DERIS S.A – Pesca Chile- Antarctic Krill Fishery Picture from : fao.org PUBLIC COMMENT DRAFT REPORT JUNE 2018 Conformity Assessment Body: Bureau Veritas Certification Holding SAS Authors: Beatriz Roel Italo Campodonico José Ríos Contact: [email protected] Client: DERIS, S.A. DERIS S.A ANTARTIC KRILL FISHERY – Public Comment Draft Report page 1 Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Glossary ................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 6 2. Authorship and Peer Reviewers ...................................................................................................... 8 3. Description of the Fishery ............................................................................................................. 10 3.1. Unit(s) of Assessment (UoA) and Scope of Certification Sought .......................................... 10 3.1.1 UoA and proposed Unit of Certification (UoC) ............................................................. 10 3.1.2 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and UoC catch data: ........................................................ 14 3.2. Overview of the fishery ......................................................................................................... 15 3.2.1. History of the krill fishery .............................................................................................. 15 3.2.2. Fishing operation and gear configurations in use ......................................................... 20 3.2.3. Ownership, history and organisational structure of the assessed fleet ....................... 21 3.2.4. Assessed area: common fishing grounds, jurisdiction and user’s rights ...................... 21 3.3. Principle One: Target Species Background ........................................................................... 23 3.3.1. Background information ............................................................................................... 23 3.3.2. State of the stock .......................................................................................................... 29 3.4. Principle Two: Ecosystem Background ................................................................................. 37 3.4.1 Scotia Sea: context ........................................................................................................ 37 3.4.2 UoC catch composition: species assigment to MSC P2 categories ............................... 48 3.4.3 Primary species impacted by the UoC .......................................................................... 58 3.4.4 Secondary species impacted by the UoC ...................................................................... 59 3.4.5 ETP species impacted by the UoC ................................................................................. 59 3.5. Principle Three: Management System Background .............................................................. 61 3.5.1. Overarching framework ................................................................................................ 61 3.5.2. CCAMLR’s Principles and objectives ............................................................................. 62 3.5.3. CCAMLR’s Structure and Functioning .......................................................................... 62 3.5.4. Management of the Antarctic krill fishery .................................................................. 63 3.5.5. Chilean Law of Fisheries and Aquaculture (LFA) and legal provisions regarding the Antarctic krill ................................................................................................................................. 65 3.5.6. Chilean Fisheries Institutional Framework and specific requirements to the vessel ... 66 4 Evaluation Procedure .................................................................................................................... 69 4.1. Harmonised Fishery Assessment .......................................................................................... 69 Harmonisation process ................................................................................................................. 69 Cumulative impacts....................................................................................................................... 70 DERIS S.A ANTARTIC KRILL FISHERY – Public Comment Draft Report page 2 4.2. Previous assessments ........................................................................................................... 71 4.3. Assessment Methodologies .................................................................................................. 71 4.4. Evaluation Processes and Techniques .................................................................................. 71 4.4.1 Site Visit ......................................................................................................................... 71 4.4.2 Consultations ................................................................................................................ 72 4.4.3 Evaluation Techniques .................................................................................................. 73 4.4.4 Risk Based Framework .................................................................................................. 74 5 Traceability .................................................................................................................................... 74 5.1. Eligibility Date ....................................................................................................................... 74 5.2. Traceability within the Fishery .............................................................................................. 74 5.2.1 Processing and final product description ...................................................................... 74 5.3.1 Determination of risk associated to traceability factors prior to entering CoC ............ 74 5.3. Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody ....................................................................... 77 5.4. Eligibility of Inseparable or Practicably Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further Chains of Custody ............................................................................................................................................. 78 6 Evaluation Results ......................................................................................................................... 79 6.1. Principle Level Scores ............................................................................................................ 79 6.2. Summary of PI Level Scores .................................................................................................. 79 6.3. Summary of Conditions ......................................................................................................... 81 6.4. Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 81 6.5. Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement ............................................................. 81 References ............................................................................................................................................ 82 Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ 90 Appendix 1 Scoring and Rationales ....................................................................................................... 90 Appendix 1.1 Performance Indicator Scores and Rationale ....................................................... 90 1.2 Appendix 1.3 Conditions ..................................................................................................... 198 Appendix 2 Peer Review Reports ........................................................................................................ 201 Appendix 3 Stakeholder submissions ................................................................................................. 219 Appendix 4 Surveillance Frequency .................................................................................................... 220 Appendix 5 Objections Process ........................................................................................................... 221 DERIS S.A ANTARTIC KRILL FISHERY – Public Comment Draft Report page 3 Glossary Below are presented the abbreviations and acronyms used in the report. The terms defined here do not contradict terms used in the MSC-MSCI vocabulary. Concepts and terms: B0 Unexploited biomass BLIM Precautionary reference point. SSB below B lim indicate increase risk of impairment of recruitment BMSY Spawning biomass (equilibrium) when fishing at FMSY BPA Precautionary reference point SSB below B PA indicate that action should be taken to recover the stock Btrigger Biomass level below which fishing mortality should be reduced BRP Biological Reference Points CAB Conformity Assessment Body (in the case of this particular assessment the CAB is Bureau Veritas Certification Holding SAS) CoC Chain of Custody CPUE Catch per Unit Effort CR (MSC) Certification