Seafood Watch® Criteria for Salmon Fisheries

Public comment period – 2: Comment Form

Please include your contact details below

All documents submitted during the public consultation process will be posted on our website. Documents will posted exactly we receive them except that this front page will be removed. The organization/author field below will be displayed as the ‘author’ of the online posted document. If you wish for your document to remain anonymous, please indicate in the check box below. If ‘Anonymous’ is selected, the ‘author’ of this document when posted on our website will then simply read ‘Anonymous.’

Organization/Author
Name of point person
Email

Click if you would you like to remain anonymous ☐

Criterion 1 – Impacts on the Species Under Assessment

Public Comment Guidance for Criterion 1
Overview – Criterion 1 is used for scoring the impacts of the fishery and associated artificial production on the stock being assessed. It incorporates both the current abundance of the stock (i.e., whether it is overfished), and the impact of artificial production. The combination of scores for abundance and artificial production determines the score for Criterion 1. These factors are inherently complex as they take into account multiple considerations, including not just abundance and artificial production, but also inherent vulnerability of the species, uncertainty in the stock assessment or other data used to determine abundance and artificial production.
Specific proposals are available under each of Factor 1.1 and Factor 1.2. Please see these respective sections.
Feedback for Factors 1.1 and 1.2 should be provided in the boxes under these respective factors below. Please provide any general comments or suggestions regarding the structure of Criterion 1 (not specific to either factor) below.
Comments:

Factor 1.1 Abundance

Public comment guidance
Overview – One of the unique characteristics of salmon fisheries management is the use of a single abundance reference point or range, rather than a combination of abundance and fishing mortality reference points. In Factor 1.1 we assess the performance of wild salmon stocks relative to the appropriate reference point (typically an escapement-based goal). The score from Factor 1.1, combined with Factor 1.2 (which assesses artificial production associated with the fishery), determines the score for Criterion 1 – Impact on the Species Under Assessment.
We have included a requirement to assess the escapement of salmon relative to the reference point over a period of time in order to address the high year-to-year variability found in returns of many salmon stocks, which is influenced by a number of factors beyond the control of fisheries and fisheries managers.
(Note that in the current criteria inherent vulnerability was assessed first in a separate factor. Inherent vulnerability is now being incorporated into the same factor as abundance (as a separate step))
Specific Proposed Changes
Assessing multiple stocks – In many salmonid fisheries a variety of stocks of the same species will be caught. It was decided that assessing the impact of a fishery on each individual stock would be an ineffective approach for a recommendation system such as Seafood Watch because such assessments would take considerable time and would result in complex recommendations which would impractical for businesses and consumers to use to make sustainable seafood choices. In an attempt to find a solution to this issue, Seafood Watch is proposing the assessment methodology below which considers the performance of stock management units caught within a fishery relative to appropriate management targets.
Major vs Minor stocks – As many stocks of the same species can be caught in salmonid fisheries, it is important to differentiate between ‘target’ and ‘non-target’ stocks so that fisheries are evaluated correctly (i.e. the correct stocks are assessed in criterion 1 versus criterion 2). Seafood Watch considers major stocks to be those that are targeted by the fishery and form the majority of the harvest; these stocks each constitute >5% of the total landings of a fishery and are assessed in Criterion 1. Minor stocks are those which are caught incidental to the major stocks, they may be endangered, depleted or low abundance stocks which managers and harvesters aim to avoid; these stocks each constitute <5% of the total fishery landings and are assessed in Criterion 2.
Feedback: please comment below on these proposed changes as well as any other comments on this factor.
Comments:

Factor 1.2 Impact of Artificial Production

Public Comment Guidance:
Overview - Many salmon fisheries are associated with artificial production operations, both for conservation purposes and enhancing fishing opportunities. Scientific research has identified impacts on wild salmonid stocks associated with artificial production. Of the potential impacts on wild salmon stocks, one of the most concerning is a loss of genetic diversity resulting in reduced fitness and a reduction in the ability of salmonid to adapt to environmental changes. In order to assess these impacts we have developed the scoring factor below, which is based on the recommendations set forth by the Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG).
Combining Very Low and Low Concern Categories – Since the previous draft the categories for very low and low concern have been combined resulting in a higher score given to production systems that were considered a low concern in the previous draft. This was done for three reasons:
-  Artificial production systems receiving a score of low concern are meeting the guidelines of the HSRG and therefore represent best practice which warrants the highest possible score.
-  The previous scoring system could result in artificial production systems that follow best practice receiving a red score for Criterion 1 when combined with a high concern for abundance.
-  The change aligns the scoring of the Salmon Standard with that of the Fisheries Standard.
Consideration of Impact Studies – Typically the impact of a specific artificial production program on a particular wild salmonid stock is unknown; therefore we have proposed a scoring system which assesses the risk to wild stocks associated with an artificial production system based on data that is likely to be available. In the event that there is an impact study (or similar) available which determines whether a specific artificial production program is impacting wild stocks, we will consider the conclusions in our assessment.
Feedback: please comment below on these proposed changes as well as any other comments on this factor.
Comments:

Criterion 2 – Impacts on Other Capture Species

Criterion 2 will be assessed according to guidance set forth in the Criteria for Fisheries.

Criterion 3 – Effectiveness of Fishery Management

Public Comment Guidance
Overview –Criterion 3 (Management Effectiveness) deals with the effectiveness of the harvest strategy, implementation, enforcement and monitoring to control fishing pressure on the managed species, as well as effectiveness of bycatch management. In the current Criteria for Fisheries, this criterion is composed of two factors – Harvest Strategy (3.1) and Bycatch Management Strategy (3.2), each of which is composed of numerous subfactors.
Specific Proposals:
Consideration of management systems for artificial production programs associated with the fishery has been included in Criterion 3. Specific guidance on what should be evaluated and the characteristics of an effective management system are provided in Appendix 9 and are based on recommendation from the Hatchery Scientific Review Group (HSRG 2009). The appropriateness of the management strategy will be evaluated under factor 3.1, the collection of data required to determine the impact of artificial production on wild stocks will be evaluated in factor 3.3, and compliance with environmental regulations relevant to the operation of artificial production facilities will be evaluated in factor 3.4.
Feedback: please comment below on these proposed changes as well as any other comments on this factor. We are particularly interested in feedback relating to the characteristics of an effective management system for artificial production programs.
Comments:

Criterion 4 – Impacts on the Habitat and Ecosystem

Criterion 4 will be assessed according to guidance set forth in the Criteria for Fisheries.

Criterion 5 Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management

Public Comment Guidance for Criterion 5
Overview – This factor assess any indirect ecological impacts not captured elsewhere in the criteria, but the focus is on potential trophic impacts, and the effectiveness of management in constraining fishing mortality to levels that are appropriate given the species’ ecological role.
Specific Proposals –
Language relating to artificial production has been removed from this criterion. The expert working group suggested that ecosystem impacts of artificial production are not well known, and that examples in the scientific literature refer to species specific impacts. When considering the management systems for artificial production, prevention of anticipated ecosystem impacts resulted in similar characteristics to those outlined in criterion 3. In order to prevent duplication in the assessment, we are proposing to remove consideration of artificial production systems in the assessment of ecosystem impacts. It is important to note that we do believe there are potential ecosystem impacts associated with artificial production, however the management systems that are expected to mitigate these effects are already considered under Criterion 3.
Feedback: please comment below on these proposed changes as well as any other comments on this factor. We are particularly interested in hearing thoughts on whether the ecosystem concerns associated with artificial production are sufficiently captured in Criterion 3 such that they do not need to be considered in Criterion 5.
Comments:

1 July 1, 2015