Amended announcement of intent to undertake expedited assessment

Transcription

Vottunarstofan Tún ehf. • Þarabakki 3 • IS-109 Reykjavík • Iceland
Tel: +354 511 1330 • Fax: +354 511 1331 • [email protected] • www.tun.is
2017-01-31
Amended announcement of intent to undertake expedited assessment
ISF Iceland golden redfish fishery (extension of scope)
This is an announcement of intent to undertake expedited assessment of two fishstocks by means of
extension of the scope of the ISF Iceland golden redfish fishery. The announcement is re-issued here
with minor amendments to clarify that the expedited assessment applies to registered Icelandic
vessels only, subsequent to the Client´s clarification that foreign vessels should not be considered as
other eligible fishers.
Units of Certification
Fishery
F-TUN-1107
ISF Iceland golden redfish
Certificate issue date: 2014-10-09
Certificate expiry date: 2019-10-08
Species
Blue ling
Molva dypterygia
Tusk
Brosme brosme
Stock
Blue ling within ICES Division Va &
Subarea XIV
Tusk within ICES Division Va & Subarea
XIV
Gear Types
Bottom (demersal) trawl
Nephrops trawl
Danish seine
Gillnet
Longline
Handline
Bottom (demersal) trawl
Nephrops trawl
Danish seine
Gillnet
Longline
Handline
Geographical Area
FAO statistical area 27, ICES Division Va & Subarea XIV, Icelandic Exclusive
Economic Area (EEZ)
Management
Iceland fisheries management
Client Group
Iceland Sustainable Fisheries ehf. (ISF)
Other Eligible
Fishers
All registered Icelandic vessels that carry valid permits for fishing within the
Icelandic EEZ issued by the Icelandic Directorate of Fisheries, and that fish,
supply and/or sell blue ling and tusk to ISF ehf. and/or its authenticated
certificate sharers.
Amended announcement re. expedited assessment
Page 1 of 10
Vottunarstofan Tún has reviewed the client´s application for the scope extensions. By reference to
MSC´s Fisheries Certification Requirements v2.0, the proposed blue ling and tusk units of assessment
qualify for expedited assessment since:
- the new UoAs of Icelandic blue ling and tusk have previously been assessed under P2 of the
golden redfish certificate as retained species in bottom trawl, Danish seine, handline, longline,
gillnets and Nephrops trawl (FCR 7.22.1.1);
- the fisheries have some assessment tree components in common (FCR 7.22.1.2); and
- the fisheries are located within the Icelandic EEZ; i.e. they are in close geographical proximity
(FCR 7.22.1.3).
The intended expedited assessment will apply MSC´s Certification Requirements v1.3, since that
version of the assessment tree was applied during the initial assessment of the Icelandic golden redfish
fishery.
For scope extensions, a gap-analysis is required for the purpose of analyzing the overlap of the
requested extension with the already certified fishery, thus providing indications of areas in Principles
1, 2 and 3 that may not have been assessed in the certified fishery. Any new information or elements
that have not previously been assessed, uncovered subsequent to completion of gap analysis and/or
during site visit, will be examined by the assessment team and taken into appropriate account during
stakeholder consultation, scoring and reporting.
A gap analysis has been conducted to assess the overlap of the Units of Assessment in the certified
fishery and in the proposed scope extension. The gap analysis entailed review of the nine Principle
Components (see GFCR Table 11), as well as eligible fishers, management bodies, fishing methods and
geographical areas. In short, the outcome of the gap analysis is as follows (see details in Table 1):
Principle 1: Neither of the two stocks have previously been assessed under Principle 1, therefore full
assessment for both stocks and PI‘s (Performance Indicators) is required, following procedures as set
out in Fisheries Certification Requirements and Guidance v2.0, and scoring requirements as set out in
MSC Certification Requirements v1.3, which requires any P1 species to be assessed across the stock’s
entire distribution range.
Principle 2: Fishing areas for the two stocks were compared to golden redfish, and it was concluded
that there was a great deal of overlap (Figure 1). New assessment for P2 is not required, but any
extension of scope should check if new main retained species are present in the context of the new
fishery. Data provided by the DF and figures on catch and fishing areas reported by the MFRI includes
all catches taken within the Icelandic EEZ. Catches of foreign vessels fishing in Icelandic waters under
bilateral agreement will not be assessed and can therefore not be considered as eligible fishers.
Principle 3: Blue ling and tusk stocks are believed to be shared to some extent with East Greenland,
although they are managed by Iceland. Therefore, new assessment for some Governance and Policy
PI´s may be needed. Fishery specific PI‘s are expected to be in line with assessment of golden redfish.
The blue ling and tusk fisheries also report catches within the Icelandic EEZ by foreign vessels under
bilateral agreement, but these vessels are not assessed as eligible fishers.
An overview of proposed actions during an expedited assessment can be found in Table 2. In summary,
the preliminary gap analysis indicate that the following PIs must be considered:
•
•
•
Principle 1: All PI‘s
Principle 2 (depending on information gathered): PI 2.1.1
Principle 3: PI´s 3.1.1, 3.1.2 and 3.1.3.
Page 2 of 10
Potential implications for other PI‘s are harmonisation issues. Other fisheries assessed in the Icelandic
EEZ, using MSC Certification Requirements v. 1.3 include cod, haddock, lumpfish, saithe, ling, golden
redfish and Atlantic herring. Therefore, the need for harmonisation shall be considered during the
assessment and scoring process.
Figure 1: Distribution of fishing for golden redfish, blue ling and tusk in Icelandic waters in 2015.
(Source: MRI 2016).
Page 3 of 10
Table 1: Gap analysis of the proposed Icelandic blue ling and tusk UoAs, compared to the existing certificate of ISF Iceland golden redfish held by ISF.
Component
Unit of Assessment – Current certificate of ISF
Iceland golden redfish
Proposed Units of Assessment – Extended scope
of current certificate
Gap analysis:
Similarities/difference
Blue ling and tusk: FAO Statistical Area 27 / ICES
Division Va and Subarea XIV
Similarities: Blue ling and tusk stocks occur
in Icelandic as well as East Greenlandic. The
majority of catches of golden redfish, blue
ling and tusk are taken within the Icelandic
EEZ.
Geographical
area
Golden redfish: FAO Statistical Area 27 / ICES
Subareas V, VI, XII, and XIV
Differences: Golden redfish is more widely
distributed within FAO area 27.
Management
Golden redfish: Ministry of Industries and
Innovation (MII)
Blue ling and tusk: Ministry of Industries and
Innovation
Similarities: The two proposed stocks are
managed by Iceland.
Fishing method
Golden redfish: Bottom trawl; Longline;
Handline; Gillnets; Danish seine; Nephrops trawl
Blue ling and tusk: Bottom trawl; Longline;
Handline; Gillnets; Danish seine; Nephrops trawl
Similarities: All stocks are caught by the
same fishing fleet within Icelandic waters
and retained by all 5 gears.
All registered Icelandic vessels that carry valid
permits for fishing within the Icelandic Exclusive
Economic Zone issued by the Icelandic
Directorate of Fisheries operating relevant fishing
gear listed above.
Similarities: The stocks are caught by
Icelandic vessels within the Icelandic EEZ.
Eligible fishers
Golden redfish: All registered Icelandic vessels
that carry valid permits for fishing within the
Icelandic Exclusive Economic Zone issued by the
Icelandic Directorate of Fisheries operating
relevant fishing gear listed above.
Principle 1–
Outcome
Target species stock:
Golden redfish is shared with Faroese grounds,
Blue ling and tusk are also caught under bilateral
agreement by Norwegian and Faroese vessels.
However, these are not considered eligible
fishers and are therefore not part of this
assessment.
Target species stocks:
Blue ling and tusk are shared with East Greenland
Differences: Blue ling and tusk are also
caught by foreign vessels in Icelandic waters
under bilateral agreement. However, these
are not considered eligible fishers and are
therefore not part of this assessment.
Differences: None of the proposed target
species have been assessed in Principle 1.
Page 4 of 10
Component
West of Scotland, North of Azores, East
Greenland
Principle 1 –
Harvest strategy
Management:
Management:
Blue ling: Managed by TAC, Fproxy serves as a
target reference.
Golden Redfish has a formal management plan
which has been reviewed by ICES.
Tusk: Managed by TAC, Fmsy serves as a target
reference.
Golden redfish: Formal management plan
adopted.
There are no formally adopted management plans
for blue ling and tusk, but they are managed by
TAC and other management strategies in the
Icelandic EEZ such as area closures and gear
restrictions where appropriate.
Management advice is based on precautionary
approach for blue ling, whereas advice for the
tusk follow an MSY approach.
Principle 2 –
Retained species
The golden redfish certification considered
retained species for the entire Icelandic fleet
operating bottom trawl, longline, handline,
gillnet, Danish seine and Nephrops trawl. Bait
species varies, but the main bait is saury, herring
or squid.
Blue ling: The majority of catches are taken by
bottom trawl (50%) and longline (49%). Small
amounts of bycatch are retained in other gears.
Tusk: Majority of landings (>95%) are retained by
longline. Small amounts of bycatch are retained
in all other gears.
The proposed species have been reported to be
retained by longline in the original assessment
and it is assumed that the main bait species for
longliners remain the same, i.e. saury, herring or
squid.
Gap analysis:
Similarities: The stocks are assessed by MRI
and managed by MII using either a
precautionary- or MSY approach.
Differences: Blue ling and tusk do not have
formal management plans.
The proposed species have not been
assessed in Principle 1.
Similarities: The retained species for all five
relevant fishing gears have already been
assessed in the Icelandic golden redfish
certification. The golden redfish certification
included all licenced Icelandic vessels using
bottom trawl, longline, handline, gillnet,
Danish seine and Nephrops trawl. There is
therefore complete overlap for “P2:
Retained species”. Main bait species for
longliners are the same.
Possible differences: It is recommended,
that for any extension of scope, an analysis
of catch data should be undertaken in
relation to the extension of scope fishery. PI
Page 5 of 10
Component
Gap analysis:
2.1.1 must be scored if any new main
retained species are identified.
Principle 2 –
Bycatch species
The golden redfish certifications considered
bycatch species for the entire Icelandic fleet
operating bottom trawl, longline, handline,
gillnet, Danish seine and Nephrops trawl.
The bycatch species for all relevant gear types
have already been assessed in the Icelandic
golden redfish certification.
Similarities: The golden redfish certification
Danish seine and Nephrops trawl, there is
therefore complete overlap for “P2: Bycatch
species”.
Principle 2 – ETP
The golden redfish certifications considered ETP
species for the entire Icelandic fleet operating
bottom trawl, longline, handline, gillnet, Danish
seine and Nephrops trawl.
ETP species for all relevant gear types have
already been assessed in the Icelandic golden
redfish certification.
Similarities: The golden redfish certification
Danish seine and Nephrops trawl, there is
therefore complete overlap for “P2: ETP
species”.
Principle 2 –
Habitat
Golden redfish: Habitats affected by bottom
trawl, longline, handline, gillnet, Danish seine and
Nephrops trawl in the Icelandic EEZ were
assessed.
The fishing areas of blue ling and tusk overlap that
of golden redfish, and all of the encompassing
habitat types were assessed for each gear type in
the golden redfish assessment.
Similarities: Habitat types for all five gears
were considered in the original assessment.
Principle 2 –
Ecosystem
Golden redfish is part of the broad Icelandic
ecological community. The golden redfish
assessment considered retained-, bycatch-, and
ETP species for the entire Icelandic fleet operating
the 5 relevant gears. The assessment also
considered the relevant habitat types and the
entire area of operation for each gear type within
the Icelandic EEZ.
Both species are contained within the broad
Icelandic ecological community and ecosystem.
Similarities: Both proposed species are
contained within the broad Icelandic
ecological community and ecosystem which
has been assessed in the golden redfish
certification. There is therefore complete
overlap with golden redfish certifications.
Page 6 of 10
Component
Principle 3 –
Governance and
policy
Golden redfish:
Blue ling; tusk:
Overarching management framework:
Overarching management framework:
• Icelandic regulatory/management framework.
In addition, there is a formal agreement
between Iceland and Greenland on sharing of
the TAC.
• Icelandic regulatory/management framework.
• Management body: Ministry of Industries and
Innovation
• Other management bodies: Directorate of
Fisheries; Marine Research Institute
• Other main stakeholders:
- Fisheries Iceland (Samtök fyrirtækja í
sjávarútvegi, SFS)
- Federation of Owners of Small Fishing
Vessels (Landssamband smabataeigenda),
- Federation of Captains and Mates
(Farmanna- og fiskimannasamband Islands,
FFSI)
- Icelandic Union of Marine Engineers and
Metal Technicians (Felag velstjora og
malmtaeknimanna, VM)
• Federation of Seamen (Sjomannasamband
Islands), as well as organisations of those
working in fish processing
• Management body: Ministry of Industries and
Innovation
• Other management bodies: Directorate of
Fisheries; Marine Research Institute
• Other main stakeholders:
- Fisheries Iceland (Samtök fyrirtækja í
sjávarútvegi, SFS)
- Federation of Owners of Small Fishing
Vessels (Landssamband smabataeigenda),
- Federation of Captains and Mates
(Farmanna- og fiskimannasamband Islands,
FFSI)
- Icelandic Union of Marine Engineers and
Metal Technicians (Felag velstjora og
malmtaeknimanna, VM)
- Federation of Seamen (Sjomannasamband
Islands), as well as organisations of those
working in fish processing
Gap analysis:
Similarities: Management for blue ling and
tusk is under Icelandic jurisdiction as is the
golden redfish fishery. Management is
mainly conducted by three institutions; the
MRI conducts research and provide advice;
the MII is responsible for management,
issuing of licences and quotas, and the
Directorate of Fisheries, in cooperation with
the Coast Guard, is responsible for
monitoring and surveillance. All fisheries are
conducted entirely within the Icelandic EEZ,
and therefore fully overlap. Blue ling and
tusk are also caught by foreign fishing
vessels under bilateral agreement, but they
will not be assessed as eligible fishers. Only
Icelandic vessels will be assessed and
incentives for sustainable fishing (PI 3.1.4)
have already been evaluated for the entire
Icelandic fleet using the gear types in
question in the golden redfish and other
certified fisheries.
Differences: Governance and policy of blue
ling and tusk should also be investigated
further, since these are shared with ICES
subarea IX. There are no formal agreements
on sharing of blue ling and tusk, apart from
bilateral agreements on fishing. There may
thus be subtle differences that need to be
investigated during an extension of scope
assessment. There are also differences to
the extent of sharing between areas. These
Page 7 of 10
Component
Gap analysis:
two species are shared stock and PIs 3.1.1,
3.1.2 and 3.1.3 should take this into account.
The CAB maintains a more detailed list of
current and past stakeholders. It is highly
likely that some additional stakeholders may
be identified.
Principle 3 –
Fishery Specific
management
system
Golden redfish:
Blue ling; tusk:
Local management framework:
Local management framework:
Icelandic regulatory/management framework
Icelandic regulatory/management framework
Similarities: During the extension of scope
assessment for ling it was concluded that
there was no need to re-assess Fishery
Specific management system as compared
to saithe. In addition, although tusk and ling
are shared stocks, the vast majority of
catches are taken in Icelandic waters and
managed locally. This is also the case for
golden redfish. It is therefore highly likely
that a similar conclusion will be reached for
these two stocks fished mostly in the
Icelandic EEZ, with management input
through ICES. Assessment of shared stocks
such as blue ling and tusk is expected to be
comparable to the golden redfish
assessment, which is also a shared stock.
Differences: However, if the team becomes
aware of any aspects of these two shared
stocks having specific impact on fisheries
specific management of the stocks which is
different from golden redfish, these
elements should be assessed.
Page 8 of 10
Table 2: Overview of proposed action during an expedited assessment of the blue ling and tusk fisheries as
extension of scope of the ISF Iceland golden redfish fishery.
Performance Indicator
Proposed action during expedited
assessment
1.1.1. Stock Status
To be assessed
1.1.2. Reference Points
To be assessed
1.1.3. Stock Rebuilding
To be assessed
1.2.1. Harvest Strategy
To be assessed
1.2.2. Harvest Control Rules and Tools
To be assessed
1.2.3. Information and Monitoring
To be assessed
1.2.4. Assessment of stock status
To be assessed
2.1.1. Retained species outcome
May need to be assessed
2.1.2. Retained species management
No new assessment
2.1.3. Retained species information
No new assessment
2.2.1. Bycatch species outcome
No new assessment
2.2.2. Bycatch species management
No new assessment
2.2.3. Bycatch species information
No new assessment
2.3.1. ETP species outcome
No new assessment
2.3.2. ETP species management
No new assessment
2.3.2. ETP species information
No new assessment
2.4.1. Habitat outcome
No new assessment
2.4.2. Habitat management
No new assessment
2.4.3. Habitat information
No new assessment
2.5.1. Ecosystem outcome
No new assessment
2.5.2. Ecosystem management
No new assessment
2.5.3. Ecosystem information
No new assessment
3.1.1. Legal and customary framework
To be assessed
3.1.2. Consultation roles and responsibilities
To be assessed
3.1.3. Long term objectives
To be assessed
3.1.4. Incentives for sustainable fishing
No new assessment
3.2.1. Fishery specific objectives
No new assessment
3.2.2. Decision making processes
No new assessment
3.2.3. Compliance and enforcement
No new assessment
3.2.4. Research plan
No new assessment
3.2.5. Monitoring and management performance evaluation
No new assessment
Page 9 of 10
Information sources:
ICES. 2016. Report of the Working Group on the Biology and Assessment of Deep-Sea Fisheries
Resources (WGDEEP), 20–27 April 2016, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen. ICES CM
2016/ACOM:17. (http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGDEEP.aspx).
MRI 2016. State of Marine Stocks in Icelandic Waters 2015/2016 and Prospects for the Quota Year
2016/2017. Hafrannsóknastofnun (Marine Research Institute) 2016. Hafrannsóknir nr. 185.
(http://www.hafro.is/undir.php?ID=26&REF=4).
www.fiskstofa.is
www.statice.is
https://fisheries.msc.org/en/fisheries/isf-iceland-golden-redfish/@@assessments
Page 10 of 10

Amended announcement of intent to undertake expedited assessment

Transcription

Similar documents