Humboldt squids (Dosidicus gigas) feed cannibalistically and on fish, including jack mackerel and anchovy (Chong et al. 2005). Some of the main fish consumers themselves are prey to larger predators, for example, swordfish and sea lions. A generalised scheme of the

Page 78 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

pelagic food web off central Chile shows the short trophic pathways typical of an upwelling region, and the predominance of relatively few main fish consumers (see Figure 35).

Figure 35. Simplified food web in the Humboldt Current System off northern and Central Chile. Size of boxes indicates relative proportions of ecosystem elements. Grey arrows show mortality due to fishing. (Thiel et al. 2007)

There are distinct seasonal changes in the HCS ecosystem. Phytoplankton biomass is highest in the summer and lowest in the winter. There are also significant geographic variations in productivity between areas where upwelling is strongest and other areas (upwelling areas are shown in Figure 33).

A significant feature of the coastal waters of northern Chile is the presence of an “Oxygen Minimum Zone” (OMZ) caused by bacterial respiration. The OMZ may extend from depths of around 100 m to 500 m. There is a seasonal change in the depth of the OMZ which is related to changes in primary and bacterial production in the water column (Figure 36). The OMZ in turn has an effect on the behaviour of jack mackerel and their prey (Figure 37). Stomach analyses have shown that the strength of the OMZ is a key factor in determining stomach fullness and diet of jack mackerel (Alegre et al. 2015).

Page 79 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 36. Conceptual model describing the annual cycle of dominant zooplankton species in the coastal upwelling areas off Chile. Upper panel shows two phases: growth of the population in spring-summer; and decay following the peak in diatom bloom. The key feature in the collapse is the rise of the oxygen minimum zone. (Thiel et al. 2007)

Figure 37. Diagram illustrating the feeding behaviour of jack mackerel in response to diurnal migrations of prey items into and out of the oxygen minimum zone (OMZ). Positions of prey items (zooplankton and mesopelagic fish) in the water column are shown as grey bands; positions of jack mackerel shown as grey patches. (Thiel et al. 2007)

Interannual fluctuations in fish stocks do not seem to affect the general characteristics of the food web off central Chile (Neira et al. 2004). However, fisheries appear to have a long-term impact on the pelagic food web in this area. Fisheries act on several trophic levels of the pelagic food web (Figure 35). Off central Chile, a decrease in the trophic level of the principal

Page 80 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

fisheries resources has been observed (Neira and Arancibia 2004). Recent analysis of the Humboldt Current Large Marine Ecosystem indicates that the main anthropogenic stressors on this ecosystem are pollution and overfishing (Taylor et al. 2008, Gutiérrez et al. 2016); Chile and Peru have recently established a bi-national Strategic Action Plain intended to address these issues (Gutiérrez et al. 2016).

3.6.3.1.2 Ecosystem monitoring Oceanographic conditions off the Chilean coast are monitored by IFOP through research cruises and satellite data. Information on surface temperature (SST) and chlorophyll a concentrations in the Pacific Ocean is gathered continuously by satellites (see Figure 38).

Figure 38. Images of recent (March 2018) satellite images showing (top) Sea Surface Temperature and (bottom) Chlorophyll a concentrations. (NASA Earth Observatory 2018)

Page 81 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The productivity of the HCS and the ecosystem it supports are affected by El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events. During an El Niño event, the colder nutrient rich waters are replaced by warmer nutrient poor waters. These events are associated with changes in the direction of the easterly trade winds and the circulation of air above the Pacific Ocean (Carlowicz and Schollaert Uz 2017).

Satellite data provide real-time information on the status of the El Niño Southern Oscillation. The effects of a strong El Niño event on Sea Surface Temperatures in 2015 is shown in Figure 39.

Figure 39. Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies in the Pacific Ocean associated with a strong El Niño event November 2015. (Carlowicz and Schollaert Uz 2017)

The strength of the El Niño Southern Oscillation is measured by Oceanic Niño Index (ONI). This is a measure of the deviation of Sea Surface Temperature (SST) in the Central Pacific. An El Niño event is declared when the ONI is more than ±0.5 (this is a deviation of SST by over than 0.5°C for a period of five consecutive months). The changes in the Oceanic Niño Index for the past 25 years are shown in Figure 40.

Page 82 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 40. Oceanic Niño Index (ONI) for the period 1992-2017. (SPRFMO 2017a)

The strong El Niño event of 2015 that is shown in the SST anomalies (Figure 39) is clearly seen as a peak in Figure 40. IFOP report that during the first half of 2016 there was a strong El Niño event, which declined over the year, and that during early 2017 the SST progressively increased, with a corresponding increase of juvenile jack mackerel in catches, and a movement of the resource closer to the Chilean coast in patches of colder water (SPRFMO 2017a).

The change in oceanographic characteristics during an El Niño event has a negative short- term impact on anchovy and chub mackerel landings (see Figure 41). There is also considered to be a longer term (multi decadal) regime shift from a warm “sardine regime” to a cooler “anchovy regime” that is driven by the larger scale Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) (Thiel et al. 2007, Harrison and Chiodi 2015, Newman et al. 2016).

In addition to changes in the abundance of fish, the ENSO and PDO can affect the distribution of fish. During warmer years, jack mackerel migrate into coastal waters to feed on anchovies; in colder years jack mackerel are found further offshore, and their range may extend considerably to the west, outside the Chilean EEZ.

The strong relationship between sea water temperature with the abundance and distribution of pelagic fish in the eastern Pacific is used by fishermen to guide day-to-day fishing activities. Real-time SST information is widely available to fishermen from websites (such as www.fishtrack.com) and via applications (apps) that can be installed on smartphones.

Page 83 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Figure 41. Total annual landings for the five most important pelagic species caught by the Chilean purse seine fleet during the time period 1980–2005 in the respective fisheries units; grey dots represent Fisheries Unit I–II, open dots Fisheries Unit III–IV, grey triangles Fisheries Unit V–IX, and open triangles Fisheries Unit X–XII. Top panel shows strength of the El Niño Southern Oscillation for each year. (Thiel et al. 2007).

Page 84 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Principle Three: Management System Background The intent of Principle Three (P3) is to ensure that there is an institutional and operational framework appropriate to the size and scale of the UoA for implementing Principles 1 and 2, and that this framework is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with the outcomes articulated in these Principles.

In the following sections a description of the broad, high-level context of the fishery management system and the fishery specific management system is provided with the intent of supporting the scoring rationales used in Appendix 2 of this report.

Area of operation of the UoA As indicated in section 3.5 above, jack mackerel is widespread throughout the South Pacific, along the shelf and oceanic waters adjacent to Ecuador, Peru, and Chile, and across the South Pacific from the coast of Chile to New Zealand within a 35º to 50º S variable band – sometime referred to as the “Jack mackerel belt” (Figure 7).

At least five management units associated with distinct jack mackerel fisheries are identified by SPRFMO (SPRFMO, 2016) in the South Pacific: the Ecuadorian fishery, which is managed as part of a more general pelagic fishery within the Ecuadorian EEZ; the Peruvian fishery, which is managed as part of a jack mackerel, mackerel and sardine fishery directed exclusively for direct human consumption taking place almost entirely within the Peruvian EEZ; the northern and the central-southern Chilean fisheries which are managed as separate management units, with the northern fishery being mostly within Chilean EEZ and the central- southern Chilean fishery which straddles the Chilean EEZ and the adjacent high sea; and, the purely high sea fishery which is a multinational fishery being managed entirely within the context of the SPRFMO.

For the purposes of this assessment the central-southern Chilean fishery that takes place within the Chilean EEZ, adjacent to the Chilean regional fishery administrative areas III – X and XIV (Figure 1) and adjacent high seas is considered to be the area of operation of the UoA.

Jurisdiction Management of the Chilean purse seine jack mackerel fishery is the responsibility of SPRFMO at the regional level and the Government of Chile within the country’s EEZ.

SPRFMO SPRFMO is an inter-governmental Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (RFMO) that is committed to the long-term conservation and sustainable use of the fishery resources of the South Pacific Ocean and, in so doing, safeguarding the marine ecosystems in which the resources occur. The “Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fishery Resources in the South Pacific Ocean” (the Convention) was adopted on 14th November 2009 (SPRFMO, 2009). The Convention came into force on 24th August 2012 and the first Commission meeting of SPRFMO took place in early 2013.

The Convention applies to waters of the South Pacific beyond areas of national jurisdiction, in accordance with international law. The Convention Management Area is described in Article 5 of the convention and shown in Figure 5 of this report.

The organisation consists of a Commission and a number of subsidiary bodies. There are currently 15 members of the Commission: Australia, Chile, China, The Cook Islands, Cuba, Ecuador, The European Union, Denmark (in respect of the Faroes Islands), Korea, New

Page 85 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Zealand, Peru, Russia, Chinese Taipei, The United States and Vanuatu. There are also Cooperating non-Contracting Parties (CNCP): Colombia, Curçao, Liberia and Panama.

New Zealand is the Depositary for the SPRFMO Convention and hosts the SPRFMO Secretariat in Wellington.

SPRFMO has no enforcement capacity of its own. In common with other RFMOs, it relies on its Members to implement management measures domestically, through suitable harvest control tools that will allow the stated objectives for the management of the overall fishery to be met. Currently, the main commercial resources fished in the SPRFMO Area are jack mackerel and Humboldt squid.

Chile Within Chile’s EEZ, the Undersecretariat for Fisheries and Aquaculture (SUBPESCA, 2018) is responsible for the regulation and management of fisheries and aquaculture activities within the EEZ. SUBPESCA is part of the Ministry of Economic Development and Tourism (MINECON, 2018) and has approximately 150 officials. Its headquarters are located in Valparaíso with an office in Santiago for inter-institutional coordination. It also has eight Regional Directorates located throughout the country. The Regional Directorates of Fisheries and Aquaculture, through the Regional Director of Fisheries, execute the management of the Undersecretariat in the regions. They chair the Fisheries Zonal Councils and the Regional Councils of Recreational Fishing.

In 2014, Chile provided consent to apply SPRFMO established Conservation and Management Measures (CMM) for jack mackerel within its national jurisdiction.

Legal and policy framework SPRFMO The SPRFMO Convention (SPRFMO, 2009) is the formal document that establishes the international legal and administrative structure for the management of shared stocks in the South Pacific. The Convention provides a framework for cooperation between its 15 members and CNCP. The Convention recognises and adopts key aspects of relevant international agreements and conventions including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the United Nations Fish Stock Agreement (UNFSA), the FAO Code of Conduct and the FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing. In accordance with UNFSA, SPRFMO ensures binding procedures that, minimally, deliver cooperation between its members on the collection and sharing of scientific data, the scientific assessment of stock status and the development of scientific advice. Article 31 of the Convention specially refers to, “Cooperation with other organisations” and states: “The Commission shall cooperate, as appropriate, with other regional fisheries management organisations, the FAO, with other specialised agencies of the United Nations, and with other relevant organisations on matters of mutual interest. The Commission shall take account of the conservation and management measures or recommendations adopted by other regional fisheries management organisations and other relevant intergovernmental organisations that have competency in relation to the Convention Area, or in relation to areas adjacent to the Convention Area or in respect of particular living marine resources including non-target and associated or dependent species, and that have objectives that are consistent with, and supportive of, the objective of this Convention. It shall endeavour to ensure that its own decisions

Page 86 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

are compatible with, and supportive of, such conservation and management measures or recommendations. The Commission shall seek to make suitable arrangements for consultation, cooperation and collaboration with such other organisations. In particular it shall seek to cooperate with other relevant organisations with the aim of reducing and eventually eliminating IUU fishing.” SPRFMO has signed memoranda of understanding with the Secretariat for the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) (SPRFMO, 2014) and the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) (SPRFMO, 2016A) to facilitate cooperation on efforts to minimise the incidental bycatch of albatrosses and petrels and advance shared objectives with respect to stocks and species with in the South Pacific and Antarctic regions (SPRFMO, 2016), respectively. SPRFMO CMMs detail various provisions such as the application of technical measures or output and input controls, requirements for data collection and reporting, as well as regulations for monitoring, control and surveillance and enforcement. Each year the Commission may revise existing or adopt new CMM. Jack mackerel is a species for which annual CMMs are provided. The current CMM is entitled, “Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi (CMM 01-2018)”. The preamble of CMM 01-2018 includes reference to the commitment to apply the precautionary approach and take decisions based on the best scientific and technical information available, as set out in Article 3 of the Convention; recognition that a primary function of the Commission is to adopt CMMs to achieve the objective of the Convention; and, affirmation of the Commission’s commitment to rebuilding the jack mackerel stock and ensuring its long-term conservation and sustainable management in accordance with the objective of the Convention. The CMM is reviewed each year by the Commission, taking into account advice from the Scientific Committee (SC) (SPRFMO, 2018f) and the Compliance and Technical Committee (CTC) (SPRFMO, 2018g). These Committees use metrics, e.g. stock status, or reporting requirements, compliance reports/action plans, against which the performance of the fishery and contracting parties are measured and relate directly to the overarching objective of Article 3 of the Convention. Reporting obligations of SPRFMO Members contained in CMM 01-2018 or agreed to in the SC annual Work Plan, (SPRFMO, 2018h) include: • The name of vessels actively operating each month; • Monthly catch report conducted in the SPRFMO area and the EEZ; • Quarterly report of the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) of each fishing vessel operating in the SPRFMO area; • A minimum of 10% scientific observer coverage; • Submission of annual scientific observer information; • Information used for the evaluation of the jack mackerel stock; • Submission of Annual National Reports which describes the jack mackerel fishery to the annual meeting of the SC

Other SPRFMO CMMs (current as of 2018) are listed below. Some may directly or indirectly apply to the Chilean jack mackerel fishery:

Page 87 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

CMM Summary

01-2018 Sets out measures (including annual TAC and quota allocations) for the jack mackerel fishery.

02-2018 Establishes the standards for the Collection, Reporting, Verification and Exchange of Data by each Member and CNCP. It contains a number of data delivery requirements, including delivery formats and deadlines.

03-2018 Establishes requirements for bottom fishing in the SPRFMO Convention Area that are consistent with long-term sustainability of deep sea fish stocks and the protection of VMEs from bottom fishing and requiring reporting of information about VMEs and marine habitats to SPRFMO.

04-2017 Establishes a list of vessels presumed to have carried out Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing activities in the SPRFMO convention area.

05-2016 Establishes the record of vessels authorised to fish in the SPRFMO Convention Area.

06-2018 Establishes the use of VMS in the SPRFMO Convention Area.

07-2017 Establishes the minimum standards of port inspection.

09-2017 Establishes mitigation measures for the interaction of seabirds with demersal longline vessels and gear.

10-2018 Establishes a scheme for compliance and monitoring to ensure that Members and CNCP implement and comply with the obligations of the Convention and the CMMs adopted by the Commission. Based on these reports, SPRFMO prepares a Compliance Report.

11-2015 Establishes boarding and inspection procedures in the SPRFMO Convention Area.

12-2018 Establishes requirements for the provision of information prior to and after transhipment.

13-2016 Establishes guidance on the management of new and exploratory fisheries in the SPRFMO Convention Area.

14b-2018 Establishes guidance exploratory potting fishery in the SPRFMO Convention Area.

15-2016 Encourages Members and CNCP to take action on IUU fishing.

16-2018 Sets out arrangements to establish the SPRFMO Observer Programme for fisheries within the SPRFMO area. (due to enter into force 27 April 2019)

Chile The Ley General de Pesca y Aquicultura (LGPA, the General Law on Fisheries and Aquaculture) which was made in 1989 and amended in 1991, 2008 and 2013 (LGPA, 2013) provides the legislative and regulatory framework for managing fisheries within Chile’s EEZ. The LGPA establishes the use of quotas, specified fishing areas and seasons, fishing gear characteristics, regulations and sanctions for non-compliance, recognises the roles of

Page 88 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

stakeholders such as representative fishery councils and scientific committees and requirements for Fishery Management Plans. The LGPA also prohibits catch of species protected by international agreements (Title II, paragraph 1 Article 3b) and establishes sanctions for non-compliance (Article 110 j). The law requires the use of tools to minimize catch of non-target species and to avoid and minimize incidental catch and the use of best practice to avoid, minimize, and mitigate incidental catch of aquatic mammals, birds and reptiles. The revisions to the LGPA in 2008 introduced protection measures for cetaceans (Law No. 20.293). There are also requirements related to Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs). VMEs are defined in Article 2º paragraph 68 and Article 6°, requires the establishment of a fisheries management regime for VMEs which includes, where appropriate, prohibiting fishing activities. Article 7º, E – F, describes the implementation of, “Treaties or International Organisations”, to which Chile is a party. Article 7º G describes the rules to be followed when a trans-zonal and highly migratory species are found in the Chilean EEZ and adjacent international waters. As a result, the LGPA requires Chile to adopt and apply the conservation and management measures applied through the Treaty or International Organisation. In reality, this means that Chile, as a member of SPRFMO, adopts the management measures established by SPRFMO for jack mackerel. As well as SPRFMO, Chile is also signatory to other international agreements and conventions. These include: UNCLOS; UNFA; the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CAMLR); the FAO Code of Conduct; the FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to prevent, deter and eliminate Illegal fishing; the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS); the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); the International Whaling Commission (IWC); the Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles (IAC); the Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation of Migratory Sharks (Sharks MOU); and, the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP).

Resolution of Disputes SPRFMO Article 34 of the Convention, “Settlement of Disputes” (SPRFMO 2015) states: 1. Contracting Parties shall cooperate in order to prevent disputes and shall use their best endeavours to resolve any disputes by amicable means which may include, where a dispute is of a technical nature, referring the dispute to an ad hoc expert panel. 2. In any case where a dispute is not resolved through the means set out in paragraph 1, the provisions relating to the settlement of disputes set out in Part VIII of the 1995 Agreement [UNFSA] shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to any dispute between the Contracting Parties. Part VIII of the 1995 Agreement includes the obligation of contracting Parties to settle disputes by peaceful means, to cooperate to avoid disputes, use expert panels for disputed issues of a technical nature and, procedures for settling disputes. Article 17, “Implementation of Commission Decisions”, provides an opportunity for contracting parties to object to a Commission decision and, in so doing, initiate a process of review by a Commission established review panel. The panel provides their findings and recommendations to the Commission. These are presented to the contracting parties and, if a resolution cannot be achieved, then Article 34 is initiated. Examples where the SPRFMO objection process has been tested and proven to be effective can be found on the SPRFMO website and include a recent objection (2018) involving Ecuador

Page 89 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

and its request for a catch entitlement of jack mackerel and another jack mackerel entitlement request, this time from Russia, in 2013. Chile The LGPA (2013) Article 1º establishes that management and regulation decisions should be carried out in a transparent, responsible and inclusive way. The management decisions adopted by SUBPESCA with advice from Fishery Management Committees (FMC), Scientific Committees (SC) and IFOP, and management action by SERNAPESCA are required to be made public and transparent. As an example, the SUBPESCA website sets out something akin to a service level agreement which provides a list of rights and commitments that are made to Chilean citizens . As a result, mechanisms that minimise and potentially resolve legal disputes are incorporated in the management system. Ultimately, if a stakeholder is not satisfied with the dispute process established by the LGPA, they have recourse through civil judiciary system afforded by the 1980 Constitution (as amended, 2012).

Respect for Rights SPRFMO The SPRFMO Convention observes the legal or established rights of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood in a number of instances. In the preamble to the Convention it states: “Recognising economic and geographical considerations and the special requirements of developing States, in particular the least developed among them, and small island developing States, and territories and possessions, and their coastal communities, in relation to the conservation, management and sustainable development of fishery resources and equitable benefit from those resources”. Article 19, “Recognition of the Special Requirements of Developing States”, explicitly considers: the specific requirements of developing states; vulnerability, especially in the context of nutritional requirements; and, to avoid adverse impacts on, and ensure access to fisheries by, subsistence, small-scale and artisanal fishers and women fish workers, as well as indigenous people in developing States. Article 21, “Participation in Fishing for Fishery Resources”, also considers the needs of coastal States dependent mainly on fishing a fishery that straddles areas of national jurisdiction. Chile The LGPA (2013) supports user rights for people dependent on fishing. Management measures protect access to inshore waters, i.e. only artisanal fishers using vessels <12 m have access to waters within 1 nm of the coast (Article 7); artisanal vessels up to 18 m length have access to waters between 1 and 5 nm of the coast (although industrial vessels may fish in certain areas dependent on the agreement of the artisanal fishers; and a proportion of the quotas are reserved for the artisanal sector, e.g. in Region XV – Region X, 10% of the jack mackerel quota is allocated to artisanal fishers. In addition, law No. 20.249 creates the indigenous peoples' marine and coastal zone (SUBPESCA, 2018a), with the aim of protecting common use of those spaces with the objective of conserving traditions and coastal area communities using the natural resources.

Consultation, roles and responsibilities SPRFMO Various Articles within the Convention clearly define the functions, roles and responsibilities of members and cooperating non-members, i.e. Articles: (6) The Organisation; (7) The Commission; (8) Functions of the Commission; (10) Scientific Committee; (11) Compliance

Page 90 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

and Technical Committee; (12) Eastern and Western Sub-Regional Management Committees; (13) Finance and Administration Committee; (14) Secretariat. The Commission is also enabled to establish any other subsidiary bodies to assist it in its work (Article 9 - Subsidiary Bodies). The two committees that play a key role in the jack mackerel fishery are the Scientific Committee (SC) and the Compliance and Technical Committee (CTC). In summary, their role and functions are: Scientific Committee • Plan, conduct and review scientific assessments of the status of fishery resources; • Provide advice and recommendations to the Commission and its subsidiary bodies based on such assessments, including as appropriate: o reference points, including precautionary reference points o management strategies or plans for fishery resources based on such reference points; and o analyses of conservation and management alternatives, such as the establishment of total allowable catch or total allowable fishing effort at different levels, that estimate the extent to which each alternative would achieve the objective or objectives of any management strategy or plan adopted, or under consideration, by the Commission • Provide advice and recommendations to the Commission and its subsidiary bodies on the impact of fishing on the marine ecosystems in the Convention Area including advice and recommendations on the identification and distribution of vulnerable marine ecosystems, the likely impacts of fishing on such vulnerable marine ecosystems and measures to prevent significant adverse impacts on them; • Encourage and promote cooperation in scientific research in order to improve knowledge of the state of fishery resources and the marine ecosystems in the Convention Area including knowledge in relation to fishery resources straddling the Convention Area and areas under national jurisdiction and • Provide such other scientific advice to the Commission and its subsidiary bodies as it considers appropriate or as may be requested by the Commission. Compliance and Technical Committee • Monitor and review the implementation of, and compliance with, conservation and management measures adopted under this Convention and provide advice and recommendations to the Commission • Provide technical advice and recommendations as it considers appropriate or as may be requested by the Commission relating to the implementation of and compliance with the provisions of this Convention and the conservation and management measures adopted, or under consideration, by the Commission • Review the implementation of cooperative measures for monitoring, control, and surveillance and enforcement adopted by the Commission and provide advice and recommendations to the Commission. SPRFMO meetings provide the consultative mechanism for Contracting Parties to share information concerning management of fisheries. The process allows for annual national reports, including local knowledge (country specific), to be reviewed and included in Commission meetings. Each year, scientists from the Contracting Parties are invited to present their latest results to the appropriate working groups/committees. Under article 18, “Transparency”, the Commission is required to, “promote transparency”, by, amongst other things:

Page 91 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

“…facilitating consultations with, and the participation of, non-governmental organisations, representatives of the fishing industry, particularly the fishing fleet, and other interested bodies and individuals.” Consultation take place via the contracting and non-contracting parties and observer organisations, that attend the Commission and Committee meetings. The SPRFMO website includes minutes of the Commission meetings and minutes and reports from the Commissions advisory bodies (SPRFMO, 2018f). Chile The LGPA (2013) explicitly defines the functions, roles and responsibilities of the public-sector bodies and their supporting advisory scientific and management committees involved in the management process for fisheries in Chile. This also includes their cooperation with international bodies. The main public-sector bodies are identified, e.g. MINECON, SUBPESCA, SERNAPESCA National Fishery Council (CNP), Regional Fishery Councils and IFOP along with their supporting Scientific and Technical Committees (STC) and Fishery Management Committees (FMC). The role and function of these bodies are summarised below: MINECON / SUBPESCA Regulates fishery activities and aquaculture according to administration and regulation measures described by the law. Regulations are established by Undersecretary of Fishery resolutions or by Minister of Economy decrees. In both cases measures need to be supported by a technical report issued by SUBPESCA and comply with consultations, technical report, previous communication or approvals depending on the law. SERNAPESCA Based with MINECON, it is responsible for enforcing regulations with respect to monitoring, surveillance and control (VMS, landing & quota control, enforcement and statistics gathering/entry) in the wild capture fisheries and aquaculture. The control of landings falls mainly on private enterprise companies contracted according to SERNAPESCA’s requirements. National Fishery Council (CNP) CNP’s role is to ensure effective involvement of stakeholders in the fisheries sector at the national level on matters related to fishing activity and aquaculture; it has decision-making, consultation, and advising character in areas established by the law. The Council membership includes 27 representatives (3 from governmental institutions, 7 nominated by the Chilean president, 7 for the labour sector, 5 for the industrial sector, and 5 for the artisanal sector. The CNP advises SUBPESCA on policy and regulations governing the fisheries. The CNP submits opinions, recommendations, propositions and technical reports to SUBPESCA. The CNP obtains input on policy and regulation from regional councils (SUBPESCA, 2018b). Regional Fishery Councils (CZP) There are eight CZPs that represent administrative regions in the country (XV-I-II; II-IV; V- VI, VII; VIII; IX-XIV; X; XI and XII), and offices are located in Coquimbo, Constitución, Concepción, Valdivia, Puerto Montt, Aysén and Punta Arenas. The CZPs are administration entities with consultation or decision-making roles and contribute to decentralise administration, supporting and enabling the participation of representatives of the fishery sector at regional levels (SUBPESCA, 2018c). Instituto de Fomento Pesquero (IFOP) IFOP is the technical agency within the administration and its main objective is to carry out scientific and technical research related to fisheries and aquaculture and support decision

Page 92 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

making on management and conservation of fishery and aquaculture as well as ecosystems. IFOP contracts scientific work (e.g. stock surveys, gear studies) to external bodies e.g. universities including the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaiso, Universidad Católica del Norte (Coquimbo), and Universidad de Concepción. IFOP is contracted by MINECON to provide advice to SUBPESCA on, among other things, fish stock status and sustainable harvest levels. Science and Technical Committees (STC) Are established by law to provide advice to SUBPESCA on the main species groups targeted by Chilean fisheries., e.g. determining status of the fisheries, biological reference points, and range within which the authority can establish quotas. Currently, the following STCs have been formed: benthic resources; small pelagic fisheries; pelagic fishery for jack mackerel; demersal resources south-central zone; demersal resources south southern zone; deepwater demersal resources; demersal crustacean resources; and highly migratory resources, chondrichthyans and biodiversity. In providing their advice, the STCs consider information provided by IFOP as well as from other sources. The Jack Mackerel Science and Technical Committee currently has 12 members. Six members are elected through a public contest. According to the Committees website at the time of writing this report, 3 vacancies remain. Four are institutional members: 2 from SUBPESCA and 2 from IFOP. Two additional members from fisheries institutes INPESCA and INPESNOR also participate but do not have voting rights. Fishery Management Committees (FMC) FMCs propose, develop, implement, evaluate and modify fishery management plans. The LGPA mandates that management plans should be established for each fishery resource, to provide a package of measures to support the work of STCs. In general, the membership of FMCs are made up of: SUBPESCA (1); SERNAPESCA (1); artisanal fishers active in the fishery (2 – 7); the industrial sector (3); and, the processing sector (1). The Jack Mackerel Fishery Management Committee is one of 17 current FMCs. In this instance, 7 regional representatives participate on behalf of the artisanal fishers (although one vacancy was open at the time of writing this report); 3 members from SONAPESCA represent the industrial sector; and, the processing sector is represented by 1 member from within regions XV-X (SUBPESCA 2018f). All of the FMCs have their own webpages on the SUBPESCA website.

The LGPA (2013) establishes the consultation procedures with the different advisory bodies, e.g. STC and FMC, when adopting new administrative and management measures. This includes formulating and adopting fishery management plans, measures and changes to quotas, closed seasons, minimum landing sizes, fishing gear specifications, percentages of species landed as by-catch, declaration of marine parks and reserves. The development and agreement of fishery management plans demonstrates consideration of the information obtained, e.g. the Jack Mackerel Fishery Management Plan (SUBPESCA, 2017). The LPGA (2013) requires stakeholder consultation in the management process. According to the law, changes to existing or the development of new regulations are required to be consulted. The SUBPESCA website highlights consultations and invites participation. It is also noted that SUBPESCA use ‘Twitter’ and, at the time of writing this report, invitation to participate in consultative meetings on inshore fisheries was “tweeted”. ENGOs, such as WWF and Oceana, contribute to the management process through submissions and lobbying (Aquilles Sepúlveda pers. comm.).

Page 93 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Long-term objectives SPRFMO Article 2, “Objective”, of the Convention, states: “…through the application of the precautionary approach and an ecosystem approach to fisheries management, to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable use of fishery resources and, in so doing, to safeguard the marine ecosystems in which these resources occur.” Article 3, “Conservation and Management Principles and Approaches”, provides detail on the principles and approach that shall be used to meet the long-term objective, including: • A transparent, accountable and inclusive manner, taking into account best international practices; • Fishing commensurate with the sustainable use of fishery resources including the impacts on non-target and associated or dependent species and the protection and preservation of the marine environment; • Overfishing and excess fishing capacity shall be prevented or eliminated; • The collection, verification and reporting of accurate data on fishing, including impacts on marine ecosystems; • Decision making based on the best scientific and technical information available; • Cooperation and coordination to ensure the compatibility of management measures between different jurisdictions; • The protection of marine ecosystems, especially those with long recovery times following disturbance; • Recognition of the interests of developing States and their coastal communities; • Effective compliance with conservation and management measures and the application of appropriately severe sanctions to discourage non-compliance; and • The application of the precautionary approach and an ecosystem approach.

Chile From Article 1°b and 1°c of the LGPA (2013) the explicit objective of the LGPA is: “…the conservation and sustainable use of fishery resources through the application of precautionary and ecosystem approaches.” It also requires that policy takes account of a number of issues: (i) Long-term objectives for the conservation and management of fisheries and protection of ecosystems; (ii) Application of the precautionary principle with greater caution in management and conservation of resources when scientific information is uncertain, unreliable or incomplete with any lack of scientific information not delaying the introduction of conservation and management measures; (iii) An ecosystem approach to conservation and management of fishery resources and protection of ecosystems; (iv) Management of fishery resources in a transparent, accountable and inclusive manner; (v) Collection, verification, reporting and sharing of timely and accurate data; (vi) Consideration of impacts of fishing on associated or dependent species; (vii) Prevention or elimination of overfishing and excess fishing capacity; (viii) Effective implementation of conservation and management measures, and (ix) Minimisation of discards of target and bycatch species.

Page 94 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Fishery specific objectives SPRFMO As highlighted in 3.7.3 above, jack mackerel is a species for which annual CMMs are provided. The current CMM being “Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi (CMM 01-2018)”. The preamble of CMM 01-2018 includes reference to the commitment to apply the precautionary approach and take decisions based on the best scientific and technical information available as set out in Article 3 of the Convention; recognition that a primary function of the Commission is to adopt CMMs to achieve the objective of the Convention; and, affirmation of the Commission’s commitment to rebuilding the jack mackerel stock and ensuring its long-term conservation and sustainable management in accordance with the objective of the Convention. Chile The LGPA (2013), Article 8º, establishes that Management Plans must contain, at least, the following aspects: a) A description of: the area of application; the resources involved; fishing areas or fishing grounds; the fleets that target the resource; and, the sectors involved, including artisanal, industrial and market. b) Objectives, goals and deadlines to maintain or ensure the fishery achieves the maximum sustainable yield. c) Strategies to achieve the objectives, which may include: (i) Conservation measures and administration that must be adopted in accordance with the provisions of LGPA; and, (ii) Agreements to resolve the interaction between the different fishing sectors involved in the fishery. d) Criteria for evaluating compliance with the objectives and strategies; e) Contingency strategies to address the variables that may affect the fishery; f) Research and control requirements; and, g) Any other matter that is considered of interest for the fulfilment of the objectives of the Plan.

Article 9º A of LGPA (2013) establishes that if a stock is in an overexploited or collapsed state the management plan must, with the agreement of the FMC, set out a recovery plan that should consider, at least, the following: a) The objectives and goals for the recovery of the fishery in the long term and in a transparent manner; and, establish a system for evaluating compliance with such goals and objectives; b) Evaluate the effectiveness of management and conservation measures and establish the changes that should be introduced in order to achieve the objective of the recovery of the fishery; c) Evaluate the effectiveness of the fishery control system and define the changes that should be introduced to increase its effectiveness, if necessary; d) Evaluate the scientific research and, if necessary, revise as appropriate; e) Take into account the economic and social effects of the adoption of the proposed measures; f) Consider mitigation and compensation measures for artisanal fishermen, crew of special ships and plant workers, and g) In the case of collapsed fisheries, evaluate and propose the alternate operation in the fishing grounds of certain fisheries referred to in the first paragraph by different fleets,

Page 95 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

as well as evaluate the temporal limitation of the use of certain gear or fishing gear in said fishing grounds. Once the fishery recovery program has been established, it must be evaluated in accordance with the respective management plan. The stated purpose of the jack mackerel FMP (SUBPESCA, 2017) is to, “Recover and maintain the jack mackerel fishery at sustainable biological, economic, social and ecological sustainable levels”. Under the separate heading, “Resource, Ecosystem, Economic and Social”, the FMP sets out a hierarchy of high level “Goals”, operational “Objectives”, “Management Standards”, with “Indicators” and “Reference Points” and “Management Measures or Actions” that are intended to show or provide a measure of progress toward meeting the high-level goals. These are supported by Action Plans that set activities, responsibilities, implementation time and monitoring to ensure their fulfilment. The following tables present examples of these high-level goals and their respective Action Plans:

Page 96 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 13. Examples of action plans from the jack mackerel FMP (translated from the Jack Mackerel FMP http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/articles-99235_documento.pdf

Action plan – Measure 1.1.1 Biological Goal Maintain a spawning biomass and catch levels that allow a recovery of the fishery to sustainable levels in the medium and long term Objective (1.1.1) Maintain and / or take the jack mackerel resource to a level around MSY (within the framework of the objectives of management of SPRFMO) Indicator (A) Spawning biomass (state variable) (B) Fishing mortality (variable flow) Reference Point (A.1) Biomass spawning at BMSY* (B.1) Fishing mortality at FMSY* Measure (1.1.1) Establish catch quotas based on the Biological Reference Points according to the recovery period. What tasks and / or Who should do it? When must it be Who will check activities should be fulfilled? compliance? done? Prepare a document that Jack Mackerel 2018 JMMC – indicates the recovery Management SUBPESCA period of the fishery. Committee (JMMC) Determination of the Jack Mackerel Annual (permanent) SUBPESCA range of Biological Scientific and Reference Points (BRP) Technical Committee of the jack mackerel, (JMSTC) considering the recovery period proposed by the JMMC Prepare the technical SUBPESCA Annual (permanent) SUBPESCA report of the annual global quota of jack mackerel Commence annual global SUBPESCA Annual (permanent) SUBPESCA catch quota process Dissemination of SUBPESCA / JMMC / Annually SUBPESCA administration measure Zonal Directorate of Fisheries and Aquaculture / SERNAPESCA Request meeting with JMMC April every year JMMC / SUBPESCA Jack Mackerel Scientific and Technical Committee for July of each year. If the resource is over- JMMC During the year that JMSTC exploited or exhausted, a the condition is proposed recovery verified (after the program must be promulgation of the generated stock assessment) Proper monitoring SERNAPESCA After the approval of JMMC / program for landings the Minster SUBPESCA Develop position paper JMMC June of each year JMMC / SUBPESCA for delegation of Chile to SPRFMO * The BMSY and FMSY reference points are estimated annually by the stock assessment model. There is also a Harvest Control Rule developed by SPRFMO for this fishery

Page 97 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Action plan – Measure 2.1.1 Biological Goal Incorporate an adaptive management approach to the management of the jack mackerel fishery to take account of climate change. Objective Knowing the Adaptation Plan to Climate Change in Fisheries and Aquaculture (APCC-FA). Indicator (A) Request from the Climate Change Unit (CCU) a presentation of the (APCC-FA) Reference Point (A.1) Presentation made Measure Request, manage and disseminate the presentation of the Plan What tasks and / or Who should do it? When must it be Who will check activities should be fulfilled? compliance? done? Request a presentation of SUBPESCA 1st Quarter 2018 SUBPESCA the Adaptation Plan to Climate Change. Make presentation to the SUBPESCA 2nd Quarter 2018 SUBPESCA Jack Mackerel Management Committee Prepare Adaptation Plan SUBPESCA 2019 SUBPESCA for Climate Change in Climate Change Unit Fisheries and Aquaculture Disseminate Adaptation SUBPESCA 2019 SUBPESCA Plan for Climate Change Climate Change Unit in Fisheries and Aquaculture

Action plan – Measure 2.2.1 Biological Goal Incorporate management actions for the adaptation of the jack mackerel fishery to climate change Objective Propose actions applicable to the jack mackerel fishery related to climate change Indicator Publish a document with proposed actions applicable to the jack mackerel fishery related to climate change Reference Point Proposal sent to the Administration Measure Action applicable to the jack mackerel fishery related to climate change What tasks and / or Who should do it? When must it be Who will check activities should be fulfilled? compliance? done? Synthesize the problems SUBPESCA 2018 Jack Mackerel caused by climate Climate Change Unit Management change (CCU) Committee (JMMC) Define the direct and SUBPESCA 2018 JMMC indirect effects on the CCU horse mackerel fishery Propose lines of action SUBPESCA 2019 JMMC and adaptation as CCU appropriate. Prepare a proposal JMMC 2019 JMMC document Proposal submission JMMC 2019 JMMC Dissemination of the JMMC 2019 JMMC proposals

Page 98 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Action plan – Measure 3.1.1 Biological Goal Implement measures to reduce discarding and bycatch Objective Minimise discarding and bycatch, including Endangered, Threatened and Protected (ETP) species Indicator A Discard and Incidental Catch Reduction Plan Reference Point A Resolution approving the Discard and Incidental Catch Reduction Plan Measure Develop and implement a Discard and Incidental Catch Reduction Plan and a Code of Good Practice. What tasks and / or Who should do it? When must it be Who will check activities should be fulfilled? compliance? done? Conduct and complete a SUBPESCA On-going SUBPESCA research program that aims to provide a baseline understanding of discarding (What is discarded, how much and why) Present the results of the SUBPESCA 2018 - 2019 SUBPESCA discard investigation project to the Jack Mackerel Management Committee Propose actions to SUBPESCA / 2018 - 2019 SUBPESCA incorporate within the Jack Mackerel Discard Reduction Plan Management Committee (JMMC) Prepare proposal JMMC 2019 JMMC document for a Discard and Incidental Catch Reduction Plan Submission of a Discard JMMC 2019 JMMC and Incidental Catch Reduction Plan to SUBPESCA Preparation of the SUBPESCA 2019 JMMC Resolution approving the Discard and Incidental Catch Reduction Plan Disseminate the Discard SUBPESCA / 2019 -2020 JMMC and Incidental Catch JMMC Reduction Plan Inform and train SUBPESCA / IFOP 2019 -2020 SUBPESCA fishermen JMMC

Page 99 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Action plan – Measure 5.1.1 Economic Goal Optimize the economic returns of the jack mackerel fishery. Objective Promote the development of new markets Indicator Execution of a study for the development of the generic country brand (Chilean jack mackerel) Reference Point Official launch of the country brand Measure Investigate and develop production lines according to the markets. What tasks and / or Who should do it? When must it be Who will check activities should be fulfilled? compliance? done? identify existing SUBPESCA On-going SUBPESCA promotion programs at the national level Make a diagnosis of the SUBPESCA 2018 - 2019 SUBPESCA advanced institutional and business. Prepare a report SUBPESCA / 2018 - 2019 SUBPESCA regarding promotion Jack Mackerel programs Management Committee (JMMC) Perform management JMMC 2019 JMMC with ProChile to promote a study for the development of the country brand "Chilean jack mackerel" and a strategy for developing new markets Official launch of the JMMC 2019 JMMC generic country brand (Chilean jack mackerel) Disseminate the report SUBPESCA 2019 JMMC among users of the fishery (various means)

Decision making SPRFMO Article 16, “Decision Making”, of the Convention sets out that decisions of the Commission will be taken by consensus (described as, “absence of formal objection made at the time the decision was taken”). If a consensus cannot be reached on decisions related to questions of procedure, a majority vote is taken. If a consensus cannot be reached on decisions on questions of substance, a vote with a requirement of a ¾ majority is taken. Fishery specific decision making with regard to the jack mackerel fishery is evidence in the full record of the 6th Meeting of the Commission in relation to CMM 01-2018 - Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi. There appears to have been a relatively quick decision-making responses to serious and important issues associated with the jack mackerel fishery as evidenced by annual amendments to CMM 01. Article 17, “Implementation of Commission Decisions”, requires that decisions are binding on questions of substance, although a member of the Commission can object within 60 days (see 3.7.4).

Page 100 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Article 18, “Transparency”, promotes transparency in the decision-making processes and highlights that all meetings of the Commission and its subsidiary bodies are open to all participants and observers. Chile The LGPA (2013) identifies and establishes the participation of the institutions, organisations and bodies involved in the decision-making process. These include SUBPESCA with the role of defining the regulation, requesting information, establishing the research programmes, requesting the opinion of the jack mackerel STC on a range of administration and conservation measures, as well as proposing the annual catch quota for the upcoming year and the participation of the jack mackerel FMC when defining the Management Plan for the fishery and its evaluation. Details of these committees, including membership, their activities and minutes of meetings are available on the SUBPESCA website. In recent years there have been significant revisions to the management approach for the jack mackerel, in particular, the new national Fisheries Law (LGPA, 2013), the decision by Chile in 2014 to provide consent to apply SPRFMO established conservation and management measures within its national jurisdiction and the development and implementation of the jack mackerel FMP in 2017. These changes have ensured consistency of approach and established clear consultation processes with entities participating in the fishery’s administration and decision-making processes that are able to respond quickly responses to serious and important issues. The decision-making process with respect to the setting of the quota is set out in the FMP (SUBPESCA, 2017) and translated below: • The management of the jack mackerel fishery at domestic level is based entirely on recommendations from the SPRFMO. This Organization conducts the joint evaluation of the fishery, establishes management measures for all the countries that comprise it, and controls and supervises fishing operations in the South Pacific on this fishery. • The procedure for adopting the jack mackerel quota under the SPRFMO begins with the collection of biological and fisheries information and direct assessments. • This information is used for the joint stock assessment process, which is carried out annually in the framework of the SPRFMO Scientific Committee in September / October of each year; from this process, an Acceptable Biologically Catch (ABC) is obtained for jack mackerel in the entire South Pacific. • This ABC is reviewed and analysed by the Jack Mackerel Science and Technical Committee (STC), in November each year, which again recommends the range of ABC, which will serve as the basis for proposing the national quota. • Afterwards, on the basis of the recommendation of the STC, SUBPESCA proposes the annual catch quota for jack mackerel in Chile in the following year. • In January/February each year, SPRFMO sets the ABC and establishes the division of this quota among the countries that make up the Organization. • Finally, in March each year, SUBPESCA adjusts the national quota according to the one defined by SPRFMO.

Compliance and enforcement SPRFMO The Convention does not explicitly provide SPRFMO with competence related to fisheries monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) and so has no enforcement capacity. As with other RFMOs, SPRFMO relies on its Contracting Parties to implement management measures, through appropriate harvest control tools. Article 27 of the Convention does, however, require the Commission to establish appropriate cooperative procedures for effective MCS and to

Page 101 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

ensure compliance with the Convention and the related conservation and management measures covering, inter alia, a vessel registry, vessel and gear markings, VMS, at-sea and in-port inspection, the regulation and supervision of transhipment, monitoring transhipment, landings, and trade to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU, reporting on violations detected, progress and outcomes of investigations, and enforcement actions taken; and, addressing IUU fishing activities. Article 27 also allows the Commission to adopt measures against those entities that engage in fishing activities that diminish the effectiveness of, or otherwise fail to comply with, the conservation and management measures. This could include trade-related measures in relation to fishery resources, to be applied by members of the Commission to any state, member of the Commission, or entity whose fishing vessels engage in fishing activities that are counter to, or fail to comply with the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. The Commission also requires its Members and CNCPs to implement and comply with obligations arising under the Convention and CMMs adopted by the Commission and provide annual compliance reports to the SPRFMO Compliance Committee, in accordance with CMM 10 (Compliance Monitoring Scheme, CMS). The CMS is designed to: a. Assess compliance by Members and CNCPs with their obligations under the Convention and CMMs; b. Identify areas in which technical assistance or capacity building may be needed to assist Members and CNCPs to achieve compliance; c. Identify aspects of CMMs which may require improvement or amendment to facilitate or advance their implementation. These findings and subsequent actions shall not necessarily replace any review procedure established in accordance with Article 30 of the Convention (“Reviews” – the Commission commitment to review the effectiveness of CMMs); d. Take action against non-compliance through preventive and remedial options that should include a range of possible responses that take into account the reasons for and degree of non-compliance. The Commission publish a Compliance Report based on the Members' and CNCP's Implementation Reports (in accordance with Article 24, “Obligations of Members of the Commission”) and on information available to the Secretariat (SPRFMO, 201k). Chile MCS are primarily the responsibility of SERNAPESCA with support from the Chilean Navy/Coastguard and Chilean police force. SERNAPESCA has approximately 150 inspectors who are charged with monitoring the artisanal and industrial fishing sectors as well as the large aquaculture industry. Enforcement is carried out using a risk analysis approach (Lilian Troncoso & Fernando Naranjo, pers. comm.) The LGPA (2013) establishes requirements for the industrial fleets that supports the MCS system: • Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) – An operating VMS is required before authorisation is given to leave port. The VMS signal is transmitted every 8 minutes. If the VMS stops working at sea the vessel has 6 hours within which to fix the problem otherwise they have to return to port. The signal is received at two shore stations operated by SERNAPESCA and the Maritime Authority (Coastguard). • Electronic logbook: all industrial vessels must report the estimated catches of each resource after each fish haul to the SERNAPESCA. • 100% dockside monitoring – all vessels must hail in on return and not commence landing until given permission. All landings are observed, monitored and certified by a

Page 102 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

third party dockside monitoring company and SERNAPESCA are also present to monitor the landing and the dockside monitors. Minimum landing size, catch composition and total landings are monitored and cross-checked against the vessels individual quota. • Observers – Scientific observers from IFOP are required to be accommodated by all industrial vessels. The assessment team were told that approximately 10% of the industrial sectors fishing trips for jack mackerel were observed (Rodrigo Vega, pers. comm.). If an observer is assigned to the vessel, the vessel cannot leave port without them. While the role of the observers is to collect data, e.g. bycatch, they are also required to report infractions on returning to port. SERNAPESCA interview the observers after each trip. Activities commonly conducted by scientific observers include: o Scientific collection and record of fishing activities; o Record of general technical features of fishing gears and equipment used; o Sampling of captured species, including identification, measurement and recording of biological data; o Observations, collection and record of relevant data regarding the weather and environmental conditions; o Observations, collection and record of relevant data regarding the target species and accompanying fauna, discard, and incidental catch; o Sample collection, as necessary, for further analysis

• Shore-based officers also accompany the Navy/Coastguard to conduct at-sea inspections. These inspections are primarily administrative checks, ensuring the correct paperwork is on board. • Aerial surveillance is also used on occasion to monitor vessels and SERNAPESCA have recently tested drones with the intent on augmenting their surveillance capabilities (Fernando Naranjo, pers. comm.). • Video cameras are due to be fitted and become operational on all industrial vessels in the latter part of 2018 and from 2020 for artisanal vessels > 15 m. The system developed by the Canadian company Archipelago has been tested and is operational elsewhere in the world (Archipelago, 2018) • The shore-based infrastructure to support the system is being installed and SERNAPESCA reported that a third-party company is expected to undertake the monitoring of the video footage. SERNAPESCA also confirmed the video cameras will be able to monitor and ensure that unauthorised discarding is not taking place. The assessment team were told that quota management and minimum landing size were the main breaches in regulations and, historically, there had been concerns with respect to the accuracy with which landings were being recorded either as a result of poor monitoring or tampering with the electronic flow scales. Furthermore, it was highlighted that discarding has been recognised as a long-term issue that has not been fully quantified and was a key factor taken into account with LGPA 2013, as highlighted in the jack mackerel FMP, Article 7º of LGPA requires a discard research program to be carried out to gather information on discards in the fishery, with the objective of defining a discard reduction plan. This research program is on-going and expected to be completed in late 2018. “Infractions, Penalties and Procedures” are set out under “Title IX” in the LGPA (2013). Article 108 sets out measures that can be applied. They include administrative and judicial sanctions, examples include: • Fines; • Suspension or removal of the Captains licence;

Page 103 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

• Closure of fishing and processing facilities; • Removal of quota; • Seizure of gear and means of transporting gear; • Confiscation of catch and fines in multiples above the value of the confiscated fish; • Additional penalties, e.g. doubling of fines, extended periods of sanctioning, if an offence is committed within 2 years of an initial offence. SERNAPESCA staff reported that because of the ITQ system and high level of monitoring, the industrial fishery was considered to be a low risk fishery (Fernando Naranjo, pers. comm.). It was also stated that when the fishery resource was doing well the likelihood of non- compliance is significantly reduced (Lilian Troncoso, pers. comm.). Although considered infrequent, SERNAPESCA staff confirmed that the most likely non-compliance within the industrial jack mackerel sector is landing of under-size fish and under-reporting. These are usually identified at shore inspections and result in warnings. The low value associated with small jack mackerel is considered to be an incentive not to land undersize fish and the 100% monitoring of landings, including accurate weigh outs, are also considered to provide incentive for accurate reporting of catches. The assessment team heard that the potential confiscation of catch, high fines and removal of quota are considered strong deterrents – no instance of this being actioned was reported. The team also heard that the processing of offences can also take a long time and potentially lessen the effectiveness of providing an effective deterrent, however, this was primarily based on experience with the artisanal fleet.

Monitoring and management performance evaluation SPRFMO Article 30, “Reviews”, of the Convention states the Commission shall: review the effectiveness of the conservation and management measures and examine the effectiveness of the Convention itself at least every five years; determine the terms of reference and methodology of such reviews which shall be carried out by an independent person or persons of recognised competence who is independent of the Commission; take account of the recommendations with the appropriate amendment of its conservation and management measures and the mechanisms for their implementation. SPRFMO is presently in the early stages of its first review process (SPRFMO, 2018l). The review is going to look at the effectiveness of the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission in meeting the objectives of the convention. The Review Panel is to be made up of four international independent experts; two of which are nationals of SPRFMO Members with experience in the SPRFMO context and a thorough understanding of the SPRFMO Convention; and, two external experts, among whom there is experience in relevant areas of science, fisheries and marine ecosystems management and legal matters, including compliance and enforcement issues. A timeline for key milestones has been included on the SPRFMO website. Chile Article 1° C of the LGPA (2013) requires that the, “effectiveness and implementation of conservation and management measures” be evaluated every five years. Furthermore, annual reviews of the objectives and strategies set out in the jack mackerel FMP (section 4.5) using specified indicators and reference points are required to be undertaken by the Management Committee or, an ad-hoc committee of the Management Committee, shall undertake an annual evaluation of the objectives and strategies set out in the plan using the indicators and reference points that have been identified. In so doing, a status report for each Goal of the plan, i.e. Resource, Ecosystem, Economic and Social (as shown in Table 13) is to be published on the SUBPESCA website and, in accordance with each status report, amendments of the FMP shall be made by the Committee. The FMP was approved by the

Page 104 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Government in December 2017 and so there has yet to be an annual review posted on the SUBPESCA website. 4 Evaluation Procedure Harmonised Fishery Assessment MSC Fisheries Certification Requirements (FCR) v 2.0 states, “The aim of harmonisation is to avoid the perversity that two essentially similar fisheries receive materially different scores (materially in the number, and text, of conditions, or in the overall outcome, whether a pass or a fail). Fisheries that are identical should receive identical scores. Any other result undermines the credibility of the MSC”. MSC have also confirmed that harmonisation of similar fisheries using different versions of the default assessment tree, i.e. v1.3 and v2.0, should still take place where they are materially unchanged (MSC Interpretations webpage). There are no other purse seine jack mackerel fisheries that are certified or in assessment in the South Pacific. Therefore, there are no Principle 1 or 2 issues that need to be harmonised. There are, however, four certified fisheries and one that is in assessment which share aspects of the “Governance and Policy” component of Principle 3 (the PIs pre-fixed with 3.1), i.e. focusing on the high-level context of the fishery management system within the UoA. Three have been assessed using MSC FCR v1.3. In so doing, they include PI 3.1.4 that relates to incentives and subsidies, which is no longer included in FCR v2.0. It is also noted that all of these fisheries only have a Chilean “Governance and Policy” component, whereas, the jack mackerel fishery has an international component, i.e. SPRFMO, too. However, to ensure the Chilean component has been harmonised a comparison of the scores has been made. Table 14 lists the MSC certified, or in-assessment fisheries that overlap with the Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel Fishery.

Table 14. MSC certified and in-assessment fisheries that overlap with the Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel Fishery and scores that have been assigned for their “Governance and Policy” component of Principle 3. The jack mackerel scores are included as the last entry in the table.

MSC FCR PIs MSC Fishery MSC Link 1.3 2.0 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 Chile Southern Hake https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fish  Not yet Not yet Not yet Industrial Trawl and scored scored scored eries/chile-southern-hake- Longline Fisher - In industrial-trawl-and- assessment longline/@@assessments

Chile Squat Lobsters and https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fish  95 85 100 Nylon Shrimp Modified eries/chile-squat-lobsters-and- Trawl Fishery - Certified nylon-shrimp-modified- trawl/@@assessments

Chile Squat Lobsters https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fish  100 85 100 Demersal Trawl eries/chile-squat-lobsters- Camanchaca Fishery - demersal-trawl-camanchaca- Certified fishery/@@assessments

Chilean Mussel Fishery https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fish   90 85 90 and Suspended Culture eries/chilean-mussel-fishery-and- Toralla S.A and Cultivos suspended-culture-toralla-s.a- Toralla S.A. – (Certified

Page 105 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

MSC FCR PIs MSC Fishery MSC Link 1.3 2.0 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 using 1.3, re-assessment and-cultivos-toralla- in progress using v2.0) s.a/@@assessments

Juan Fernandez Rock https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fish  100 100 100 Lobster - Certified eries/juan-fernandez-rock- lobster/@@assessments

Chile Purse Seine Jack https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fish  90 90 90 Mackerel Fishery - In eries/chile-purse-seine-jack- assessment (this fishery) mackerel-jurel/@@assessments

There is no significant difference between the scores for all the fisheries such that a condition of certification has been applied in any of the fisheries and so it is confirmed that the Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel Fishery is harmonised with other MSC certified and in-assessment fisheries in the region.

Previous assessments The fishery has not been assessed against the MSC standard before. Evaluation processes and techniques This assessment of the Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel Fishery was conducted using the FCR version 2.0 (MSC 2014), and with the MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template version 2.0. The default assessment tree was adopted, with no changes made to the text of any default Performance Indicator (PI). Following extensive interviews and the completion of questionnaires by stakeholders it was concluded that the risk-based framework (RBF) needed to be used for the ecosystem outcome PI 2.5.1, see section 4.3.3 below.

Consultations and site visit Notifications of each key step in the assessment process were provided to the MSC, uploaded by the MSC to their website, and advertised through the MSC’s ‘Fisheries Update’. Known stakeholders were also contacted and advised of the key steps. The site visit was conducted from the 18th March 2018 February to the 23rd March 2018. At least 30 days prior to the site visit, notification of the site visit was made through the MSC’s Fisheries Update. Meetings were held in Santiago, Concepcion and Valparaíso. The assessment team sought information from all stakeholders on the key aspects associated with the MSC Principles and traceability. They also had chance to visit and inspect a purse seine vessel and discuss the operational aspects of the fishery with fishers. The following table identifies who participated in the site visit information gathering exercise:

Name Organisation Role All week Paul Knapman Lloyd’s Register Assessor on behalf of Lloyd’s Register Jim Andrews Lloyd’s Register Assessor on behalf of Lloyd’s Register

Page 106 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Name Organisation Role Giuseppe Scarcella Lloyd’s Register Assessor on behalf of Lloyd’s Register Patricio Rojas Cave Traducciones Translator Sergio Cansado Accreditation Services Auditor on behalf of ASI International (ASI) 19th March - Santiago Rodrigo Zamorra SONAPESCA Certification Coordinator Andres Couve SONAPESCA Advisor on international affairs Ian Scott SONAPESCA Consultant supporting the client group Carlos Merino CIAM Executive Director Miguel Angel Escobar CORPESCA Operations Manager Ian Scott SONAPESCA Consultant supporting the client group Rigoberto Rojo SONAPESCA / Horizon Director Ian Scott SONAPESCA Consultant supporting the client group 20th March - Concepcion Macarena Cepeda Asoiación de Industriales President Pesqueros (ASIPES) Enrique Cisterna Blumar Director of Operations Aleiandro Flores Camanchaca Manager Andrés Daroch Foodcorp Chief Executive Claudio Salasar Alimentos Marinos General Manager Daniel Cerda Alimentos Marinos Fleet Manager Aquilles Sepulveda INPESCA Director Alexandre Gretchina INPESCA Biologist Carlos González INPESCA Biologist Ian Scott SONAPESCA Consultant supporting the client group 21st March - Concepcion Joseph Nemo Blumar Fish Master Roberto Contreras Blumar Fleet Manager Enrique Cisterna Blumar Director of Operations Ian Scott SONAPESCA Consultant supporting the client group Lilian Troncoso SERNAPESCA (Bio Bio) Director Gerardo Gallegos Intertek Operations Coordinator Sergio Mora Opazo IFOP Regional Manager Pedro Medina Torres IFOP Fishery Observer Veronica Valdedenito IFOP Fishery Observer Cristian Villouta IFOP Fishery Observer 22nd March - Valparaíso Javier Rivera SUBPESCA Head of Fisheries Mario Acevedo SUBPESCA Fisheries management Luis Cocas SUBPESCA Fisheries management

Page 107 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Name Organisation Role Silvia Harnandez SUBPESCA Fisheries management Juan Carlos Quiroz IFOP Head of Fisheries Science Rodrigo Vega IFOP Researcher – Observation Programme Fernando Naranjo SERNAPESCA Head of Region Sebastian Klarian Scholle of Biological Researcher Sciences, Universidad Andres Bello 22nd March - Santiago Andres Couve SONAPESCA Advisor on international affairs Ian Scott SONAPESCA Consultant supporting the client group 23rd March – Santiago (via Skype) Oliver Yates Ex Birdlife International Ornithologist / Researcher

Evaluation Techniques Several sources of information provided the basis of the conclusions of this assessment, including a review of information and references provided by the client prior to the site visit, information and data sourced during site visit meetings held with stakeholders involved with the fishery, and review of literature and information provided following site visit meetings. Peer review and stakeholder comment on the draft report also provide a very important contribution to the assessment process. The MSC Principles and Criteria set out the requirements for sustainable fishing. These Principles and Criteria have subsequently been used to develop a standardized, default assessment tree (within the MSC Certification Requirements), including Performance Indicators (PIs) and Scoring Issues (SIs), by the MSC and its advisory boards, which have been used in the assessment of this fishery. Each SI may be scored at three scoring guideposts (SGs), which define the level of performance that is required to achieve 100, 80 (the passing score), and 60 scores; 100 represents a theoretically ideal level of performance and 60 a measurable shortfall. If a fishery does not meet the minimum SG 60 level of performance for any SI, the fishery would fail its assessment. For each PI, the performance of the fishery is evaluated, and a score issued. In order for the fishery to achieve certification, an overall weighted average score of 80 is necessary for each of the three Principles and no SI should score less than 60. Scores are issued using a minimum increment of five. Average scores for each Principle are rounded to one decimal place. Following the review and synthesis of information available, the assessment team discussed each individual SI to assess the evidence is present to assess the level of performance that the fishery achieved. Justification of the scoring is provided in the scoring table presented in Appendix 1. Scores for each PI were determined based on guidance outlines in Section 7.10 of the Fisheries Certification Requirements v2.0. Scores were agreed by each team member. The elements that were scored for each PI under Principle 1 and 2 are listed in Table 15 below. Scores allocated for each PI were entered into the MSC Fishery Assessment Scoring Worksheet in order to attain the overall Principle scores; these scores are shown in section 6 of this report.

Page 108 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 15. Scoring elements

Component Scoring elements Main / Data- Minor deficient? P1 – Target Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) Main No species P2 – Primary Not applicable N/A N/A species P2 – Secondary Caballa / Chub mackerel Minor No species (Scomber japonicus) Jibia / Humboldt squid Minor No (Dosidicus gigas) Pez medusa / Blue flathead Minor No (Cubiceps caeruleus) Sierra / Snoek Minor No (Thyrsites atun) Merluza común / South Pacific hake Minor No (Merluccius gayi gayi) Merluza de cola / Patagonian grenadier Minor No (Macrorunus megallanicus) Kelp gull Main No (Larus dominicanus) Peruvian pelican Main No (Pelecanus thagus) Albatross species Main No (Thalassarche spp.) Cape Petrel Main No (Daption capense) Sooty shearwater Main No (Ardenna grisea) P2 - ETP South American sea lion N/A No (Otaria flavescens) Black-browed albatross N/A No (Thalassarche melanophris) Grey-headed albatross N/A No (Thalassarche chrysostoma) Pink-footed shearwater N/A No (Ardenna creatopus) White chinned petrel N/A No (Procellaria aequinoctialis) Leatherback turtle N/A No (Dermochelys coriacea) Wandering albatross N/A No (Diomedea exulans) P2 - Habitat Not applicable (Purse seine used in N/A No deep water fishing for a pelagic species) P2 - VME Not applicable N/A No P2 - Ecosystem Trophic structure N/A Yes

Page 109 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Risk Based Framework (RBF) The announcement for the assessment of the fishery indicated that the RBF might be required for several PIs. Prior to, as well as during, the site visit, stakeholders were asked to fill in an on-line questionnaire to help the assessment team evaluate whether any PI was data deficient. After the site visit and the evaluation of the information gathered and using the criteria set out in MSC FCR v 2.0 section 7.7.6 and FCR Table 3, the assessment team concluded that the RBF was required for the evaluation of the ecosystem PI (2.5.1).

Lloyd’s Register carried out a series of stakeholder interviews to discuss the scoring of this PI. All of the stakeholders that participated at the site visit and that were contacted before the site visit were invited to participate in these interviews. Six stakeholders accepted the invitation. In each case a questionnaire prepared by the assessment team was used to structure the discussions. A further stakeholder declined to participate in the interviews but did submit responses to the questionnaire.

The interviews and questionnaires allowed the assessment team to work with stakeholders to assign scores to the spatial scale, temporal scale, intensity and consequence of the impacts of the fishery on marine ecosystems.

The process and outcome is further elaborated in Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs of this report.

5 Traceability Eligibility date The eligibility date for the fishery is the date of the publication of the Public Comment Draft Report (PCDR) (29th January 2019). It is considered that the existing enforcement and monitoring of the fishery, is sufficiently robust to give confidence in the proposed eligibility date. Vessels within the client group land to designated ports that will have chain of custody certification.

Traceability within the fishery Existing fisheries management requirements include the clear identification of species, quantity, fishing method and area of capture by all vessels landing fish from the fishery. All catches are reported in logbooks and in catch and effort landing returns. On-board observer coverage also contributes to monitoring, cross checking and verification of catches and landings with the vessels logbook.

Cross referencing of VMS data with logbooks, observer and aerial and at-sea surveillance reports also ensures that fish is reported from the correct area of capture. All vessels have to hail in and out before leaving or returning to port. All landings are monitored by independent dockside monitors. Vessels have to advise SERNAPESCA before discharging and are subject to regular monitoring by enforcement officers.

Table 16. The ports of landing where jack mackerel is landed by the client group vessels

Port Name Region Coquimbo Coquimbo (iv) San Vicente Bio Bio (VII) Lota Bio Bio (VII) Coronel Bio Bio (VII)

Page 110 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Vessels fishing outside the UoCs The northern extent of the UoC is coincident with the southern border of Administrative Region III at parallel 26º 03’ S, extending seaward beyond the EEZ. The southern extent of the UoC is the southern boundary of Administrative Region XII (see Figure 1).

Jack mackerel are not found beyond Region XII as the waters are too cold. The industrial fleet targeting jack mackerel operate south of 26º 03’ S. To ensure there is no risk of jack mackerel from outside of the UoC being mixed with jack mackerel caught within the UoC, all landings will need to have the area of capture confirmed by the third-party dockside monitors.

At sea processing Jack mackerel is not subject to at-sea processing.

Transhipping Transhipping is allowed within the SPRFMO convention area under provisions set out in CMM 12-2018 (which include prior notification and the requirement to have an observer on-board). However, Chilean national law does not permit transhipping by Chilean flagged vessels unless under strict conditions. Boats must be registered and notify their intentions in advance.

Eligibility to enter further chains of custody The scope of this certification ends at the points of landing. Downstream certification of the product will require appropriate certification of storage and handling facilities at these locations.

In order for subsequent links in the distribution chain to be able to use the MSC logo, jack mackerel products must enter into a separate chain of custody certification from the point of landing forward.

The subsequent links must be able to prove that they can trace jack mackerel products back to the permitted vessels which landed the product.

The main points of landing for this fishery are all major Chilean ports (see Table 16).

The assessment team has determined that the systems in place for tracking and tracing are sufficient and fish and fish products from the fishery may enter into further certified chains of custody and be eligible to carry the MSC ecolabel.

The eligible parties to use the fisheries certificate are vessels owned by members of SONAPESCA. The client will provide a list of eligible vessels to the CAB on certification of the fishery and this will be made available to stakeholders.

The following table summarises traceability factors within the fishery.

Table 17. Traceability factors within the fishery

Traceability Factor Description of risk factor, if present.

Potential for non-certified gear/s to be Jack mackerel is only caught by purse seine. The at- used within the fishery sea tracking and tracing systems described above ensure that the potential for non-certified gears to be used within the fishery to be negligible.

Page 111 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Traceability Factor Description of risk factor, if present.

Potential for vessels from the UoC to All vessels are equipped with VMS, there is a high fish outside the UoC or in different level of observer coverage, and there is extensive geographical areas (on the same trips record keeping required to verify this. All landings or different trips) are subject to dockside monitoring. These checks will confirm the area of capture and ensure only fish from within the UoC are eligible to qualify for certification.

Potential for vessels outside of the UoC The artisanal fleet sector target jack mackerel with or client group fishing the same stock purse seines. Administrative checks, including 100% dockside monitoring will ensure that landings from the client group vessels is not mixed with fish from vessels outside of the client group.

Risks of mixing between certified and Where there is potential for mixing, these risks are non-certified catch during storage, managed by the operators who have their own transport, or handling activities protocols in place to separate catches. (including transport at sea and on land, points of landing, and sales at auction) Risks of mixing between certified and Jack mackerel are not processed at sea. They are non-certified catch during processing kept aboard vessels in refrigerated salt water (RSW) activities (at-sea and/or before tanks and landed whole to shore based processing subsequent Chain of Custody) facilities. Risks of mixing between certified and Transhipments are not authorised for Chilean vessels non-certified catch during transhipment unless under strict conditions. Boats must be registered and notify their intentions in advance so that the process can be inspected Any other risks of substitution between No additional risks were identified. fish from the UoC (certified catch) and fish from outside this unit (non-certified catch) before subsequent Chain of Custody is required

Eligibility of Inseparable or Practicably Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further Chains of Custody There are no IPI stocks in the fishery.

Page 112 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

6 Evaluation Results Principle Level Scores The preliminary scores for the three Principles for the thirty Performance Indicators that were scored are provided below.

Table 18. Principle Scores

Principle Scores Principle Score Principle 1 – Target Species 84.2 Principle 2 – Ecosystem 85.0 Principle 3 – Management System 86.5

Summary of PI Level Scores Table 19. Summary of PI level scores

Principle Component Performance Indicator (PI) Score 1.1.1 Stock status 90 Outcome 1 1.1.2 Stock rebuilding N/A 1.2.1 Harvest strategy 75 1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools 75 Management 1.2.3 Information & monitoring 80 1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 95 2.1.1 Outcome 100 Primary 2 2.1.2 Management 80 species 2.1.3 Information 95 2.2.1 Outcome 95 Secondary 2.2.2 Management 75 species 2.2.3 Information 80 2.3.1 Outcome 85 ETP species 2.3.2 Management 70 2.3.3 Information 80 2.4.1 Outcome 100 Habitats 2.4.2 Management 85 2.4.3 Information 80 2.5.1 Outcome 80 Ecosystem 2.5.2 Management 80 2.5.3 Information 90 3.1.1 Legal & customary framework 95 Governance 3 3.1.2 Consultation, roles & responsibilities 95 and policy 3.1.3 Long term objectives 100 3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 100 Fishery 3.2.2 Decision making processes 65 specific 3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement 75 management Monitoring & management system 3.2.4 70 performance evaluation

Page 113 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Summary of Conditions Table 20 Summary of Conditions

Related to Condition Condition Performance previously number Indicator raised condition? (Y/N/NA) The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and 1 practicality of alternative measures to 1.2.1 (f) NA minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock and they are implemented as appropriate. The client shall ensure by the fourth surveillance audit that there are well defined HCRs in place that ensure that the 2 exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is 1.2.2 (a) NA approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to NA 3 minimise UoA-related mortality of 2.2.2 (e) unwanted catch of main secondary species and evidence shall be presented to show that they are implemented as appropriate. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to 4 2.3.2 (e) NA minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species and evidence shall be presented to show that they are implemented as appropriate. The client shall ensure by the second surveillance audit that: • There are established decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery- NA 5 specific objectives. 3.2.2 (a,b,d) • Decision-making processes respond to serious and other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely

Page 114 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Related to Condition Condition Performance previously number Indicator raised condition? (Y/N/NA) and adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions. • Information on the fishery’s performance and management action is available on request, and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit that the monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) system NA 6 has been implemented in the fishery and 3.2.3 (a) has demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit that the fishery-specific 7 3.2.4 (b) NA management system is subject to regular internal and occasional external review.

Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement Following this assessment team’s work, and review by stakeholders and peer-reviewers, the determination will be presented to Acoura’s decision making entity that this fishery has passed its assessment and should be certified.

(REQUIRED FOR PCR)

1. The report shall include a formal statement as to the certification action taken by the CAB’s official decision-makers in response to the Determination recommendation.

Page 115 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

7 References Principle 1 Abramov, A.A., Kotlyar, A.N. (1980). Some biological features of the Peruvian jack mackerel, Trachurus symmetricus murphyi. Journal of Ichthyology 80: 25–31. Anon (1984). Report of survey for the development of new distant water trawling grounds in 1983. Kaihatsu News No 40. Anon (1985). Report of survey for the development of new distant water trawling grounds in 1984. Kaihatsu News No 45. Antezana, T., (2010). Euphausia mucronata: A key stone herbivore and prey of the Humboldt Current system. Deep Sea Res. II 57: 652–662. Arcos, D., C. Gatica, P. Ruiz, A. Sepulveda, M.A. Barbieri, R. Alarcon, S. Nuñez, J. Chong, J. Cordova, A. Rebolledo, C. Gonzales, F. Contreras, M. Aguayo, F. Vejar, P. Torres and C. Toro. (2005). Condición biologica de jurel en Alta Mar, año 2004. Informe Final Proyecto FIP 2004-33. Fondo de Investigación Pesquera. Ayón, P. & J. Correa. (2013). Spatial and temporal variability of Jack mackerel Trachurus murphy (Nichols 1920) larvae in Peru between 1966-2010. In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara- Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 083-086. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Bahamonde, R. (1978). Distribución y abundancia relitiva de los principales recursos demersales entre Corral (40ºS) y el Cabo de Hornos (57ºS). Instituto de Fomento Pesquero IFOP/JAMARC. Informe Interno. Bailey, K. (1987). Townsend Cromwell surveys South Pacific albacore resource. Catch, 14(7); 20–22. Bailey, K. (1989). Description and surface distribution of juvenile Peruvian jack mackerel, Trachurus murphyi, Nichols from the subtropical convergence zone of the central South Pacific. Fishery Bulletin 87: 273–278. Basten, J.; Contreras, P. (1978). Observaciones preliminares sobre la pesquería del jurel Trachurus murphyi (Nichols) en la zona norte de Chile. Períoda julio 1975–julio 1978. Universidad del Norte Departamento Pesquerías Informe Técnico. 62 p. Braun, M. and V. Valenzuela (2008). Seasonal distribution and abundance of jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) eggs and larvae off northern Chile 1981-2007. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Brinton, E. (1962). The distribution of Pacific euphausiids. Bull. Scripps Inst. Oceanogr. 8(2): 51-270. Canales, C. and R Serra. (2008). Chilean jack mackerel stock assessment model. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Chur, V. N., A. A. Nesterov, K. V. Kashirin (1984). Distribution of jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi Nichols in the southern part of the Pacific Ocean. Fishery studies in the open areas of the World Ocean. Collection of scientific papers. M.: VNIRO: 56-70. (In Russian). Coker R.E. (1907). Condición en que se encuentra la pesca marina desde Paita hasta bahía de la Independencia. Boletín del Ministerio de Fomento, Año VI, No 2, 30 de noviembre de 1907, 89-117. Coker R.E. (1910). Condiciones de la pesquería de Mollendo. Boletín del Ministerio de Fomento, Año VIII, No 8, 31 de octubre de 1910, 64-114.

Page 116 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Cordova et al. (1998). Evaluación hidroacústica del recurso jurel en la ZEE de Chile. IFOP/FIP 98-11. Informe Final. 200 págs. +figs. Cordova, J. R Bahamonde and V Catasti. (2008). Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi, Nichols, 1920) acoustic survey in the central coast of Chile. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Csirke J. (2013). The Jack mackerel Trachurus murphy in Perú. In: Csirke J., R. Guevara- Carrasco & M. Espino (eds.). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. Special issue 20(1): 005 – 008 (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Cubillos, L., C Gatica and R Serra. (2008). Short review of natural mortality and size at first maturity on jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in the southeastern Pacific. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Díaz, E. (2013). Estimation of growth parameters of Jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi (Nichols 1920) caught in Peru, from length frequency analysis. In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara- Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 061-066. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Dioses, T. (2013a). Abundance and distribution patterns of Jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi (Nichols 1920) in Peru. In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara-Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 067-074. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Dioses, T. and Ñiquen, M. (1988). Aspectos generales sobre la biología y pesquería del recurso jurel (Trachurus murphyi) en Perú. En: Pesca Perú, 1988. Forum: Características en el diseño de una embarcación ideal para la captura de especies pelágicas. 14-15 enero 1988, 40p. Dioses, T., Alarcon, V.H.; Nakama, M.H.; Echevarria, A. (1989). Desarrollo ovocitario, fecundidad parcial y distribucion vertical de los cardumenes en desove del jurel Trachurus murphyi (N). (Oocyte development, partial fecundity and vertical distribution of the spawning schools of jack mackerel, Trachurus murphyi N.). Revista de la Comision Permanente del Pacifico Sur. 287–294. Elizarov, A.A.; Grechina, A.S.; Kotenev, B.N.; Kuzetsov, A.N. (1993). Peruvian jack mackerel,Trachurus symmetricus murphyi, in the open waters of the South Pacific. Journal of Ichthyology 33: 86–104. Espino, M. (2013). The Jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi (Nichols 1920) and the environmental macro-scale variables. In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara-Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 009-020. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Espinoza, E M Ñiquen and R Flores. (2008). Changes in the latitudinal and longitudinal distribution of the aggregations of jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in the Perúvian sea during 1996 – 2007. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Espinoza, P., Lorrain, A., Ménard, A.F., Cherel, Y., Tremblay‑Boyer, L., Argüelles, L., Tafur, R., Bertrand, S., Tremblay, Y., Ayón, P., Munaron, J.M., Richard, P., Bertrand, A. (2017). Trophic structure in the northern Humboldt Current system: new perspectives from stable isotope analysis. Marine Biology (2017) 164:86. Evseenko, S.A. (1987). Reproduction of the Peruvian jack mackerelTrachurus symmetricus murphyi in the South Pacific. Journal of Ichthyology 27: 151–160.

Page 117 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Flores, R., M. Espino, G. Luque & J. Quispe. (2013). Environmental variability patterns in the Peruvian waters. In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara-Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 021-028. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Frank, K. T. and Brickman, D. 2010. Allee effects and compensatory population dynamics within a stock complex. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57, 513–517. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245263918_Allee_Effects_and_Compensatory_Po pulation_Dynamics_Within_a_Stock_Complex George, M.R. (1995). Aspects of the reproductive cycle of southern Pacific jack mackerel, Trachurus murphyi Nichols, 1920, off northern coast of Chile. Ices C.M 1995/H30: 12. Gili, R., V. Alegría, V. Bocic, L. Cid y H. Miranda. (1996). Estudio biológico pesquero del recurso jurel en la zona centro sur, V a X Regiones. Determinación de la estructura de edad y parámetros de crecimiento del jurel. FIP 018 - 93. Goicochea, C., J. Mostacero, P. Moquillaza, T. Dioses, Y. Topiño & R. Guevara-Carrasco. (2013). Validation of the formation rate of growth rings in otoliths of Jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi (Nichols 1920). In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara-Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 053-060. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Gutiérrez , M., A Bertrand , M Ballón, P Espinoza , A Alegre and F Gerlotto. (2008). Distribution changes and interactions of jack mackerel off Perú as observed using acoustics (1983-2006). Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Guzman, O.; Castillo, J.; Lillo, S.; Pineda, P.; Rodriguez; Giakoni, I. (1983). Estudio de recursos pelágicos. Programa monitoreo de los recursos pelágicos. I. Prospección zona Arica–Coquimbo. (18º30’–30º00’S ). CORFO. Gerencia de Desarrollo. IFOP (AP 83–32). 48 p. Hintzen, N. T., Roel, B., Benden, D., Clarke, M., E gan, A., Nash, R. D. M., Rohlf, N. (2014). Managing a complex population structure: Exploring the importance of information from fisheries-independent sources. ICES Journal of Marine Science 72 (2), 528-542. Hückstädt, L.A., Rojas, C.P., Antezana, T. (2007) Stable isotope analysis reveals pelagic foraging by the Southern sea lion in central Chile. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 347:123–133. doi:10.1016/j.jembe.2007.03.014 Icochea L., A. Chipollini & M. Ñiquen. (1988). Análisis de pesquería de arrastre pelágica en la costa peruana durante 1983-1987 y su relación con el medio ambiente. Rev. Com. Perm. Pacif. Sur. 455-465. Memorias del Simposio Internacional de los Recursos Vivos y las Pesquerías en el Pacífico Sudeste. Viña del Mar. IFOP (2017). Documento Técnico. Convenio de Desempeño 2017. Estatus y posibilidades de explotación biológicamente sustentables de los principales recursos pesqueros nacionales, año 2017 IFOP, (2016). Documento Técnico. Convenio de Desempeño 2016. Estatus y posibilidades de explotación biológicamente sustentables de los principales recursos pesqueros nacionales, año 2017. Jurel, 2017. http://www.portaltransparencia.cl/PortalPdT/ingreso-sai- v2?idOrg=843 Kawahara, S.; Uozumi, Y.; Yamada, H. (1988). First record of a carangid fish Trachurus murphyi from New Zealand. Japanese Journal of Ichthyology 35: 2 212–214. Kochkin, P.N. (1994). Age determination and estimate of growth rate for the Peruvian jack mackerel,Trachurus symmetricus murphyi. Journal of Ichthyology 34: 39–50.

Page 118 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Konchina, Y.V. (1979). The feeding of the Peruvian jack mackerel,Trachurus symmetricus murphyi. Journal of Ichthyology 19: 52–61. Kotenev, B.N., Kukhorenko, K.G., Glubokov, A.I. (2006). Main results of the Russian multidisciplinary ecosystem research, and exploratory fish-finding of concentrations of hydrobionts and their fisheries development in the south Pacific. Moscow: VNIRO. 37 p. Miller, T.W., Brodeur, R.D., Rau, G., Omori, K. (2010). Prey dominance shapes trophic structure of the northern California Current pelagic food web: evidence from stable isotopes and diet analysis. Mar Ecol Progr Ser 420:15–26. doi:10.3354/meps0887 Neira, S. and Arancibia H. (2004). Trophic interactions and community structure in the upwelling system off Central Chile (33–39°S). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 312 (2004) 349–366. Ñiquen, M,. and Carranza. (2008). Program Bio-oceanographic research of resources jack mackerel and Pacific mackerel in Perú. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Ñiquen, M., M. Bouchon, D. Ulloa, A. Medina. (2013). The Jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi (Nichols 1920) fishery in Peru: an analysis of catches and the fishing fleet. In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara-Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 097-106. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Ñiquen, M.A. and C.L. Peña. (2008). Distribution of jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) related to oceanographical features between north Perú to north Chile. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Núñez, S, S Vásquez, P Ruiz and A Sepúlveda. (2008). Distribution of early developmental stages of jack mackerel in the Southeastern Pacific Ocean. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Nuñez, S., J. Letelier, D. Donoso, A. Sepulveda y D. Arcos. (2004). Relating spatial distribution of the Chilean jack mackerel eggs and environmental factors in the oceanic waters off Chile. Proceedings (Tomo II) of the Pan Ocean Remote Sensing Conference, 2004. Remote Sensing of Oceans, Coasts and Atmosphere: Developments and Applications. Gayana, Vol. 68 Nº 2: 444-449. Ojeda, V. Bocic and L. Muñoz. (2008). Methodology employed for age determination in Chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi). Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Doc. CHJMWS pap #8: 11p. Oliva, J; G. Claramunt; G. Herrera; C. Padilla y P. Pizarro (1995). Reproducción In: Alegría, V. (Ed.), Estudio Biológico Pesquero sobre el recurso jurel en la zona norte (Regiones I y II). IFOP. Oliva, M.E. (1999). Metazoan parasites of the jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi (teleostei, Carangidae) in a latitudinal gradient from South America (Chile and Peru). Parasite 6: 223- 230. Oyarzún, C. y S. Gacitúa. (2002). Aspectos reproductivos, fecundidad parcial y frecuencia de desove del jurel, año 2001. In: Cubillos, L. (Ed.) Condición biológica del jurel en alta mar, año 2001. Preinforme Final Corregido, FIP 2001-12. 168 p. + Anexo. Oyarzún, C., J. Chong y M. Malagueño. (1998). Fenología reproductiva en el jurel, Trachurus symmetricus /Ayres, 1855)(Perciformes, Carangidae) en el área de Talcahuano- Chile: 1982-984. En: D. Arcos (ed). Biología y Ecología del Jurel en Aguas Chilenas: 67.75. Penney, A. and P Taylor. (2008). An overview of the New Zealand jack mackerel fishery: Catch composition, catch trends, seasonality and length-frequency composition. Paper

Page 119 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. Perea, A., J. Mori, B. Buitron y J. Sánchez. (2013). Reproductive aspects of Jack mackerel Trachurus murphy (Nichols 1920) in Peru. In: J. Csirke, R. Guevara-Carrasco y M. Espino (eds). 2013. Ecology, Fishery and Conservation of Jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) in Peru. Rev. peru. biol. special issue 20 (1): 029-034. (Volume published in Spanish with titles, abstracts and captions in English). Poulin, E., L. Cárdenas, C. E. Hernández, I. Kornfield y F. P. Ojeda. (2004). The brief history of the Chilean jack mackerel: population genetic inference from the mitochondrial DNA control region. J. Fish Biol. 65: 1160-1164. Serra, J.R. (1983). Changes in the abundance of pelagic resources along the Chilean coast. In: G.D. Sharp and J. Csirke (Eds.) Proceedings of the Expert Consultation to examine changes in abundance and species composition of neritic fish resources. San José, Costa Rica, 18 - 29 April 1983. FAO Fish. Rep. 291 (2): 255 - 284. Serra, R. (1991a). Important life history aspects of the Chilean jack mackerel,Trachurus symmetricus murphyi. Investigacion Pesquera (Chile) 36: 67–83. Serra, R. (1991a). Important life history aspects of the Chilean jack mackerel,Trachurus symmetricus murphyi. Investigacion Pesquera (Chile) 36: 67–83. Serra, R. (1991b). Long - term variability of the Chilean sardine. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Long - Term Variability of Pelagic Fish Populations and their Environment. T. Kawasaki, S. Tanaka, Y. Toba and A. Taniguchi (eds.) New York: Pergamon Press. pp 165 - 172. Soldat V.T., Kolomeiko F.V., Glubokov A.I., Nesterov A.A., Chernyshkov P.P. and Timokhin E.N. (2008). Jack Mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) distribution peculiarities in the high seas of the South Pacific in relation to the population structure. Paper presented to the SPRFMO Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop, Santiago, 30 June – 4 July 2008. SPRFMO (2008). Report of the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organization Chilean Jack Mackerel Workshop. 30 June – 4 July 2008, Santiago, Chile. 70 p. SPRFMO (2014). Report of the Scientific Committee 02 of SPRFMO. 2014 jack mackerel stock assessment. 53 p. SPRFMO (2015). Report of the Scientific Committee 03 of SPRFMO. 2015 jack mackerel stock assessment. 50 p. SPRFMO (2016b). Report of the 4th Scientific Committee Meeting - The Hague, Kingdom of the Netherlands 10-14 October 2016. Page 50. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings-2013-plus/SC-Meetings/4th-SC-Meeting- 2016/SC04-report/SC-04-FinalReport-Rev1-25Oct2016.pdf SPRFMO (2017a). Final report of the 5th Scientific Committee Meeting Shanghai, China 23- 28 September 2017. Page 51. SPRFMO. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/00-SC5-2017/SC05- Report-Final-4Oct2017.pdf SPRFMO (2017b). Scientific Committee 5, Annex 09 – 2017 Jack mackerel Assessment Input and Results. Page 30. SPRFMO. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/00-SC5-2017/Annex-9- 2017-Assessment-input-and-results.pdf SPRFMO (2018). CMM 01-2018 Conservation and Management Measure for Trachurus murphyi. March 2018. Page 5. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and- Management-Measures/2018-CMMs/CMM-01-2018-Trachurus-murphyi-8March2018.pdf SPRFMO, (2016a). Annex 7: Jack mackerel stock assessment. Report of the 4th Scientific Committee Meeting - The Hague, Kingdom of the Netherlands 10-14 October 2016. Page

Page 120 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

53. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings-2013-plus/SC-Meetings/4th-SC- Meeting-2016/SC04-report/SC-04-tech-annex-7.pdf Taylor P.R. (in prep.) Species composition and seasonal variability in commercial catches of jack mackerel (Trachurus declivis, T. symmetricus murphyi, and T. novaezelandiae) in JMA 1, JMA 3, and JMA 7 during 2003–04. Draft New Zealand Fisheries Assessment Report. Tilic, I. (1963). Material estadístico sobre la industria peruana de harina de pescado. Inf. Inst. Inv. Rec. Marinos No 14: 51p. Zuta, S., Tsukayama I.; Villanueva, R. (1983). El ambiente marino y las fluctuaciones de las principales poblaciones pelágicas de la costa peruana. En Sharp, G.D. & J. Csirke (eds) Actas de la Consulta de Expertos para examinar los cambios en la abundancia y composición por especies de recursos de peces neríticos. San José, Costa Rica, 18-29 abril 1983. Una reunión preparatoria para la Conferencia Mundial de la FAO sobre ordenación y desarrollo pesqueros. FAO Fish. Rep./FAO Inf, Pesca (291) vol.2:553p.

Principle 2 ACAP. 2018. Albatross and Petrel Species to which the ACAP Agreement applies. https://www.acap.aq/en/acap-species/307-acap-species-list/file. Advanced Conservation Strategies. 2011. A Coastal-Marine Assessment in Chile. A report prepared for the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. Pages 1–62. http://static1.squarespace.com/static/537c92d5e4b071e47398cfcb/t/54fedbfee4b03e955565 fa0e/1425988606032/ACS+marine+assessment+Chile.pdf. Alegre, A., A. Bertrand, M. Espino, P. Espinoza, T. Dioses, M. Ñiquen, I. Navarro, M. Simier, and F. Ménard. 2015. Diet diversity of jack and chub mackerels and ecosystem changes in the northern Humboldt Current system: A long-term study. Progress in Oceanography 137:299–313. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079661115001627. Atlas of Marine Protection. 2018. MPAtlas, Chile. http://www.mpatlas.org/region/country/CHL/. Bertrand, A., A. Chaigneau, S. Peraltilla, J. Ledesma, M. Graco, F. Monetti, and F. P. Chavez. 2011. Oxygen: A Fundamental Property Regulating Pelagic Ecosystem Structure in the Coastal Southeastern Tropical Pacific. PLoS ONE 6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3247266/. Birdlife. 2018. Peruvian Pelican (Pelecanus thagus) - BirdLife species factsheet. http://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/peruvian-pelican-pelecanus-thagus. Carlowicz, M., and S. Schollaert Uz. 2017, February 14. El Niño: Pacific Wind and Current Changes Bring Warm, Wild Weather. Text. Article. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ElNino. CITES. 2018. Checklist of CITES species. http://checklist.cites.org/#/en. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2012. Azores Scientific Criteria and Guidance for identifying ecologically or biologically significant marine areas and designing representative networks of marine protected areas in open ocean waters and deep sea habitats. Convention on Biological Diversity. https://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/mar/ebsaws-2014- 01/other/ebsaws-2014-01-azores-brochure-en.pdf. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2018a. Dorsal de Nazca y de Salas y Gómez (Salas y Gómez and Nazca Ridges) EBSA Description. https://chm.cbd.int/database/record?documentID=204100.

Page 121 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Convention on Biological Diversity. 2018b. Sistema de Surgencia de la Corriente de Humboldt en el Norte de Chile (Northern Chile Humboldt Current Upwelling System) EBSA Description. https://chm.cbd.int/database/record?documentID=204069 . Convention on Biological Diversity. 2018c. Sistema de Surgencia de la Corriente de Humboldt en Chile Central (Central Chile Humboldt Current Upwelling System) EBSA Description. https://chm.cbd.int/database/record?documentID=204091. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2018d. Montes submarinos en el Cordón de Juan Fernández (Seamounts in the Juan Fernandez Islands) EBSA Description. https://chm.cbd.int/database/record?documentID=204114. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2018e. Sistema de Surgencia de la Corriente de Humboldt en el Sur de Chile (Southern Chile Humboldt Current Upwelling System) EBSA Description. https://chm.cbd.int/database/record?documentID=204086. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2018f. Convergencia de la Deriva del Oeste (West Wind Drift Convergence). https://chm.cbd.int/database/record?documentID=204089. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2018g. Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs). https://www.cbd.int/ebsa/. CMS. 2018. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals: Agreements. https://www.cms.int/en/cms-instruments/agreements. DS MINECON. 2004. Regulación sobre Parques y Reservas Marinas 2005/08/04. DS MINECON 238-2004. Pages 1–6. http://www.sernapesca.cl/sites/default/files/DS_238_2004.pdf. Embassy of Chile to New Zealand. 2018, March 7. Chile: Letter of Consent for the application of Conservation & Management Measure No. 01-2018 throughout Chilean territorial waters. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management- Measures/Chile-consent-to-CMM-01-2018.pdf. FAO Fisheries Resources Division. 2001. Fishing Gear types. Purse seines. Technology Fact Sheets. http://www.fao.org/fishery/geartype/249/en. Friedlander, A. M., E. Ballesteros, J. Beets, E. Berkenpas, C. F. Gaymer, M. Gorny, and E. Sala. 2013. Effects of isolation and fishing on the marine ecosystems of Easter Island and Salas y Gómez, Chile. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 23:515– 531. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/aqc.2333. Gutiérrez, D., M. Akester, and L. Naranjo. 2016. Productivity and Sustainable Management of the Humboldt Current Large Marine Ecosystem under climate change. Environmental Development 17:126–144. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211464515300397. Harrison, D. E., and A. M. Chiodi. 2015. Multi-decadal variability and trends in the El Niño- Southern Oscillation and tropical Pacific fisheries implications. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography 113:9–21. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967064513004669. IFOP. 2017. INFORME FINAL. Convenio de Desempeño 2016. Programa de Observadores Científicos, 2016. SUBSECRETARÍA DE ECONOMÍA Y EMT / Julio 2017. Pages 1–431. Instituto de Fomeno Pesquero, Valparaíso. IFOP. 2018. Discard Program of Demersal and Pelagic fisheries | Instituto de Fomento Pesquero. https://www.ifop.cl/en/nuestro-que-hacer/la-investigacion-pesquera/depto-de- evaluacion-de-pesquerias/proyectos-de-descarte/. IUCN. 2012. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 3.1 Second Edition. Page iv + 32pp. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland & Cambridge, UK. http://s3.amazonaws.com/iucnredlist- newcms/staging/public/attachments/3097/redlist_cats_crit_en.pdf.

Page 122 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

IUCN. 2013a, June 21. Dermochelys coriacea: Wallace, B.P., Tiwari, M. & Girondot, M.: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013: e.T6494A43526147. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/6494/0. IUCN. 2013b, June 24. Dermochelys coriacea (East Pacific Ocean subpopulation): Wallace, B.P., Tiwari, M. & Girondot, M.: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013: e.T46967807A46967809. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/46967807/0. IUCN. 2015, November 2. Otaria byronia: Cárdenas-Alayza, S., Crespo, E. & Oliveira, L.: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T41665A61948292. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41665/0. IUCN. 2016a, October 1. Pelecanus thagus: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T22697619A93624574. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22697619/0 . IUCN. 2016b, October 1. Thalassarche chrysostoma: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22698398A112041443. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698398/0. IUCN. 2016c, October 1. Ardenna creatopus: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22698195A112079183. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698195/0. IUCN. 2016d, October 1. Ardenna grisea: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22698209A110674925. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698209/0. IUCN. 2016e, October 1. Procellaria aequinoctialis: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22698140A112245853. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698140/0. IUCN. 2016f, October 1. Diomedea exulans: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22698305A110676747. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698305/0. IUCN. 2016g, October 1. Larus dominicanus: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T22694329A93448691. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22694329/0. IUCN. 2016h, October 1. Daption capense: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22697879A111828859. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22697879/0. IUCN. 2017, October 1. Thalassarche melanophris: BirdLife International: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22698375A119512041. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22698375/0. LGPA. 1991. Ley General de Pesca y Acuicultura (consolidated version). Page 189. https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=30265&idParte=&idVersion=. LGPA. 2013. Modifica en el ámbito de la sustentabilidad de recursos hidrobiológicos, acceso a la actividad pesquera industrial y artesanal y regulaciones para la investigación y fiscalización, la ley general de pesca y acuicultura contenida en la ley n° 18.892 y sus modificaciones. (F.D.O. 09/02/2013). Pages 1–114. https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=1048776. Mangel, J. C., J. Adams, J. Alfaro, P. Hodum, K. D. Hyrenbach, V. Colodro, P. Palavecino, and J. H. Norris. 2006. Conservation implications of pink-footed shearwater (Puffinus creatopus) movements and fishery interactions assessed using multiple methods. Pages 1–

Page 123 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

50. ACAP. http://oikonos.org/papers/SBWG5_Doc_06_Mangel_et_al._pink- footed_shearwater_E_s_f.pdf. Marine Stewardship Council. 2014. MSC Fisheries Certification Requirements and Guidance, v.2.0. Marine Stewardship Council. https://www.msc.org/documents/scheme- documents/fisheries-certification-scheme-documents/fisheries-standard-version-2.0. Marine Stewardship Council. 2015a. Use of ‘if necessary’ in P2 management PIs (2.1.2, 2.2.2, 2.4.2, 2.5.2) | MSC Interpretation Log. http://msc-info.accreditation- services.com/questions/use-of-if-necessary-in-p2-management-pis-2-1-2-2-2-2-2-4-2-2-5-2/. Marine Stewardship Council. 2015b. Historical cut off point of VME unimpacted level | MSC Interpretation Log. http://msc-info.accreditation-services.com/questions/historical-cut-off- point-of-vme-unimpacted-level/. Marine Stewardship Council. 2016. Get certified: a practical guide for fisheries. https://www.msc.org/documents/get-certified/fisheries/get-certified-a-practical-guide-for- fisheries-low-resolution. Marine Stewardship Council. 2017. Move-on rules at SG60 for PI2.4.2a. | MSC Interpretation Log. http://msc-info.accreditation-services.com/questions/move-on-rules-at-sg60-for-pi2-4- 2a/. Medina, M., and H. Arancibia. 2002. Dinámica trófica del jurel (Trachurus symmetricus murphyi) en el norte de Chile. Investigaciones marinas 30:45–55. https://scielo.conicyt.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0717- 71782002000100003&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es. NASA Earth Observatory. 2018, July 12. Global Maps. Text.Article. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/global-maps. National Geographic News. 2015, October 5. Chile Creates Largest Marine Reserve in the Americas. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/10/151005-desventuradas-islands- marine-protected-area-conservation-science/. National Geographic News. 2017, October 4. New Marine Parks Protect 290,000 Square Miles of Ocean. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/niue-chile-marine-parks- ocean-conservation-environment/. Neira, S., and H. Arancibia. 2004. Trophic interactions and community structure in the upwelling system off Central Chile (33–39°S). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 312:349–366. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022098104004538. Neira, S., H. Arancibia, and L. Cubillos. 2004. Comparative analysis of trophic structure of commercial fishery species off Central Chile in 1992 and 1998. Ecological Modelling 172:233–248. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380003003715. Newman, M., M. A. Alexander, T. R. Ault, K. M. Cobb, C. Deser, E. Di Lorenzo, N. J. Mantua, A. J. Miller, S. Minobe, H. Nakamura, N. Schneider, D. J. Vimont, A. S. Phillips, J. D. Scott, and C. A. Smith. 2016. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation, Revisited. Journal of Climate 29:4399–4427. https://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0508.1. No.19.300. 1994. Aprueba Ley Sobre Bases Generales Del Medio Ambiente. https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=30667. No.20.417. 2010. Crea El Ministerio, El Servicio De Evaluación Ambiental Y La Superintendencia Del Medio Ambiente. https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=1010459&idParte=8848125&idVersion=2010-01- 26. NOAA. 2018. Fishing gear in the Southeast Pacific Ocean from left to right: a Chilean purse seiner; a tuna purse seiner in tropical waters of the northern part of Area 87; a Peruvian

Page 124 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

purse seiner; a trawler; and a small purse seiner. http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/bigs/fish2200.jpg. Sellanes, J., C. Neira, E. Quiroga, and N. Teixido. 2010. Diversity patterns along and across the Chilean margin: a continental slope encompassing oxygen gradients and methane seep benthic habitats. Marine Ecology 31:111–124. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1439-0485.2009.00332.x. SEREMI. 2018a. Clasificación de Especies - 2014. http://www.mma.gob.cl/clasificacionespecies/listado-especies-nativas-segun-estado- 2014.htm. SEREMI. 2018b. Lista de especies de Chile según Estado de Conservación (Excel Spreadsheet). Secretarías Regionales Ministeriales del Medio Ambiente. http://www.mma.gob.cl/clasificacionespecies/doc/NominaDeEspeciesSegunEstadoConserva cion-Chile_actualizado_13erProcesoRCE.xls. SERNAPESCA. 2016. Parques y Reserva Marinas. SERNAPESCA. http://www.sernapesca.cl/sites/default/files/parquesyreservasmarinas.pdf. SERNAPESCA. 2018a. Fichas de Especies Protegidas (URCEP) | Servicio Nacional de Pesca y Acuicultura. http://www.sernapesca.cl/informacion-utilidad/fichas-de-especies- protegidas-urcep. SERNAPESCA. 2018b. Servicio Nacional de Pesca y Acuicultura: Parques y Reservas Marinas. http://www.sernapesca.cl/preguntas-frecuentes/parques-y-reservas-marinas. SERNAPESCA. 2018c. Normativa | Servicio Nacional de Pesca y Acuicultura. http://www.sernapesca.cl/normativa?areas_de_trabajo%5B%5D=1314&title=&tid=All&field_f echa_de_publicacion_value%5Bmin%5D%5Bdate%5D=&field_fecha_de_publicacion_value %5Bmax%5D%5Bdate%5D=. SPRFMO. 2015a. Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) in the Eastern SPRFMO Area: Information received from the Secretariat of the CBD. Pages 1–60. SPRFMO. SPRFMO. 2015b. REPORT OF THE 3rd SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE MEETING. Port Vila, Vanuatu, 28th September - 3rd October 2015. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings-2013-plus/SC-Meetings/3rd-SC-Meeting- 2015/Report/SC-03-Final-report-14Oct15-A1-7.pdf. SPRFMO. 2015c. Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fishery Resources in the South Pacific Ocean. Pages 1–50. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Basic- Documents/Convention-web-12-Feb-2018.pdf. SPRFMO. 2016. Chile Annual Report. Pages 1–32. SPRFMO, The Hague, Netherlands. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings-2013-plus/SC-Meetings/4th-SC-Meeting- 2016/SC04-papers/SC-04-14-Chile-Annual-Report.pdf. SPRFMO. 2017a. Chile’s Annual Report to the 2017 SPRFMO Scientific Committee Part I: The Jack Mackerel Fishery. Pages 1–19. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/SC5-2017/SC5- Doc21-Chiles-Annual-report-Part-I-Jack-mackerel-fishery.pdf. SPRFMO. 2017b. Conservation and Management Measure for minimising bycatch of seabirds in the SPRFMO Convention Area. Pages 1–8 CMM 09-2017. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management-Measures/2018- CMMs/CMM-09-2017-Seabirds-8March2018.pdf. SPRFMO. 2018a. South Pacific Regional Management Organisation: Illustrative map of the SPRFMO area. https://www.sprfmo.int/about/illustrative-map-of-sprfmo-area/. SPRFMO. 2018b. Conservation and Management Measure for the Management of Bottom Fishing in the SPRFMO Convention Area (CMM 03-2018). Pages 1–6.

Page 125 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management-Measures/2018- CMMs/CMM-03-2018-Bottom-Fishing-8March2018.pdf. SPRFMO. 2018c. South Pacific Regional Management Organisation: Participation. https://www.sprfmo.int/about/participation/. SPRFMO. 2018d. South Pacific Regional Management Organisation: Conservation and Management Measures. https://www.sprfmo.int/measures/. SPRFMO. 2018e. South Pacific Regional Management Organisation: Article 20 Consents. https://www.sprfmo.int/about/the-convention/article-20-consents/. SUBPESCA. 2018. Visualizador de Mapas. https://mapas.subpesca.cl/ideviewer/?locale=es- es. Taylor, M. H., J. Tam, V. Blaskovic, P. Espinoza, R. Michael Ballón, C. Wosnitza-Mendo, J. Argüelles, E. Díaz, S. Purca, N. Ochoa, P. Ayón, E. Goya, D. Gutiérrez, L. Quipuzcoa, and M. Wolff. 2008. Trophic modeling of the Northern Humboldt Current Ecosystem, Part II: Elucidating ecosystem dynamics from 1995 to 2004 with a focus on the impact of ENSO. Progress in Oceanography 79:366–378. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079661108001882. Thiel, M., E. Macaya, E. Acuna, W. Arntz, H. Bastias, K. Brokordt, P. Camus, J. Carlos Castilla, L. Castro, M. Cortes, C. P. Dumont, R. Escribano, M. Fernandez, J. A. Gajardo, C. Gaymer, I. Gomez, A. E. Gonzalez, H. E. González, P. Haye, and J. M. A. Vega. 2007. The Humboldt Current System of Northern and Central Chile. Oceanography and marine biology 45:195-345. Ulloa, O., and C. Grob. 2009. Marine Pelagic Ecosystems. Pages 119–137 Washington DC American Geophysical Union Geophysical Monograph Series. Wang, C., C. Deser, J.-Y. Yu, P. DiNezio, and A. Clement. 2017. El Niño and Southern Oscillation (ENSO): A Review. Pages 85–106 Coral Reefs of the Eastern Tropical Pacific. Springer, Dordrecht. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-7499-4_4. Wikipedia. 2018, June 14. Pelagic zone. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pelagic_zone&oldid=845777811. Yanez, E., C. Silva, R. Vega, F. Espindola, L. Alvarez, N. Silva, S. Palma, S. Salinas, E. Menschel, V. Haeussermann, D. Soto, and N. Ramirez. 2009. Seamounts in the southeastern Pacific Ocean and biodiversity on Juan Fernandez seamounts, Chile. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research 37:555–570. http://www.lajar.cl/pdf/imar/v37n3/Articulo_37_3_20.pdf.

Principle 3 Archipelago, 2018. Archipelago Marine Research website: http://www.archipelago.ca/fisheries-monitoring/electronic-monitoring/ Constitute, 2012. Chile's Constitution of 1980 with Amendments through 2012. https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Chile_2012.pdf LGPA 2013. The Ley General de Pesca y Aquicultura (LGPA, the General Law on Fisheries and Aquaculture) http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/615/articles-88020_documento.pdf or http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-article-86429.html (English - main aspects of the General Law on Fisheries and Aquaculture) MINECON. http://www.economia.gob.cl SERNAPESCA, 2018. SERNAPESCA website: http://www.sernapesca.cl

Page 126 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

SPRFMO, 2009. The “Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fishery Resources in the South Pacific Ocean” https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Basic-Documents/Convention-web-12-Feb-2018.pdf

SPRFMO, 2014. Memoranda of understanding with the Secretariat for the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Cooperation- with-others/MoU-Between-ACAP-and-SPRFMO-final-signed-28-Oct-2014.pdf SPRFMO, 2016. Potential jack mackerel management units https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Meetings/Meetings-2013-plus/SC-Meetings/4th-SC-Meeting- 2016/SC04-report/SC-04-tech-annex-7.pdf SPRFMO, 2016a. Memoranda of understanding with the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Cooperation-with-others/SPRFMO-CCAMLR-MoU- 15April2016.pdf SPRFMO 2018a. Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi (CMM 01-2018) https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management- Measures/2018-CMMs/CMM-01-2018-Trachurus-murphyi-8March2018.pdf SPRFMO, 2018b. SC Annual Work Plan. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/2018-COMM6/00- Report-and-ANNEXES/COMM6-Report-Annex-3-SC-Workplan-2018.pdf SPRFMO, 2018c. 6th Meeting of the Commission. COMM6-Report. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/2018-COMM6/00-Report-and-ANNEXES/COMM6-Complete- Report-with-Annexes.pdf SPRFMO, 2018d. SPRFMO Performance Review 2018. https://www.sprfmo.int/about/the- convention/sprfmo-review-2018/ SUBPESCA, n.d. http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-propertyvalue-543.html SUBPESCA 2017, Jack Mackerel Fishery Management Plan http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/articles-99235_documento.pdf SUBPESCA. Law No. 20.249. http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-article-86165.html SUBPESCA, 2018. SUBPESCA website: http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3- propertyname-505.html SUBPESCA, 2018a. Regulated Activities: Indigenous People. http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-article-86165.html SUBPESCA 2018b. National Fishery Council website: http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-propertyvalue-38005.html SUBPESCA 2018c. Regional Fishery Council website: http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-propertyvalue-38005.html SUBPESCA 2018d. Instituto de Fomento Pesquero (IFOP) website: http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-propertyvalue-38002.html SUBPESCA 2018f. Jack Mackerel Science and Technical Committee website: http://www.subpesca.cl/portal/616/w3-propertyvalue-51143.html MINECON, 2018. Ministry of Economics website: http://www.economia.gob.cl SPRFMO 2018e, Conservation Management Measure (CMM) “Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi (CMM 01-2018) https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management-Measures/2018- CMMs/CMM-01-2018-Trachurus-murphyi-8March2018.pdf

Page 127 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

SPRFMO 2018f, Scientific Committee (SC) https://www.sprfmo.int/science/

SPRFMO 2018g, Compliance and Technical Committee (CTC): https://www.sprfmo.int/meetings/ctc/ SPRFMO, 2018h, Scientific Committee Work Plan https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/2018- COMM6/00-Report-and-ANNEXES/COMM6-Report-Annex-3-SC-Workplan-2018.pdf SPRFMO, 2018i, SPRFMO Commission Meeting Report https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Commission-2017/COMM5-Report-FINAL-With-Annexes-2- Feb.pdf SPRFMO, 2018j. SPRFMO Compliance reports https://www.sprfmo.int/measures/compliance-reports/ SPRFMO, 2018k SPRFMO Contracting members implementation reports. https://www.sprfmo.int/measures/compliance-reports/implementation-reports/ SPRFMO, 2018l. SPRFMO Performance Review 2018. https://www.sprfmo.int/about/the- convention/sprfmo-review-2018/

Page 128 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 1: Assessment tree

This section of the report provides a background to the assessment tree used to evaluate this fishery. It begins with an outline of the MSC Principles & Criteria and then continues to describe the modified assessment tree that has been used in this fishery assessment. MSC Principles & Criteria Below is a much-simplified summary of the MSC Principles and Criteria, to be used for over- view purposes only. For a fuller description, including scoring guideposts under each Performance Indicator, reference should be made to the full assessment tree, complete with scores and justification, contained in this report. Alternatively, a fuller description of the MSC Principles and Criteria can be obtained from the MSC website (www.msc.org).

Figure 42: Graphic summarising MSC Principles and Performance Indicators (Source: Marine Stewardship Council 2016)

Page 129 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Principle 1 A fishery must be conducted in a manner that does not lead to over-fishing or depletion of the exploited populations and, for those populations that are depleted, the fishery must be conducted in a manner that demonstrably leads to their recovery. Intent: The intent of this Principle is to ensure that the productive capacities of resources are maintained at high levels and are not sacrificed in favour of short-term interests. Thus, exploited populations would be maintained at high levels of abundance designed to retain their productivity, provide margins of safety for error and uncertainty, and restore and retain their capacities for yields over the long term. Status • The stock is at a level that maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing. • Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock (or some measure or surrogate with similar intent or outcome). • Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock rebuilding and rebuilding strategies are in place with reasonable expectation that they will succeed. Harvest strategy / management • There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place, which is responsive to the state of the stock and is designed to achieve stock management objectives. • There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place that endeavour to maintain stocks at target levels. • Sufficient relevant information related to stock structure, stock productivity, fleet composition and other data is available to support the harvest strategy. • The stock assessment is appropriate for the stock and for the harvest control rule, takes into account uncertainty, and is evaluating stock status relative to reference points. Principle 2 Fishing operations should allow for the maintenance of the structure, productivity, function and diversity of the ecosystem (including habitat and associated dependent and ecologically related species) on which the fishery depends Intent: The intent of this Principle is to encourage the management of fisheries from an ecosystem perspective under a system designed to assess and restrain the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem. Retained species / Bycatch / ETP species • Main species are highly likely to be within biologically based limits or if outside the limits there is a full strategy of demonstrably effective management measures. • There is a strategy in place for managing these species that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species. • Information is sufficient to quantitatively estimate outcome status and support a full strategy to manage main retained / bycatch and ETP species.

Page 130 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Habitat & Ecosystem • The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat or ecosystem structure and function, considered on a regional or bioregional basis. • There is a strategy and measures in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to habitat types. • The nature, distribution and vulnerability of all main habitat types and ecosystem functions in the fishery area are known at a level of detail relevant to the scale and intensity of the fishery and there is reliable information on the spatial extent, timing and location of use of the fishing gear. Principle 3 The fishery is subject to an effective management system that respects local, national and international laws and standards and incorporates institutional and operational frameworks that require use of the resource to be responsible and sustainable. Intent: The intent of this principle is to ensure that there is an institutional and operational framework for implementing Principles 1 and 2, appropriate to the size and scale of the fishery. Governance and policy • The management system exists within an appropriate and effective legal and/or customary framework that is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries and observes the legal & customary rights of people and incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework. • Functions, roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals involved in the management process are explicitly defined and well understood. The management system includes consultation processes. • The management policy has clear long-term objectives, incorporates the precautionary approach and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing. Fishery specific management system • Short and long term objectives are explicit within the fishery’s management system. • Decision-making processes respond to relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner. • A monitoring, control and surveillance system has been implemented. Sanctions to deal with non-compliance exist and there is no evidence of systematic non- compliance. • A research plan provides the management system with reliable and timely information and results are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely fashion.

Page 131 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 2: Scoring and Rationales Performance Indicator Scores and Rationale

Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.1 – Stock status 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 Stock status relative to recruitment impairment Guide post It is likely that the stock It is highly likely that There is a high degree is above the point where the stock is above the of certainty that the recruitment would be PRI. stock is above the PRI. impaired (PRI).

Met? Y Y Y Justifi cation Recruitment has continually increased since its low point in 2011 and is now at or above the levels recorded in the 1970s, the mid-80s to the mid-90s (from which it recovered), and appears to be at its highest point since 2001. Fishing mortality has been below FMSY since 2011. The limit reference point (or PRI) is not analytically determined, therefore, in accordance with MSC-FCRG Ver.2.0 GSA2.2.3.1 the default PRI should be ½ BMSY in the case of low productivity stocks or 75% in the case of highly productive stock. Considering that the productivity of Chilean jack mackerel is strictly connected with the climatic force (El Niño fluctuations), in accordance with precautionary approach the 75%BMSY has been considered as the PRI (3,898 kt). Taking into account that the current SSB is estimated as 5,294 kt (SPRFMO, 2017) with coefficient of variation of around 20% it is possible to conclude that there is a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the PRI. Therefore, SG 60, 80 and 100 are met. b Stock status in relation to achievement of MSY Guide post The stock is at or There is a high degree fluctuating around a of certainty that the level consistent with stock has been MSY. fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY or has been above this level over recent years. Met? Y N Justifi cation The BMSY in 2017 has been estimated as 5,198 kt (SPRFMO, 2017). Taking into account that the 2017 estimate of SSB is 5,294 kt (SPRFMO, 2017) it is plausible to conclude that the stock is at a level consistent with MSY, meeting SG 80.

Page 132 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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 However, taking into account the historical trend of SSB it is not possible to conclude that the stock has been fluctuating around a level consistent with MSY or has been above this level over recent years (Figure 12). Therefore, SG 100 is not met.

SPRFMO (2017). Final report of the 5th Scientific Committee Meeting References Shanghai, China 23-28 September 2017. Page 51. SPRFMO. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/00-SC5-2017/SC05-Report-Final- 4Oct2017.pdf Stock Status relative to Reference Points Type of reference Value of reference Current stock status relative point point to reference point Reference point used in PRI = 75% of BMSY 3,898 kt 1.34 scoring stock relative to PRI (SIa) Reference point used in BMSY 5,198 kt 1.02 scoring stock relative to MSY (SIb) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 133 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.2 – Stock rebuilding N/A – the stock is not depleted.

Page 134 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.1 – Harvest strategy PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Harvest strategy design Guide The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy is post expected to achieve responsive to the state responsive to the state stock management of the stock and the of the stock and is objectives reflected in elements of the harvest designed to achieve PI 1.1.1 SG80. strategy work together stock management towards achieving stock objectives reflected in management objectives PI 1.1.1 SG80. reflected in PI 1.1.1 SG80. Met? Y Y Y Justifi The approach in managing the fishery of SPRFMO and Chile incorporates cation the key elements of harvest strategies as defined by MSC as the combination of the following elements: - Monitoring - Stock assessment - Harvest control rule - Management actions The monitoring and data collection are clearly in place both in the framework of SPRFMO and Chile (IFOP and INPESCA). The stock assessment is carried out every year by SPRFMO with a benchmark process foreseen every 2 years. The harvest control rule is in place that allow the main harvest control tools (TACs and quotas) to vary according to stock status as measured against biological reference points in the context of a recovery plan. The latter allows SPRFMO and Chile to respond rapidly to any changes in stock status. SPRFMO continues to respond to the need to reduce the risk of overcapacity by limiting the size and the effort of the national catching fleets for Chilean jack mackerel. There is evidence that the harvest strategy has been successful in returning the stock to BMSY. Therefore, SG 60 is met There is an annual TAC which is explicitly precautionary while the applied harvest control rule defines how fishery managers must respond to changes in stock status. The management cycle is described in the fishery management plan (SUBPESCA 2017). Therefore, SG 80 is met. The harvest strategy reflects the approach taken by SPRFMO and the member countries that recognized the critical need to establish a strong response to stop overfishing of jack mackerel and to recover the stock to BMSY. In addition to the rational presented above (SG 80) this provides evidence that the harvest strategy is designed to meet stock management objectives as demonstrated by the fact that in 2017 the stock is at BMSY. Therefore, SG 100 is met. b Harvest strategy evaluation

Page 135 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place Guide The harvest strategy is The harvest strategy The performance of the post likely to work based on may not have been fully harvest strategy has prior experience or tested but evidence been fully evaluated plausible argument. exists that it is achieving and evidence exists to its objectives. show that it is achieving its objectives including being clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels. Met? Y Y Y Justifi The harvest strategy has been fully tested and evaluated by Hitzen et al. cation (2014), using a Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) approach in 2014. This study described a framework developed to evaluate the proposed rebuilding plan and potential alternative plans. The output of the 2013 jack mackerel stock assessment has been used as the basis for these evaluations. Based on two stakeholder consultations a number of alternative plans were developed and evaluated. The derivation and design of these plans are presented in this study. The results of the evaluation of the plans, using MSE, show the performance of these plans according to a number of performance statistics evidencing that the plan shows a moderate increase in SSB. SSB is able to rebuild to values close to BMSY under the low recruitment scenario, thereby being associated with moderate to low catches when compared to the other HCRs. Under the long-term recruitment scenario, the alternative plans stand out in terms of anticipated increase in SSB, higher than 2 x BMSY. This HCR is also being associated with among the lowest catches reported. The original SPRFMO proposed plan scores on average all performance statistics evaluated, compared to the other HCRs. Taking into account such outcomes as well as the evidence of the current SSB, it is possible to conclude that evidence exists to show that the harvest strategy is achieving its objectives including being clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels. SG 60, 80 and 100 are met. c Harvest strategy monitoring Guide Monitoring is in place post that is expected to determine whether the harvest strategy is working. Met? Y Justifi The SPRFMO approach involves full monitoring of fishing activity, with annual cation up-dates on stock status supporting the frequent benchmark process. Therefore, SG 60 is met. d Harvest strategy review Guide The harvest strategy is post periodically reviewed

Page 136 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place and improved as necessary. Met? Y Justifi The various key elements of the harvest strategy are reviewed by the cation scientific committee and intersessional working groups and considered in the annual meeting of the SPRFMO (SPRFMO 2017). On the basis of findings, individual elements of the harvest strategy may be revised e.g. considering potential changes to the assessment model, the use of VMS and increased observer coverage. Therefore, SG 100 is met. e Shark finning Guide It is likely that shark It is highly likely that There is a high degree post finning is not taking shark finning is not of certainty that shark place. taking place. finning is not taking place. Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Justifi The species is not a shark. cation f Review of alternative measures Guide There has been a There is a regular There is a biennial post review of the potential review of the potential review of the potential effectiveness and effectiveness and effectiveness and practicality of practicality of practicality of alternative measures to alternative measures to alternative measures to minimise UoA-related minimise UoA-related minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted mortality of unwanted mortality of unwanted catch of the target catch of the target catch of the target stock. stock and they are stock, and they are implemented as implemented, as

appropriate. appropriate.

Met? Y N N Justifi Chilean fisheries regulations forbid discarding. The UoA has a monitoring cation system that assists the captain to avoid areas with high concentration of juvenile (www.fishtrack.com), which is the main reason for discarding due to the lack of market value for smaller fish. Moreover, as evidenced during the site visit, discard is negligible. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that there are alternative measures to minimize UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock. Therefore, SG 60 is met. A specific regulation on discards in the Chilean jack mackerel fishery is under preparation. One of the roles of the enhanced observer programme being formulated by SPRFMO is to identify levels of discard. In Chile, two action plans are being implemented to respond to the issues of discards quantification and minimization. The SPRFMO is in the process of designing the observer programme.

Page 137 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place While there are proposals in the Chilean Action Plans to review the effectiveness of the steps to reduce potential discards, as yet there is no evidence to show that there has been a regular review. Therefore SG 80 is not met.

Hintzen, N. T., Roel, B., Benden, D., Clarke, M., Egan, A., Nash, R. D. M., Rohlf, N. (2014). Managing a complex population structure: Exploring the importance of information from fisheries-independent sources. ICES Journal of Marine Science 72 (2), 528-542. SPRFMO (2017). Final report of the 5th Scientific Committee Meeting References Shanghai, China 23-28 September 2017. Page 51. SPRFMO. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/00-SC5-2017/SC05-Report-Final- 4Oct2017.pdf SUBPESCA (2017). Informe sectorial de pesca y acuicultura 2017. December 2017. Departamento de Análisis Sectorial. Subsecretaria de Pesca (SUBPESCA). Chile. 22 pp. (In Spanish). OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 1

Page 138 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.2 – Harvest control rules and tools There are well defined and effective harvest control rules (HCRs) in PI 1.2.2 place Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a HCRs design and application Guide Generally understood Well defined HCRs are The HCRs are expected post HCRs are in place or in place that ensure to keep the stock available that are that the exploitation rate fluctuating at or above expected to reduce the is reduced as the PRI is a target level consistent exploitation rate as the approached, are with MSY, or another point of recruitment expected to keep the more appropriate level impairment (PRI) is stock fluctuating taking into account the approached. around a target level ecological role of the consistent with (or stock, most of the time. above) MSY, or for key LTL species a level consistent with ecosystem needs. Met? Y N N Justifi The HCR is established to allow the stock to recover from its overfished state cation by reducing fishing mortality while also taking a precautionary approach. It can be seen that this approach is generally understood by members and aims clearly to recover the stock toward BMSY. Therefore, SG 60 is met. The SPRFMO HCR is based on the biomass reaching BMSY (SPRFMO, 2018). The HCR are defined and have been agreed by most members. However, according to the current HCRs it is not possible to consider what may happen if the biomass decreases below the PRI due reasons other than fishing. In particular, to what extent exploitation might be reduced as biomass estimate shows low values is not formally defined. Implicitly SPRFMO would take appropriate actions (such as a rebuilding plan), however, these actions are not well defined. Therefore, SG 80 is not met. b HCRs robustness to uncertainty Guide The HCRs are likely to The HCRs take account post be robust to the main of a wide range of uncertainties. uncertainties including the ecological role of the stock, and there is evidence that the HCRs are robust to the main uncertainties. Met? Y N Justifi Evidence on the consideration of uncertainty is available through: (i) the cation number of stock assessment models; (ii) the short term catch; and medium / long term predictions for some of the models; and (iii) the projections of jack

Page 139 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There are well defined and effective harvest control rules (HCRs) in PI 1.2.2 place mackerel population trajectories for different multipliers of the reference 2016 fishing mortality rates under 2 of the models. These take into account potential variations in recruitment (whether or not resulting from changes in ecosystem conditions) and variations in fishing mortality (SPRFMO, 2017). Therefore, SG 80 is met. The ecological role of jack mackerel is not taken into account. In addition, the structure of the population remains uncertain and more evidence is required to confirm the stock configuration. Therefore, SG 100 is not met. c HCRs evaluation Guide There is some Available evidence Evidence clearly post evidence that tools indicates that the tools shows that the tools in used or available to in use are appropriate use are effective in implement HCRs are and effective in achieving the appropriate and achieving the exploitation levels effective in controlling exploitation levels required under the exploitation. required under the HCRs. HCRs. Met? Y Y N Justifi The main tools in use are TACs and quotas, and the arrangements for sharing cation TACs between SPRFMO members. In the past, the lack of cooperation led to substantial overfishing. From this situation, it is clear that cooperation at the international level is appropriate and given reduced fishing mortality it has proved effective in controlling exploitation by individual members. Therefore, SG 60 is met. F is currently substantially below FMSY and, as required by MSC, this provides evidence of the effectiveness of the harvest control tools. The current level of F is consistent with rebuilding the stock. Therefore, SG 80 is met (SPRFMO, 2017). Debate continues on whether or not the jack mackerel stock is comprised of a single meta-population. In order to avoid the risk of depletion of the smaller stock components areas/stocks would need to be assessed separately (Frank & Brickman, 2010). In the absence of this, there is not clear evidence to show that the tools will be effective in avoiding local depletion. Therefore, SG 100 is not met. SPRFMO (2017). Scientific Committee 5, Annex 09 – 2017 Jack mackerel Assessment Input and Results. Page 30. SPRFMO. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/00-SC5-2017/Annex-9-2017-Assessment- input-and-results.pdf SPRFMO (2018). CMM 01-2018 Conservation and Management Measure for References Trachurus murphyi. March 2018. Page 5. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management- Measures/2018-CMMs/CMM-01-2018-Trachurus-murphyi-8March2018.pdf

Frank, K. T. and Brickman, D. 2010. Allee effects and compensatory population dynamics within a stock complex. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57, 513–517

Page 140 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There are well defined and effective harvest control rules (HCRs) in PI 1.2.2 place https://www.researchgate.net/publication/245263918_Allee_Effects_and_C ompensatory_Population_Dynamics_Within_a_Stock_Complex

OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 2

Page 141 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.3 – Information and monitoring PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Range of information Guide Some relevant Sufficient relevant A comprehensive post information related to information related to range of information (on stock structure, stock stock structure, stock stock structure, stock productivity and fleet productivity, fleet productivity, fleet composition is available composition and other composition, stock to support the harvest data is available to abundance, UoA strategy. support the harvest removals and other strategy. information such as

environmental information), including some that may not be directly related to the current harvest strategy, is available. Met? Y Y N Justifi The regular monitoring of the information available on stock structure, stock cation productivity and fleet composition supports the definition and implementation of a harvest strategy by fishery managers. Therefore, SG 60 is met. Comprehensive data that is monitored and regularly updated is available to fishery managers on stock structure and productivity, fleet composition, stock abundance, fisheries removals and other data such as oceanographic conditions and shifts in the main fishing areas. This information is sufficient to define and implement a harvest strategy designed to rebuild the stock, monitor the results and identify where there may need to be changes (SPRFMO, 2018). Therefore, SG 80 is met. The lack of certainty on stock structure and the impact of changes in environmental conditions (e.g. El Niño) indicates that the information available is not sufficiently comprehensive to represent a body of information that is relevant to the long-term management of the stock. Therefore, SG 100 is not met. b Monitoring Guide Stock abundance and Stock abundance and All information post UoA removals are UoA removals are required by the harvest monitored and at least regularly monitored at control rule is monitored one indicator is a level of accuracy with high frequency and available and monitored and coverage a high degree of with sufficient frequency consistent with the certainty, and there is a to support the harvest harvest control rule, good understanding of control rule. and one or more inherent uncertainties indicators are available in the information [data] and monitored with and the robustness of sufficient frequency to assessment and

Page 142 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy support the harvest management to this control rule. uncertainty. Met? Y Y N Justifi A biennial full assessment with annual up-dates together with annual catch cation data from members together with monthly reports that are sent to SPRFMO support the harvest control rule by monitoring total catches in relation to the established TAC. SPRFMO informs members when up-take of their allocated quota has reached 75 % of the annual amount. Therefore, SG 60 is met. The periodicity of reports on fishery removals and the regular and continuous work on stock abundance support the HCR by indicating if it is meeting its objective. A wide range of information is collected to support the HCR, with the SPRFMO Compliance Committee evaluating the responsiveness of members to data submission needs. It appears that past non-compliance of some members in providing information has been resolved. The work of the Scientific Committee incorporates robust analysis of the uncertainties in the data and how the assessment may be tuned to account for such uncertainty (SPRFMO, 2017). Therefore, SG 80 is met. However, taking into account the doubts in stock configuration, it is not possible to conclude that there is a good understanding of inherent uncertainties in the information and, although the assessment methodology comprises the hypothesis of more than one stock, the robustness of the analyses and the following management to this uncertainty is not completely robust. Therefore, SG 100 is not met. c Comprehensiveness of information Guide There is good post information on all other fishery removals from the stock. Met? Y Justifi The catches of other SPRFMO members are reported. Catches of jack cation mackerel from the Chilean Industrial fleet in Northern Region (I, II, XV) and Chilean artisanal fleet are monitored by a third-party dockside monitoring programme which is subject to audits by SERNAPESCA. Therefore, it is considered that there is good information on all other fishery removals from the stock. The SG 80 is met. SPRFMO (2017). Final report of the 5th Scientific Committee Meeting Shanghai, China 23-28 September 2017. Page 51. SPRFMO. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/00-SC5-2017/SC05-Report-Final- 4Oct2017.pdf References SPRFMO (2018). CMM 01-2018 Conservation and Management Measure for Trachurus murphyi. March 2018. Page 5. https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/Fisheries/Conservation-and-Management- Measures/2018-CMMs/CMM-01-2018-Trachurus-murphyi-8March2018.pdf

Page 143 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 144 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.4 – Assessment of stock status PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Appropriateness of assessment to stock under consideration Guide The assessment is The assessment takes post appropriate for the stock into account the major and for the harvest features relevant to the control rule. biology of the species and the nature of the UoA. Met? Y Y Justifi Uncertainty about stock structure is recognised, and both the single stock and cation two stock scenarios are taken into consideration. Over 18 alternative model configurations are tested to evaluate the consistency of the model. The model provides data on fishing mortality and biomass in relation to SSBMSY. Therefore, SG 80 is met. The stock assessment includes fisheries independent and dependent data from each fishing country in a statistical catch-at-age model performed by the SPRFMO Scientific Committee. The models run consider the two working hypotheses on stock structure: 1) two separate stocks, Peruvian/northern stock and Chilean/southern stock which straddle the high seas; 2) a single shared stock which straddles the high seas. The second has been used as the basis for the advice, as it results in more conservative catch levels (SPRFMO, 2017). A benchmark assessment was conducted in 2016 and the next one is planned for 2018. The benchmark assessment included sensitivity runs using alternative model configurations, evaluated the sample size of the data sources used in the assessment, evaluated new fisheries selectivity settings to reduce the number of parameters to be estimated in the assessment models, and evaluated whether re-scaling natural mortality to reflect higher mortality at younger ages would affect the estimates (SPRFMO, 2017). Therefore, SG 100 is met. b Assessment approach Guide post The assessment The assessment estimates stock status estimates stock status relative to generic relative to reference reference points points that are appropriate to the appropriate to the stock species category. and can be estimated. Met? Y Y Justifi cation Biological reference points have been defined for the Chilean jack mackerel stock within an MSY framework. BMSY and FMSY have been used as target reference points. The assessment estimates stock status in relation to target

Page 145 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status reference points for biomass and fishing mortality. These reference points are appropriate to the stock (SPRFMO, 2017). Therefore, SG 80 is met. c Uncertainty in the assessment Guide post The assessment The assessment takes The assessment takes identifies major uncertainty into into account uncertainty sources of uncertainty. account. and is evaluating stock status relative to reference points in a probabilistic way. Met? Y Y Y Justifi cation Major sources of uncertainty have been identified: recruitment, ecological influences, stock structure and aging estimates of Chilean jack mackerel. Increasingly, the assessment takes uncertainty into account. It uses single stock and two stock models, although the advice is based on the former. In 2016, it was agreed to maintain age reading research as a high priority and to account for ageing error in the assessment. The Scientific Committee has an age growth task team. Therefore, SG 60 and 80 are met. The results for the short and medium term catch together with the projections of jack mackerel population trajectories for different multipliers of the reference 2016 fishing mortality rate indicates that the stock status relative to reference points is evaluated in a probabilistic way. Therefore, SG 100 is met. d Evaluation of assessment Guide post The assessment has been tested and shown to be robust. Alternative hypotheses and assessment approaches have been rigorously explored. Met? N Justifi cation A benchmark assessment was conducted in 2016, including sensitivity runs using alternative model configurations, evaluating the sample size of the data sources used in the assessment. However only one model (JMM) has been tested. In the benchmark assessment planned for 2018, another model (SS3) will be tested (SPRFMO, 2017). Therefore, SG 100 is not met. e Peer review of assessment Guide post The assessment of The assessment has stock status is subject to been internally and peer review. externally peer reviewed. Met? Y Y

Page 146 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status Justifi The degree of activity at an international level e.g. experts from USA and cation Europe routinely participate at the benchmark and Scientific Committee meetings, leads to the conclusion that the SPRFMO stock assessment is internally and externally peer reviewed (SPRFMO, 2017). Therefore, SG 80 and 100 are met. SPRFMO (2017). Scientific Committee 5, Annex 09 – 2017 Jack mackerel Assessment Input and Results. Page 30. SPRFMO. References https://www.sprfmo.int/assets/00-SC5-2017/Annex-9-2017-Assessment- input-and-results.pdf OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 147 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.1 – Primary species outcome The UoA aims to maintain primary species above the PRI and does not PI 2.1.1 hinder recovery of primary species if they are below the PRI.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Main primary species stock status Guide Main primary species Main primary species There is a high degree post are likely to be above are highly likely to be of certainty that main the PRI above the PRI primary species are above the PRI and are OR OR fluctuating around a If the species is below If the species is below level consistent with the PRI, the UoA has the PRI, there is either MSY. measures in place that evidence of recovery are expected to ensure or a demonstrably that the UoA does not effective strategy in hinder recovery and place between all MSC rebuilding. UoAs which categorise this species as main, to ensure that they collectively do not hinder recovery and rebuilding.

Met? Y Y Y Justifi The distinction that the MSC Standard makes between “primary” and cation “secondary” non-target species, and between “main” and “minor” species is explained in section 3.6.1.2 of this report. An analysis of catch composition by onboard observers over the period 2015 - 2016 concluded that there are no primary species in the catch from the Chilean jack mackerel purse seine fishery (see review in section 3.6.1.1 & 3.6.1.2 of this report). During interviews with stakeholders about the possible use of the MSC Risk Based Framework (RBF) for this assessment, no stakeholders identified any additional species that would be classed as “primary” species under the MSC programme. On this basis, the assessment team has concluded that it is not necessary to use the RBF for this PI, and that in the absence of any catch of primary species the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements are met. B Minor primary species stock status Guide Minor primary species post are highly likely to be above the PRI OR

Page 148 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA aims to maintain primary species above the PRI and does not PI 2.1.1 hinder recovery of primary species if they are below the PRI. If below the PRI, there is evidence that the UoA does not hinder the recovery and rebuilding of minor primary species Met? Y Justifi As noted above, there is no evidence of any primary species in the catch. cation The SG 100 requirements are therefore met.

Section 3.6.1.1 of this report. References (IFOP 2017, 2018, SPRFMO 2018d) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 149 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.2 – Primary species management strategy There is a strategy in place that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of primary species, and the UoA regularly reviews PI 2.1.2 and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Management strategy in place Guide There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy in post place for the UoA, if strategy in place for the place for the UoA for necessary, that are UoA, if necessary, that managing main and expected to maintain or is expected to maintain minor primary species. to not hinder rebuilding or to not hinder of the main primary rebuilding of the main species at/to levels primary species at/to which are likely to levels which are highly above the point where likely to be above the recruitment would be point where recruitment impaired. would be impaired. Met? Y Y N Justifi The terms “strategy”, “partial strategy” and “measures” have a specific cation meaning within the MSC Standard. These are set out in the MSC Fisheries Certification Requirements (FCR) v 2.0 Table SA8 and reproduced below: “Measures” are actions or tools in place that either explicitly manage impacts on the component or indirectly contribute to management of the component under assessment having been designed to manage impacts elsewhere. A “partial strategy” represents a cohesive arrangement which may comprise one or more measures, an understanding of how it/they work to achieve an outcome and an awareness of the need to change the measures should they cease to be effective. It may not have been designed to manage the impact on that component specifically. A “strategy” represents a cohesive and strategic arrangement which may comprise one or more measures, an understanding of how it/they work to achieve an outcome and which should be designed to manage impact on that component specifically. A strategy needs to be appropriate to the scale, intensity and cultural context of the fishery and should contain mechanisms for the modification fishing practices in the light of the identification of unacceptable impacts. As noted in the scoring of PI 2.1.1. above, there are no primary species in the catch from this fishery. The qualifier “if necessary” therefore applies, and the SG60 and SG80 requirements are therefore met. The assessment team noted that SPRFMO have been working on stock assessments for species such as the Humboldt squid, Dosidicus gigas, with a view to establishing management measures for this species. This would result in this species becoming a “primary” non-target species. The assessment team will therefore need to keep the status of the secondary

Page 150 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of primary species, and the UoA regularly reviews PI 2.1.2 and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch. species under review to ensure that if management measures are introduced for this or other species, they are appropriately assessed as primary species against this PI. SG100 does not have the “if necessary” qualifier and is therefore not met. b Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is some Testing supports high post considered likely to objective basis for confidence that the work, based on confidence that the partial strategy/strategy plausible argument measures/partial will work, based on (e.g., general strategy will work, information directly experience, theory or based on some about the fishery and/or comparison with similar information directly species involved. fisheries/species). about the fishery and/or species involved.

Met? Y Y N Justifi The MSC has provided an interpretation to guide the application of this SI cation which states that the “if necessary” clause included in SIa above should also apply to SIb and SIc (Marine Stewardship Council 2015a). In accordance with MSC interpretation, a management strategy is not necessary in the absence of any primary species in the catch. The SG60 and SG80 requirements are met. SG100 does not have the “if necessary” qualifier and is therefore not met. c Management strategy implementation Guide There is some There is clear evidence post evidence that the that the partial measures/partial strategy/strategy is strategy is being being implemented implemented successfully and is successfully. achieving its overall objective as set out in scoring issue (a). Met? Y N Justifi The MSC has provided an interpretation to guide the application of this SI cation which states that the “if necessary” clause included in SIa above should also apply to SIb and SIc (Marine Stewardship Council 2015a). In accordance with MSC interpretation, a management strategy is not necessary in the absence of any primary species in the catch. The SG60 and SG80 requirements are met. SG100 does not have the “if necessary” qualifier and is therefore not met.

Page 151 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of primary species, and the UoA regularly reviews PI 2.1.2 and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch. d Shark finning Guide It is likely that shark It is highly likely that There is a high degree post finning is not taking shark finning is not of certainty that shark place. taking place. finning is not taking place. Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Justifi Shark species are very infrequently caught and there is no evidence of shark cation finning taking place. This SI is therefore not relevant. e Review of alternative measures Guide post There is a review of the There is a regular There is a biennial potential effectiveness review of the potential review of the potential and practicality of effectiveness and effectiveness and alternative measures to practicality of practicality of minimise UoA-related alternative measures to alternative measures to mortality of unwanted minimise UoA-related minimise UoA-related catch of main primary mortality of unwanted mortality of unwanted species. catch of main primary catch of all primary species and they are species, and they are implemented as implemented, as appropriate. appropriate. Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Justifi cation This scoring issue does not need to be scored if there are no unwanted catches of Primary species.

Section 3.6.1.1 of this report. References (IFOP 2017, 2018, SPRFMO 2018d) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 152 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.3 – Primary species information Information on the nature and extent of primary species is adequate to PI 2.1.3 determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage primary species

Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 a Information adequacy for assessment of impact on main primary species Guide post Qualitative information Some quantitative Quantitative information is adequate to information is available is available and is estimate the impact of and is adequate to adequate to assess the UoA on the main assess the impact of with a high degree of primary species with the UoA on the main certainty the impact of respect to status. primary species with the UoA on main respect to status. primary species with OR respect to status. OR If RBF is used to score PI 2.1.1 for the UoA: If RBF is used to score PI 2.1.1 for the UoA: Qualitative information is adequate to estimate Some quantitative productivity and information is adequate susceptibility attributes to assess productivity for main primary and susceptibility species. attributes for main primary species.

Met? Y Y Y Justifi cation The IFOP observer data gathered from 2015 - 2016 provide quantitative data about the non-target species caught in the fishery. These data are adequate to determine that there are no primary species in the catch, and that the catch of any non-target species is very low indeed. The absence of any primary non-target species and the evidence of a very clean catch of jack mackerel in the fishery meets the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements for this SI. b Information adequacy for assessment of impact on minor primary species Guide post Some quantitative information is adequate to estimate the impact of the UoA on minor primary species with respect to status. Met? Y Justifi cation The IFOP observer data gathered from 2015 - 2016 provide quantitative data about the non-target species caught in the fishery. These data are adequate to estimate the impact of the UoA on minor primary species is very low with respect to their status. The SG 100 is met.

Page 153 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Information on the nature and extent of primary species is adequate to PI 2.1.3 determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage primary species c Information adequacy for management strategy Guide Information is adequate Information is adequate Information is adequate post to support measures to to support a partial to support a strategy to manage main primary strategy to manage manage all primary species. main Primary species. species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective.

Met? Y Y N Justifi The catch information indicates that there are no primary species in the catch, cation and no species that would qualify as “main” catch components (whether as secondary species at present or as primary species if their management context changed). The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. The assessment team note that the independent observer data presently available is limited in both its temporal and spatial extent. The information available is considered to be adequate to support both “measures” and a “partial strategy” as required by SG60 and SG80, but not a “strategy” as required at SG100. There is evidence that information is being gathered to support a management strategy for the Humboldt squid Dosidicus gigas, which is one of the more abundant catch components; but there is no evidence of similar work being carried out for other catch components. Taking a precautionary view, it is therefore considered that the SG 100 requirements are not met.

Section 3.6.1.1 of this report. References (IFOP 2017, 2018, SPRFMO 2018d) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 154 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.1 – Secondary species outcome The UoA aims to maintain secondary species above a biologically PI 2.2.1 based limit and does not hinder recovery of secondary species if they are below a biological based limit.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Main secondary species stock status Guide Main Secondary Main secondary There is a high degree post species are likely to be species are highly of certainty that main within biologically likely to be above secondary species are based limits. biologically based limits within biologically based limits. OR OR If below biologically If below biologically based limits, there are based limits, there is measures in place either evidence of expected to ensure that recovery or a the UoA does not hinder demonstrably recovery and rebuilding. effective partial strategy in place such that the UoA does not hinder recovery and rebuilding. AND Where catches of a main secondary species outside of biological limits are considerable, there is either evidence of recovery or a, demonstrably effective strategy in place between those MSC UoAs that also have considerable catches of the species, to ensure that they collectively do not hinder recovery and rebuilding.

Met? See scoring table for individual elements below. Justifi The distinction that the MSC Standard makes between “primary” and cation “secondary” non-target species, and between “main” and “minor” species is explained in section 3.6.1.2.1 of this report. An analysis of catch composition by onboard observers over the period 2015 - 2016 concluded that there are no “main” secondary fish species in the catch from the Chilean jack mackerel purse seine fishery (see review in section

Page 155 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA aims to maintain secondary species above a biologically PI 2.2.1 based limit and does not hinder recovery of secondary species if they are below a biological based limit. 3.6.1.1 of this report). The only secondary fish species in the catch are caught in quantities of less than 5% of the total catch. The catch composition also showed that there were several “out of scope” species in the catch. The MSC indicate that these should be treated as “main” secondary species (MSC FCR v 2.0 SA3.7.1.2). The abundance of “out of scope” species in the catch and the status of their respective populations are considered in section 3.6.1.3.33.6.1.3 of this report. It is evident that the IUCN has determined the status of these species relative to reference points that are appropriate for the management of these species (IUCN 2012). It is thus not appropriate to assess these species using the MSC Risk Based Framework. The level of interaction between each species and the fishery, and their status are considered here, with a score appropriate for each species:- 1. Kelp gull, Larus dominicanus – no evidence of any catch in the fishery during the observer programme from over 200 individuals sighted around fishing nets. The global population of this species is estimated at over 3,300,000 individuals. Its status is reported as “Least Concern” and its population is increasing. (IUCN 2016g). The abundance and increasing trend for this species provides a high degree of certainty that the species is above biologically based limited, meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements. 2. Peruvian pelican, Pelecanus thagus – an estimated 26 individuals killed from an estimated population of between 100,000 – 1,000,000 individuals. Its status is reported to be “Near Threatened” and its population is increasing. (IUCN 2016a). The abundance and increasing trend for this species provides a high degree of certainty that the species is above biologically based limited, meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements. 3. Cape petrel, Daption capense – no evidence of any catch; just 8 individuals sighted during the observer programme. This species is estimated to have a global population of around 2,000,000 individuals. Its status is reported to be “Least Concern” and its population is increasing. (IUCN 2016h). The abundance and increasing trend for this species provides a high degree of certainty that the species is above biologically based limited, meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements. 4. Sooty shearwater, Ardenna grisea – only one individual was sighted during the observer programme, and it was caught and killed in the net. This is equivalent to 9 individuals per year from a global population estimated at 20,000,000 individuals. Its status is reported to be “Near Threatened” and its population trend is decreasing. (IUCN 2016d). The abundance of this species is very high compared to the level of interaction with the fishery; however, the decreasing trend in the population contrasts with all of the other “out of scope” species. Whilst the level of interaction with the fishery is vanishingly small, it is considered that only the SG 60 and 80 requirements are presently met.

Page 156 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA aims to maintain secondary species above a biologically PI 2.2.1 based limit and does not hinder recovery of secondary species if they are below a biological based limit. Of the four scoring elements considered here, 3 meet the SG 100 requirements and 1 meets the SG 80 requirements. According to the procedure set out in §7.10.7 of the MSC FCR v2.0, an overall score of 95 is therefore indicated. b Minor secondary species stock status Guide Minor secondary

post species are highly likely to be above biologically based limits.

OR

If below biologically based limits’, there is evidence that the UoA does not hinder the recovery and rebuilding of secondary species Met? N Justifi The IFOP observer programme identified six minor secondary species in the cation catch:- 1. Caballa / chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus) 2. Humboldt squid (Dosidicus gigas) 3. Blue fathead (Cubiceps caeruleus) 4. Snoek (Thyrsites atun) 5. Common hake (Merluccius gayi) 6. Patagonian grenadier (Macrorunus magellanicus) These species made up less than 1% of the total catch from the jack mackerel fishery during observer trips. During the course of the site visit, stakeholders suggested several more minor secondary species in the catch including King gar (Scomberesox saurus), blue shark (Prionace glauca), Mako shark (Isurus oxyrhincus), swordfish (Xiphias gladius) and skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis). The assessment team consider that the difference between the perception of catch composition shown by the observer programme compared to the perception shown in stakeholder interviews would make the use of the RBF to score this SI very uncertain. Given this uncertainty, and that the only outcome that would arise from using the RBF to score this SI would be to increase the overall score for the PI, the assessment team considers that it is not appropriate to use the RBF in this instance. The SG100 requirements are therefore not met.

Page 157 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA aims to maintain secondary species above a biologically PI 2.2.1 based limit and does not hinder recovery of secondary species if they are below a biological based limit.

Section 3.6.1.2.1 of this report. References (IFOP 2017, 2018, SPRFMO 2018d) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Scoring Table for PI 2.1.1 Scoring Elements The scoring procedure for Performance Indicators (PIs) that have multiple species (“elements”) is set out in §7.10.7 of MSC Fishery Certification Requirements v2.0. This requires that the score for each element is determined in accordance with the process set out in §7.10.5, and then the overall PI score is determined from the combination of individual scoring elements.

The table below sets out the individual element scores for each Scoring Issue (SI) for this PI, and the resulting overall PI score determined by this process.

Main / SIa SIb Element PI UoA Species Minor (60, 80, (100 only) Score Score Kelp Gull Main 100)100 NA 100 Peruvian Pelican Main 100 NA 100 1 Cape Petrel Main 100 NA 100 95 Sooty Shearwater Main 80 NA 80 NA Minor NA Not Scored NA

Page 158 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.2 – Secondary species management strategy There is a strategy in place for managing secondary species that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species PI 2.2.2 and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Management strategy in place Guide There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy in post place, if necessary, strategy in place, if place for the UoA for which are expected to necessary, for the UoA managing main and maintain or not hinder that is expected to minor secondary rebuilding of main maintain or not hinder species. secondary species at/to rebuilding of main

levels which are highly secondary species at/to likely to be within levels which are highly biologically based limits likely to be within or to ensure that the biologically based limits UoA does not hinder or to ensure that the their recovery. UoA does not hinder their recovery. Met? Y Y N Justifi The terms “measures”, “partial strategy” and “strategy” used in this SI are cation defined in the MSC FCR v 2.0 (Table SA8) - the FCR text is reproduced in the rationale for PI 2.1.2 SIa). It was reported during the site visit that the vessels operating in the industrial jack mackerel fishery are required to operate more than 5 nautical miles from the coast, and specifically target shoals of jack mackerel (located using satellite and oceanographic data). These management measures were considered by stakeholders to form a key part of a partial strategy that minimises interactions with non-target species, and in particular the out of scope species (such as pelicans) which are more abundant closer inshore and which have been observed to suffer more adverse impact from fisheries for smaller pelagic species such as anchovies and sardines. The evidence available for the 4 “main” secondary species indicates that the partial strategy in place (in the form of the measures that require fishing in offshore areas and specifically targeting jack mackerel) results in a very low level of mortality relative to the population size of each species. The increasing population trend for each species clearly shows that the fishery is not hindering their recovery, meeting the SG 60 and SG 80 requirements. Revisions were made to the national fisheries legislation (LGPA) in 2013. Article 1C (i) of the LGPA requires that measures are introduced in the context of the national fisheries policy to “minimize the discarding of both the target species and the accompanying fauna and the capture of bycatch.” A “Discard Plan” is in preparation for the fishery, in response to this requirement, and using the information gathered from the IFOP study of the fishery.

Page 159 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place for managing secondary species that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species PI 2.2.2 and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch. Whilst is it clear that work is underway, in the absence of strategy in place to manage interactions with non-target species the SG 100 requirements are not presently met. b Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is some Testing supports high post considered likely to objective basis for confidence that the work, based on confidence that the partial strategy/strategy plausible argument measures/partial will work, based on (e.g. general strategy will work, information directly experience, theory or based on some about the UoA and/or comparison with similar information directly species involved. UoAs/species). about the UoA and/or species involved. Met? Y Y N Justifi The MSC has provided an interpretation to guide the application of this SI cation which states that the “if necessary” clause included in SIa above should also apply to SIb and SIc (Marine Stewardship Council 2015a). The data gathered by the IFOP observer programme and summarised in section 3.6.1.1 of this report provides an objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy and measures in place are working in this UoA: the catch rates of any non-target species in the jack mackerel fishery are very low indeed, and the mortality rates for the out of scope “main” secondary species are also very low (see the scoring rationale for PI 2.1.2 SIa above). The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. No evidence of anything more than practical testing has been presented in support of the existing management arrangements. In the absence of some consideration of alternative scenarios and their outcomes, SG 100 is not met. c Management strategy implementation Guide There is some There is clear evidence post evidence that the that the partial measures/partial strategy/strategy is strategy is being being implemented implemented successfully and is successfully. achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a).

Met? Y N Justifi As noted above, the evidence gathered by the IFOP observer programme cation and summarised in section 3.6.1.1 of this report demonstrates the effective implementation of the partial strategy: the catch rates of any non-target species in the jack mackerel fishery are very low indeed, and the mortality

Page 160 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place for managing secondary species that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species PI 2.2.2 and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch. rates for the out of scope “main” secondary species are also very low (see the scoring rationale for PI 2.1.2 SIa above). The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. In the absence of clearly defined management objectives, the partial strategy in place does not meet the SG 100 requirements. d Shark finning Guide It is likely that shark It is highly likely that There is a high degree post finning is not taking shark finning is not of certainty that shark place. taking place. finning is not taking place. Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Justifi Shark species are very infrequently caught and there is no evidence of shark cation finning taking place. This SI is therefore not relevant. e Review of alternative measures to minimise mortality of unwanted catch Justifi There is a review of the There is a regular There is a biennial cation potential effectiveness review of the potential review of the potential and practicality of effectiveness and effectiveness and alternative measures to practicality of practicality of minimise UoA-related alternative measures to alternative measures to mortality of unwanted minimise UoA-related minimise UoA-related catch of main mortality of unwanted mortality of unwanted secondary species. catch of main catch of all secondary secondary species and species, and they are they are implemented implemented, as as appropriate. appropriate.

Met? Y N N Guide The only catch of “main” secondary species comprises several bird species, post all of which are unwanted catch. The discard reduction programme launched by IFOP in 2014 in response to the revised LGPA in 2013 represents part of a formal process for reducing the catch of non-target species that is due to result in the publication of a “Discard Plan” for the jack mackerel fishery. There is evidence that this review is underway, which is sufficient to meet the SG 60 requirements. The revisions to the LGPA that were made in 2013 require (at Article 1º C) that “Every five years, the effectiveness and implementation of conservation and management measures will be evaluated”. At this point the initial review is still underway, and there is no evidence that it will be conducted regularly, so neither the SG 80 or SG 100 requirements are presently met.

References Section 3.6.1.1 of this report.

Page 161 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place for managing secondary species that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species PI 2.2.2 and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of unwanted catch. (LGPA 1991, 2013, IFOP 2017, 2018) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 3

Page 162 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.3 – Secondary species information Information on the nature and amount of secondary species taken is PI 2.2.3 adequate to determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage secondary species.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Information adequacy for assessment of impacts on main secondary species Guide Qualitative information Some quantitative Quantitative information post is adequate to information is available is available and estimate the impact of and adequate to adequate to assess the UoA on the main assess the impact of with a high degree of secondary species with the UoA on main certainty the impact of respect to status. secondary species with the UoA on main respect to status. secondary species with OR respect to status. OR If RBF is used to score PI 2.2.1 for the If RBF is used to UoA: score PI 2.2.1 for the UoA: Qualitative information Some quantitative is adequate to estimate information is adequate productivity and to assess productivity susceptibility attributes and susceptibility for main secondary attributes for main species. secondary species.

Met? Y Y N Justifi The IFOP observer programme and the parallel self-reporting programme cation described in section 3.6.1.1 of this report has provided quantitative information on the impact of the fishery on the main secondary species encountered. Information is also available about the status of the species concerned from other sources, notably the IUCN. The SG 60 and 80 requirements are met. The quantitative information from the fishery covers a period of just 2 years. Although this period of time is sufficient to be able to assess impacts, it does not provide the “high degree of certainty” required at SG 100, so this level is not yet met. b Information adequacy for assessment of impacts on minor secondary species Guide Some quantitative

post information is adequate to estimate the impact of the UoA on minor secondary species with respect to status.

Met? N

Page 163 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Information on the nature and amount of secondary species taken is PI 2.2.3 adequate to determine the risk posed by the UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage secondary species. Justifi As noted in the scoring of PI 2.2.1 at SIb, the status of some of the minor cation secondary species is not certain. The SG 100 requirements for this SI are not therefore met. c Information adequacy for management strategy Guide Information is adequate Information is adequate Information is adequate post to support measures to to support a partial to support a strategy to manage main strategy to manage manage all secondary secondary species. main secondary species, and evaluate species. with a high degree of certainty whether the strategy is achieving its objective.

Met? Y Y N Justifi The IFOP observer programme and the parallel self-reporting programme cation were specifically designed to gather the information necessary to support a strategy for managing the impact of the fishery on all secondary species. The information gathered is summarised in section 3.6.1.1 of this report and meets the SG 60 and 80 requirements. Without evidence that there is an adequate information gathering strategy in place to determine that any management strategy is meeting its objectives, SG 100 is not met.

Section 3.6.1.1 of this report. References (IUCN 2015, 2016g, 2016a, 2016h, 2016d, IFOP 2017) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 164 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.1 – ETP species outcome The UoA meets national and international requirements for the PI 2.3.1 protection of ETP species The UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Effects of the UoA on population/stock within national or international limits, where applicable Guide Where national and/or Where national and/or Where national and/or post international international international requirements set limits requirements set limits requirements set limits for ETP species, the for ETP species, the for ETP species, there effects of the UoA on combined effects of is a high degree of the population/stock are the MSC UoAs on the certainty that the known and likely to be population/stock are combined effects of within these limits. known and highly the MSC UoAs are likely to be within these within these limits. limits. Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Justifi The definition of Endangered Threatened & Protected (ETP) species in the cation MSC Standard is set out in section 3.6.1.3.2 of this report. This Scoring Issue only applies to species for which national and or international limits for protection or rebuilding are in place, either through national legislation or binding international agreements (see FCR v2.0 at SA3.10.1). Although the classification of the conservation status of different species by the IUCN and conducted nationally in Chile use clear and objective criteria, these do not set limits for ETP species in terms of management of impacts. Likewise, the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) identifies long term objectives (such as “favourable conservation status” (Article 1(2)(n)), but does not set any limits. The assessment team therefore considers that there are no national or international limits set for any of the ETP species that interact with the fishery, and that this SI is thus not relevant. b Direct effects Guide Known direct effects of Known direct effects of There is a high degree post the UoA are likely to not the UoA are highly of confidence that there hinder recovery of likely to not hinder are no significant ETP species. recovery of ETP detrimental direct species. effects of the UoA on ETP species.

Met? See Scoring Table for Individual Elements below.

Page 165 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA meets national and international requirements for the PI 2.3.1 protection of ETP species The UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species Justifi The MSC indicate (FCR v 2.0, GSA3.10) that under this scoring issue it is cation important to consider the combined effect of MSC UoAs on these ETP species. The assessment team has reviewed the Public Certification Reports for the other MSC-certified fisheries in Chilean waters, and found that there are no shared ETP species. Some of the ETP species that this fishery interacts with have a wide or even global distribution (see, for instance, the range of the sooty shearwater, Ardenna grisea in Figure 25). There has been just one individual sooty shearwater mortality observed in the fishery (indicating an annual mortality of around 9 individuals. The species has global population of around 20,000,000 birds. For this and the other widely-distributed species, the assessment team has considered the level of impact relative to population size rather than examining the impact of each MSC UoA within the species range, which would require a review of most of the MSC certified fisheries in the world. The ETP species that have been recorded interacting with the fishery are considered in turn below:- 1. South American Sea Lion, Otaria flavescens – an estimated 35 individuals are killed per year in this UoA from a Chilean population of around 16,000 individuals which is reported to be increasing. This species is reported to be the most abundant marine mammal in South America. Its status is reported as “Least Concern” both internationally and nationally (IUCN 2015, SEREMI 2018b). The mortality rate of this species in this fishery compared to national population size is low (around 0.04% mortality p.a.). The abundance and increasing trend for this species provides a high degree of certainty that the combined effect of MSC UoAs have no significant detrimental impact on the species, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements. 2. Black browed albatross, Thallasarche melanophris – there are no reports of any mortality of this species in the jack mackerel purse seine UoA, although it is frequently sighted near to fishing vessels. The absence of any evidence of negative impact indicates that the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements are met. 3. Grey headed albatross, Thallasarche chrysostoma – there are no reports of any mortality of this species in the jack mackerel purse seine UoA. The absence of any evidence of negative impact indicates that the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements are met. 4. Pink footed shearwater, Ardenna creatopus – observers reported 13 interactions and 13 deaths of this species in the jack mackerel fishery between 2015 - 2016; an estimated 113 birds per year in the entire fleet (Table 9). The species has a wide distribution but a very small breeding range, limited to the Juan Fernandez Islands where there are estimated to be around 30,000 breeding pairs. The main interaction with fisheries is thought to be in coastal driftnet fisheries both close to breeding colonies and off the Peruvian coast. The mortality rate of this species in this fishery compared to the population size is low (around 0.1% mortality p.a.). This level of mortality is

Page 166 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA meets national and international requirements for the PI 2.3.1 protection of ETP species The UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species considered highly likely to be within limits, meeting the SG 60 & 80 requirements. Although the mortality rate is low, it does not provide a “high degree of certainty” required to meet the SG 100 requirements. 5. White chinned petrel, Procellaria aequinoctialis - there are no reports of any mortality of this species in the jack mackerel purse seine UoA, and it was only occasionally sighted near to fishing vessels. The absence of any evidence of negative impact and the low level of interaction indicates that the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements are met. 6. Leatherback turtle, Dermochelys coriacea – there are no reports of any mortality of this species in the jack mackerel purse seine UoA, and it was very rarely sighted near to fishing vessels. The absence of any evidence of negative impact indicates that the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements are met. 7. Wandering albatross, Diomedea exulans - there are no reports of any mortality of this species in the jack mackerel purse seine UoA, and it was very rarely sighted near to fishing vessels. The absence of any evidence of negative impact indicates that the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements are met. Of the seven scoring elements considered here, 6 meet the SG 100 requirements and 1 meets the SG 80 requirements. According to the procedure set out in §7.10.7 of the MSC FCR v2.0, an overall score of 95 is therefore indicated. c Indirect effects Guide Indirect effects have There is a high degree post been considered and of confidence that there are thought to be highly are no significant likely to not create detrimental indirect unacceptable impacts. effects of the fishery on ETP species.

Met? Y N Justifi The possible indirect effects of the fishery on the ETP species observed could cation arise through loss of gear or through the depletion of the jack mackerel stock to the extent that the availability of food was reduced. The loss of fishing gear from purse seine vessels is reported to be very rare both in this fishery and globally. The consequences of the removal of jack mackerel can be inferred from existing information such as the food web and trophic interactions in the Humboldt Current System (see Figure 35). These studies indicate that jack mackerel is not the main, nor the only prey item available to ETP species, so the removal of jack mackerel is not considered likely to have an indirect effect upon them.

Page 167 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA meets national and international requirements for the PI 2.3.1 protection of ETP species The UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species The current management regime for the jack mackerel stock ensures that the stock is recovering, with an increasing trend in biomass. The fishery is therefore currently highly unlikely to be having unacceptable impacts on any of the ETP species identified, and the SG 80 requirements are therefore met. The SG 100 requirements are not considered to be met; this would require some additional information (such as studies of trophic interactions with ETP species) that have not been presented at this assessment.

(Thiel et al. 2007, IUCN 2013a, 2013b, 2015, 2016b, 2016e, 2016c, 2016f, References 2017, Harrison and Chiodi 2015, Gutiérrez et al. 2016, ACAP 2018, CITES 2018) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Scoring Table for PI 2.3.1 Scoring Elements The scoring procedure for PIs that have multiple species (“elements”) is set out in §7.10.7 of MSC Fishery Certification Requirements v2.0. This requires that the score for each element is determined in accordance with the process set out in §7.10.5, and then the overall PI score is determined from the combination of individual scoring elements.

The table below sets out the individual element scores for each SI for this PI, and the resulting overall PI score determined by this process.

SIa SIb SIc Element PI UoA ETP species (60, 80, 100) (60, 80, 100) (80, 100 only) Score Score S. American Sea Lion NA 100 80 80 Black Browed Albatross NA 100 80 90 Grey Headed Albatross NA 100 80 90 1 Pink Footed Shearwater NA 80 80 80 85 White Chinned Petrel NA 100 80 90 Leatherback Turtle NA 100 80 90 Wandering Albatross NA 100 80 90

Page 168 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.2 – ETP species management strategy The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: • meet national and international requirements; PI 2.3.2 • ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species.

Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species. Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Management strategy in place (national and international requirements) Guide There are measures in There is a strategy in There is a post place that minimise the place for managing the comprehensive UoA-related mortality of UoA’s impact on ETP strategy in place for ETP species, and are species, including managing the UoA’s expected to be highly measures to minimise impact on ETP species, likely to achieve mortality, which is including measures to national and designed to be highly minimise mortality, international likely to achieve which is designed to requirements for the national and achieve above national protection of ETP international and international species. requirements for the requirements for the protection of ETP protection of ETP species. species. Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Justifi Although there are some international requirements for the protection of ETP cation species (such as the Agreement on the Consevation of Albatrosses and Petrels, ACAP), there are no equivalent national requirements in place at present. Thus there are not both national legislation and international agreements in place that establish requirements for the protection of ETP species. This SI is therefore not relevant and does not need to be scored. b Management strategy in place (alternative) Guide There are measures in There is a strategy in There is a post place that are expected place that is expected to comprehensive to ensure the UoA does ensure the UoA does strategy in place for not hinder the recovery not hinder the recovery managing ETP species, of ETP species. of ETP species. to ensure the UoA does not hinder the recovery of ETP species

Met? Y N N Justifi The terms “measures” and “strategy” used in this SI are defined in the MSC cation Fisheries Certification Requirements v 2.0 (see the FCR text reproduced in the rationale for PI 2.1.2 SIa). The additional term “comprehensive strategy” is used at SG 100 for this SI, which is defined as:-

Page 169 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: • meet national and international requirements; PI 2.3.2 • ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species.

Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species. A “comprehensive strategy” (applicable only for ETP component) is a complete and tested strategy made up of linked monitoring, analyses, and management measures and responses. MSC CR v 2.0 Table SA8 As noted in the scoring comments for PI 2.2.2 above, the industrial jack mackerel fishery is subject to management controls that prevent operations within 5 nautical miles of the coast, and the fishers used oceanographic data to identify areas where jack mackerel are likely to be caught. As a larger pelagic fish, jack mackerel do not attract the numbers of seabirds that congregate around the fisheries for smaller pelagic fish such as anchovies and sardines. The ETP species that was recorded to interact with the jack mackerel fishery most frequently is the South American Sea Lion, Otaria flavescens. Fishermen reported that the sea lions actively enter the nets to catch the encircled fish, and leap over the headline of the net to avoid the pump used to recover fish. The sea lions that were reported to be killed had either become entangled in the net and then the machinery aboard the vessel or in the fish pump. Nevertheless, the level of mortality both as a proportion of the interactions observed and the sea lion population is very small. The evidence available for the sea lions and the other 6 ETP species indicates that the partial strategy in place (in the form of the measures that require fishing in offshore areas and targeting jack mackerel rather than smaller pelagic species) results in a very low level of mortality of ETP species. The evidence of low levels of mortality meet associated with these management measures meet the SG 60 requirements for this SI. The SG 80 requirements specify that there should be a strategy in place. The revision of the LGPA in 2013 created a requirement to develop a Discard Plan to manage both the level of discarding from Chilean fisheries, and also to address the catch of non-target species, including ETP species (Article 1º C(i)). The IFOP observer programme has gathered the data required to inform this Discard Plan. Nevertheless, in the absence of this Discard Plan the SG 80 and SG100 requirements are not presently met. c Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is an objective The strategy / post considered likely to basis for confidence comprehensive strategy work, based on that the is mainly based on plausible argument measures/strategy will information directly (e.g., general work, based on about the fishery and/or experience, theory or information directly species involved, and a comparison with similar about the fishery and/or quantitative analysis fisheries/species). the species involved. supports high

Page 170 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: • meet national and international requirements; PI 2.3.2 • ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species.

Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species. confidence that the strategy will work.

Met? Y Y N Justifi The information from the IFOP observer programme conducted in the UoA cation shows that there is a very low level of interaction between the jack mackerel purse seine fishery and ETP species, and that the level of ETP species mortality is very low. Information is available on the status of the ETP species concerned (see review in section 3.6.1.3.2 of this report). The information available is directly from the fishery and for the species involved, and shows that the measures in place are consistently achieving a low level of adverse interaction with ETP species, meeting the SG 60 and 80 requirements. In the absence of the Discard Plan that will be based on this information, the SG 100 requirements are not presently met. d Management strategy implementation Guide There is some There is clear evidence post evidence that the that the measures/strategy is strategy/comprehensiv being implemented e strategy is being successfully. implemented successfully and is achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a) or (b).

Met? Y N Justifi There is good evidence from VMS monitoring of the fishery that the vessels cation operate in areas further than 5 nautical miles from the shore, as required, and the catch composition shows that very few non-target fish species are caught. The clean catch and offshore location of the fishery is one of the measures thought to result in a low level of interaction with ETP bird species. The evidence gathered by the IFOP observers aboard UoA vessels for a 2 year period provides evidence of a low level of interaction with ETP species, and demonstrates that the measures are being implemented successfully, which satisfies the SG 80 requirements. In the absence of a clear strategy to manage interactions with ETP species, SG 100 is not presently met. e Review of alternative measures to minimize mortality of ETP species

Page 171 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: • meet national and international requirements; PI 2.3.2 • ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species.

Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species. Guide There is a review of the There is a regular There is a biennial post potential effectiveness review of the potential review of the potential and practicality of effectiveness and effectiveness and alternative measures to practicality of practicality of minimise UoA-related alternative measures to alternative measures to mortality of ETP minimise UoA-related minimise UoA-related species. mortality of ETP species mortality ETP species, and they are and they are implemented as implemented, as appropriate. appropriate.

Met? Y N N Justifi The discard reduction programme launched by IFOP in 2014 in response to cation the revised LGPA in 2013 represents part of a formal process for reducing the catch of non-target species (including ETP species) that is due to result in the publication of a “Discard Plan” for the jack mackerel fishery. There is evidence that this review of catch composition and management measures is underway, which is sufficient to meet the SG 60 requirements. The revisions to the LGPA that were made in 2013 require (at Article 1º C) that “Every five years, the effectiveness and implementation of conservation and management measures will be evaluated”. At this point the initial review is still underway, and there is no evidence that it will be conducted regularly, so neither the SG 80 or SG 100 requirements are presently met.

Section 3.6.1.3.2 of this report. References (LGPA 1991, 2013, IFOP 2017, 2018) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 4

Page 172 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.3 – ETP species information Relevant information is collected to support the management of UoA 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 SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Information adequacy for assessment of impacts Guidep Qualitative information Some quantitative Quantitative information ost is adequate to information is adequate is available to assess with estimate the UoA to assess the UoA a high degree of certainty related mortality on ETP related mortality and the magnitude of UoA- species. impact and to determine related impacts, whether the UoA may be mortalities and injuries OR a threat to protection and and the consequences If RBF is used to score recovery of the ETP for the status of ETP PI 2.3.1 for the UoA: species. species. Qualitative information OR is adequate to If RBF is used to score PI estimate productivity 2.3.1 for the UoA: and susceptibility attributes for ETP Some quantitative species. information is adequate to assess productivity and susceptibility attributes for ETP species.

Met? Y Y N Justific Quantitative information is available on the level of interaction, including ation mortality, of ETP species in the UoA. This information has been provided by 2 years of scientific observer trips aboard UoA vessels. Quantitative information is also available on the status of the ETP species that may be impacted by the UoA, including information on current population sizes and trends for the species concerned. A brief review of this information is set out in section 3.6.1.3.2 of this report. The information available is adequate to assess the UoA-related mortality of ETP species (see Table 9) and to identify the implications for all of the affected species (see scoring rationale for PI 2.3.1 SIb). The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. The quality of the information available does not currently meet the SG 100 requirements. b Information adequacy for management strategy Guidep Information is adequate Information is adequate Information is adequate ost to support measures to to measure trends and to support a

Page 173 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Relevant information is collected to support the management of UoA 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. manage the impacts on support a strategy to comprehensive ETP species. manage impacts on ETP strategy to manage species. impacts, minimize mortality and injury of ETP species, and evaluate with a high degree of certainty whether a strategy is achieving its objectives.

Met? Y Y N Justific The IFOP observer programme and the parallel self-reporting programme were ation specifically designed to gather the information necessary to support a strategy for managing the impact of the fishery on non-target species, including ETP species. The information gathered is summarised in section 3.6.1.1 & 3.6.1.3 of this report. Information is available from IUCN and ACAP on the status of, and any trends in, the abundance of ETP species. That status of ETP species is also kept under review by Government bodies in Chile. The quality of this information meets the SG 60 and 80 requirements. There is a lack of evidence that there is an adequate information gathering strategy in place to determine that any management strategy is meeting its objectives. This SG 100 requirement is not met.

Section 3.6.1.1 & 3.6.1.3 of this report. References (IUCN 2013a, 2013b, 2015, 2016c, 2016h, 2016f, 2016e, 2016b, 2017, IFOP 2017) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 174 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.1 – Habitats outcome The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure and function, considered on the basis of the area covered by the PI 2.4.1 governance body(s) responsible for fisheries management in the area(s) where the UoA operates.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Commonly encountered habitat status Guidep The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly There is evidence that ost reduce structure and unlikely to reduce the UoA is highly function of the commonly structure and function of unlikely to reduce encountered habitats to a the commonly structure and function of point where there would be encountered habitats to the commonly serious or irreversible a point where there encountered habitats to harm. would be serious or a point where there irreversible harm. would be serious or irreversible harm.

Met? Y Y Y Justific The context for determining fishery performance against this SI is complex, and ation is outlined below with reference to the MSC Standard. The MSC FCR v 2.0, SA3.13.3.1, define a “commonly encountered habitat” as:- “A commonly encountered habitat shall be defined as a habitat that regularly comes into contact with a gear used by the UoA, considering the spatial (geographical) overlap of fishing effort with the habitat’s range within the management area(s) covered by the governance body(s) relevant to the UoA.” Further to this, “serious or irreversible harm” to a commonly encountered habitat is defined as:- “…reductions in habitat structure and function (as defined in Table SA8) such that the habitat would be unable to recover at least 80% of its structure and function within 5-20 years if fishing on the habitat were to cease entirely.” FCR v 2.0 at SA 3.14 The definition referred to in Table SA8 states that:- “Serious or irreversible harm to “structure or function” means changes caused by the UoA that fundamentally alter the capacity of the habitat or ecosystem to maintain its structure and function. For the habitat component, this is the reduction in habitat structure, biological diversity, abundance and function such that the habitat would be unable to recover to at least 80% of its unimpacted structure, biological diversity and function within 5-20 years, if fishing were to cease entirely.” FCR v 2.0, Table 8

Page 175 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure and function, considered on the basis of the area covered by the PI 2.4.1 governance body(s) responsible for fisheries management in the area(s) where the UoA operates. Fishing for jack mackerel in the UoA is conducted using pelagic purse seine nets, which are designed to operate in the water column without contacting the seabed. The purse seines may be up to 110 fathoms (approximately 200 m) in depth. This fishing gear is operated in waters deeper than 200 m (and typically over 400 m). Therefore, for the purpose of this assessment the epipelagic habitat is considered to be the only commonly encountered habitat. The principal factor determining the character of the epipelagic habitat in the eastern Pacific is the Humboldt Current System (HCS) which brings cold, nutrient rich water to the sea surface in the eastern Pacific and along the Chilean coast from southern Chile (~42°S) to the equator (see Figure 33). This is one of the most productive marine ecosystems in the world and has been well studied (Thiel et al. 2007). The main influence on the HCS is decadal oscillations of oceanic currents in the Pacific Ocean (the El Niño Southern Oscillation and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation in the north Pacific). These oscillations have been well studied, and are driven by physical climatic processes (Newman et al. 2016, Wang et al. 2017). The ENSO and PDO affect the abundance and distribution of fish assemblages in the eastern Pacific (Thiel et al. 2007, Harrison and Chiodi 2015). The functions provided by pelagic habitats are determined by their physico- chemical characteristics (such as sea water temperature, nutrient and oxygen concentrations). These characteristics determine both the abundance of food for jack mackerel and other fish species; and also determine the extent of pelagic habitat which is suitable for jack mackerel (i.e. the extent of the water column with an amenable water temperature and oxygen concentration for jack mackerel) (Thiel et al. 2007, Ulloa and Grob 2009, Bertrand et al. 2011). Studies of the impacts of purse seine nets elsewhere in the world indicate that this fishing method has no physical impact on pelagic habitats (FAO Fisheries Resources Division 2001). The key anthropogenic impact on Pacific oceanographic processes is considered to be climate change. In summary, the only commonly encountered habitat is the epipelagic habitat. There is evidence that this habitat is well studied and understood within the UoA. The key functions provided by this habitat are physico-chemical. There is no evidence (nor any plausible mechanism) for pelagic purse seines to impact these habitat characteristics to the point where there would be “serious or irreversible harm” as defined by the MSC. There is thus evidence that the UoA is highly unlikely to have any serious or irreversible effect on commonly encountered habitats, meaning that the SG 60, 80 and 100 requirements are met. b VME habitat status Guidep The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly There is evidence that ost reduce structure and unlikely to reduce the UoA is highly function of the VME structure and function of unlikely to reduce habitats to a point where the VME habitats to a structure and function of there would be serious or point where there would the VME habitats to a irreversible harm. point where there would

Page 176 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure and function, considered on the basis of the area covered by the PI 2.4.1 governance body(s) responsible for fisheries management in the area(s) where the UoA operates. be serious or be serious or

irreversible harm. irreversible harm.

Met? Y Y Y Justific The context for determining fishery performance against this SI is complex, and ation is outlined below with reference to the MSC Standard. Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs) are defined in the MSC FCR v 2.0 as:- “A VME shall be defined as is done in paragraph 42 subparagraphs (i)- (v) of the FAO Guidelines [i.e., that they have uniqueness or rarity, functional significance, fragility, life history traits that make recovery difficult, and/or structural complexity]. This definition shall be applied both inside and outside EEZs and irrespective of depth.” MSC FCR v 2.0 SA3.13.3.2 & GSA 3.13.3.2 Further to these definitions, “serious or irreversible harm” is defined by the MSC as “…reductions in habitat structure and function below 80% of the unimpacted level.” MSC FCR v 2.0 SA3.14.1 The “unimpacted level” is defined as, to all intents and purposes, the status of the VME in 2006 (Marine Stewardship Council 2015b). The assessment team notes that the Convention on Biological Diversity has identified several Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) within the UoA area. The criteria for identifying these areas are very similar to those set out in the FAO guidelines referred to by the MSC. These EBSAs are therefore regarded as VMEs. As noted under SIa above, the available evidence is that the jack mackerel purse seine fishery is conducted in a manner that avoids contact between the fishing gear and the seabed: the gear is not designed for this, and the fishing practice is to fish in waters that are deeper than the depth of the net. The assessment team notes that the Chilean Government has identified and designated Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in order to conserve VMEs within its EEZ. These MPAs cover over 25% of the Chilean EEZ, and include both Marine Reserves (where no extractive industries including fishing are permitted); and Marine Parks and Multi-Use MPAs where a limited amount of fishing is permitted. The conservation features of the Marine Parks and Marine Reserves in Chile are listed in Table 12 of this report. The fishing gear used in the UoA is pelagic, and deployed in a way that avoids contact with the seabed and any benthic VMEs or EBSA features in the UoA. The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. There is evidence that the UoA fleet complies with the closures that are in place to protect benthic VMEs (see Figure 2 & Figure 3 & Figure 31). This information, coupled with the absence of any pelagic VMEs in the UoA, nor any likely interaction with benthic VMEs, provides evidence that this fishery is highly

Page 177 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure and function, considered on the basis of the area covered by the PI 2.4.1 governance body(s) responsible for fisheries management in the area(s) where the UoA operates. unlikely to cause serious or irreversible harm (sensu SA3.14.1) and the SG 100 requirements are therefore met. c Minor habitat status Guidep There is evidence that

ost the UoA is highly unlikely to reduce structure and function of the minor habitats to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. Met? Y Justific Minor habitats are defined by the MSC as those which are neither “commonly ation encountered habitats” or VMEs (SA3.13.3). Taking into account the information presented in SIa and SIb above, the only “minor” habitats within the UoA would be benthic habitats, excluding those that have been identified as VMEs. The pelagic purse seines used in the jack mackerel fishery are designed to operate in the water column and avoid contact with benthic habitats. The SG 100 requirements are therefore considered to be met.

(FAO Fisheries Resources Division 2001, Neira and Arancibia 2004, Thiel et al. 2007, Ulloa and Grob 2009, Bertrand et al. 2011, Convention on Biological References Diversity 2012, 2018g, Marine Stewardship Council 2015b, Harrison and Chiodi 2015, SERNAPESCA 2016, 2018b, Newman et al. 2016, Wang et al. 2017) Section 3.6.2 of this report. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 178 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.2 – Habitats management strategy There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the UoA does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the habitats.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Management strategy in place Guidep There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy in ost place, if necessary, that are strategy in place, if place for managing the expected to achieve the necessary, that is impact of all MSC Habitat Outcome 80 level expected to achieve the UoAs/non-MSC of performance. Habitat Outcome 80 fisheries on habitats. level of performance or above.

Met? Y Y Y Justific The terms “measures”, “partial strategy” and “strategy” used in this SI are defined ation in the MSC FCR v 2.0 (see the FCR text reproduced in the rationale for PI 2.1.2 SIa). The MSC has further determined that “measures” at the SG 60 level for a UoA that encounters VMEs shall include as a minimum:- a. Requirements to comply with management measures to protect VMEs (e.g., designation of closed areas); b. Implementation by the UoA of precautionary measures to avoid encounters with VMEs, based on commonly accepted move-on rules. MSC FCR v 2.0 at SA3.14.2.3 The MSC has provided interpretation on this requirement, stating that move-on rules are not required where there are no interactions with VMEs (Marine Stewardship Council 2017). The information available about the nature of the epipelagic habitat and pelagic purse seine nets indicates that there is no evidence of an impact of the fishery on this habitat, nor any plausible mechanism for an impact. The information available about interactions between pelagic purse seines and VMEs within the UoA is that there is very little risk of any interaction at all, since the gear is used in the water column where there are no VMEs. On this basis there is no need for management measures or a partial strategy. The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. The SG 100 level of performance requires that there is a strategy (i.e. a cohesive and strategic arrangement which may comprise one or more measures) in place that manages the impact of all MSC UOAs and non-MSC fisheries on habitats. The performance of the management system within and outside the Chilean EEZ is reviewed separately below. Within the Chilean EEZ: There is evidence that within the Chilean EEZ there is a strategy in place that meets these requirements. The Marine Parks and Reserves Regulations (D.S. (MINECON) No. 238/2004) (DS MINECON 2004) sets out the legal basis for establishing marine parks and reserves, and has

Page 179 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the UoA does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the habitats. enabled the creation of a network of over 1,000,000 km² of Marine Protected Areas. Extractive activities (including fishing) are prohibited in many of these (see section 3.6.2.2.2 of this report); there are exceptions for low-impact (and MSC- certified) fisheries such as the Juan Fernandez Islands rock lobster fishery. The LGPA also sets out a system of penalties to address non-compliance with this network. Article 6 of the LGPA sets out specific requirements for the protection of Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems, including requirements (for fishing vessels using bottom towed gear) to suspend fishing operations if any VMEs are caught and to report these (Article 6B). Outside Chilean EEZ: Article 20 of the SPRFMO Convention establishes the basis for Contracting Parties to protect marine habitats & ecosystems. Text from the SPRFMO Convention is reproduced in section 3.6.2.2.2 of this report. In summary, Article 2 sets out a strategic objective to safeguard marine ecosystems; Article 3 defines the objectives further; and Article 20 sets out a clear basis for SPRFMO to make Conservation and Management Measures (CMMs) for, inter alia, the purpose of protecting “….the habitats and marine ecosystems in which fishery resources and non-target and associated or dependent species occur from the impacts of fishing, including measures to prevent significant impact on vulnerable marine ecosystems…..” (SPRFMO 2015c). In 2018 SPRFMO agreed a Conservation Management Measure (CMM 03- 2018) that addresses the impacts of fishing on the seabed (SPRFMO 2018b). This requires SPRFMO Members and CNCPs to define their bottom fishing footprint; prohibits all bottom fishing that does not comply with the CMM; cap the catch from demersal fisheries at the average level for the Member or CNCP at the level seen between 2002-06; have 100% observer coverage for demersal trawlers and 10% coverage for other bottom fishing methods; establish thresholds for VME encounters; to cease fishing within 5 nautical miles of any VMEs; and to report information about the encounters with VMEs to SPRFMO. The management systems in place for protecting marine habitats both within the Chilean EEZ and in the SPRFMO area clearly meet the SG 100 requirement for both a cohesive and strategic management framework with management measures in place which address the impacts of all MSC UOAs and non-MSC fisheries. The SG 100 requirements are therefore met. b Management strategy evaluation Guidep The measures are There is some Testing supports high ost considered likely to work, objective basis for confidence that the based on plausible confidence that the partial strategy/strategy argument (e.g. general measures/partial will work, based on experience, theory or strategy will work, information directly comparison with similar based on information about the UoA and/or UoAs/habitats). directly about the UoA habitats involved. and/or habitats involved.

Page 180 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the UoA does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the habitats.

Met? Y Y N Justific The MSC has provided an interpretation to guide the application of this SI which ation states that the “if necessary” clause included in SIa above should also apply to SIb and SIc (Marine Stewardship Council 2015a). The information available about the nature of the epipelagic habitat and pelagic purse seine nets indicates that there is no evidence of an impact of the fishery on this habitat, nor any plausible mechanism for an impact. The information available about interactions between pelagic purse seines and VMEs within the UoA is that there is very little risk of any interaction at all, since the gear is used in the water column where there are no VMEs. On this basis there is no need for management measures or a partial strategy. The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. Whilst it is clear that there is a strategy in place for managing the impacts of fisheries on marine habitats both within the Chilean EEZ and in the SPRFMO area, there is no evidence of any testing of this strategy for the UoA or the epipelagic habitat in which it takes place. SG 100 is therefore not considered to be met at present. c Management strategy implementation Guidep There is some There is clear ost quantitative evidence quantitative evidence that the that the partial measures/partial strategy/strategy is strategy is being being implemented implemented successfully and is successfully. achieving its objective, as outlined in scoring issue (a).

Met? Y N Justific The MSC has provided an interpretation to guide the application of this SI which ation states that the “if necessary” clause included in SIa above should also apply to SIb and SIc (Marine Stewardship Council 2015a). The information available about the nature of the epipelagic habitat and pelagic purse seine nets indicates that there is no evidence of an impact of the fishery on this habitat, nor any plausible mechanism for an impact. The information available about interactions between pelagic purse seines and VMEs within the UoA is that there is very little risk of any interaction at all, since the gear is used in the water column where there are no VMEs. On this basis there is no need for management measures or a partial strategy. The SG 60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. Within the Chilean EEZ there is clear quantitative evidence that the strategy for protecting marine habitats is being implemented (provided by the evidence of designation of over 50 MPAs covering more than 25% of the EEZ); and also evidence of good compliance by the UoA with these MPAs (see distribution of

Page 181 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the UoA does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the habitats. fishing activity relative to MPA areas by comparison of Figure 2 & Figure 3 & Figure 31). Outside the Chilean EEZ there is not yet any clear quantitative evidence that the SPRFMO CMM introduced earlier in 2018 is being implemented successfully or is achieving its objective. The CMM includes provisions for gathering data and defining the footprint of bottom fishing activity, so this information may be available in the future. In the absence of clear quantitative evidence of successful implementation of management measures throughout the EEZ, SG 100 is not considered to be met at present. d Compliance with management requirements and other MSC UoAs’ / non-MSC fisheries’ measures to protect VMEs Guidep There is qualitative There is some There is clear ost evidence that the UoA quantitative evidence quantitative evidence complies with its that the UoA complies that the UoA complies management requirements with both its with both its to protect VMEs. management management requirements and with requirements and with protection measures protection measures afforded to VMEs by afforded to VMEs by other MSC UoAs/non- other MSC UoAs/non- MSC fisheries, where MSC fisheries, where relevant. relevant.

Met? Y Y N

Justific There is no overlap between the UoAs and any other MSC UoAs. The only VME ation protection measures in place within the UoA are those established by the Government of Chile and SPRFMO (outlined in 3.6.2.2 of this report). The information available about the nature of the epipelagic habitat and pelagic purse seine nets indicates that there is no evidence of an impact of the fishery on this habitat, nor any plausible mechanism for an impact. This qualitative evidence meets the SG 60 requirements for this SI. The information available about interactions between pelagic purse seines and VMEs within the UoA is that there is very little risk of any interaction at all, since the gear is used in the water column where there are no VMEs; all of the VMEs that have been identified in the Chilean EEZ and SPRFMO waters are benthic. There is also evidence that the UoA fleet do not operate within Marine Parks which have been established as no take zones (see distribution of fishing activity relative to MPA areas by comparison of Figure 2, Figure 3 & Figure 31). This quantitative evidence demonstrates compliance with VME protection measures, meeting the SG 80 requirements. As noted previously, SPRFMO has only recently implemented a CMM to protect VMEs which establishes an information-gathering mechanism. Whilst this CMM is likely to produce clear quantitative information about the nature and extent of interactions with VMEs, the SG 100 requirements for this SI are not currently met.

Page 182 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the UoA does not PI 2.4.2 pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the habitats.

Sections 3.6.2.2.1 & 3.6.2.2.2 of this report; Table 12; Figure 2; Figure 3; Figure References 31 (LGPA 1991, 2013, DS MINECON 2004, Marine Stewardship Council 2015a, 2017, SPRFMO 2015c, 2018b) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 183 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.3 – Habitats information Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to the habitat by the PI 2.4.3 UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on the habitat.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Information quality Guidep The types and distribution The nature, distribution The distribution of all ost of the main habitats are and vulnerability of the habitats is known over broadly understood. main habitats in the their range, with UoA area are known at particular attention to OR a level of detail relevant the occurrence of If CSA is used to score PI to the scale and vulnerable habitats. 2.4.1 for the UoA: intensity of the UoA. Qualitative information is OR adequate to estimate the If CSA is used to score types and distribution of the PI 2.4.1 for the UoA: main habitats. Some quantitative information is available and is adequate to estimate the types and distribution of the main habitats.

Met? Y Y N Justific As noted in PI 2.4.1, the jack mackerel purse seine fishery is pelagic. The fishing ation gear makes no contact with benthic habitats. The purse seines may fish up to 200 m deep, and thus the “main” habitat that the fishery interacts with is the epipelagic habitat. The character of the epipelagic habitat in the south-eastern Pacific Ocean and along the coast of Chile has been studied and described in detail (Thiel et al. 2007). The key features of this habitat are shown in 3.6.2.2 & Figure 33. The habitat is considered to be vulnerable to oscillations of ocean currents which can affect the extent and depth of the sea area that is amenable for jack mackerel, and hence the abundance of fish (Thiel et al. 2007, Harrison and Chiodi 2015). The jack mackerel fleet uses habitat information (water temperature from satellite images) to identify areas suitable for fishing; hence this information is available at a level of detail and scale that is relevant to the UoA (including real-time data available on the internet and through smartphone applications), meeting the SG 60 and 80 requirements. SG 100 requires that the distribution of “all” habitats is known over their range, with particular attention to vulnerable habitats. This includes benthic habitats. This information is not available, so SG 100 is not met. b Information adequacy for assessment of impacts Guidep Information is adequate to Information is adequate The physical impacts of ost broadly understand the to allow for the gear on all habitats

Page 184 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to the habitat by the PI 2.4.3 UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on the habitat. nature of the main impacts identification of the have been quantified of gear use on the main main impacts of the fully. habitats, including spatial UoA on the main overlap of habitat with habitats, and there is fishing gear. reliable information on the spatial extent of OR interaction and on the If CSA is used to score timing and location of PI 2.4.1 for the UoA: use of the fishing gear. Qualitative information is OR adequate to estimate the If CSA is used to consequence and spatial score PI 2.4.1 for the attributes of the main UoA: habitats. Some quantitative information is available and is adequate to estimate the consequence and spatial attributes of the main habitats.

Met? Y Y N Justific As noted in PI 2.4.1, the jack mackerel purse seine fishery is pelagic. The fishing ation gear makes no contact with benthic habitats. The purse seines may fish up to 200 m deep, and thus the “main” habitat that the fishery interacts with is the epipelagic habitat. There is no evidence (nor any plausible mechanism) for pelagic purse seines to adversely impact this habitat. Vessels are tracked using VMS, which enables the spatial extent of interaction and the timing and location of use of the fishing gear to be monitored both within and beyond the Chilean EEZ (see Figure 2 and Figure 3). The nature of the interaction of the purse seine fishery with the epipelagic habitat, coupled with monitoring of the UoA fleet by VMS is adequate to meet the SG 60 and 80 requirements. SG 100 refers to the need for the physical impacts of the gear on all habitats to have been quantified fully. There is no indication that this is the case, so the SG 100 requirements are not met. c Monitoring Guidep Adequate information Changes in habitat ost continues to be distributions over time collected to detect any are measured. increase in risk to the main habitats.

Met? Y N

Page 185 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to the habitat by the PI 2.4.3 UoA and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on the habitat. Justific An increase in risk to habitats could result from changes in the type of fishing ation gear used, or in the spatial extent of the fishery. Both of these aspects of the fishery are monitored: the former by fishery officers; the latter by VMS monitoring of the spatial extent of fishing activity. All SPRFMO Members including the Chilean Government report the extent of fishing activity annually to SPRFMO. This meets the SG 80 requirements. Whilst there is information available about the changes in pelagic habitats over time throughout the UoA (Thiel et al. 2007), there is no evidence that similar information is available for benthic habitats. SG 100 is therefore not met.

Section 3.6.2.2 of this report; Figure 2; Figure 3; Figure 33. References (Thiel et al. 2007, Harrison and Chiodi 2015, SPRFMO 2016, 2017a) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 186 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.1 – Ecosystem outcome The UoA does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key PI 2.5.1 elements of ecosystem structure and function.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Ecosystem status Guide The UoA is unlikely to The UoA is highly There is evidence that post disrupt the key unlikely to disrupt the the UoA is highly elements underlying key elements unlikely to disrupt the ecosystem structure underlying ecosystem key elements and function to a point structure and function to underlying ecosystem where there would be a a point where there structure and function to serious or irreversible would be a serious or a point where there harm. irreversible harm. would be a serious or irreversible harm.

Met? RBF RBF RBF Justifi The RBF has been used to score this PI. cation See Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs.

References N/A OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 187 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.2 – Ecosystem management strategy There are measures in place to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Management strategy in place Guide There are measures in There is a partial There is a strategy that post place, if necessary strategy in place, if consists of a plan, in which take into account necessary, which takes place which contains the potential impacts into account available measures to address of the fishery on key information and is all main impacts of the elements of the expected to restrain UoA on the ecosystem, ecosystem. impacts of the UoA on and at least some of the ecosystem so as to these measures are in achieve the Ecosystem place. Outcome 80 level of performance.

Met? Y Y N Justifi The terms “measures”, “partial strategy” and “strategy” used in this SI are cation defined in the MSC FCR v 2.0 (see the FCR text reproduced in the rationale for PI 2.1.2 SIa). The most likely mechanisms for the fishery to impact the ecosystem is through the removal of the target species; through impacts on non-target species & ETP species; and through physical impacts on marine habitats. There are measures in place to address these potential impacts both within the Chilean EEZ and in the SPRFMO area, which are briefly described below. The strategy for managing impacts of the fishery on the target species is described in section 3.5.5 of this report. Very briefly, fishery removals of jack mackerel throughout its range in the eastern Pacific are now set at a level determined by SPRFMO through a process that takes account of “…the precautionary approach and an ecosystem approach to fisheries management…” [Article 2 of the SPRFMO Convention]. SPRFMO sets an annual TAC using this approach, which is based on the most recent stock assessment and which is expected to maintain the jack mackerel stock at a level consistent with MSY. The impact of the Chilean jack mackerel industrial purse seine fleet on non- target species has recently been studied by IFOP. This information shows that the fishery has a very low catch of non-target or ETP species. A discard plan is being developed for the jack mackerel fishery based on this information, but is not yet in place. There is no evidence that the fishery has any adverse impacts on marine habitats. Nevertheless, it is significant that the Chilean Government has established a network of Marine Reserves, Parks and MPAs which are designed to protect vulnerable marine habitats within the Chilean EEZ. These protected areas include some of the areas that have been identified by the Convention on Biological Diversity as Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) in the region.

Page 188 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There are measures in place to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function. The history of the fishery shows that commercial fishing for jack mackerel has the capacity to deplete this stock; clearly a management strategy is necessary that takes account of available information and restrains impacts on this ecosystem component. For the other ecosystem components, the available information indicates that there is no significant adverse impact, and hence no strategy is necessary. The existence of a management strategy where necessary (for the target species) and evidence of a lack of necessity for other ecosystem components (non-target, ETP species and marine habitats) means that the SG 60 and 80 requirements are met. At the SG100 level, the “if necessary” qualifier does not apply. Thus, although there is a management strategy and plan (in the form of an annual Conservation & Management Measure) in place for jack mackerel and also a strategy and series of plans in place for Marine Parks and Marine Reserves, the absence of an equivalent approach for other ecosystem components means that the SG 100 requirements are not met. b Management strategy evaluation Guide The measures are There is some Testing supports high post considered likely to objective basis for confidence that the work, based on confidence that the partial strategy/strategy plausible argument measures/partial will work, based on (e.g., general strategy will work, information directly experience, theory or based on some about the UoA and/or comparison with similar information directly ecosystem involved fisheries/ ecosystems). about the UoA and/or the ecosystem involved

Met? Y Y N Justifi The MSC has provided an interpretation to guide the application of this SI cation which states that the “if necessary” clause included in SIa above should also apply to SIb and SIc (Marine Stewardship Council 2015a). As noted above, the only aspect of this UoA where management intervention is necessary to restrain fishery impacts is the removal of the target species. The recovery of this stock from a depleted state provides an objective basis for confidence that the strategy established by SRFMO and implemented by its Members has worked. There is also an objective basis for confidence that the management strategy for protecting marine habitats in Chile (the Marine Parks, Reserves and MPAs described in section 3.6.2.2 of this report) will work. This evidence comes from studies of the efficacy of these measures on other fisheries which can have a detectable impact on marine habitats (Friedlander et al. 2013). Although aspects of this strategy (such as no-take zones) apply to the jack mackerel purse seine fishery, there is no evidence nor any plausible mechanism for this fishery to adversely impact either commonly encountered habitats or vulnerable marine ecosystems in the UoA. There is no evidence that a management strategy is currently necessary to restrain impacts of the fishery on non-target species or ETP species, given observer records which show a very low level of interaction with these

Page 189 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There are measures in place to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function. species. At the SPRFMO level it is clear that action has been taken where necessary to address impacts on ETP species in other fisheries (CMM 09- 2018, which applies to longline and trawl fisheries). The existence of a management strategy where necessary (for the target species) meets the SG 60 and 80 requirements. The existence of a strategy to protect marine habitats and the proposal to implement a discard plan for the fishery in Chile, coupled with the SPRFMO action to protect ETP species from longline and trawl fishery impacts goes some way to meet the SG 100 requirements; however, in the absence of a management strategy / partial strategy that applies to all UoA impacts and which has been tested, SG 100 is not met. c Management strategy implementation Guide There is some There is clear evidence post evidence that the that the partial measures/partial strategy/strategy is strategy is being being implemented implemented successfully and is successfully. achieving its objective as set out in scoring issue (a).

Met? Y N Justifi The MSC has provided an interpretation to guide the application of this SI cation which states that the “if necessary” clause included in SIa above should also apply to SIb and SIc (Marine Stewardship Council 2015a). As noted in SIa and SIb above, the available evidence is that the mechanism by which the fishery might impact the ecosystem is through the removal of the target species. A strategy has been developed to address this impact – the setting of a TAC by SPRFMO that takes account of the ecosystem approach to fisheries management. This TAC has been implemented by SPRFMO since 2013, and has been applied in the Chilean EEZ since 2014. The evidence of fishery removals from the stock shows that the UoA have complied with this strategy. This meets the SG 80 requirements. The SG 100 level of performance requires that there is a strategy / partial strategy in place to address all fishery impacts, and also that it is achieving its objectives. It is clear that there is a strategy in place to manage removals of the target species, and evidence (from the recovery of the stock) that it is achieving its objectives. However, for the other ecosystem components, there is only a management strategy in place at present for marine habitats, and a strategy in development for catches of non-target species. There is no evidence as yet that either the habitat management strategy or the proposed discard plan for non-target species are meeting their objectives, so SG 100 is not met.

Sections 3.6.3.1.1 and 3.6.3.1.2 of this report. References (LGPA 1991, 2013, DS MINECON 2004, Convention on Biological Diversity 2012, 2018f, 2018a, 2018g, 2018d, 2018c, 2018b, 2018e, SPRFMO 2015c,

Page 190 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There are measures in place to ensure the UoA does not pose a risk of PI 2.5.2 serious or irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function. 2017b, 2018b, 2018e, 2018d, National Geographic News 2015, 2017, SERNAPESCA 2016, Embassy of Chile to New Zealand 2018) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 191 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.3 – Ecosystem information There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the UoA on the PI 2.5.3 ecosystem.

Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Information quality Guide Information is adequate Information is adequate post to identify the key to broadly understand elements of the the key elements of the ecosystem. ecosystem.

Met? Y Y Justifi The “key elements” of the ecosystem are defined by the MSC as:- cation “the features of an ecosystem considered as being most crucial to giving the ecosystem its characteristic nature and dynamics, and are considered relative to the scale and intensity of the UoA; they are features most crucial to maintaining the integrity of its structure and functions and the key determinants of the ecosystem resilience and productivity” FCR v 2.0 at SA3.16.3 Applying this definition, the key elements of the ecosystem have been identified: they are the physical oceanographic processes associated with the Humboldt Current System (HCS) that bring cold nutrient rich water to the sea surface in equatorial regions and supports a high biological productivity off the coast of Chile. These ecosystem elements are well studied (Thiel et al. 2007), and are described in section 3.6.3.1 of this report. In summary, there is a good understanding of the HCS in the UoA, and the factors (such as the El Niño Southern Oscillation and Pacific Decadal Oscillation) that affect these currents. The food web and trophic interactions supported by the HCS are well documented and understood. The effect of the physical processes on these trophic interactions have been studied, and the effect of fishery removals on the ecosystem has been examined. The information available and the level of understanding meets the SG 60 and 80 requirements. b Investigation of UoA impacts Guide Main impacts of the Main impacts of the Main interactions post UoA on these key UoA on these key between the UoA and ecosystem elements ecosystem elements these ecosystem can be inferred from can be inferred from elements can be existing information, but existing information, inferred from existing have not been and some have been information, and have investigated in detail. investigated in detail. been investigated in detail.

Met? Y Y N

Page 192 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the UoA on the PI 2.5.3 ecosystem. Justifi The main interaction between the UoA and ecosystem elements is cation considered to be the removal of jack mackerel biomass: the fishery does not have a significant adverse effect on other species or on marine habitats. The consequence of this interaction can be inferred from existing information such as the food web and trophic interactions in the Humboldt Current System (see Figure 35). The main fishery interaction with the ecosystem (the removal of jack mackerel) has been investigated in detail. Interannual fluctuations in fish stocks do not seem to affect the general characteristics of the food web off central Chile (Neira et al. 2004). However, fisheries appear to have a long- term impact on the pelagic food web in this area. Fisheries act on several trophic levels of the pelagic food web (Figure 37). Off central Chile, a decrease in the trophic level of the principal fisheries resources has been observed, coincident with the depletion of the jack mackerel stock from 1996 (Neira and Arancibia 2004). The scope of these investigations is however limited to investigating some impacts in specific parts of the UoA. These investigations are considered to meet the SG 60 and 80 requirements. SG 100 is not considered to be met because the investigations do not extend to all interactions throughout the UoA. c Understanding of component functions Guide The main functions of The impacts of the UoA post the components (i.e., on P1 target species, P1 target species, primary, secondary and primary, secondary and ETP species and ETP species and Habitats are identified Habitats) in the and the main functions ecosystem are known. of these components in the ecosystem are understood.

Met? Y Y Justifi The functions of the components of the ecosystem are known, and have been cation extensively studied and reviewed. A summary of this information is presented in section 3.6.3.1.1 of this report. The extent of this knowledge meets the SG 80 requirements. The impacts of the UoA on the target species have been identified (see section 3.5 of this report). Impacts on non-target species have been documented and quantified through a recent observer programme and are considered to be negligible (see section 3.6.1.1); likewise impacts on ETP species have been studied recently and are also considered to be negligible (see section 3.6.1.3.2). The fishery is pelagic and does not have any appreciable habitat impacts (see section 3.6.2.2). The structure of the food web in the Humboldt Current System has been identified and modelled (Neira et al. 2004, Neira and Arancibia 2004, Thiel et al. 2007), and the effect of both natural and anthropogenic factors on the ecosystem have been examined (Gutiérrez et al. 2016, Newman et al. 2016), so that there is a good understanding of the functions of the different ecosystem components and

Page 193 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the UoA on the PI 2.5.3 ecosystem. their interaction with one another. The SG 100 requirements are therefore considered to be met. d Information relevance Guide Adequate information is Adequate information is post available on the impacts available on the impacts of the UoA on these of the UoA on the components to allow components and some of the main elements to allow the consequences for the main consequences for ecosystem to be the ecosystem to be inferred. inferred.

Met? Y Y Justifi As noted in the scoring comments for SIc above, information is gathered cation about target stock removals; the extent and magnitude of interactions with non-target and ETP species; and the spatial location of fishing activity (and hence the risk of impacts on marine habitats). In the case of non-target and ETP species, the information is gathered to a level of detail that allows impacts of the UoA on individual elements (species) to be determined. This information is summarised in the relevant sections of this report. The information available meets the SG80 and SG 100 requirements for this SI. e Monitoring Guide Adequate data continue Information is adequate post to be collected to detect to support the any increase in risk development of level. strategies to manage ecosystem impacts.

Met? Y N Justifi Data continue to be gathered about target species removals at the stock level, cation which informs the management strategy for the jack mackerel stock. This management strategy is based on the objectives of the SPRFMO convention, which requires that fishery removals are consistent with the ecosystem approach to fisheries management (Article 2 of the SPRFMO Convention). For non-target species and ETP species, data have been gathered from Chilean vessels to inform the development of a “Discard Plan”, which is due to be implemented by the Chilean Government and which will apply to the Chilean vessels working in the UoA. The monitoring of these interactions would detect an increase in risk level for non-target and ETP species. SPRFMO are in the process of establishing data collecting procedures that should ultimately inform the development of similar strategies across the SPRFMO area. There is adequate information available about the extent and nature of marine habitats in Chile to have enabled the creation of a network of Marine Parks, Reserves, and MPAs as part of the Chilean Government’s strategy to meet

Page 194 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the UoA on the PI 2.5.3 ecosystem. its commitment to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The location of Chilean fishing vessels is monitored using VMS, which determines where they are fishing relative to Marine Parks, Reserves and MPAs. This information is used to monitor compliance with these areas, and would detect an increase in risk level. The evidence available therefore indicates that evidence is being gathered on fishery interactions with target, non-target, and ETP species, as well as with marine habitats and hence with marine ecosystems. The SG 80 requirements are therefore met. The information available has enabled strategies to be developed for managing impacts of the fishery on the target species throughout the UoA, and also a strategy for protecting habitats throughout the UoA. A strategy is being developed by the Chilean Government to manage impacts of the fishery on non-target species, but this is not yet in place. The SG 100 requirements are therefore not currently met.

Section 3.5 & 3.6 of this report. References (Medina and Arancibia 2002, Neira et al. 2004, Neira and Arancibia 2004, Thiel et al. 2007, Bertrand et al. 2011, Harrison and Chiodi 2015, Newman et al. 2016, SPRFMO 2017a, Wang et al. 2017) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 195 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Principle 3 The “Governance and Policy” component of Principle 3 (the PIs pre-fixed with 3.1) focuses on the high-level context of the fishery management system within the UoA. In this instance, there are two aspects of the management that need to be taken into account – the international (SPRFMO) and the domestic (Chile).

Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.1 – Legal and/or customary framework The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: PI 3.1.1 • Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); and • 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 SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Compatibility of laws or standards with effective management Guide There is an effective There is an effective There is an effective post national legal system national legal system national legal system and a framework for and organized and and binding cooperation with other effective cooperation procedures governing parties, where with other parties, cooperation with necessary, to deliver where necessary, to other parties which management outcomes deliver management delivers management consistent with MSC outcomes consistent outcomes consistent Principles 1 and 2 with MSC Principles 1 with MSC Principles 1 and 2 and 2. Met? (Y) (Y) (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation The SPRFMO Convention (SPRFMO, 2009) applies to the high seas of the South Pacific. Currently, the main commercial resources fished in the SPRFMO Area are jack mackerel and Humboldt squid and, to a much lesser degree, deep-sea species often associated with seamounts in the Southwest Pacific. The Convention provides a framework for cooperation between its 15 members – Australia, Chile, China, The Cook Islands, Cuba, Ecuador, The European Union, Denmark (in respect of the Faroes Islands) Korea, New Zealand, Peru, Russia, Chinese Taipei, The United States and Vanuatu. Cooperating non-Contracting Parties are Colombia, Curçao Liberia and Panama. The Convention recognises and adopts key aspects of relevant international agreements and conventions including UNCLOS, UNFSA, the FAO Code of Conduct and the FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU fishing. In accordance with UNFSA, SPRFMO ensures binding procedures that, minimally, deliver cooperation between its members on the collection and sharing of scientific data, the scientific assessment of stock status and the development of scientific advice.

Page 196 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: PI 3.1.1 • Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); and • 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. Furthermore, Article 31 of the Convention specially refers to “Cooperation with other organisations” and states: “The Commission shall cooperate, as appropriate, with other regional fisheries management organisations, the FAO, with other specialised agencies of the United Nations, and with other relevant organisations on matters of mutual interest. The Commission shall take account of the conservation and management measures or recommendations adopted by other regional fisheries management organisations and other relevant intergovernmental organisations that have competency in relation to the Convention Area, or in relation to areas adjacent to the Convention Area or in respect of particular living marine resources including non-target and associated or dependent species, and that have objectives that are consistent with, and supportive of, the objective of this Convention. It shall endeavour to ensure that its own decisions are compatible with, and supportive of, such conservation and management measures or recommendations. The Commission shall seek to make suitable arrangements for consultation, cooperation and collaboration with such other organisations. In particular it shall seek to cooperate with other relevant organisations with the aim of reducing and eventually eliminating IUU fishing.” SPRFMO has signed memoranda of understanding with the Secretariat for the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) (SPRFMO, 2014) and the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) to facilitate cooperation on efforts to minimise the incidental bycatch of albatrosses and petrels and advance shared objectives with respect to stocks and species with in the South Pacific and Antarctic regions (SPRFMO, 2016), respectively. Therefore, it is concluded that there is an effective legal system and binding procedures governing cooperation with other parties which delivers management outcomes consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile The General Law on Fisheries and Aquaculture (Ley General de Pesca y Aquicultura – (LGPA, 2013) provides the legislative and regulatory framework within Chile’s EEZ. Article 1º B, of LGPA (2013), states that the objective of the law is, “…to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of hydrobiology resources using a precautionary and ecosystem-based approach, and to safeguard marine ecosystems.”.

Page 197 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: PI 3.1.1 • Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); and • 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. The LGPA explicitly establishes the roles of the main administrative bodies in Chilean Fisheries including those that undertake research, monitoring, compliance and inform decision making (see 3.1.2 and 3.2.2 below). Article 7º, E – F, of the LGPA (2013), describes the implementation of, “Treaties or International Organisations”, to which Chile is a party. Article 7º G describes the rules to be followed when a trans-zonal and highly migratory species are found in the Chilean EEZ and adjacent international waters. As a result, the LGPA requires Chile to adopt and apply the conservation and management measures applied through the Treaty or International Organisation. In reality, this means that Chile, as a member of SPRFMO, adopts the management measures established by SPRFMO for jack mackerel. As well as SPRFMO, Chile is also signatory to other international agreements and conventions. These include: The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS); the United Nations Fisheries Agreement (UNFA); the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CAMLR); the FAO Code of Conduct; the FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to prevent, deter and eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing; the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS); the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); the International Whaling Commission (IWC); the Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles (IAC); the Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation of Migratory Sharks (Sharks MOU); and, the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP). Therefore, it is concluded that there is an effective national legal system and binding procedures governing cooperation with other parties which delivers management outcomes consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. b Resolution of disputes Guide The management The management The management post system incorporates or system incorporates or system incorporates or is subject by law to a is subject by law to a is subject by law to a mechanism for the transparent transparent resolution of legal mechanism for the mechanism for the disputes arising within resolution of legal resolution of legal the system. disputes which is disputes that is considered to be appropriate to the effective in dealing with context of the fishery most issues and that is and has been tested appropriate to the and proven to be context of the UoA. effective. Met? (Y) (Y) (N)

Page 198 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: PI 3.1.1 • Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); and • 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. Justifi SPRFMO cation Article 34 of the Convention (SPRFMO, 2009), “Settlement of Disputes” (SPRFMO 2015) states: 1. Contracting Parties shall cooperate in order to prevent disputes and shall use their best endeavours to resolve any disputes by amicable means which may include, where a dispute is of a technical nature, referring the dispute to an ad hoc expert panel. 2. In any case where a dispute is not resolved through the means set out in paragraph 1, the provisions relating to the settlement of disputes set out in Part VIII of the 1995 Agreement [UNFSA] shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to any dispute between the Contracting Parties. Part VIII of the 1995 Agreement includes the obligation of states to settle disputes by peaceful means, to cooperate to avoid disputes, use expert panels for disputed issues of a technical nature and, procedures for settling disputes. Article 17 “Implementation of Commission Decisions” provides an opportunity for contracting parties to object to a Commission decision and, in so doing, initiate a process of review by a Commission established review panel. The panel provides their findings and recommendations to the Commission. These are presented to the contracting parties and, if a resolution cannot be achieved, then Article 34 is initiated. Examples where the SPRFMO objection process has been tested and proven to be effective can be found on the SPRFMO website. Therefore, it is concluded that the management system incorporates or is 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, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile The LGPA (2013) Article 1º establishes that management and regulation decisions should be carried out in a transparent, responsible and inclusive way. The management decisions adopted by SUBPESCA with advice from Management Committees (CM) Scientific Committees (CCT) and IFOP, and management action by SERNAPESCA are required to be made public and transparent. As an example, the SUBPESCA website sets out something akin to a service level agreement which provides a list of rights and commitments that are made to Chilean citizens . As a result, mechanisms that minimise and potentially resolve legal disputes are incorporated in the management system. Ultimately, if a stakeholder is not satisfied with the dispute process established by the LGPA, they have recourse through civil judiciary system afforded by the 1980 Constitution (as amended). Therefore, it is concluded that the management system incorporates or is subject by law to a transparent mechanism for the resolution of legal disputes

Page 199 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: PI 3.1.1 • Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); and • 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. which is considered to be effective in dealing with most issues and that is appropriate to the context of the UoA, thereby meeting the SG 60 and 80. The SG 100 is not met as there was no evidence to show the legal dispute mechanism has been tested. c Respect for rights Guide The management The management The management post system has a system has a system has a mechanism to mechanism to observe mechanism to formally generally respect the the legal rights created commit to the legal legal rights created explicitly or established rights created explicitly explicitly or established by custom of people or established by by custom of people dependent on fishing for custom of people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood in a dependent on fishing for food or livelihood in a manner consistent with food and livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2. Principles 1 and 2. Met? (Y) (Y) (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation The preamble in the Convention states, “Recognising economic and geographical considerations and the special requirements of developing States, in particular the least developed among them, and small island developing States, and territories and possessions, and their coastal communities, in relation to the conservation, management and sustainable development of fishery resources and equitable benefit from those resources”. Furthermore, Article 19, “Recognition of the Special Requirements of Developing States” explicitly considers: the specific requirements of developing states, vulnerability especially in the context of nutritional requirements and to avoid adverse impacts on, and ensure access to fisheries by, subsistence, small-scale and artisanal fishers and women fish workers, as well as indigenous people in developing States. And, Article 21, “Participation in Fishing for Fishery Resources” considers the needs of coastal States dependent mainly on fishing a fishery that straddles areas of national jurisdiction. Therefore, it is concluded that the management systems have formally committed to the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food and livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile

Page 200 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary framework which ensures that it: PI 3.1.1 • Is capable of delivering sustainability in the UoA(s); and • 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. The LGPA (2013) supports user rights for people dependent on fishing. Management measures protect access to inshore waters, i.e. only artisanal fishers using vessels <12 m have access to waters within 1 nm of the coast (Article 7); artisanal vessels up to 18 m length have access to waters between 1 and 5 nm of the coast (although industrial vessels may fish in certain areas dependent on the agreement of the artisanal fishers; and a proportion of the quotas are reserved for the artisanal sector, e.g. in Region XV – Region X, 10% of the jack mackerel quota is allocated to artisanal fishers. In addition, law No. 20.249 creates the indigenous peoples' marine and coastal zone, with the aim of protecting common use of those spaces with the objective of conserving traditions and coastal area communities using the natural resources. Therefore, it is concluded that the management system has a mechanism to formally commit to the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of people dependent on fishing for food and livelihood in a manner consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles 1 and 2, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100.

Sections: 3.7.2; 3.7.3; 3.7.4; 3.7.5 of this report References (SPRFMO, 2009), (SPRFMO, 2014), (SPRFMO, 2016), (LGPA, 2013) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 201 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.2 – Consultation, roles and responsibilities 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 SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Roles and responsibilities Guide Organisations and Organisations and Organisations and post individuals involved in individuals involved in individuals involved in the management the management the management process have been process have been process have been identified. Functions, identified. Functions, identified. Functions, roles and roles and roles and responsibilities are responsibilities are responsibilities are generally understood. explicitly defined and explicitly defined and well understood for well understood for all key areas of areas of responsibility responsibility and and interaction. interaction. Met? (Y) (Y) (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation Various Articles within the Convention (SPRFMO, 2009) clearly define the functions, roles and responsibilities of members and cooperating non- members. Articles: (6) The Organisation; (7) The Commission; (8) Functions of the Commission; (9) Subsidiary Bodies; (10) Scientific Committee; (11) Compliance and Technical Committee; (12) Eastern and Western Sub- Regional Management Committees; (13) Finance and Administration Committee; (14) Secretariat. Therefore, it is concluded that organisations and individuals involved in the management process have been identified. Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and well understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction, meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile The LGPA (2013) explicitly defines the functions, roles and responsibilities of the public-sector bodies and their supporting advisory scientific and management committees involved in the management process for fisheries in Chile. This also includes their cooperation with international bodies. The main public-sector bodies are identified, e.g. MINECON, SUBPESCA, SERNAPESCA and IFOP along with their supporting Scientific and Technical Committees (STC) and Fishery Management Committees (FMC). The private-sector are represented by industry bodies, e.g. SONAPESCA, INPESCA, and regional artisanal representatives, contribute to these committees, e.g. the Jack Mackerel Fishery Management Committee (SUBPESCA, 2017).

Page 202 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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 ENGOs, such as WWF and Oceana, also contribute to the management process through submissions and lobbying. The role of SPRFMO, is covered in the LGPA (2013) and identifies how the national approach is integrated with this and other international commitments. Therefore, it is concluded that organisations and individuals involved in the management process have been identified. Functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly defined and well understood for all areas of responsibility and interaction, meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. b Consultation processes Guide The management The management The management post system includes system includes system includes consultation processes consultation processes consultation processes that obtain relevant that regularly seek and that regularly seek and information from the accept relevant accept relevant main affected parties, information, including information, including including local local knowledge. The local knowledge. The knowledge, to inform management system management system the management demonstrates demonstrates system. consideration of the consideration of the information obtained. information and explains how it is used or not used. Met? (Y) (Y) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation SPRFMO meetings provide the consultative mechanism for Contracting Parties to share information concerning management of fisheries. The process allows for annual national reports, including local knowledge (country specific), to be reviewed and included in Commission meetings. Each year, scientists from the Contracting Parties are invited to present their latest results to the appropriate working groups/committees The SPRFMO website includes minutes of the Commission meetings and minutes and reports from the Commissions advisory bodies It is concluded that the management system includes consultation processes that regularly seek and accept relevant information, including local knowledge and, the management system demonstrates consideration of the information obtained. Therefore, the SG 60 and 80 are met. No information was available to demonstrate the management system explains how information is used or not used, therefore it is concluded that the SG 100 is not met. Chile

Page 203 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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 The LGPA (2013) establishes the consultation procedures with the different advisory bodies, e.g. Scientific and Technical Committees (STC) and Fishery Management Committees (FMC), when adopting new administrative and management measures. This includes formulating and adopting fishery management plans, measures and changes to quotas, closed seasons, minimum landing sizes, fishing gear specifications, percentages of species landed as by-catch, declaration of marine parks and reserves. Representatives from the fishing sectors, e.g. artisanal and industrial, are represented on the FMCs. The development and agreement of fishery management plans demonstrates consideration of the information obtained. The SUBPESCA website highlights consultations and invites participation. It is also noted that SUBPESCA use Twitter and, at the time of writing this report, invitation to participate in consultative meetings on inshore fisheries was “tweeted”. It is concluded that the management system includes consultation processes that regularly seek and accept relevant information, including local knowledge and, the management system demonstrates consideration of the information obtained. Therefore, the SG 60 and 80 are met. No information was available to demonstrate the management system explains how information is used or not used, therefore it is concluded that the SG 100 is not met. c Participation Guide The consultation The consultation post process provides process provides opportunity for all opportunity and interested and affected encouragement for all parties to be involved. interested and affected parties to be involved, and facilitates their effective engagement. Met? (Y) (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation Under article 18, “Transparency” The Commission is required to, “promote transparency”, by, amongst other things, “…facilitating consultations with, and the participation of, non-governmental organisations, representatives of the fishing industry, particularly the fishing fleet, and other interested bodies and individuals.” Consultation take place via the contracting and non- contracting parties and observer organisations, that attend the Commission and Committee meetings. It is concluded that the consultation process provides opportunity and encouragement for all interested and affected parties to be involved and

Page 204 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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 facilitates their effective engagement consideration, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile The LPGA (2013) requires stakeholder consultation in the management process. According to the law, changes to existing or the development of new regulations are required to be consulted. Furthermore, the participation of representative stakeholders on the various entities created by the LPGA (2013) that contribute to the management process, e.g. FMC, STC, provides the opportunity for all interested and affected parties to be represented. The SUBPESCA website highlights consultations and invites participation , it is also noted that SUBPESCA use Twitter and, at the time of writing this report, invitation to participate in consultative meetings on inshore fisheries was “tweeted”. It is concluded that the consultation process provides opportunity and encouragement for all interested and affected parties to be involved and facilitates their effective engagement consideration, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100.

Section: 3.7.6 of this report References (SPRFMO, 2009), (LGPA, 2013), (SUBPESCA, 2017) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 205 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.3 – Long term objectives The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide PI 3.1.3 decision-making that are consistent with MSC fisheries standard and incorporates the precautionary approach. Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Objectives Guide Long-term objectives to Clear long-term Clear long-term post guide decision-making, objectives that guide objectives that guide consistent with the MSC decision-making, decision-making, fisheries standard and consistent with MSC consistent with MSC the precautionary fisheries standard and fisheries standard and approach, are implicit the precautionary the precautionary within management approach are explicit approach, are explicit policy. within management within and required by policy. management policy. Met? (Y) (Y) (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation Article 2, “Objective” - The objective of the Convention is: “…through the application of the precautionary approach and an ecosystem approach to fisheries management, to ensure the long-term conservation and sustainable use of fishery resources and, in so doing, to safeguard the marine ecosystems in which these resources occur.”. It is concluded that, clear long-term objectives that guide decision-making, consistent with MSC fisheries standard and the precautionary approach, are explicit within and required by management policy, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile From Article 1°b and 1°c of the LGPA (2013) the explicit objective of the LGPA is: “…the conservation and sustainable use of fishery resources through the application of precautionary and ecosystem approaches.”. It requires that policy takes account of a number of issues: “(i) long-term objectives for conservation and management of fisheries and ecosystem protection; (ii) application of the precautionary principle with greater caution in management and conservation of resources when scientific information is uncertain, unreliable or incomplete; with any lack of scientific information not delaying introduction of conservation and management measures; (iii) an ecosystem approach to conservation and management of fishery resources and protection of ecosystems; (iv) management of fishery resources in a transparent, accountable and inclusive manner; (v) collection, verification, reporting and sharing of timely and accurate data; (vi) consideration of impacts of fishing on associated or dependent species; (vii) prevention or elimination of overfishing and excess fishing capacity; (viii) effective implementation of conservation and management measures, and (ix) minimising discards.”

Page 206 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide PI 3.1.3 decision-making that are consistent with MSC fisheries standard and incorporates the precautionary approach. It is concluded that, clear long-term objectives that guide decision-making, consistent with MSC fisheries standard and the precautionary approach, are explicit within and required by management policy, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100.

Section 3.7.7 of this report References (SPRFMO, 2009), (LGPA, 2013) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 207 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.1 – Fishery-specific objectives The fishery-specific management system has clear, specific objectives PI 3.2.1 designed to achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Objectives Guide Objectives, which are Short and long-term Well defined and post broadly consistent with objectives, which are measurable short and achieving the outcomes consistent with long-term objectives, expressed by MSC’s achieving the outcomes which are demonstrably Principles 1 and 2, are expressed by MSC’s consistent with implicit within the Principles 1 and 2, are achieving the outcomes fishery-specific explicit within the expressed by MSC’s management system. fishery-specific Principles 1 and 2, are management system. explicit within the fishery-specific management system. Met? (Y) (Y) (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation The management of shared stocks under the auspicious of SPRFMO, are defined in a regulatory framework known as, “Conservation and Management Measures (CMM)”. CMMs detail various provisions such as the application of technical measures or output and input controls, requirements for data collection and reporting, as well as regulations for monitoring, control and surveillance and enforcement. Each year the Commission may revise existing or adopt new CMM. Jack mackerel is a species for which annual CMMs are provided. The current CMM is entitled “Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi (CMM 01-2018)” (SPRFMO, 2018). The preamble of CMM 01-2018 includes reference to the commitment to apply the precautionary approach and take decisions based on the best scientific and technical information available as set out in Article 3 of the Convention; recognition that a primary function of the Commission is to adopt CMMs to achieve the objective of the Convention; and, affirmation of the Commission’s commitment to rebuilding the jack mackerel stock and ensuring its long-term conservation and sustainable management in accordance with the objective of the Convention. The CMM is reviewed each year, taking into account advice from the Scientific Committee and the Compliance and Technical Committee. These Committees use metrics, e.g. stock status, or reporting requirements, compliance reports/action plans, against which the performance of the fishery and contracting parties are measured and relate directly to the overarching objective of Article 3 of the Convention. It is concluded that, well defined and measurable short and long-term objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes

Page 208 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The fishery-specific management system has clear, specific objectives PI 3.2.1 designed to achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery-specific management system, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile The LGPA (2013) Article 8º establishes that Management Plans must contain, at least, the following aspects: • A description of: the area of application; the resources involved; fishing areas or fishing grounds; the fleets that target the resource; and, the sectors involved, including artisanal, industrial and market. • Objectives, goals and deadlines to maintain or ensure the fishery achieves the maximum sustainable yield. • Strategies to achieve the objectives, which may include: o Conservation measures and administration that must be adopted in accordance with the provisions of LGPA; and, o Agreements to resolve the interaction between the different fishing sectors involved in the fishery. • Criteria for evaluating compliance with the objectives and strategies; • Contingency strategies to address the variables that may affect the fishery; • Research and control requirements; and, • Any other matter that is considered of interest for the fulfilment of the objectives of the Plan. Article 9º A of LGPA (2013) establishes that if a stock is in an overexploited or collapsed state the management plan must, with the agreement of the Management Committee, set out a recovery plan that should consider, at least, the following: • The objectives and goals for the recovery of the fishery in the long term and in a transparent manner; and, establish a system for evaluating compliance with such goals and objectives; • Evaluate the effectiveness of management and conservation measures and establish the changes that should be introduced in order to achieve the objective of the recovery of the fishery; • Evaluate the effectiveness of the fishery control system and define the changes that should be introduced to increase its effectiveness, if necessary; • Evaluate the scientific research and, if necessary, revise as appropriate; • Take into account the economic and social effects of the adoption of the proposed measures; • Consider mitigation and compensation measures for artisanal fishermen, crew of special ships and plant workers, and • In the case of collapsed fisheries, evaluate and propose the alternate operation in the fishing grounds of certain fisheries referred to in the first paragraph by different fleets, as well as evaluate the temporal limitation of the use of certain gear or fishing gear in said fishing grounds. • Once the fishery recovery program has been established, it must be evaluated in accordance with the respective management plan.

Page 209 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The fishery-specific management system has clear, specific objectives PI 3.2.1 designed to achieve the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2. The stated purpose of the Jack Mackerel Fishery Management Plan (SUBPESCA, 2017) is to, “Recover and maintain the jack mackerel fishery at sustainable biological, economic, social and ecological sustainable levels”. Under the separate heading, “Resource, Ecosystem, Economic and Social”, the jack mackerel management plan sets out a hierarchy of high level “Goals”, operational “Objectives”, “Management Standards”, with indicators and reference points and “Management Measures or Actions” that are intended to show or provide a measure of progress toward meeting the high- level Goals. These are presented in tabular form within the plan and some are presented in Table 13 of this report. While economic and social goals and objectives are not explicitly required for purposes of MSC assessments, biological and ecological clearly are. It is concluded that, well defined and measurable short and long-term objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery-specific management system, thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100.

Section 3.7.8 of this report References (SPRFMO, 2009), (LGPA, 2013), (SUBPESCA, 2017) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant):

Page 210 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.2 – Decision-making processes The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision- making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve PI 3.2.2 the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery. Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Decision-making processes Guide There are some There are established post decision-making decision-making processes in place that processes that result in result in measures and measures and strategies to achieve strategies to achieve the fishery-specific the fishery-specific objectives. objectives. Met? (Y) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation Article 16, “Decision Making”, of the Convention sets out that decisions of the Commission will be taken by consensus (described as, “absence of formal objection made at the time the decision was taken). If a consensus cannot be reached on decisions related to questions of procedure, a majority vote is taken. If a consensus cannot be reached on decisions on questions of substance, a vote with a requirement of a ¾ majority is taken. Fishery specific decision making with regard to the jack mackerel fishery is evidence in the full record of the 6th Meeting of the Commission in relation to CMM 01-2018 - Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi. Article 17, “Implementation of Commission Decisions”, requires that decisions are binding on questions of substance, although a member of the Commission can object within 60 days (see 3.1.1 above). It is concluded that there are established decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives, thereby meeting the SG 60 and 80. Chile The LGPA (2013) identifies and establishes the participation of the institutions, organisations and bodies involved in the decision-making process. These include SUBPESCA with the role of defining the regulation, requesting information, establishing the research programmes, requesting the opinion of Jack Mackerel Scientific Technical Committees on a range of administration and conservation measures, as well as proposing the annual catch quota for the upcoming year and the participation of the Jack Mackerel Fisheries Management Committee when defining the Jack Mackerel Management Plan for the fishery and its evaluation. Details of these committees, including membership, their activities and minutes of meetings are available on the SUBPESCA website.

Page 211 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision- making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve PI 3.2.2 the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery. It is noted that the Management Committee meeting minutes provide only a summary and no detail of substantive discussion or how the decisions were made which is in contrast to the Scientific and Technical Committee minutes. Furthermore, Article 155 of the LGPA (2013) describes the rules of operation and decision making for the Scientific and Technical Committee whereas, nothing similar is set out for the Management Committee. It is clear there are decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives, as evidenced by requirements set out in the LGPA, thereby meeting the SG 60. However, there was no evidence to show that they are ‘established’ for the Jack Mackerel Management Committee through, for example, terms of reference or meeting procedures, to clearly demonstrate established decision making- processes. Therefore, the SG 80 is not met. b Responsiveness of decision-making processes Guide Decision-making Decision-making Decision-making post processes respond to processes respond to processes respond to serious issues serious and other all issues identified in identified in relevant important issues relevant research, research, monitoring, identified in relevant monitoring, evaluation evaluation and research, monitoring, and consultation, in a consultation, in a evaluation and transparent, timely and transparent, timely and consultation, in a adaptive manner and adaptive manner and transparent, timely and take account of the take some account of adaptive manner and wider implications of the wider implications of take account of the decisions. decisions. wider implications of decisions. Met? (Y) (N) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation Since the establishment of SPRFMO, there appears to have been a relatively quick decision-making responses to serious and important issues associated with the jack mackerel fishery and these have been reflected in annual amendments to CMM 01 - Conservation and Management Measures for Trachurus murphyi (SPRFMO, 2018) - these include, setting the TAC; percentage allocations for the contracting and non-contractingg parties; the data collection requirements and system for reporting monthly catches; and effort limitation and management (see section 3.5.5 of this report). It is concluded that Decision-making processes respond to serious and other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions, thereby meeting the SG 60 and 80. There was no evidence to indicate that decision-making processes respond to all issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation and so the SG 100 is not met.

Page 212 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision- making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve PI 3.2.2 the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery. Chile In recent years there have been significant revisions to the management approach for the jack mackerel fishery, i.e. the establishment of SPRFMO in 2012; a new national Fisheries Law in 2013 (LGPA, 2013); the decision by Chile in 2014 to provide consent to apply SPRFMO established Conservation and Management Measures (CMM) within its national jurisdiction; the development and subsequent implementation of the Jack Mackerel Fisheries Management Plan (FMP) in 2017 (SUBPESCA, 2017). It is concluded that this demonstrates that decision-making processes respond to serious issues, i.e. the sustainable long-term management of the jack mackerel fishery, in response to relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and takes some account of the wider implications of decisions, thereby meeting the SG 60. However, other important issues such as discarding and catch reporting have been recognised as a serious issue for a period of time extending beyond that of the recent changes identified above and, while now being addressed, it is concluded that decision-making with regard to this important issue has not been undertaken in a timely manner and therefore the SG 80 is not met c Use of precautionary approach Guide Decision-making post processes use the precautionary approach and are based on best available information. Met? (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation As indicated in 3.1.1 and 3.1.3 above the precautionary approach is explicit in the overarching framework and management policy that the fishery is required to operate within. Use of the precautionary approach is most clearly demonstrated under Principle 1, the jack mackerel fishery applies 75% BMSY as the PRI (see 1.1.1 above); sets an annual TAC which is explicitly precautionary (see 1.2.1 above) and has an established HCR that allows the stock to recover from its overfished state by reducing fishing mortality while also taking a precautionary approach (see 1.2.2 above). The information upon which these decisions have been made are provided by all parties that participate in the fishery throughout the South Pacific and are considered to be the best available information. It is therefore concluded that the decision-making processes use the precautionary approach and are based on best available information, thereby meeting the SG 80. Chile By consenting to application of the SPRFMO CMM within the national jurisdiction and following the precautionary approach adopted by SPRFMO

Page 213 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision- making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve PI 3.2.2 the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery. for setting the annual TAC, as described above, it is concluded that the decision-making processes use the precautionary approach and are based on best available information, thereby meeting the SG 80. d Accountability and transparency of management system and decision-making process Guide Some information on Information on the Formal reporting to all post the fishery’s fishery’s performance interested stakeholders performance and and management provides management action is action is available on comprehensive generally available on request, and information on the request to stakeholders. explanations are fishery’s performance provided for any actions and management or lack of action actions and describes associated with findings how the management and relevant system responded to recommendations findings and relevant emerging from recommendations research, monitoring, emerging from evaluation and review research, monitoring, activity. evaluation and review activity. Met? (Y) (N) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation Article 18, “Transparency”, states that the Commission shall promote transparency in decision-making, in so doing, all meetings of the Commission and its subsidiary bodies are open to all participants and registered observers and so explanations can be heard or sought for actions or lack of actions; reports and CMM are published on the Commission website; consultations are open to all interested bodies; and, the rules of procedure allows for timely access to all relevant and non-commercially sensitive information. It is concluded that information on the fishery’s performance and management action is available on request, and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity, thereby meeting the SG 80. Chile Information on fishery management measures is available on the SUBPESCA, SERNAPESCA, IFOP, Fishery Management and Scientific Committee webpages. The FMP also has nine Action Plans that have been established for each of the overarching Resource, Ecosystem, Economic and Social Goals that are described in 3.2.1 above. These define indicators, responsibilities and implementation time and, in so doing, provide a means of measuring the fishery’s performance. At the time of writing this report, the FMP was too new for progress against these action plans to have been reported.

Page 214 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision- making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve PI 3.2.2 the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery. As indicated in 3.1.1b above, the SUBPESCA website provides a list of rights and commitments to citizens and this includes access to information and responses to questions they might have. It is concluded that information on the fishery’s performance and management action is generally available on request, thereby meeting the SG 60, however, there was no evidence to show that explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity, therefore the SG 80 was not met. e Approach to disputes Guide Although the The management The management post management authority system or fishery is system or fishery acts or fishery may be attempting to comply in proactively to avoid subject to continuing a timely fashion with legal disputes or rapidly court challenges, it is judicial decisions implements judicial not indicating a arising from any legal decisions arising from disrespect or defiance challenges. legal challenges. of the law by repeatedly violating the same law or regulation necessary for the sustainability for the fishery. Met? (Y) (Y) (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation It was confirmed by SPRFMO representatives that the fishery management system is not subject to any court challenges or judicial decisions arising from any legal challenges and that, through the various committees that have stakeholder representation, they and the fishery both work proactively to avoid legal disputes. It is concluded that the management system and the fishery act proactively to avoid legal disputes thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100. Chile It was confirmed on the site visit by SUBPESCA representatives that the fishery management system is not subject to any court challenges or judicial decisions arising from any legal challenges and that, through the various committees that have stakeholder representation, they and the fishery both work proactively to avoid legal disputes. It is concluded that the management system and the fishery act proactively to avoid legal disputes thereby meeting the SG 60, 80 and 100.

Section 3.7.9 of this report References (SPRFMO, 2009), (SPRFMO, 2018), (LGPA, 2013), (SUBPESCA, 2017)

Page 215 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision- making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve PI 3.2.2 the objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery. OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 65 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 5

Page 216 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.3 – Compliance and enforcement Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the PI 3.2.3 management measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with. Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a MCS implementation Guide Monitoring, control and A monitoring, control A comprehensive post surveillance and surveillance monitoring, control and mechanisms exist, and system has been surveillance system has are implemented in the implemented in the been implemented in fishery and there is a fishery and has the fishery and has reasonable expectation demonstrated an ability demonstrated a that they are effective. to enforce relevant consistent ability to management enforce relevant measures, strategies management and/or rules. measures, strategies and/or rules. Met? (Y) (N) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation The Convention does not explicitly provide SPRFMO with competence related to Monitoring Control and Surveillance (MCS) and so has no enforcement capacity. As with other RFMOs, SPRFMO relies on its Contracting Parties to implement management measures, through appropriate harvest control tools. Article 27 of the Convention does, however, require the Commission to establish appropriate cooperative procedures for effective MCS and to ensure compliance with the Convention and the related conservation and management measures covering, inter alia, a vessel registry, vessel and gear markings, VMS, at-sea and in-port inspection, the regulation and supervision of transhipment, monitoring transhipment, landings, and trade to prevent, deter and eliminate IUU, reporting on violations detected, progress and outcomes of investigations, and enforcement actions taken; and, addressing IUU fishing activities. Furthermore, the Commission requires its Members and Cooperating Non- Contracting Parties (CNCPs) to implement and comply with obligations arising under the Convention and CMMs adopted by the Commission and provide annual compliance reports to the Compliance Committee, in accordance with CMM 10 (Compliance Monitoring Scheme, CMS). The Commission publish a Compliance Report based on the Members' and CNCP's Implementation Reports (in accordance with Article 24, “Obligations of Members of the Commission”) and on information available to the Secretariat. It is concluded that because SPRFMO does not have competence for MCS this PI is not scored for the SPRFMO element. Chile

Page 217 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the PI 3.2.3 management measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with. MCS is primarily the responsibility of SERNAPESCA with support from the Chilean Navy/Coastguard and Chilean police force. SERNAPESCA has approximately 150 inspectors who are charged with monitoring the artisanal and industrial fishing sectors as well as the large aquaculture industry. Enforcement is carried out using a risk analysis approach (Lilian Troncoso & Fernando Naranjo, pers. comm.) The LGPA (2013) establishes requirements for the industrial fleets that supports the MCS system: • Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) – An operating VMS is required before authorisation is given to leave port. The MS signal is transmitted every 8 minutes. If the VMS stops working at sea the vessel has 6 hours within which to fix the problem otherwise they have to return to port. • Electronic logbook: all industrial vessels must report the estimated catches of each resource after each fish haul to the SERNAPESCA. • 100% dockside monitoring – all vessels must hail in on returning to port and not commence landing until given permission. All landings are observed, monitored and certified by a 3rd party dockside monitoring company and SERNAPESCA are often present to monitor the landing and the dockside monitors. • Observers – Scientific observers from IFOP are required to be accommodated by all industrial vessels. The assessment team were told that approximately 10% of the industrial sectors fishing trips for jack mackerel were observed (Rodrigo Vega, pers. comm.). If an observer is assigned to the vessel, the vessel cannot leave without them. While the role of the observers is to collect data, e.g. bycatch, they are also required to report infractions on returning to port. SERNAPESCA interview the observers after each trip. Observer coverage is reported annually to SPRFMO. • Shore-based officers also accompany the Navy/Coastguard to conduct at-sea inspections. These inspections are primarily administrative checks, ensuring the correct paperwork is on board. • Aerial surveillance is also used on occasion to monitor vessels and SERNAPESCA have recently tested drones with the intent on augmenting their surveillance capabilities (Fernando Naranjo, pers. comm.). • Video cameras are due to be fitted and become operational on all industrial vessels in the latter part of 2018. SERNAPESCA confirmed the video cameras will be able to monitor and ensure that unauthorised discarding is not taking place. The assessment team were told that quota management and minimum landing size were the main breaches in regulations and, historically, there had been concerns with respect to the accuracy with which landings were being recorded either as a result of poor monitoring or tampering with the electronic flow scales. Furthermore, it was highlighted that discarding has been recognised as a long-term issue that has not been fully quantified, however, this is expected to be minimised once the results of the discard

Page 218 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the PI 3.2.3 management measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with. reduction plan project have been completed and video cameras are placed aboard all industrial vessels. It is concluded that MCS mechanisms exist and are implemented in the fishery and there is a reasonable expectation that they are effective, thereby meeting the SG 60. It is also concluded that because of continuing concerns particularly with catch recording whether at sea (discarding) or on landing (accurate landing data), that the MCS system has not demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules and so the SG 80 and 100 are not met. b Sanctions Guide Sanctions to deal with Sanctions to deal with Sanctions to deal with post non-compliance exist non-compliance exist, non-compliance exist, and there is some are consistently are consistently applied evidence that they are applied and thought to and demonstrably applied. provide effective provide effective deterrence. deterrence. Met? (Y) (Y) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation SPRFMO relies on its Contracting Parties to implement effective sanctions over their flagged vessels and so this PI is not scored for the SPRFMO element. However, it is noted that Article 27 of the Convention allows the Commission to adopt measures against those entities that engage in fishing activities that diminish the effectiveness of, or otherwise fail to comply with, the conservation and management measures. This could include trade- related measures/sanctions in relation to fishery resources, to be applied by members of the Commission to any state, member of the Commission, or entity whose fishing vessels engage in fishing activities that are counter to, or fail to comply with the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission. To date, no measures/sanctions have been applied. The ability of the Commission to act at an international level is considered to provide an effective deterrent for ensuring contracting parties meet their obligations. Chile “Infractions, Penalties and Procedures” are set out under “Title IX” in the LGPA (2013). Article 108 sets out measures that can be applied. They include administrative and judicial sanctions, examples include: • Fines; • Suspension or removal of the Captains ticket; • Closure of fishing and processing facilities; • Removal of quota; • Seizure of gear and means of transporting gear

Page 219 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the PI 3.2.3 management measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with. • Confiscation of catch and fines in multiples above the value of the confiscated fish; • Additional penalties, e.g. doubling of fines, extended periods of sanctioning, if an offence is committed within 2 years of an initial offence. SERNAPESCA staff reported that because of the ITQ system and high level of monitoring, the industrial fishery was considered to be a low risk fishery. It was also stated that when the fishery resource was doing well the likelihood of non-compliance is significantly reduced (Fernando Naranjo & Lilian Troncoso, pers. comm.). Although considered infrequent, SERNAPESCA staff considered that the most likely non-compliance with the industrial sector is landing of under-size jack mackerel and under-reporting. These are usually identified at shore inspections and result in warnings. The low value associated with small jack mackerel is considered to be an incentive not to land undersize fish and the 100% monitoring of landings, including accurate weigh outs, are also considered to provide incentive for accurate reporting of catches. The team heard from both SERNAPESCA staff, company representatives and fishers that the potential confiscation of catch, high fines and removal of quota are considered strong deterrents. The team also heard that the processing of offences can also take a long time and potentially lessen the effectiveness of providing an effective deterrent, however, this was based on recent experience with the artisanal fleet. As sanctions to deal with non-compliance clearly exist, are consistently applied and thought by stakeholders to provide effective deterrents, the SG 60 and 80 are met. The SG 100 is not met as there was no evidence to demonstrate the deterrents are effective. c Compliance Guide Fishers are generally Some evidence exists There is a high degree post thought to comply with to demonstrate fishers of confidence that the management comply with the fishers comply with the system for the fishery management system management system under assessment, under assessment, under assessment, including, when including, when including, providing required, providing required, providing information of information of information of importance to the importance to the importance to the effective management effective management effective management of the fishery. of the fishery. of the fishery. Met? (Y) (Y) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation MCS does not directly apply to SPRFMO and so this PI is not scored for the SPRFMO management element. Chile There were concerns in the past that discarding and mis-reporting were a significant problem within the fishery, however, the revised Fisheries Act

Page 220 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the PI 3.2.3 management measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with. (LGPA 2013) and emphasis on a co-operative approach between the management authorities (in particular SUBPESCA, SERNAPESCA and IFOP) and the industrial fleet, to gather information and provide a better understanding of the level of discarding to support a jack mackerel discard plan, provides evidence that fishers are complying with the management system and providing important information which contributes to the effective management of the fishery. As a result, the SG 60 and 80 are considered to have been met. The SG 100 is not met as there was not enough evidence to say there is a high degree of confidence that fishers comply with the management system. d Systematic non-compliance Guide There is no evidence of post systematic non- compliance. Met? (Y) Justifi SPRFMO cation MCS does not directly apply to SPRFMO and so this PI is not scored for the SPRFMO management element. Chile There was evidence in the past that discarding and mis-reporting were a significant problem within the fishery and to the extent that it could have been considered to represent evidence of systematic non-compliance. However, the revised Fisheries Act (LGPA 2013) and emphasis on a co-operative approach between the management authorities and the industrial fleet on gathering information to inform a jack mackerel discard plan there is no longer evidence of this. The fishery therefore meets the SG 80.

Section 3.7.10 of this report References (SPRFMO, 2009), (LGPA, 2013) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 75 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 6

Page 221 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.4 – Monitoring and management performance evaluation There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives. PI 3.2.4 There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system. Scoring SG 60 SG 80 SG 100 Issue a Evaluation coverage Guide There are mechanisms There are mechanisms There are mechanisms post in place to evaluate in place to evaluate key in place to evaluate all some parts of the parts of the fishery- parts of the fishery- fishery-specific specific management specific management management system. system system. Met? (Y) (Y) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation Article 30 of the Convention states the Commission shall review the effectiveness of the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission in meeting the objective of the Convention and the consistency of the measures with its Principles and Approaches as set out in Article 3. Such reviews may include examination of the effectiveness of the provisions of the Convention itself and shall be undertaken at least every five years. The Commission initiated the review process at its 5th meeting in 2017. The SPRFMO Secretariat introduced a background document on review processes and approaches recommended by FAO and applied by other RFMOs. Item 9, of the report of the 6th Meeting of the Commission (SPRFMO 2018a) confirms the Commission decision to appoint a Review Panel of four independent experts in the fields of science, fisheries, marine ecosystem management and legal matters, including compliance and enforcement, to conduct a performance review of SPRFMO during the 2018 inter-sessional period, and submit a final report, conclusions and recommendations prior to the 2019 annual meeting of the Commission for its consideration at that meeting. The Commission decision is accompanied by an Annex that provides a list of specific criteria that the Review Panel is to address. It is concluded that there are mechanisms in place to evaluate key parts of the fishery-specific management system, thereby meeting the SG 60 and SG 80. There was no evidence to show that mechanisms are in place to evaluate all parts of the fishery specific management system and so the SG 100 is not met. Chile The LPGA (2013), Article 1° C requires that the “effectiveness and implementation of conservation and management measures” be evaluated every five years.

Page 222 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives. PI 3.2.4 There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system. The jack mackerel FMP (see section 3.7.8) states that the Management Committee or, an ad-hoc committee of the Management Committee, shall undertake an annual evaluation of the objectives and strategies set out in the plan using the indicators and reference points that have been identified. In so doing, a status report for each Goal of the plan, i.e. Resource, Ecosystem, Economic and Social is to be published on the SUBPESCA website and, in accordance with each status report, amendments of the Management Plan shall be made by the Committee. The FMP was approved by the Government in December 2017 and so there has yet to be an annual review posted on the SUBPESCA website. It is concluded that there are mechanisms in place to evaluate key parts of the fishery-specific management system, thereby meeting the SG 60 and SG 80. There was no evidence to show that mechanisms are in place to evaluate all parts of the fishery specific management system and so the SG 100 is not met. b Internal and/or external review Guide The fishery-specific The fishery-specific The fishery-specific post management system is management system is management system is subject to occasional subject to regular subject to regular internal review. internal and internal and external occasional external review. review. Met? (Y) (N) (N) Justifi SPRFMO cation As indicated in 3.2.4(a), SPRFMO is presently in the process of reviewing the effectiveness of the conservation and management measures adopted by the Commission in meeting the objectives of the Convention. The Review Panel is to be made up of four international independent experts; two of which are nationals of SPRFMO Members with experience in the SPRFMO context and a thorough understanding of the SPRFMO Convention; and, two external experts, among whom there is experience in relevant areas of science, fisheries and marine ecosystems management and legal matters, including compliance and enforcement issues. Furthermore, SPRFMO undertakes regular reviews of its CMM at its annual meetings, e.g. CMM 01-2018 is reviewed every year. It is concluded that the fishery-specific management system is subject to regular internal and occasional external review, thereby meeting the SG 60 and SG 80. The SG 100 is not met as it is not considered that the external review is regular. Chile As indicated in 3.2.4(a), Article 1° C of the LGPA (2013) requires that the, “effectiveness and implementation of conservation and management measures” be evaluated every five years. Furthermore, annual reviews of the

Page 223 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives. PI 3.2.4 There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system. objectives and strategies set out in the FMP using specified indicators and reference points are required to be undertaken by either the Management Committee or, an ad-hoc committee, of the Management Committee. In order to achieve the SG 80 and SG 100 the fishery-specific management system is required to have an “external review”. In MSC terms, this means external to the fisheries management system, but not necessarily international. Depending on the scale and intensity of the fishery, it could be by: • Another department within an agency; • Another agency or organisation within the country; • A government audit that is external to the fisheries management agency; • A peer organisation nationally or internationally, and • External expert reviewers Aspects of the management system are, in effect, subject to regular external review, i.e. the jack mackerel stock status and TAC setting is subject to the SPRFMO process. However, no evidence was available to show that the Chilean fishery-specific management system is occasionally externally reviewed. It is concluded that the fishery-specific management system is subject to regular internal review, thereby meeting the SG 60, however, in the absence of occasional external review of the fishery-specific management system, the SG 80 is not met.

Section 3.7.11 of this report References (SPRFMO, 2009), (LGPA, 2013), (SUBPESCA, 2017) OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70 CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 7

Page 224 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 1.2 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs The announcement for the assessment of the fishery indicated that the RBF might be required for several PIs. The site visit for the fishery took place in several different locations in Santiago, Valparaiso and Concepcion in Chile, with the assessment team moving between locations. Prior to and during the site visit, stakeholders were asked to fill in on-line questionnaires to enable the evaluation of this PI. After the site visit and the evaluation of the information gathered, the assessment team concluded that the RBF was required for the evaluation of the ecosystem PI (2.5.1). Lloyd’s Register carried out a series of follow up interviews with stakeholders to discuss the scoring of this PI. All of the stakeholders that were met on the site visit and that were contacted before the site visit were invited to participate in these interviews. The purpose of the interviews and questionnaires was to allow the assessment team to work with stakeholders to assign scores to the spatial scale, temporal scale, intensity and consequence of the impacts of the fishery on marine ecosystems. The stakeholders who accepted interviews with the assessment team are listed below along with their interview dates:- 1. Andres Couve, SONAPESCA – 29th May 2018 2. Macarena Cepeda, ASIPES – 27th June 2018 3. Oliver Yates, Cefas – 25th June 2018 4. Rodrigo Vega, IFOP – 29th June 2018 5. Rodrigo Zamora, SONAPESCA – 30th May 2018 6. Sebastian Klarian, Quintay Marine Research Centre – 12th July 2018 In each case a questionnaire prepared by the assessment team was used to structure the discussions. In addition to the interview responses, independent questionnaire responses were submitted by:- 1. Jorge Oliva Lopez, Centro de Investigacion Aplicada del Mar (CIAM) – 27th April 2018 In some instances, stakeholders declined to give scores about ecosystem interactions. The English and Spanish questionnaires and the responses that were received are included in Appendix 3 of this report. The following Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis (SICA) scoring template was populated using the information provided by the stakeholders:

Page 225 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 21. SICA Scoring Template for PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem

Spatial scale of Temporal scale Intensity of Relevant subcomponents Consequence Score fishing activity of fishing activity fishing activity

Species composition

PRINCIPLE TWO: Functional group

Ecosystem outcome composition 5 4 3 Distribution of the

community

Trophic size/structure 80 Rationale for spatial The spatial scales identified by stakeholders are shown in the table below, adapted from the MSC Fisheries scale of fishing activity Certification Requirements:-

Spatial <1% 1-15% 16-30% 31-45% 46-60% >60% Overlap SICA Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of MC SK RV respondents10

Stakeholders presented a range of views on the extent of the spatial overlap between the fishery and the ecosystem. Two respondents felt that the overlap was less than 30%; one respondent considered that it was more than 60%.

The assessment team has reviewed the extent of fishing activity (Figure 2 and Figure 3); maps showing the extent of ecosystem features (Figure 33 and Figure 34) and also satellite images Figure 38. This information suggests an overlap that is in the range of 46-60%. This figure lies between the extremes suggested by stakeholders. The team consider that the corresponding score of 5 is appropriate.

10 These are initials of the people who provided a response

Page 226 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Rationale for temporal The temporal scales identified by stakeholders are shown in the table below, adapted from the MSC Fisheries scale of fishing activity Certification Requirements:-

Temporal 1 day every 1 day every 1-100 days 101-200 201-300 301-365 scale 10 years or few years per year days per days per days per so year year year SICA Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 Number of MC RV SK respondents10

Again, a range of values were indicated by stakeholders for the temporal scale of the fishery.

During the course of the site visit the assessment team met and spoke to vessel owners, fleet managers and a vessel skipper. On the basis of this information and the stakeholder feedback, it is considered unlikely that vessels fish on more than 200 days per year (due to limitations imposed by weather and the movements of the jack mackerel stock). The corresponding score of 4 lies within the range identified by stakeholders and is considered to be appropriate.

Rationale for intensity of The intensity level for the fishery is considered below. fishing activity Intensity Score Rationale Number of respondents Negligible 1 remote likelihood of detection of fishing activity at any MC spatial or temporal scale Minor 2 activity occurs rarely or in few restricted locations and detectability of fishing activity even at these scales is rare Moderate 3 moderate detectability of fishing activity at broader spatial RV scale, or obvious but local detectability Major 4 detectable evidence of fishing activity occurs reasonably SK often at broad spatial scale Severe 5 occasional but very obvious detectability or widespread and frequent evidence of fishing activity

Page 227 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Catastrophic 6 local to regional evidence of fishing activity or continual and widespread detectability

Again, a range of values was proposed, ranging from a level corresponding to a “Major” intensity to a “Negligible” level.

The assessment team consider that given the spatial and temporal scale of the fishery, an intensity score of 3 (“Moderate detectability of fishing activity at broader spatial scale, or obvious but local detectability”) would be appropriate and precautionary, lying within the range selected and towards its higher end.

Rationale for The consequence score identified by stakeholders is shown below. Consequence score Sub component 100 80 60 Trophic Structure Changes that Change in mean Changes in mean affect the internal trophic level and trophic level and dynamics unlikely biomass/number biomass/number to be detectable in each size class in each size class against natural up to 5%. up to 10%. Time to variation. recover from impact on the scale of several to 20 years. Number of MC, RV, JOL SK respondents

All stakeholders agreed that the subcomponent of the ecosystem most likely to be affected was “Trophic Structure”.

Again, a range of scores were proposed: 3 felt a score of 100 was appropriate, whilst the fourth felt that a score of 80 was appropriate.

The assessment team has consequence level associated with a score of 80 as an appropriate and precautionary score.

Page 228 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 1.3 Conditions Table 22. Conditions

Condition 1

PI 1.2.1. There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place. Performance SIf Indicator There is a regular review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock and they are implemented as appropriate.

Score 75

Chilean fisheries regulations forbid discarding. The UoA has a monitoring system that assists the captain to avoid areas with high concentration of juvenile (www.fishtrack.com), which is the main reason for discarding due to the lack of market value for smaller fish. Moreover, as evidenced during the site visit, discard is negligible. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that there are alternative measures to minimize UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock. Therefore, SG 60 is met. Rationale A specific regulation on discards in the Chilean jack mackerel fishery is under preparation. One of the roles of the enhanced observer programme being formulated by SPRFMO is to identify levels of discard. In Chile, two action plans are being implemented to respond to the issues of discards quantification and minimization. The SPRFMO is in the process of designing the observer programme. While there are proposals in the Chilean Action Plans to review the effectiveness of the steps to reduce potential discards, as yet there is no evidence to show that there has been a regular review. Therefore SG 80 is not met.

The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular reviews of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative Condition measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock and they are implemented as appropriate.

At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that a review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock is being carried out. Resulting score: 75 At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that a review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of Milestones alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock has been carried out. Resulting score: 75 At the third surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that alternative measures to minimise UoA related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock are being implemented as appropriate. Resulting Score: 80

Page 229 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

We recognise that Principle 1 refers to the whole fishery and not just the activities of our certified vessels. The activities that we propose to respond to this condition are centred on four aspects: (i) Review of the issue within the Chilean fisheries management committee, with confirmation of the nature of the problem and consensus on appropriate solutions; (ii) Continued cooperation with the SUBPESCA project on the investigation of discards; (iii) the identification, testing and implementation of measures to change the nature of the fishing operation with the objective of reducing the discard of jurel; (iv) On-going cooperation and collaboration with SPRFMO. At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with minutes of the Fishery Management Committee meetings to provide evidence that the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock has been considered. We will also present the auditors with any additional information that has been provided in response to the concern about the level of discards of jurel in the fishery. The Committee meetings will consider any new reports from the discard programme and show how the Unit of Certification has reacted to them. This will mainly be in relation to the implementation of the Chilean action plans. We will provide copy of any SPRFMO activities related to the issue of the discard of jurel, with concentration on the application and results of the Client action observer programme. plan We will ensure that reports on the level of discards in each trip of client vessels are available, with an explanation of the motive for discard and the estimated quantity discarded. We anticipate that this programme will be designed and tested in the first 12-months of certification with full implementation in the second year. Using the various data, we will prepare a report that assesses the issue and need to reduce discards and the associated options. We will consider their potential effectiveness and the practicality of implementation. The report will be presented for validation by the Fishery Management Committee. It will confirm any measures to be implemented in the following 12-month period, define responsibilities, and identify indicators of successful implementation. We will ensure that the issue of discards is contained in the Agenda for any relevant SPRFMO meetings. We anticipate that we will need a second year to fully review the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to reduce discards of jurel, potentially through pilot projects. At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with a report that provides evidence that the review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch has been completed. We will present data on discards by vessel and in total and identify the reasons for any discard. The report will confirm if and how the measures identified to reduce the discard were implemented, with analysis of the results. As a result of the

Page 230 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

experience in the second year of certification, we will consider the need for adjustments. We will report on progress on managing discards at the SPRFMO level. At the third annual audit we will present evidence to the auditors that measures to reduce the to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch has been fully implemented by the client group. We will present data that indicates the success of the measures implemented by the SPRFMO.

The work plan will be generated by the SONAPESCA working within the Consultation on Fisheries Management Committee and SPRFMO through its designated condition representatives. As such, we do not require the commitment of other entities to support our action plan related to Condition 1.

Condition 2

PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules (HCRs) in place. Performance SIa Indicator Well defined HCRs are in place that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached, are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY, or for key LTL species a level consistent with ecosystem needs

Score 75

The HCR is established to allow the stock to recover from its overfished state by reducing fishing mortality while also taking a precautionary approach. It can be seen that this approach is generally understood by members and aims clearly to recover the stock toward BMSY. Therefore, SG 60 is met. Rationale The SPRFMO HCR is based on the biomass reaching BMSY. The HCR are defined and have been agreed by most members. However, according

to the current HCRs it is not possible to consider what may happen if the biomass decreases below the PRI due reasons other than fishing. In particular, to what extent exploitation might be reduced as biomass estimate shows low values is not formally defined. Implicitly SPRFMO would take appropriate actions (such as a rebuilding plan), however, these actions are not well defined. Therefore, SG 80 is not met.

The client shall ensure by the fourth surveillance audit there are well defined HCRs in place that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as Condition the PRI is approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY.

At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show they have advocated that the Chilean delegation to SPRFMO encourages SPRFMO to agree and adopt well defined HCRs that ensure that the Milestones exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. Resulting score: 75 Page 231 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that the Chilean delegation to SPRFMO has advocated and encouraged SPRFMO to agree and adopt well defined HCRs that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. Resulting score: 75 At the third surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence that SPRFMO Scientific Committee has developed and provided scientific advice to the Commission on well-defined HCRs that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. Resulting score: 75 At the fourth surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that well defined HCRs are in place that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. Resulting score: 80

We do not see the focus of this condition as advocating and encouraging SPRFMO; rather it is for Chilean scientists (INPESCA) to work closely with their peers in IFOP and the SPRFMO scientific committee in developing the approach to HCRs. At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with evidence of the communications between the Chilean delegation to SPRFMO covering the issue of harvest control rules, advocating SPRFMO to ensure that if the stock reduces below MSY due to ecosystem factors, action will be taken to ensure that fishing mortality does not risk the stock declining towards the point of recruitment impairment and is expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. This work will be led by INPESCA in collaboration with IFOP with direct linkages to the SPRFMO SC. For example, this cooperative work may consider various options, such as the setting of a trigger reference point Client action between the PRI and MSY that requires the exploitation rate to be reduced plan and support recovery of the stock around a target level consistent with MSY. At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with evidence that the work of INPESCA in collaboration with IFOP and the SPRFMO SC has continued. The objective will be to encourage SPRFMO to agree and adopt well defined HCRs that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. We will inform the auditors on any progress that may have been made in modifying the established HCRs in the period since the first surveillance audit. At the third annual audit we will present evidence to the auditors that the cooperative work of INPESCA, IFOP and the SPRFMO SC has led the SC to make recommendations to the Commission on adopting well defined HCRs that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the

Page 232 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

PRI is approached and they are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY. At the fourth annual audit we will present evidence to the auditors that the Commission of the SPRFMO has approved a Resolution on the application of well-defined HCRs that ensure that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is approached and these are expected to keep the stock fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or above) MSY.

SPRFMO will take the lead on this action plan through its cooperative Consultation on programme with INPESCA. As such, we do not require the commitment condition of other entities to support our action plan related to Condition 2.

Condition 3

PI 2.2.2 There is a strategy in place for managing secondary species that is designed to maintain or to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species and the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to Performance minimise the mortality of unwanted catch. Indicator SIe There is a regular review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of main secondary species and they are implemented as appropriate.

Score 75

The only catch of “main” secondary species comprises several bird species, all of which are unwanted catch. The discard reduction programme launched by IFOP in 2014 in response to the revised LGPA in 2013 represents part of a formal process for reducing the catch of non- target species that is due to result in the publication of a “Discard Plan” for the jack mackerel fishery. Rationale There is evidence that this review is underway, which is sufficient to meet the SG 60 requirements. The revisions to the LGPA that were made in 2013 require (at Article 1º C) that “Every five years, the effectiveness and implementation of conservation and management measures will be evaluated”. At this point the initial review is still underway, and there is no evidence that it will be conducted regularly, so neither the SG 80 or 100 requirements are presently met.

The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular Condition reviews of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch of main secondary species and evidence shall be presented to show that they are implemented as appropriate. At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show Milestones that a review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative

Page 233 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch is being carried out. Resulting score: 75 At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that a review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch has been carried out. Resulting score: 75 At the third surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that alternative measures to minimise UoA related mortality of unwanted catch are being implemented as appropriate. Resulting score: 80 At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with evidence that we are reviewing the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch is being carried out. Currently, this relates to the impact of the UOA fishery on sea birds; should future surveillance audits indicate concern for other species these will be accommodated within the work programme. This review will be conducted by INPESCA through a formal agreement with a suitable ENGO such as Bird Life to ensure there is a full understanding of the scope of the issue, the levels of interaction between the UOC vessels and sea birds and the identification and implementation of any required mitigation measures. As such, we will not evaluate conservation and management measures every five years; rather in the first period of certification the process on-going, with 6-monthly meetings to review the progress being achieved. Supplementary information will be provided to inform the auditors of Client action reports on the interactions with sea birds presented to SPRFMO, both to plan the relevant committee and the annual Chile national report. At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with evidence that the review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of unwanted catch has being carried out. Supplementary information will be provided to inform the auditors of reports on the interactions with sea birds presented to SPRFMO, both to the relevant committee and the annual Chile national report. At the third annual audit we will present the auditors with a report from an independent ENGO (e.g. Bird Life) that assesses the interactions between the UOC vessels and sea birds and confirms that alternative measures to minimise UoA related mortality of unwanted catch are being implemented as appropriate. Supplementary information will be provided to inform the auditors of reports on the interactions with sea birds presented to SPRFMO, both to the relevant committee and the annual Chile national report.

SONAPESCA will implement this action plan through INPESCA. As such, Consultation on we do not require the commitment of other entities to support our action condition plan related to Condition 3.

Page 234 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Condition 4

PI 2.3.2 The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: • meet national and international requirements; • ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species. Performance Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as Indicator appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species. SIe There is a regular review of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species and they are implemented as appropriate.

Score 70

The discard reduction programme launched by IFOP in 2014 in response to the revised LGPA in 2013 represents part of a formal process for reducing the catch of non-target species (including ETP species) that is due to result in the publication of a “Discard Plan” for the jack mackerel fishery. There is evidence that this review of catch composition and management Rationale measures is underway, which is sufficient to meet the SG 60 requirements. The revisions to the LGPA that were made in 2013 require (at Article 1º C) that “Every five years, the effectiveness and implementation of conservation and management measures will be evaluated”. At this point the initial review is still underway, and there is no evidence that it will be conducted regularly, so neither the SG 80 or 100 requirements are presently met.

The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit there are regular Condition reviews of the potential effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species and evidence shall be presented to show that they are implemented as appropriate.

At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that a review of the effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species is being carried out. Resulting score: 75

At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide to show that a Milestones review of the effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species has been carried out.

Resulting score: 75

At the third surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence to show that there is a regular review of alternative measures to minimise UoA related mortality of ETP species and that such measures are being implemented as appropriate. Resulting score: 80

Page 235 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with evidence that a review of the effectiveness and practicality of alternative measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species is being carried out by INPESCA. This review will confirm the level of interaction between the UOC and ETP species and the magnitude of any mortalities through the direct and indirect effects of the fishery. This information will be supplemented by detail on the measures that have already been implemented to minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species. INPESCA will identify how implementation of the existing measures may be improved and assess the options for additional measures. Supplementary information will be provided to inform the auditors of reports on the interactions with ETP species presented to SPRFMO, both to the relevant committee and the annual Chile national report. At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with evidence that a review of the effectiveness and practicality of alternative Client action measures to minimise UoA-related mortality of ETP species has plan being carried out by INPESCA. Supplementary information will be provided to inform the auditors of reports on the interactions with ETP species presented to SPRFMO, both to the relevant committee and the annual Chile national report. At the third annual audit we will present evidence the auditors with a report from an independent ENGO (e.g. WWF) that provides evidence to show that alternative measures to minimise UoA related mortality of ETP species are being implemented as appropriate. The report will assess the interactions between the UOC vessels and ETP species, confirms any mitigation measures that may have been introduced in the initial three years of the certification and the success of those mitigation measures in minimising UoC related mortality. The report will confirm our approach to on-going review of the UOC interactions with ETP species. Supplementary information will be provided to inform the auditors of reports on the interactions with ETP species presented to SPRFMO, both to the relevant committee and the annual Chile national report.

SONAPESCA will implement this action plan through INPESCA. As such, Consultation on we do not require the commitment of other entities to support our action condition plan related to Condition 4

Condition 5

PI 3.2.2 The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision- Performance making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the Indicator objectives, and has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery. SIa

Page 236 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

There are established decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. SIb Decision-making processes respond to serious and other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions. SId Information on the fishery’s performance and management action is available on request, and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity.

Score 65

SIa It is noted that the Jack Mackerel Management Committee meeting minutes provide only a summary and no detail of substantive discussion or how the decisions were made which is in contrast to the Scientific and Technical Committee minutes. Furthermore, Article 155, of the LGPA (2013) describes the rules of operation and decision making for the Scientific and Technical Committee whereas, nothing similar is set out for the Management Committee. It is clear there are decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives, as evidenced by requirements set out in the LGPA, thereby meeting the SG 60. However, there was no evidence to show that they are ‘established’ for the Jack Mackerel Management Committee through, for example, terms of reference or meeting procedures, to clearly demonstrate established decision making-processes. Therefore, the SG 80 is not met. SIb Rationale In recent years there have been significant revisions to the management approach for the jack mackerel fishery, i.e. the establishment of SPRFMO in 2012; a new national Fisheries Law in 2013 (LGPA, 2013); the decision by Chile in 2014 to provide consent to apply SPRFMO established Conservation and Management Measures (CMM) within its national jurisdiction; the development and subsequent implementation of the Jack Mackerel Fisheries Management Plan (FMP) in 2017. It is concluded that this demonstrates that decision-making processes respond to serious issues, i.e. the sustainable long-term management of the jack mackerel fishery, in response to relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and takes some account of the wider implications of decisions, thereby meeting the SG 60. However, other important issues such as discarding and catch reporting have been recognised as a serious issue for a period of time extending beyond that of the recent changes identified above and, while now being addressed, it is concluded that decision-making with regard to this important issue has not been undertaken in a timely manner and therefore the SG 80 is not met. SId

Page 237 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Information on fishery management measures is available on the SUBPESCA, SERNAPESCA, IFOP, Fishery Management and Scientific Committee webpages. The FMP also has nine Action Plans that have been established for each of the overarching Resource, Ecosystem, Economic and Social Goals. These define indicators, responsibilities and implementation time and, in so doing, provide a means of measuring the fishery’s performance. At the time of writing this report, the FMP was too new for progress against these action plans to have been reported. The SUBPESCA website provides a list of rights and commitments to citizens and this includes access to information and responses to questions they might have. It is concluded that information on the fishery’s performance and management action is generally available on request, thereby meeting the SG 60, however, there was no evidence to show that explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity, therefore the SG 80 was not met. The client shall ensure by the second surveillance audit that: • There are established decision-making processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. • Decision-making processes respond to serious and other important issues identified in relevant research, monitoring, evaluation and Condition consultation, in a transparent, timely and adaptive manner and take account of the wider implications of decisions. • Information on the fishery’s performance and management action is available on request, and explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. SIa At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence showing they have advocated that SUBPESCA provide clear terms of reference and meeting procedures that clearly demonstrate established decision making-processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. Resulting score: 70

At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence that clearly demonstrates established decision making-processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives.

Resulting score: 80

SIb At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide an update on the

discard programme and evidence of how decision-making processes Milestones have responded to any of the key outcomes identified in associated research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation. Resulting score: 70 At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence that the decision-making process have responded to the research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation outcomes from the discard programme and taken account of the wider implications of the decisions.

Page 238 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Resulting score: 80 SId At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence showing they have advocated that SUBPESCA provide explanations for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. Resulting score: 70 At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence that explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. Resulting score: 80

Sia At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with evidence that we have advised SUBPESCA and the fisheries management committee of the need to strengthen various aspects of the management approach i.e. provide clear terms of reference and meeting procedures that clearly demonstrate established decision making- processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. We will request that a meeting of FMC is held in the initial months of certification to consider the modified approach: - Confirmation of the formal terms of reference for the FMC; - Formal definition of the way FMC is managed; including but not limited to: membership; periodicity of meetings; meeting agendas; participation in meetings; meeting procedures; and the preparation of the Acts of meetings and required contents. The minute of the meeting will provide evidence that it was held. At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with evidence Client action that clearly demonstrates decision making-processes have been plan established that result in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery-specific objectives. Evidence will be the minutes of the fishery management meetings that clearly indicate the way issues have been presented and discussed, and the resulting measures and strategies. Given that some measures and strategies will derive from other processes (e.g. SPRFMO) we will present detail of these as appropriate. Sib At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with an up-date of the discard programme and evidence of how decision-making processes have responded to any of the key outcomes identified in associated research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation. Evidence will be presented that show how the implications for the UOC were presented and discussed at the FMC with consequent decisions. The discussion will consider the response in terms of a modified approach to research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation related to the discard programme and ensure that FMC analyses taken the wider implications of the proposed changes.

Page 239 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with evidence that the decision-making process have responded to the research, monitoring, evaluation and consultation outcomes from the discard programme and taken account of the wider implications of the decisions. This will take the form of a report to the final meeting of the FMC prior to the second surveillance audit so that it may be validated prior to the second surveillance audit. Sid. The approach to this issue will be through the FMC. At the first annual audit we will provide evidence (meeting minutes) showing we have advocated that SUBPESCA provide explanations for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. We will provide a presentation to the FMC on the topic and advocate that SUBPESCA approves the steps recommended. When SUBPESCA responds the reply will be considered at the following meeting of the FMC. At the second annual audit we will present evidence that the selected approach has been adopted and in the previous year explanations are have been provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and relevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity. These will be confirmed by the minutes of FMC meetings. The work plan will be generated by the SONAPESCA working within the Consultation on Fisheries Management Committee through its designated condition representatives. As such, we do not require the commitment of other entities to support our action plan related to Condition 5.

Condition 6

PI 3.2.3 Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the management measures in the fishery are enforced and complied with Performance Indicator SIa A monitoring, control and surveillance system has been implemented in the fishery and has demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules. Score 75

The assessment team were told that quota management and minimum landing size were the main breaches in regulations and, historically, there had been concerns with respect to the accuracy with which landings were Rationale being recorded either as a result of poor monitoring or tampering with the electronic flow scales. Furthermore, it was highlighted that discarding has been recognised as a long-term issue that has not been fully quantified, however, this is expected to be minimised once the results of the discard reduction plan project have been completed and video cameras are placed aboard all industrial vessels.

Page 240 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

It is concluded that MCS mechanisms exist, and are implemented in the fishery and there is a reasonable expectation that they are effective, thereby meeting the SG 60. It is also concluded that because of continuing concerns particularly with catch recording whether at sea (discarding) or on landing (accurate landing data), that the monitoring, control and surveillance system has not demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules and so the SG 80 is not met.

The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit that the monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) system has been implemented in the Condition fishery and has demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules.

At the first surveillance audit the client shall provide an update on: • The discard programme and how the MCS system will adapt to the outcome; • The implementation of the video camera monitoring and surveillance system for the industrial fleet; and, • Information to show the number of inspections and any findings carried out by SERNAPESCA on landings by industrial vessels and audits/checks they made on the third-party dockside monitoring company. Resulting score: 75 At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide an update on: • Any changes made to the MCS system as a result of implementing Milestones the discard plan; • The implementation of the video camera monitoring and surveillance system for the industrial fleet including any preliminary findings; and, • Information to show the number of inspections and any findings carried out by SERNAPESCA on landings by industrial vessels and audits/checks they made on the third-party dockside monitoring company. Resulting score: 75 At the third surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence that the MCS system in the fishery has demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules. Resulting score: 80

At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with a report that considers: - The changes proposed to the MCS programme of the implementation of the discard project; Client action - The status of the video monitoring project in the UOC; plan - A report on MCS activity covering: The number of trips by UOC vessels, the number and type of inspections by SERNAPESCA on- vessel and in the processing plants, and the activities of the dockside monitoring programme (Intertek). The report will identify any lack of compliance by UOC vessels, the nature of the non-

Page 241 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

compliance and the resulting measures taken by SERNAPESCA including sanctions. At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with a report that considers: - The changes proposed to the MCS programme of the implementation of the discard project; - The status of the video monitoring project in the UOC; - A report on MCS activity covering: The number of trips by UOC vessels, the number and type of inspections by SERNAPESCA on- vessel and in the processing plants, and the activities (completed checks and audits) of the dockside monitoring programme (Intertek). The report will identify any lack of compliance by UOC vessels, the nature of the non-compliance and the resulting measures taken by SERNAPESCA including sanctions. The report will identify any lack of compliance by UOC vessels, the nature of the non-compliance and the resulting measures taken by SERNAPESCA including sanctions. At the third annual audit we will present evidence to the auditors that the system of MCS has demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant management measures, strategies and/or rules.

We have consulted with SERNAPESCA and Intertek who have indicated Consultation on their agreement to cooperate with SONPESCA in providing the required condition information. See Appendix 4 for Letters of Support.

Condition 7

PI 3.2.4 There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-specific management system against its objectives. Performance There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management Indicator system. SIb The fishery-specific management system is subject to regular internal and occasional external review. Score 70 In order to achieve the SG 80 and SG 100 the fishery-specific management system is required to have an “external review”. In MSC terms, this means external to the fisheries management system, but not necessarily international. Depending on the scale and intensity of the fishery, it could be by: • Another department within an agency; Rationale • Another agency or organisation within the country; • A government audit that is external to the fisheries management agency; • A peer organisation nationally or internationally, and • External expert reviewers Aspects of the management system are, in effect, subject to regular external review, i.e. the jack mackerel stock status and TAC setting is

Page 242 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

subject to the SPRFMO process. However, no evidence was available to show that the Chilean fishery-specific management system is occasionally externally reviewed. It is concluded that the fishery-specific management system is subject to regular internal review, thereby meeting the SG 60, however, in the absence of occasional external review of the fishery-specific management system, the SG 80 is not met. The client shall ensure by the third surveillance audit that the fishery- Condition specific management system is subject to regular internal and occasional external review. At the first surveillance audit the client will provide evidence in the form of minutes and/or meeting reports showing discussion on how it will to initiate and adopt an occasional external review of the industrial jack mackerel purse seine fishery management system. Resulting score: 70 At the second surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence in the form of minutes and/or meeting reports showing how an occasional Milestones external review of the industrial jack mackerel management system will be adopted. Resulting score: 70 At the third surveillance audit the client shall provide evidence that the fishery management system is subject to occasional external review and the review has or will be initiated and completed within four years of the re-certification date of the fishery. Resulting score: 80

At the first annual audit we will present the auditors with evidence that the requirement for regular internal and occasional external review has been raised and considered by the Fisheries Management Committee. The evidence will be in the form of approved minutes of the meeting of the Fisheries Management Committee. It may prove to be the case that the plans for occasional external review will be confirmed by the time of the first annual audit. Furthermore, we will inform the auditors of any changes in the SPRFMO management approach that have implications for the management of the UOC. At the second annual audit, we will present the auditors with evidence of the plans for an external review of the management system for jack Client action mackerel in the third year of certification. We will present the ToR for plan the external review. Furthermore, we will inform the auditors of any changes in the SPRFMO management system that have implications for the management of the UOC. At the third annual audit we will provide the auditors with a report completed by the selected external experts on the Chilean management system for jack mackerel. fishery management system is subject to occasional external review and the review has or will be initiated and completed within four years of the re-certification date of the fishery. Furthermore, we will inform the auditors of any changes in the SPRFMO management system that have implications for the management of the UOC.

Page 243 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

The work plan will be generated by the SONAPESCA working within the Consultation on Fisheries Management Committee and SPRFMO through its designated condition representatives. As such, we do not require the commitment of other entities to support our action plan related to Condition 7.

Page 244 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 2 Peer Review Reports

Peer Reviewer A Summary of Peer Reviewer Opinion

Has the assessment team arrived at an Yes/No CAB Response appropriate conclusion based on the evidence presented in the assessment report? YES Justification: Noted, thank you. I think that the assessment team were correct in their evaluation of the jurel fishery. The report read well and provided adequate evidence and used expert consultation appropriately.

Page 245 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes/No CAB Response appropriately written to achieve the SG80 No (For 1- outcome within the specified timeframe? 4, 6) [Reference: FCR 7.11.1 and sub-clauses] Justification: These are good points and we have considered them carefully. Our responses In most cases, I think the wording used suggests that the evidence are set out below. will be that the measures were successful without evaluation of whether the measures are working. For example in Condition 1, the 1. Wording of conditions 1st 2 years are devoted to setting up the review and completion of the The conditions have been set in accordance review, and then year 3 to ensuring that the measures are being with section 7.11 of the MSC FCR v2.0. This implemented correctly. I would suggest keeping a contingency year of rather constrains what can be put into a review in place and an additional year 4 if revision or modification of condition and milestones – in particular the the measures is determined to be necessary at year 3. My specific conditions have to follow the “narrative and comments can be found at each condition row in Table 1. metric form” of the relevant PISG, and the Overall for the 5 conditions noted, I feel that the wording should CAB is only able to identify outcomes, and generally be tempered so that there is not an assumption that an not to specify actions (such as types & timing action or measure will be successful, but instead provide provisions of meetings). as to if the measure is successful then close the condition (i.e., SG80 This context determines the wording of the is reached) or if not, then reevaluate in the next year. This is conditions and milestones. particularly the case for conditions 1, 3, 4, and 6. In other cases I’ve 2. Timescales just asked for some more clarification as to how the timeline will With respect to the reviewer’s suggestion of proceed, e.g., types, timing, and outcomes of key meetings. tempering the conditions such that there is provision in case actions / measures are not successful within the specified time schedule. When setting a condition an assessment team does make the assumption that the condition will be met within a specified time. The client is given opportunity to consider the appropriate actions / measures to meet the condition within the specified timeline and set this out in their action plan. If, in developing their action plan, the client considers there is need for a longer time to meet the condition, they can make the case to the assessment team and, if considered appropriate, the timeline can be amended. This process was followed and the client has agreed actions / measures to fulfil the conditions within the specified time. It is also highlighted that at subsequent annual audits of a fishery, if the milestone of a condition is not met then, as per MSC audit requirements, the audit will report that progress against meeting the condition is ‘behind target’ and the client will be required to ensure the fishery is ‘back on target’ within 12 months. This, in effect, provides an additional period of time within which a client has to meet the condition and also provides incentive to meet the requirements, as failure to do so would result in the fishery certificate being suspended. Furthermore, if an additional contingency year is put in place in year 4, this can create a problem as this could carry over into year 5, for the same reasons as above, and complicate the ability to be re-certified. Therefore, the assessment team do not consider there is a need to change the timeline and add an additional milestone to conditions 1, 3, 4 and 6.

Page 246 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

If included: Do you think the client action plan is sufficient Yes/No CAB Response to close the conditions raised? Yes (but [Reference FCR 7.11.2-7.11.3 and sub-clauses] see comment on conditions in Table 1) Justification: Noted and Assessment Team comments Yes, I do, if all the measures are successful, etc. as noted above. provided below. But, there are some questions whether these timelines are reasonable that should be considered.

Performance Indicator Review Please complete the appropriate table(s) in relation to the CAB’s Peer Review Draft Report:

• For reports using one of the default assessment trees (general, salmon or enhanced bivalves), please enter the details on the assessment outcome using Error! Reference source not found..

• For reports using the Risk-Based Framework please enter the details on the assessment outcome at Error! Reference source not found..

• For reports assessing enhanced fisheries please enter the further details required at. Table 23.

Page 247 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 23 For reports using one of the default assessment trees:

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

Example:1.1.2 No No NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. The 80 scoring guidepost asks that there is evidence that rebuilding strategies are rebuilding stocks, or it is highly likely based on simulation modelling or previous performance that they will be able to rebuild the stock within the timeline specified. However, no timeline has been specified based on previous performance, or simulation models.

1.1.1 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 90 for this PI. Noted, thank you. For SIa, SG100 is met because there is a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the PRI (taken to be 75%BMSY): current SSB is well above this with 20% CV.

For SIb, I agree with SG 80, being met as the stock is likely at or around BMSY (in 2017), but the Kobe plot illustrates that this has not been the case over the past years. Therefore, SG100 cannot be met.

1.1.2 NA NA NA NA

Page 248 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

1.2.1 Yes Yes Yes The certifier gave a score of 75 for this PI. There Noted thank you For condition 1, if are 6 SI for this PI. the client can, by year 3 provide For SIa, monitoring and evalaution of this stock is evidence that there conducted, there is an annual TAC, and the are measures in harvest strategy recognizes that jack mackerel place that are were overfished and needed harvest reductions to successful in recover the stock to BMSY. Therefore, SG100 is reducing the UoA- warranted. related mortality of unwanted catch, For SIb, the harvest strategy has been fully then this condition evaluated using an MSE, so this and the current can be closed, but stock status are justification that SG100 is met. see comments on the timeline. For SIc, the fishery is monitored and these data are used in the stock assessment, so SG60 is met.

For SId, harvest strategy is reviewed annually, so SG100 is met.

SIe is NA

For SIf, while discarding in Chile is banned and the fishtrack system is used by captains to avoid juveniles, there is not a specific regulation on discarding relative to the jack mackerel fishery and levels of discards are still being observed, so SG60 is met, but not SG80.

Page 249 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

1.2.1 Yes Yes Yes Condition: The timeline for ensuring closure is fairly We have considered these points carefully. For condition 1, if aggressive at 3 years, with year 1 focused on the As mentioned above, the wording of this the client can, by establishment of a review of the discard plan, year 2 (and other conditions) has been in year 3 provide focused on demonstrating that the review is complete accordance with section 7.11 of the MSC evidence that there and year 3 devoted to ensuring that the alternative FCR v2.0. Regarding the timeline, the are measures in measures to reduce mortality of unwanted catch are client is given opportunity to consider the place that are being implemented correctly. I think that the proposed appropriate actions / measures to meet the successful in activities are appropriate: review of issue with Chilean condition within the specified timeline and management, cooperation with SUBPESCA on reducing the UoA- set this out in their action plan. If, in discard research, testing and implementation of related mortality of measures to reduce discarding of jurel, and developing their action plan, the client unwanted catch, collaboration with the SPRFMO. However, I was considers there is need for a longer time to then this condition surprised by the wording for the 3rd audit, where it meet the condition, they can make the can be closed, but is stated that data will be presented that “indicates case to the assessment team and, if see comments on the success of the measures implemented by the considered appropriate, the timeline can be the timeline. SPRFMO”. In my opinion, there is the need to (1) amended. This process was followed and regularly evaluate the SPRFMO observer program, the client has agreed actions / measures to which is being set up to id levels of discarding and fulfil the condition within the specified time. (2) to regularly review the Chilean Action Plans as Therefore, the assessment team do not to their effectiveness. By this 3rd audit, I would consider there is reason to change the expect that both of these goals will be reached timeline and add an additional milestone to (not just the evaluation of the SPRFMO measures), this condition. and that while the hope is that the measures are successful, there should be a plan for the 4th and With respect to the client’s action plan, the 5th years to reevaluate if the plans are not measure of success for an audit team will successful. Also, what is the bar for measuring be achieving the required outcome, i.e. success? Have these been defined? I think that it Evidence that there is a regular review of would be good to be explicit on this for the 3rd and the potential effectiveness and practicality (if needed) 4th and 5th years. of alternative measures to minimise UoA- related mortality of unwanted catch of the target stock and they are implemented as appropriate.

1.2.2 Yes Yes (but see request Yes The certifier gave a score of 75 for this PI. There With regard to SIc, the assessment team for information on For condition 2, if are 3 Sis for this PI. considered that, given the uncertainty in SIc) this plan over the 4 the stock configuration a precautionary years meets each For SIa, there is an HCR in place that aims to approach would need to be used and the of the annual keep the stock at or above BMSY, but the HCR areas/stocks assessed separately to avoid milestones, then does not define the action to take if the biomass risk of depletion of local stocks. The this condition can decreases below the PRI, therefore, SG60 is met, scoring rationale has been amended to be closed. but not SG80. include this point and an additional

Page 250 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

However, as noted reference provided (i.e. Frank, K. T. and in my comments For SIb, the measures used to evaluate Brickman, D. 2010. Allee effects and on the condition, uncertainty are robust and SG80 is warrented, but compensatory population dynamics within more detail on the I agree that given the fact that more of the a stock complex. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. timeline, including ecological role of jack mackerel is not evaluated, 57, 513–517.). key meetings and that the stock structure is still uncertain, where the SG100 cannot be met. advocating will take place, the For SIc, there are TACs, quotas and stock sharing approval of the arrangements that are generally agreed upon Solution, etc. through the SPRFMO and F is substantially below would be helpful. FMSY, indicating that overfishing is not occuring as it had in the past. Therefore, SG60 and SG80 are met. The authors cite the fact that since the stock structure is debated, there could be localized depletion occurring that the HCRs would not be effective against. Could you provide more information specifically on why this is the case? Otherwise, I agree with the interpretation of the authors.

Page 251 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

1.2.2 Yes Yes (but see request Yes Condition: The condition raised for PI 1.2.2 is that The condition milestones have taken for information on there are well defined HCRs in place that ensure account of processes within SPRFMO, i.e., SIc) that the exploitation rate is reduced as the PRI is Scientific Committee (SC) timelines in approached, are expected to keep the stock terms of meetings and workshops. fluctuating around a target level consistent with (or Therefore, it would not be realistic to above) MSY, or for key LTL species a level shorten the timeline for meeting the consistent with ecosystem needs. This condition is condition. This is not explicitly mentioned in expected to be achieved in 4 years, with the focus the condition / milestone, for the reasons in the 1st year on advocating that the Chilean described above with respect to MSC delegation to the SPRFMO convince the requirements for wording/setting SPRFMO adopt HCRs that are precautionary if conditions. the stock is reduced below MSY. The focus is on the collaborative work of INPESCA, IFOP and the SPRFMO SC to establish these HCRs over years 1 and 2. By year 3, the goal is to see that the SPRFMO SC has recommended the adoption of the HCRs, and by year 4 the evidence should be that the HCRs are adopted via approval of a Resolution. I think that this plan is fine, but I would like to know more about the pace of this timeline and whether there is a chance it could be sped up, or if this pace is dictated by particular meeting schedules. If the latter, then I think it would be helpful to note this in the Milestones as part of the plan to meet the end goal.

Page 252 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

1.2.3 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. Noted, thank you.

For SI a, the assessment procedure has adopted a hypothesis that seems reaonable for the stock structure, evaluates the stock productivity, and has sufficient information on the fleet composition to meet SG80. But there is debate on stock structure and on environmental impacts from events like ENSO that mean that SG100 is not met.

For Sib, the current stock assessment meets the requirements for SG80 that stock abundance and UoA removals are regularly monitored at a level of accuracy and coverage consistent with the HCR, but there are uncertainties around stock structure that are not evaluated as to management response that mean that SG100 is not met.

For SIc, there is good information on total removals from the stock, therefore, SG80 is met.

Page 253 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

1.2.4 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 95 for this PI. Noted, thank you. For SI a, the assessment takes into account the major features relevant to the biology of the species and the nature of the UoA.

For SIa, I agree that the assessment currently in use is adequate for the stock and takes into account the major features relevant to the biology of the species and the nature of the UoA. The benchmark assessment explored the use of alternative models, fisheries selectivity changes, the natural mortality estimated in the model, and the appropriateness of the data sample sizes in the model to determine sensitivity of the results to the major assumptions, therefore SG100 is met.

For Sib, the use of MSY-based reference points is is appropriate for this stock and SG80 is met.

For SIc, the assessment takes into account uncertainty and is evaluating stock status relative to reference points in a probabilistic way, so SG100 is met.

For SId, I would have thought that the sensitivity runs described in SIa would justify an evaluation of the assessment, but I agree ultimately, that ideally alternative models would be evaluated to ensure robustness of results, so I agree that SG100 is not met in this case.

For SIe, the assessment has been internally and externally reviewed as per the international attendance at the benchmark and Scientific Committee meetings, so SG100 is met.

2.1.1 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 100 for this PI. Noted, thank you.

For SIa, there are no primary species identified in this fishery, so SG100 is met.

For SIb, there are no primary species identified in

Page 254 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

this fishery, so SG100 is met.

2.1.2 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 5 SIs for this PI.

For SIa, there are no primary species, so SG60 and SG80 are met (under the ‘as necessary’ qualifier).

For SIb, there are no primary species, so SG60 and SG80 are met (under the ‘as necessary’ qualifier).

For SIc, there are no primary species, so SG60 and SG80 are met (under the ‘as necessary’ qualifier).

Sid and SIe are not relevant (not shark and no primary species).

Page 255 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

2.1.3 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 95 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 3 SIs for this PI.

For SIa, although there are no main primary species, there is observer data from IFOP to use ot make this evaluation and to determine that bycatch is low. These data are quantitative and I agree meet the criteria for SG100 (given no current main primary species).

For SIb, I would assume that since there are no primary species currently (major or minor) that SG100 can be met, i.e., the quantitative information available indicates no primary species and therefore low (or no) impact of the UoA

For SIc, given the uncertainty around the Humboldt squid status (pending assessment and subsequent management strategy), it is probably wise to assume that SG100 is not met, but that SG80 is given that there are no current primary species.

Page 256 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

2.2.1 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 95 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 2 SIs for this PI.

For SIa, there are no main secondary fish species, but there are four bird species that are “out of scope” and therefore assessed as main secondary species. Kelp gull, Peruvian pelican, and cape petrel are all in relatively good IUCN status, or for kelp gull, showing signs of increaing abundance, so SG100 is met. For sooty shearwater, while interaction is low and abundance is high, population abundance is believe to be declining. Therefore, it meets SG80.

For SIb, there are 6 minor secondary species that make up less than 1% of the catch of jack mackerel identified from the observer data. The assessment team also noted that there was a discrepancy between these data and several other species that stakeholders felt were also minor secondary sepcies. Since the RBF would increase the score for this SI, I agree that it is more precautionary to find that SG100 is not met.

Page 257 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

2.2.2 Yes Yes Yes (but see The certifier gave a score of 75 for this PI. There Noted, no response required to these comments on are 5 SIs for this PI. comments. condition) For SIa, the measures in place for industrial vessels to operate >5nm from shore with specific targeting of jack mackerel means that there is little bycatch or interaction with non-target species, therefore SG80 is met. However, there is nothing meeting the criteria of “strategy” in place to warrant SG100.

For SIb, these measures appear to be working as evidenced by the IFOP observer data and the assessment of the 4 out of scope species, but these measures have not been tested. Therefore only SG80 is warranted.

For SIc, the same evidence used for SIb can justify SG80, but there are no clearly defined management objectives so SG100 is not met.

SId is not relevant.

For SIe, there is a discard plan that is currently being reviewed, so only SG60 is warranted.

Page 258 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

2.2.2 Yes Yes Yes (but see Condition: The condition raised for PI 2.2.2 is These are all good points. We agree with comments on that there is a strategy in place for managing the PR, and feel that we have already condition) secondary species that is designed to maintain or addressed these issues. We hope that our to not hinder rebuilding of secondary species and response below provides reassurance that the UoA regularly reviews and implements they are appropriately addressed. measures, as appropriate, to minimize the We agree that the Year 3 milestone would mortality of unwanted catch. This condition is require a positive outcome in order to close raised to ensure the regular review of the the condition. Under MSC FCR v2.0, if effectiveness and implementation of CMMs for the progress was “behind target” in Year 3, the bird species that are and the 3 year timeframe assessment team would review progress in seems logical. However, as with condition 1, I Year 4, irrespective of whether or not there wonder at the wording of the year 3 CAP. is a Year 4 milestone (see our earlier comments and also FCR 7.23.13). For condition 3, this action timeline seems From a practical perspective the conditions adequate to meet and close the condition by year specified would need to be resolved by 3 if the findings in year 3 are positive for evidence Year 4 at the latest to ensure that the that the alternative measures are effective. Like fishery is eligible for recertification after a condition 1, I have concerns with the wording site visit at the Year 4 surveillance audit; here that there is an assumption that these hence the proposed timescale and measures will be working. I think it would milestones. make more sense to have this timeline extended to allow review in year 3 and if not We also agree that consultation with successful, then reevaluation in year 4. I also ENGOs will be desirable. Indeed the client question the “Consultation on condition” that action plan proposes that the review shall says that no other entities are needed to be conducted by INPESCA through a support the action when there will be the need formal agreement with a suitable ENGO to interact with an ENGO by year 3 (or sooner) such as BirdLife. to evaluate the alternative measures and We do not, however, consider that the interactions between UoC vessels and birds. ENGOs are “other entities” in the sense of MSC FCR 7.11.3. In this regard we are satisfied that the “other entities” that are critical to the condition are adequately engaged in the process and that the funding and resources required to address this condition is in place.

2.2.3 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 3 SIs for this PI.

Page 259 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

For SI a, there is some quantitative info from IFOP’s observer program and from the self- reporting program to evaluate the status of the “out of scope” main secondary species, but this info is not highly certain, so only SG80 is met.

For SI b, the available info is not adequate to assess the status of the minor secondary species, so SG100 is not met.

For SIc, SG100 cannot be met because there is no strategy in place to manage all secondary species. SG80 can be met as there is the IFOP observer program and the self-reporting program that are designed to manage the impact of the fishery on main secondary species.

Page 260 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

2.3.1 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 85 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 3 SIs for this PI.

For SI a, since there are no national or international limits set for ETPs this SI is not relevant.

For SIb, of the 7 ETP that interact with this fishery, 6 meet SG100 due to low mortality rates. The one species that only meets SG80, pink footed shearwater, has low mortality, but this is less certain. Looking over the section on “out of scope” species (3.6.1.3.3) I think that this evaluation was sufficient to assign these status scores.

For SIc, the assessment team lists the possible indirect effects of the fishery on ETPs as loss of gear or depletion of the stock so that the prey of the ETP was reduced. Purse seine gear is not typically lost and these ETP have a fairly wide prey base, so SG80 is warrented, but the lack of detailed trophic and diet assessments precludes SG100.

Page 261 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

2.3.2 Yes Yes Yes (but see The certifier gave a score of 70 for this PI. There comments on are 5 SIs for this PI. condition) For SI a, this is NA as there are no national or international limits set for ETPs.

For SIb, only SG60 is met as there is no strategy (or comprehensive strategy) in place to manage ETP or to ensure that the UoA is not hindering recovery of ETP. The management measures of fishing >5nm offshore with targeted fishing for jack mackeral meet the criteria of a partial strategy.

For SIc, given the very low level of interaction between the jack mackerel purse seine fishery and ETP species, and that the level of ETP species mortality is very low, it can be said that the measures in place are achieving a low level of negative interactions. Therefore, SG80 is warranted.

For SId, VMS monitoring indicates that the >5nm requirement is met, and observer data and catch composition suggests that there is a low level of interaction, so SG80 is met, but I agree that there is no strategy in place to manage ETP species or interactions with them, so SG100 is not met.

For SIe, the discard reduction program and work towards a Discard Plan meets SG60, but there is no evidence to suggest that the plan will be reviewed regularly, so SG80 is not met.

2.3.2 Yes Yes Yes (but see Condition: The condition raised for PI 2.3.2 is We have considered these comments very comments on that the UoA has precautionary management carefully and we have revised our Year 3 condition) strategies in place that are designed to meet milestone in response so that it better national and international requirements and that follows the narrative and metric form of the ensure that the UoA does not hinder recovery and relevant PISG. minimizes mortality of ETP species. This condition With regard to specifying “how” information is expected to be achieved over 3 years with should be used in our milestones, we are reviews in years 1 and 2 and evidence from these unable to specify this in our milestone. The reviews that the alternative measures are MSC FCR (at 7.11.1.2 and 7.11.1.4) appropriate. If these reviews are carried out and requires us to follow the narrative and

Page 262 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

the outcomes are shown to be effective, then this metric form of the relevant PISG and also condition can be closed in the specified to specify outcomes rather than actions. timeframe. The form of words we have used requires For condition 4, I think that the plan is good to that in Year 1 and Year 2 there is a review have a review in year 1 and year 2, but it is not of the effectiveness and practicality of clear to me as written how the information alternative measures and that in Year 3 from the review will be used specifically. For there is evidence that they have been example, if the first review shows that the “implemented as appropriate”. We alternative measures are not effective how will consider that this approach would the measures be adjusted going forward? accommodate a wide range of scenarios Also, the year 3 plan is to “show that including one where no effective or alternative measures to minimize UoA related practical alternative measures were mortality of ETP species is being implemented identified (in which case it would not be as appropriate”. I wonder if this wording appropriate to implement alternative should be modified to say “evaluate whether measures). alternative measures…”. I also question the We also agree that consultation with “Consultation on condition” that says that no ENGOs will be desirable. Indeed the client other entities are needed to support the action action plan proposes that the review shall when there will be the need to interact with an be conducted by INPESCA through a ENGO (WWF) by year 3 to evaluate the formal agreement with a suitable ENGO alternative measures. such as WWF. We do not, however, consider that the ENGOs are “other entities” in the sense of MSC FCR 7.11.3. In this regard we are satisfied that the “other entities” that are critical to the condition are adequately engaged in the process and that the funding and resources required to address this condition is in place.

2.3.3 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 2 SIs for this PI.

For SIa, there is some quantitative information available that is adequate to assess the UoA related mortality and impact of the UoA, so SG80 is met.

For SIb, I agree that based on the information from IUCN and ACAP presented for the ETP

Page 263 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

species, a strategy coulid be implemented to manage impacts on ETP species. However, these data are not regularly collected and evaluated, so a comprehensive strategy would not be possible, therefore SG100 is not met.

2.4.1 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 100 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 3 SIs for this PI.

For SIa, I would think that the use of purse seines(and the fact that they don’t contact the seafloor, have very low probabilty of being lost, etc.) would be enough to justify SG100, but the extra information on the pelagic habitat and studies which show that there is no physical impacts in this habitat are helpful.

For SIb, the assessment team identified several EBSAs that are evaluated as VMEs. The evidence for SIa, that purse seines don’t contact the seabed and the fact that the UoA fleets comply with marine closures is enough evidence to meet SG100.

For SIc, the information used to justify SIa and SIb is sufficient to also meet SG100.

Page 264 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

2.4.2 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 85 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 4 SIs for this PI.

For SIa, gear is purse seines, so little to no interaction with VMEs, so SG80 is met. In terms of a strategy in place, the assessment team notes the extensive network of MPAs where the UoA does not operate as well as the requirement of the SPRFRMO to report the bottom fishing footprint, which seems sufficient for a cohesive and strategic management framework for SG100.

For SIb, the justification of SG80, based on the fact that pelagic purse seines don’t touch the seabed and therefore management measures or a partial strategy is not necessary, is warranted. I agree that the fact that the strategy mentioned in SIa has likely not been tested, so SG100 should not be met.

For SIc, same justification can be used to meet SG80. For SG100, there is evidence that the network of MPAs covering 25% of the EEZ are not just paper parks (i.e., there is compliance), but the CMM established by the SPRFMO outside the EEZ was only operational earlier in 2018, so there has not been enough time to establish evidence that the measure is achieving objectives.

For SId, purse seine gear have little interaction with the seabed or, by default, with VMEs, and that the UoA avoids closed areas is enough to meet SG80’s requirement for quantitative evidence. The fact that the CMM is too newly established to provied clear quantitative evidence, is good rationale for not meeting SG100.

2.4.3 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 3 SIs for this PI.

For SIa and SIb, the main habitat is epipelagic, so based on that, and the fact that there is little

Page 265 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

interaction of the purse seine gear with pelagic habitat, SG80 is met for both SIs. The requirement of knowing the distribution of habitats over all of jack mackerel range is a high bar, and the assessment team notes that benthic habitat is not known, so SG100 is not warranted in either case.

For SIc, the fact that the extent of the fishing activity is monitored and that the gear is known and monitored is sufficient evidence to determine the risk (low) to the habitat from the UoA and SG80 is warranted. SG100 would require information about changes in benthic habitat over time, which is not available, therefore I agree that this SG can’t be met.

2.5.1 Yes Yes (See Table 2) NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. There No comment. is 1 SI for this PI.

For SI a, the RBF framework was used for scoring.

Page 266 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

2.5.2 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 3 SIs for this PI.

For SI a, the assessment team noted the most likely mechanisms for the fishery to impact the ecosystem: 1. removal of the target species; 2. impacts on non-target species & ETP species; and 3. physical impacts on marine habitats. They noted the measures that are in place to address these potential impacts both within the Chilean EEZ and in the SPRFMO area, which are adequate to meet SG80: basically, a management strategy exists for the target species, which, if depleted by the fishery, could negatively affect the ecoystem, the fact that the fishery has low bycatch, and the low/no interaction of the gear with habitat. SG100 is not met because there are no similar strategies in place (like the CMM) for other ecosystem components.

For SIb, similar evidence can be used to justify SG80 and I agree with this interpretation. I also agree that there is no tested strategy/partial strategy that applies to all the UoA impacts, so SG100 is not met.

For SIc, there is a management plan in place for the target species (of which removals consitute the main impact on the ecosystem), therefore SG80 is warranted. For SG100 to be met, there would need to be a working strategy in place to address all fishery impacts. However, there is no evidence that the management strategy for habitats is meeting its objectives, nor that the developing strategy for reducing bycatch will work, so SG100 is not met.

2.5.3 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 90 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 5 SIs for this PI.

For SIa, I agree that the physical oceanographic processes of the HCS are well studied by the

Page 267 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

reference (Thiel et al. 2007) that the assessment team provided, but also by many other authors, and also information on trophic interactions and on effects of the physical environment on biological factors. This information is enough to broadly understand the key elements of the ecosystem and SG80 is met.

For SIb, I would agree that there is some understanding of the impacts of the UoA on key ecosystem elements that have been studied in detail, in particular how the removal by fishing of jack mackerel affected other species through trophic linkages. I would agree that all interactions have not been evaluated and that SG80 is warranted.

Page 268 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

2.5.3 Yes Yes NA For SIc and SId, the evidence the assessment Noted, thank you. team provides in 3.6.3.1.1 is sufficient to establish that the functions of the components of the ecosystem are known, and have been extensively studied and reviewed. The impacts of the UoA on target species are well understood, and the impacts on non-target and ETP species and habitats are negligible, and interactions of the different ecosystem components have been studied to some extent, so SG100 is met in both cases.

For SIe, for the jack mackerel stock, there is sufficient information to conduct a stock assessment, which allows a risk evaluation. For non-target and ETPs, the data that has been collected for the proposed discard plan constitutes adequate data collection, but there is not yet a strategy in place to manage impacts of the fishery on non-target species, so SG100 is not met.

Page 269 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

3.1.1 Yes No (See SIb) NA The certifier gave a score of 95 for this PI. There SIb states, “The management system are 3 scoring SIs for this PI. incorporates or is subject by law to a transparent mechanism for the resolution For SI a to reach SG100, there must be an of legal disputes which is considered to effective national legal system and binding be effective in dealing with most issues procedures governing cooperation with other and that is appropriate to the context of the parties which delivers management outcomes UoA.” consistent with MSC Principles 1 and 2. The management of jack mackerel by the Chilean The assessment team have no government under the General Law, the information/evidence to indicate that a management under the SPRFMO, and the fact SPRFMO member has withdrawn as a that Chile has signed on to numerous international result of disagreement on an issue. The agreements and conventions aimed at protection SPRFMO website provides examples of of biota, habitats, and sustainable fishing objections and their outcomes. Both practices is sufficient evidence of an effective examples that are cited relate to issues of national legal system. Therefore, SG100 is met. allocation: https://www.sprfmo.int/about/the- For SIb, the means of dispute resolution at the convention/objections/ SPRFMO and national levels is well-documented. However, I would argue that the fact that the The assessment team also notes that the SPRFMO does not have a way of making rulings SI indicates that 100% effectiveness in binding (e.g., a party can withdraw from the dealing with disputes is not a requirement. SPRFMO if they don’t agree with a quota) means that it may be difficult to assess “effectiveness”. I The above and other information described would like to know more about how the in the evaluation of 3.1.1 enabled the team assessment team is assessing effectiveness in to score the SPRFMO element of this PI at this case? I think that ultimately there may be 100. enough evidence to still score SG80, but I was unsure about this point.

For SIc, I agree that the supporting articles and laws of the SPRFMO and the LGPA justify that the management system has a mechanism to formally commit to legal rights and SG100 is warranted.

3.1.2 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 95 for this PI. There are 3 SIs associated with this PI.

For SI a, the roles and responsibilities of the Noted, thank you. international (SPRFMO) and national (MINECON, SUBPESCA, SERNAPESCA, IFOP) are clearly defined and well-established so as to be

Page 270 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

understood clearly by stakeholders and public, so SG100 is warranted.

For SIb, the evidence supplied does illustrate that the management system at the international and national levels solicit and use relevant information, but since there was no evidence at either level of how the information is used or not, then only SG80 is warranted. For SIc, for the SPRFMO, there are regular meetings that are attended by NGOs, fishing industry reps and other stakeholders and these meetings are listed on the website (although the assessment team did not note this specifically). Similarly, at the national level, the LPGA requires stakeholder engagement in the management process and meetings and consultation opportunities are announced in multiple ways (website, Twitter, etc.), therefore, SG100 is met.

Page 271 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

3.1.3 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 100 for this PI. An Noted, thank you. SG100 for this PI requires that there are clear long- term objectives that guide decision-making, consistent with MSC fisheries standard and the precautionary approach, are explicit within and required by management policy. The SPRFMO and the national LGPA base management on the precautionary approach and EAFM so that long- term conservation goals are met and sustainable use is ensured. Therefore, sufficient evidence was provided at the international and national levels to justify SG100.

Page 272 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

3.2.1 Yes Yes NA The certifier gave a score of 100 for this PI. An Noted, thank you. SG100 for this PI requires that there are well defined and measurable short and long-term objectives, which are demonstrably consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fishery- specific management system. The SPRFMO defines CMM explicitly for jack mackerel that specify a precautionary approach and the use of sound scientific data to set management measures and regulations for MCS. Within Chile, the jack mackerel fishery management plan has specific goals, objectives, management standards, indicators, and reference points that meet the criteria of measureable and short and long-term objectives. Therefore, sufficient evidence was provided at the international and national levels to justify SG100.

Page 273 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

3.2.2 Yes No (See SIb) Yes The certifier gave a score of 65 for this PI. There With respect to SIc, MSC guidance does are 5 SIs for this PI. not specify what constitutes “serious or important issues” and so it is left to the For SI a, at the international level, there is assessment team’s judgement. evidence that the SPRFMO (through Article 16 and 17 and the record of the meeting relating to The assessment team highlighted in the the CMM for jack mackerel) that there are scoring rationale that amendments to established decision-making processes that result Conservation and Management Measures in measures and strategies to achieve the fishery- (CMM) for Trachurus murphyi (CMM 01) specific objectives, so SG80 is met. At the reflected decsion-making responding to national level, there is a decision-making process serious and important issues. These through the STC and Fisheries Management include, setting the TAC; percentage Committee, but the management committee allocations for the contracting and non- meeting minutes are only a summary and the contractingg parties; the data collection assessment team could not determine whether an requirements and system for reporting established process exists for making the monthly catches; and effort limitation and decisions, so they could not justify SG80. I agree management. These, and others, are set with this assessment. out in section 3.5.5 of the report and, as a result of the reviewers comment, reference For SIb, I would like to understand specifically is now made to this section in the scoring what constitutes “serious” and “important” issues rationale. to understand how the SPRFMO has dealt with these issues in a quick decision-making process before I can evaluate if the SG80 is warranted. The evidence for SG60 being met at the national scale via the establishment of SPRFMO, the national Fisheries Law, the consent to apply SPRFMO established CMM within its national jurisdiction and the Jack Mackerel FMP, is sufficient. Since important issues such as discarding and catch reporting have been an issue for a while and have only recently been addressed, I agree that SG80 cannot be met.

3.2.2 Yes No (See SIb) Yes For SIc, as stated above in 3.1.1 and 3.1.3, at Noted, thank you. both the international and national levels, there are frameworks in place that dictate the use of the precautionary approach and that robust science and technical information is used in the management of jack mackerel, so I agree SG80 is met.

Page 274 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

For SId, I agree that transparency at the national scale is likely a limiting factor in scoring this SI higher and since there was no evidence to show that explanations are provided for any actions or lack of action associated with findings and elevant recommendations emerging from research, monitoring, evaluation and review activity, SG80 cannot be met. Therefore SG60 is warranted.

For SIe, the confirmation of the SPRFMO reps that there are no active court challenges and that the fishery is working proactively to avoid legal disputes, warrants SG100. Similarly, at the national level there are no active court challenges and the fishery management bodies work proactively to avoid legal disputes through stakeholder engagement, so SG100 is warranted.

Page 275 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

3.2.3 Yes No (See SId) Yes (but see The certifier gave a score of 70 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. comments on are 4 SIs for this PI. condition) For SI a, I agree with the decision to only evaluate the national MCS system due to the fact that the SPRFMO, like other RFMOs, does not have perview over MCS. The national system does appear to have all the necessary components, but is still unable to effectively enforce accurate reporting and prevent discarding. Therefore, SG60 is warranted.

For SIb, at the national level there are ample examples of sanctions to deal with non- compliance that seem comprehensive and reasonable. However, there may be non- compliance with the industrial sector is landing of under-size jack mackerel and under-reporting, which are dealt with using fines and monitoring of landings. There is anecdotal evidence about the effectiveness of such deterrents, but no real evaluation of how effective they are. Therefore, SG80 is warranted.

Page 276 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

3.2.3 Yes No (See SId) Yes (but see For SIc, only the national level is valid, and the The assessment team has considered the comments on assessment team used the fact that there is a recent PRs comments with respect to SId and, as condition) co-operative approach between SUBPESCA, a result, has revised the text, as follows SERNAPESCA, IFOP, and the industrial fleet to (revised text is underlined): “There was provide data on discarding that can be used to evidence in the past that discarding and support a discard plan for jack mackerel. While this is mis-reporting were a significant problem a new endeavor, there is some information to within the fishery and to the extent that it suggest that discards are low, suggesting could have been considered to represent compliance with MCS. Therefore, SG80 is warranted. evidence of systematic non-compliance.

For SId, only the national level is valid and while However, the revised Fisheries Act (LGPA discarding and mis-reporting were (until fairly 2013) and emphasis on a co-operative recently) an issue in the fishery, the discard plan and approach between the management work to achieve that has reduced this concern. My authorities and the industrial fleet on suggestion is that unless there is evidence (time- gathering information to inform a jack series of discards for at least the past 5 years), mackerel discard plan there is no longer the team doesn’t say that the concern has been evidence of this. The fishery therefore “removed”. meets the SG 80.”

Condition: The condition raised for PI 3.2.3 relies on With respect to the Condition, as presently an MCS system has been implemented in the fishery written, if the year 3 milestone is not met and has demonstrated an ability to enforce relevant then, as per MSC audit requirements, the management measures, strategies and/or rules. The 3rd annual audit will report that progress 3 year timeline for this condition seems against meeting the condition is behind justifiable if the MCS system can be target and the client will be required to demonstrated to be working appropriately. If not, ensure the milestone is met by year 4. I recommend adding an evaluation in year 3 and

a conditional year 4 to ensure that the MCS is working. Overall, the reports in years 1 and 2 will This outcome would provide an additional be important for identifying and allowing period of time to meet the condition, i.e. the rectification of any gaps or weaknesses. same outcome that would be achieved if the reviewer’s recommendation was applied. However, the way the condition is presently written provides greater incentive to deliver the required outcome within, at least 4 years, as failure to do so could lead to the certificate suspension or withdrawal.

3.2.4 Yes Yes Yes The certifier gave a score of 70 for this PI. There Noted, thank you. are 2 SIs for this PI. For SI a, at the international level, the SPRFMO is required to review the effectiveness of the CMM under Article 30 and undertook this in 2017, appointing a review panel of experts to conduct a

Page 277 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

performance review in 2018. Conservatively, I agree that SG80 is met. At the national scale, the LPGA also requires that the FMP and CMM are reviewed and the FMP dictates that this review be carried out by the management committee (or designated committee) annually. This has been initiated in 2017, but not yet repeated. Therefore, conservatively SG80 is met as there is no evidence to support the fact that this review all parts of the FMP.

For SIb, the SPRFMO does undertake internal and external reviews. Internal reviews of the CMM are annual and regular, but the external review is too new to be considered ‘regular’. Therefore, SG60 is warranted. At the national scale, the CMM are reviewed every 5 years and the FMP is reviewed annually. These reviews are internal. There is annual external review of the stock status and TAC setting for jack mackerel by the SPRFMO, but the fishery specific management system in Chile is not reviewed by another departmen, agency or peer organization, or by external expert reviewers, so I agree that SG60 is warranted. Table 24 For reports using the Risk-Based Framework:

Page 278 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Performance Does the report Are the RBF risk Justification: CAB Response: Indicator clearly explain scores well- Please support your answers by referring to specific how the referenced? scoring issues and any relevant documentation where process(es) Yes/No possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary. applied to determine risk using the RBF Note: Justification to support your answers is only has led to the required where answers given are ‘No’. stated outcome? Yes/No 1.1.1

2.1.1

2.2.1

2.3.1

2.4.1

2.5.1 Yes Yes

Page 279 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Peer Reviewer B Summary of Peer Reviewer Opinion

Has the assessment team arrived at an Yes CAB Response appropriate conclusion based on the evidence presented in the assessment report? Justification:

The report is well written and provides plenty of information to justify The assessment team is grateful for the the scores assigned to the PIs. update on the present debate on the LGPA. There is no doubt that there are several points that favour the We are keeping this under review, and if certification of this fishery. Some of these points are just a product of there are actual material changes in the how the fishery operates in physical terms. For instance, the fact that status or management of the fishery then an mackerel schools swim in the upper layers of the water column, averts expedited audit would be undertaken, as per any risk of impacting vulnerable benthic habitats and this in turn allows section 7.23.22 in the MSC FCR v2.0. the fishery to reach by default the maximum SG under 2.4.1. On the other hand it is also clear that both the SPRFMO and the Chilean government are making considerable progress towards improving their performance in many topics encompassed by the three Principles. A different matter though is whether the fishery has already reached a vantage position which would enable it an untroubled certification. The seven conditions included in the certification report might be taken as a sign that, despite undoubtable progress, there is still plenty to do in terms of improving the overall sustainability of the fishery. Be it as it may, at this point the main concern of the PR is that recent political developments in Chile might have direct implications for the certification of this fishery: at the time of writing (December 2018), the revoking of the General Law of Fishery and Aquaculture (LGPA 2013) is being debated in the Chilean Parliament. If the Law was finally revoked, this would have considerable consequences to the scores of all PIs concerned with national legislation, especially those under Principle 3. It is unclear from the report whether the AT was aware of this issue.

Do you think the condition(s) raised are Yes CAB Response appropriately written to achieve the SG80 outcome within the specified timeframe? [Reference: FCR 7.11.1 and sub-clauses] Justification:

If included: Do you think the client action plan is sufficient Yes CAB Response to close the conditions raised? [Reference FCR 7.11.2-7.11.3 and sub-clauses] Justification:

Performance Indicator Review Please complete the appropriate table(s) in relation to the CAB’s Peer Review Draft Report:

• For reports using one of the default assessment trees (general, salmon or enhanced bivalves), please enter the details on the assessment outcome using Error! Reference source not found..

Page 280 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

• For reports using the Risk-Based Framework please enter the details on the assessment outcome at Table 2.

• For reports assessing enhanced fisheries please enter the further details required at Table 26.

Page 281 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 25 For reports using one of the default assessment trees:

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

Example:1.1.2 No No NA The certifier gave a score of 80 for this PI. The 80 scoring guidepost asks that there is evidence that rebuilding strategies are rebuilding stocks, or it is highly likely based on simulation modelling or previous performance that they will be able to rebuild the stock within the timeline specified. However, no timeline has been specified based on previous performance, or simulation models.

1.1.1 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 90 agreed. Noted, thank you The PR agrees with the overall score 90 at this PI and the individual scores for each Scoring Issue (SI). In particular the SI 1.1.1b does meet the SG 80 but clearly not 100.

1.1.2 NA NA NA

1.2.1 Yes Yes Yes Overall PI score 75 agreed. The assessment team respectfully disagrees with Condition 1 also agreed. the PR conclusion with respect to SIb. The SG100 makes clear reference to the HS effectiveness. Howevever, regarding SI 1.2.1b: The subscore The HS provides clear evidence of stock 100 assigned to SI 1.2.1b seems somewhat rebuilding due to the changes in the fishing excessive in view of the available information. The activities. The environmental factors are also requirement for such score requires that “(…) included in the HS, therefore the Team considers evidence exists to show that it [the harvest it appropriate to score SIb at 100.

Page 282 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

strategy] is achieving its objectives including being clearly able to maintain stocks at target levels”. This requirement cannot be deemed to have been fully met already. The mackerel biomass is indeed showing signs of recovery from its previous collapse, but it is still too early to know whether this recovery is solid and has taken hold. The current estimated spawning stock biomass (5,294 kt, with about 20% CV) is slightly above the RP (5,198 kt), but it wasn’t so in recent years. So it’s still too early to take the recovery for granted. Furthermore, it is also not fully known whether the recovery has been solely due to the adequateness of the harvest strategy, or if some other factors (e.g. exceptionally favourable environmental conditions during the past few years) might have also played a key role in the recovery. As pointed out in Quiroz 2018: “La reconstrucción de la biomasa, gatillada por un efecto conjunto de reducción de mortalidad por pesca y clases anuales exitosas en los años 2015-2016 (…)”. It might well happen that in the event of extreme ENSO phenomena in the incoming years, this time inducing negative environmental conditions, the stock recovery could be halted or even reversed. Besides, there are still large uncertainties concerning the stock assessment, which in turn might also affect the projections of the range of possible future trajectories of the stock spawning

Page 283 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

biomass, for instance related to the data on ageing and recruitment estimates, as is recognised in the report; e.g. “There is a need for independent abundance indicators” (p. 37); “another main source of uncertainty is ageing estimates of jack mackerel” (p. 37); “Recruitment in the most recent years shows signs of stronger incoming year-classes although the information is highly uncertain” (p. 38), etc. Lastly, the stock isn’t fully characterised. Even though there seems to be a reasonable basis to support the two main stock hypotheses upon which SPRFMO bases its management (i.e. hypothesis 1) Jack mackerel caught off the coasts of Peru and Chile each constitute separate stocks (Peruvian or northern and Chilean or southern stocks) which straddle the high seas; and hypothesis 2) Jack mackerel caught off the coasts of Peru and Chile constitute a single shared stock that straddles the high seas), these are still just that, working hypothesis. Given all these reasons, assigning the maximum score of 100 in 1.2.1b does not seem fully aligned with the precautionary principle.

1.2.2 Yes Yes Yes Overall PI score 75 agreed. Noted, thank you Condition 2 also agreed.

1.2.3 Yes Yes, but see NA Overall PI score 80 mostly agreed, but a lesser The Team stresses that as evidenced by

Page 284 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

justification score (75) might also apply, taking into account SPRFMO scientists, the amount of discards are the doubts on Scoring Issue 1.2.3b. negligible and as evidenced during the site visit, slipping is not routinely carried out because the SI 1.2.3b, monitoring: according to the assessment purse seiners have the technologies to avoid team (AT) the fishery meets SG 80 in this Scoring areas with high concentrations of juveniles, e.g. Issue: “Stock abundance and UoA removals are (www.fishtrack.com). Therefore SG 80 in 1.2.3b is regularly monitored at a level of accuracy and considered to be met. coverage consistent with the harvest control rule”.

To the PR it is not at all clear that the level of removals is monitored at a level of accuracy and coverage fit to match the 80 score in this SI. Discards are a key component of total fishery removals. The most common way to monitor discards is through the presence of fisheries observers onboard. Other methods are also possible, such as e.g. the installation of video cameras which allow the examination of footage corresponding to each fishing event. However, although the stakeholders are planning to introduce video cameras in the mackerel fleet (pages 102 and 215 of the report), footage data are not yet available. Therefore, at present, the way to monitor discards is by deploying observers onboard. And whilst it seems that the fishery is making efforts to improve its observer coverage level, the current level is mentioned to be only about 10%: “Scientific observers from IFOP are required to be accommodated by all industrial vessels. The

Page 285 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

assessment team were told that approximately 10% of the industrial sectors fishing trips for jack mackerel were observed (Rodrigo Vega, pers. comm.” (p. 102). Even if it the alleged 10% average coverage was deemed enough to provide the level of monitoring consistent with the 80 score, 10% is the current coverage, not the average coverage since the programme started. In p. 46 of the report it is mentioned that according to IFOP 2017, “A total of 74 observer trips aboard industrial Jack mackerel vessels took place in 2015 and 2016, covering 5.7% of the fishing trips”. Hence, the best case seems to be 5.7% observer coverage in 2015 and 2016, about 10% observer coverage for 2018, and an undetermined observer coverage in 2017 – possibly, midway between 6 and 10%. Thus, given both the low level of observer coverage and the short duration of the observer program (which only started in 2014), it seems somewhat hazardous to assume that it is enough to warrant the 80 score in SI 1.2.3b.

Furthermore: slipping is a source of unaccounted mortality known to occur in similar fisheries i.e. those for Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) and herring (Clupea harengus) in the Northeast Atlantic, where the species targeted, the vessel design, and the fishery operation are considerably similar to the Chilean mackerel fishery. However, neither the certification report or the IFOP and

Page 286 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

SPRFMO papers seem to mention the potential occurrence of slipping in this fishery. The possibility that slipping is also happening here, but has so far passed unmonitored and unreported, cannot be automatically dismissed. Amongst other sources, the following papers and PhD theses shed some light on the slipping topic: Borges et al (2008), Tenningen (2014), Nedreaas et al (2015).

1.2.4 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 95 agreed. Noted, thank you

2.1.1 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 100 agreed, due to the absence Noted, thank you of primary species.

2.1.2 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 80 agreed. Noted, thank you.

In SI 2.1.2d, the AT states that “There are no We have revised the comments for SId in shark species in the catch. This SI is therefore not response to this comment. relevant.” It might be convenient to slightly modify this statement to something in the line of “shark species seem to be very rarely caught”, since shark catches are shown in Table 6c (p. 48), based on self-reported data from the fishery logbooks. However, the frequency of catches seems annecdotical, so the AT is correct.

Page 287 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

2.1.3 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 95 mostly agreed. We agree that in situations like this, where observer coverage is limited, it is very important to However, regarding SI 2.1.3.a: in this SI the AT interpret the observer data cautiously. assigns the maximum score 100, which requires that “Quantitative information is available and is In this case we feel that our scoring of SIa is adequate to assess with a high degree of certainty robust and appropriate, for the simple reason that the impact of the UoA on main primary species the available evidence is that there are absolutely with respect to status”. no “primary species” in the catch or liable to In the scoring rationale, the AT states that “The capture in the fishery. IFOP observer data gathered from 2015-2016 provide quantitative data about the non-target We considered the status of the non-target species caught in the fishery. These data are species recorded in the catch, (see section 3.6.1.2 adequate to determine that there are no primary of our report). species in the catch, and that the catch of any non-target species is very low indeed. The The absence of any records of catches of any absence of any primary non-target species and species that would meet the definition of a the evidence of a very clean catch of jack “primary” species is the basis for the team’s mackerel in the fishery meets the SG 60, 80 and confidence that there is a high degree of certainty 100 requirements for this SI”. that there are no “main” primary species in the The PR agrees that the available information catch (i.e. species that both meet the definition suggests that there are no primary species in the above and make up more than 5% of the total catch. But, taking into account the low level of catch). observer coverage already discussed under PI 1.2.3, it appears too low -and hence not In response to these PR comments we have “adequate”- to reach a “high degree of certainty” amended our scoring comments for SIc to reflect on any assumption regarding the catch of primary the limited spatial and temporal scale of the species. Hence, it might be considered that the observer programme at present; however we also conditions for score 100 are not yet met. If feel that the evidence available would be observer coverage improves over the next years, adequate to support a “partial strategy”. and if it continues to yield data supporting the

Page 288 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

low/nil presence of primary species, then in Therefore after a review of the information subsequent re-assessments of the fishery the 100 available to the team and careful consideration of score could be assigned to this SI. these points we feel that our scoring of this PI is appropriate.

2.2.1 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 95 agreed. Noted, thank you

2.2.2 Yes Yes Yes Overall score 75 and Condition 3 agreed. We have considered these points carefully. But with these points: For SIa, we fully agree that there is no “strategy” -SI 2.2.2.a: The justification given by the in place yet for the fishery, and our scoring reflects stakeholders that the ban on industrial fisheries this – we have not taken the “discard plan” that is within 5 nm from the coast is in itself a protective in preparation into account in our scoring. measure which minimises the bycatch of secondary species is highly debatable, and at In our scoring we have considered that the most would only be applicable to some, but not all management that is in place meets the MSC secondary species. The Peruvian pelican is one of definition of a “partial strategy”. This definition is such cases where the ban might have some given in full for PI 2.1.2 and cross-referenced (unintended) protective effect. However, for other here. A key part of the definition is that the partial secondary species of higher conservation concern strategy “...may not have been designed to such as Cape petrel and Sooty shearwater, it is manage the impact on that component unlikely. Also, the ban on industrial fishing in specifically.” Although the MSC do not use this inshore waters has a socio-economic and political term, it allows for the “serendipity” referred to in explanation, i.e. it aimed to decrease the risk of the comments (e.g. that the ban on inshore fishing conflict between the artisanal and industrial fishing to minimise inter-sectoral disputes has the effect sectors. It did not sought to minimise bycatch. The of protecting Peruvian pelicans). text can be read here: http://ww2.sernapesca.cl/index.php?option=com_ Further to this, we saw during the site visit and

Page 289 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

content&view=article&id=2027&Itemid=1162 report in our rationale that the industry practice is to locate shoals of jack mackerel using satellite It does not even mention the words “captura and oceanographic data, which results in them incidental” (=bycatch) or any synonyms or related fishing further offshore. It was the combination of concepts. It merely stresses that within the 5 nm this established practice coupled with the statutory only artisanal fisheries are allowed. Thus, it controls in place that led us to conclude that there cannot be considered a management measure is a “partial strategy” in place that through a devised to reduce bycatch. combination of both design (the intent to obtain a “clean catch”) and serendipity (the exclusion from That aside, it does seem that in general, the level inshore areas) of interactions with secondary species is very low, but as noted before, observer coverage is far from For SIb, we have to respectfully disagree with the optimal. Hence, this is yet another issue where the suggestion that SG80 is not met. need to improve the observer coverage in order to sustain higher scores is evident. SG80 requires that “There is some objective basis Also, as of now there is no management strategy for confidence that the measures / partial strategy for any potential non-target species, as is well will work based on some information directly about noted by the AT. The PR agrees with the AT that the UoA and / or species involved.” “Whilst is it clear that work is underway, in the absence of strategy in place to manage The observer data presented in the IFOP report is interactions with non-target species the SG 100 directly about the UoA and the species involved, requirements are not presently met.” Also “A and it provides an objective basis for confidence “Discard Plan” is in preparation for the fishery”, but that catches of non-target species in the UoA are being in preparation does not mean that it is low. We appreciate that the spatial and temporal already in place. Therefore it is doubtful that there extent of this information is limited but we consider is a partial strategy already in place and in the that it is adequate to meet the SG80 requirements PR’s opinion this SI does not meet SG 80. for this SI. -SI 2.2.2b: Whilst the PR agrees with the essential point previously stated -that with the information For SId we have revised our scoring rationale in available so far, interactions with non-target response to the PR comments.

Page 290 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

species seem to be very low- the conclusion that “The data gathered by the IFOP observer programme and summarised in section 3.6.1.1 of this report provides an objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy and measures in place are working in this UoA” is not shared: in one hand, as commented earlier, the observer data come from an incipient, very recent programme which is still far from having attained a solid coverage level; in the other hand, there does not seem to be evidence that the fishery has implemented any protocol of best practices to actively avoid the capture of non-target species. In fact there seem to be no measures to speak of. The low bycatch level seems inherent to the fishery, i.e. is more a result of serendipity rather than a management result sought on purpose. The current information seems to support the notion of the fishery’s low impact on non-target species, but until more data are collected as the observer program continues and expands during the next years, this information should be deemed preliminary. -SI 2.2.2d: same comment as in 2.1.2d.

2.2.3 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 80 agreed. Noted, thank you

Page 291 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

2.3.1 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 85 agreed.

SI 2.3.1b, specifically, mortality of Pink footed SIb: We are a bit puzzled by the comment that shearwater, Ardenna creatopus: If the mortality of Pink footed shearwaters should be observers report 13 deaths -corresponding to raised to the fleet level. We have already done 13 interaction events, i.e. a 100% mortality this. Our existing scoring rationale states:

rate in each observed event- shouldn’t this “…observers reported 13 interactions and 13 figure be raised to the total number of trips, in deaths of this species in the jack mackerel fishery order to get an estimation of the overall between 2015 - 2016; an estimated 113 birds mortality in the fishery? Thus with an observer per year in the entire fleet (Table 8)”. [Emphasis coverage ranging from 5 to 10% of total trips, added]. the figure of 13 observed deaths would lead to an estimated total mortality of about 130-260 We used this figure of 113 birds per year to individuals (assuming 100% mortality in each calculate that mortality is very low relative to the event). Perhaps the subscore of 85 for this breeding population on the Juan Fernandez Islands of 30,000 pairs; a calculation that took element might be reconsidered to something account of the observed 100% mortality lower. associated with the information about interactions.

We therefore consider that we have already arrived at a score for this element that is consistent with the PR’s comments.

2.3.2 Yes Yes Yes Overall PI score 70 and Condition 4 agreed.

But please note: Thank you for pointing out the error, we have -in page 170 where the overall PI score for 2.3.2 is corrected the score given in the Condition. given, it is 70; -whilst in page 232 where Condition 4 is fully We have carefully considered the comments

Page 292 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

stated, the overall PI score for 2.3.2 says 75. made in respect of whether to score either SIa or SIb. It is not appropriate to score both. And also: in the opinion of the PR, the SI 2.3.2a is relevant and should be scored (though SGs 80 We would preface our response below with the and 100 would not be met). observation that whether SIa or SIb is scored, the In the justification for SI 2.3.2a, the AT states “As overall score for this PI is not affected, nor would noted for PI 2.3.1 SIa above, the national legislation the condition alter – our view (and also that of the and international agreements in place do not PR) is that there is clearly a need for action with establish requirements for the protection of ETP respect to this PI. species. This SI is therefore not relevant and does not need to be scored”. We agree with the PR’s comments that there are The PR disagrees with this interpretation. What the international requirements in place for the international agreements in place (most relevantly protection of ETP species. the ACAP, which is binding and signed by Chile) do not establish is specific limits for protection or However, as the PR has previously noted, the rebuilding. This absence of limits, though national legislation (in the form of a Discard Plan regrettable, is the current state of affairs. But it has implemented under the LGPA) is not yet in place. already been taken into account in SI 2.3.1a, and in fact it is providing the basis for that SI being This PI states that for SIa there should be either deemed “Not relevant”. measures (SG60) a partial strategy (SG80) or a comprehensive strategy (SG100) in place to But to say that ACAP does not establish any achieve or exceed “…national and international requirements for the protection of ETP species requirements…” [emphasis added]. does not seem to match the available information. In detail, ACAP article II states that Thus, if there are no national requirements in “1. The objective of this Agreement is to achieve place it is not appropriate to score the fishery and maintain a favourable conservation status for against SIa, and SIb is then triggered. albatrosses and petrels. 2. The Parties shall take measures, both In response to the PR comments we have clarified individually and together, to achieve this objective. the rationale that we have given in SIa to avoid

Page 293 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

3. In implementing such measures the Parties confusion. shall widely apply the precautionary approach. In particular, where there are threats of serious or irreversible adverse impacts or damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing measures to enhance the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels.”

Furthermore, Article III states that the Parties shall: “c) develop and implement measures to prevent, remove, minimize or mitigate the adverse effects of activities that may influence the conservation status of albatrosses and petrels; d) initiate or support research into the effective conservation of albatrosses and petrels; e) ensure the existence and appropriateness of training for, inter alia, the implementation of conservation measures; f) develop and maintain programmes to raise awareness and understanding of albatross and petrel conservation issues;” and “6. In furtherance of their obligation to take measures to achieve and maintain a favourable conservation status for albatrosses or petrels, the Parties shall progressively implement the Action Plan.” (https://www.acap.aq/en/acap- agreement/206-agreement-on-the-conservation- of-albatrosses-and-petrels/file).

Page 294 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

Generalist as they might be, these are requirements, nonetheless. So, the key point relevant here is that for several scoring elements (Wandering Albatross, Diomedea exulans; Black browed albatross, Thallasarche melanophris; Grey headed albatross, Thallasarche chrysostoma; Pink footed shearwater, Ardenna creatopus; White chinned petrel, Procellaria aequinoctialis), there are international agreements in place which establish requirements for the protection of these ETP species. Thus the SI 2.3.2a is relevant, since it concerns whether “The UoA has in place precautionary management strategies designed to: • meet national and international requirements; • ensure the UoA does not hinder recovery of ETP species. Also, the UoA regularly reviews and implements measures, as appropriate, to minimise the mortality of ETP species.” Therefore it ought to be assessed.

2.3.3 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 80 agreed. Noted, thank you

2.4.1 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 100 agreed. Noted, thank you (By default, the fishery cannot have any impact on habitat structure or function, since it operates in

Page 295 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

the upper layers of the water column).

2.4.2 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 85 agreed. Noted, thank you

2.4.3 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 80 agreed. Noted, thank you

2.5.1 Yes Yes NA RBF Score of 80 agreed. Noted, thank you

2.5.2 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 80 agreed. Noted, thank you

2.5.3 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 90 agreed. Noted, thank you The PR agrees with both the overall PI scoring and with almost all the individual SI scores, except perhaps SI 2.5.3d where a SG 80 may seem more precautionary. However, the distinction between SGs 80 and 100 in SI 2.5.3d is so subjective as to become fuzzy; it is unclear to this PR if under the currently available information, it can be said that “Adequate information is available on the impacts of the UoA (…) to allow the main consequences for the ecosystem to be inferred”, or it is instead the case that only “some of the main consequences for the ecosystem” can be inferred. Probably no fishery in the world could claim to have complete information about all its main consequences upon the ecosystem.

Page 296 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

3.1.1 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 95 agreed. Noted, thank you

3.1.2 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 95 agreed. Noted, thank you

3.1.3 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 100 agreed under the current Noted, thank you. The assessment team were not Chilean legal framework, but please take the aware of the present debate on the LGPA. If there following into acount: are actual material changes in the status or “Objectives under the Chilean Law”: the AT has management of the fishery then an expedited deemed that Article 1°b and 1°c of the LGPA audit would be undertaken, as per MSC FCR v2.0 (2013) meets SG 100. The PR agrees. But it is very section 7.23.22. important to take note of the following recent development: the current LGPA seems to be in process of being revoked, as shown by some recent news: e.g. “Hoy se vota nulidad de la Ley de Pesca ”(https://www.terram.cl/2018/12/hoy-se- vota-nulidad-de-la-ley-de-pesca/). The parliamentary process of revoking the Fisheries law seems to be still underway at the time this peer review was finished and sent to the MSC Peer Review College (18 December 2018): “2) Destinar la segunda mitad de la sesión a continuar con el proyecto de ley que “declara la nulidad de la ley N°20.657, que Modifica en el ámbito de la sustentabilidad de recursos hidrobiológicos, acceso a la actividad pesquera industrial y artesanal y regulaciones para la investigación y fiscalización, la ley General de Pesca y Acuicultura contenida en la

Page 297 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

ley N° 18.892 y sus modificaciones” (boletín N° 10.527-07).” Source: https://www.camara.cl/trabajamos/comision_citaci onxcomision.aspx?prmIDCOM=401 If the current LGPA was to be finally revoked, and a new fisheries law was to be drafted, this would affect all pertinent PIs within Principle 3.

3.2.1 Yes Yes NA Overall PI score 100 agreed

3.2.2 Yes Yes Yes Overall PI score 65 and Condtion 5 agreed. Noted and the score for Condition 5 on page 234 has been amended to 65. Thank you. But please note this apparent score mismatch: -in page 213 where the overall PI score for 3.2.2 is given, it is 65; -Whilst in page 234, where Condition 5 is fully stated, the overall PI score for 3.2.2 says 70.

3.2.3 Yes Yes Yes Overall PI score 75 and Condition 6 agreed. With respect to observer coverage, the SPRFMO Observer Programme is due to enter into force in Perhaps Condition 6 should also include a specific April 2019 and sets coverage levels for mention that, besides achieving an effective contracting and non-contracting parties. The implementation of the video camera monitoring and implementation of the programme, including surveillance system, the observer programme must observer coverage levels will be subject to also be improved (coverage ought to be scrutiny at annual audits. increased).

Page 298 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

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

3.2.4 Yes Yes Yes Overall PI score 70 and Condtion 7 agreed.

Page 299 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Table 26 For reports using the Risk-Based Framework:

Performance Does the report Are the RBF risk Justification: CAB Response: Indicator clearly explain scores well- Please support your answers by referring to specific how the referenced? scoring issues and any relevant documentation where process(es) Yes/No possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary. applied to determine risk using the RBF Note: Justification to support your answers is only has led to the required where answers given are ‘No’. stated outcome? Yes/No 1.1.1

2.1.1

2.2.1

2.3.1

2.4.1

2.5.1 Yes Yes

Optional: General Comments on the Peer Review Draft Report (including comments on the adequacy of the background information if necessary) can be added below and on additional pages

Page 300 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

References

Quiroz, J. C. (2018). Informe 2 de estatus. Convenio de Desempeño 2017. Estatus y posibilidades de explotación biológicamente sustentables de los principales recursos pesqueros nacionales año 2018. Jurel, 2018. Subsecretaría de Economía y EMT. 90 pp.

-slipping issue:

Borges, L., Van Keeken, O. A., Van Helmond, A. T., Couperus, B., & Dickey-Collas, M. (2008). What do pelagic freezer-trawlers discard?. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 65(4), 605-611.

Nedreaas K., Iversen S. and Kuhnle G. (2015). Preliminary estimates of total removals by the Norwegian marine fisheries,1950-2010. Working Paper #2015-94. Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. 16 pp.

Tenningen, M. M. (2014). Unaccounted mortality in purse seine fisheries. Quantification and mitigation of slipping mortality. Dissertation for the degree philosophiae doctor (PhD) at the University of Bergen. 62 pp.

Page 301 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 3 Stakeholder submissions RBF Questionnaire English version (on-line)

Page 302 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 303 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 304 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 305 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 306 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 307 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 308 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 309 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 310 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 311 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 312 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 313 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 314 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 315 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 316 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 317 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 318 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 319 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 320 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 321 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 322 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 323 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 324 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 325 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Spanish version

Page 326 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 327 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 328 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 329 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 330 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 331 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 332 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 333 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 334 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 335 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 336 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 337 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 338 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 339 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 340 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 341 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 342 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 343 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 344 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 345 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 346 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 347 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 348 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 349 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 350 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 351 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 352 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 353 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

RBF Responses

Macarena Cepeda, ASIPES

Page 354 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 355 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 356 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 357 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Oliver Yates, Cefas

Page 358 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 359 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 360 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 361 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 362 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 363 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Rodrigo Vega, IFOP

[Pages 1-10 omitted – no comments]

Page 364 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 365 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 366 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 367 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 368 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 369 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 370 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 371 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 372 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 373 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 374 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 375 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 376 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 377 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 378 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 379 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 380 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 381 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 382 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 383 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 384 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 385 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 386 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 387 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Rodrigo Zamora, SONAPESCA

Page 388 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 389 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 390 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 391 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Sebastian Klarian

Page 392 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 393 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 394 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 395 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 396 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Sergio Opazo

Page 397 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 398 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 399 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Submissions to PCDR None received.

Page 400 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 4 Letters of Support for Client Action Plans

Page 401 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 402 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Page 403 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 5 Surveillance Frequency

Table 4.1 : Surveillance level rationale Year Surveillance Number of Rationale activity auditors 1 On-site audit 3 auditors on-site There are 7 conditions of certification – P1 and P2 each have 2 conditions and P3, 3 conditions. Given this is the first audit and there is always longer than a 12 month gap between the assessment site visit / evaluation and the first surveillance audit, it is considered prudent that a team of 3 auditors conduct the first annual audit on-site.

Table 4.2: Timing of surveillance audit Year Anniversary date Proposed date of Rationale of certificate surveillance audit 1 TBC TBC It is noted that the annual round of SPRFMO meetings often take place toward the beginning of the year, therefore it is proposed the first annual audit take place relatively soon after the outcomes of the 2020 meetings are available. The dates for these have yet to be set and so this will need to be re-visited in the course of this current assessment process.

Table 4.3: Fishery Surveillance Program Surveillance Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Level Level 5 On-site On-site On-site On-site surveillance audit surveillance audit surveillance audit surveillance audit & recertification site visit

Page 404 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org LR Final Report Chile Purse Seine Jack Mackerel

Appendix 6 Objections Process

(REQUIRED FOR THE PCR IN ASSESSMENTS WHERE AN OBJECTION WAS RAISED AND ACCEPTED BY AN INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATOR)

The report shall include all written decisions arising from an objection. (Reference: FCR 7.19.1)

Page 405 of 405 MSC-FA Template 2.0 LR 20181224 www.lr.org