SGS Product & Process Certification - Marine Stewardship Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

General Comments on the Assessment Report (optional) 1. In the North Sea two species of the genus Pollachius occur: Pollachius virens or saithe and Pollachius pollachius or pollack. In the southern North Sea only adult specimens of pollack occur. The species shown in Figure 4 is a clear example of a pollack. Saithe in the North Sea has a much more northerly distribution. All references throughout the report to saithe should be changed in pollack. Agreed, text etc amended as required. Also there is no quota for pollack in the North Sea (ICES area IV) and the text below figure 4 on TAC and management should therefore be deleted. Done 2. Our knowledge of sea bass, life history, stocks, and also fishery, is largely based on what is known for English waters. About the situation in the Netherlands not a lot is known, but what is known has been used in the report. 3. A number of times the remark is made that there are no discards in this fishery. But at the same time it is said that small cod, below the legal minimum size, are thrown back into the sea (paragraph 4.1 on page 28). So there are discards, and survival of these discards is probably quite high, and no threat to the recovery of the North Sea cod stock. Remarks that there are no discards should be rephrased. The text has been amended to clarify that the only discards are of species that are retained and landed, and that there is no non-retained by catch (a difficulty with the MSC definitions). 4. Page 48, line 5 under Table 8: it is not clear to me where the score of 2.7 comers from. In the footer of the same page it is said that weightings are given in Table 10 above: there is no table 10. The text above Table 8 explains how the selectivity values for each of the hook and line, gill net and trawl fisheries were scored, but the aggregate score (2.7) was obtained by weighting these scores (2,2,3) by the proportional landings taken by the 3 metiers in the North Sea (Table 10 is immediately below). The foot note has now been incorporated in the text for clarification. 5. Under Recommendation 1 (page 56) it is said that the Client should encourage IMARES to extend the collection of biological information on sea bass landed in the Netherlands. As long as this is not a ―legal task‖, or as long as this data-collection is not specifically paid for it is highly unlikely that this will be done by IMARES. Point noted 6. In the scoring comments for 2.3.1 (page 84) spurdog (Squalus acanthias) is being mentioned as incidentally being caught. It does not seem very likely to catch spurdog in this area. More likely the ―shark‖ that is being caught are smooth hound (Mustelus sp.). We have to take information from the client who, incidentally, fish widely across the southern North Sea where spurdog do occur. Page 113 of 151
Performance Indicator Review Please complete the table below for each Performance Indicator which are listed in the Certification Body‘s Public Certification Draft Report. Performanc e Indicator Has all the relevant information available been used to score this Indicator? (Yes/No) Does the information and/or rationale used to score this Indicator support the given score? (Yes/No) Will the condition(s) raised improve the fishery‘s performance to the SG80 level? (Yes/No/NA) 1.1.1 yes yes NA RBF assessment used 1.1.2 yes yes NA RBF default score Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary. 1.1.3 yes yes NA Sea bass in the North Sea is not depleted. No score has been given. 1.2.1 yes yes NA Based on experience in UK fisheries the harvest strategy is likely to work 1.2.2 yes yes yes As it is phrased here the condition is likely to improve the performance of the fishery 1.2.3 yes yes NA Monitoring is well organised on the EU scale 1.2.4 yes yes NA RBF default score Certification Body Response
Page 1 and 2:
Public comment draft report Marine
Page 3 and 4:
Glossary of acronyms and terms used
Page 5 and 6:
9.2.3 PSA .........................
Page 7 and 8:
Condition 1: P1, 1.2.2 Harvest cont
Page 9 and 10:
Current members of VBHL are the fol
Page 11 and 12:
1.4 References Castilho, R., and Mc
Page 13 and 14:
Pawson, M.G., G. D. Pickett and P.
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 2.Main migration routes of a
Page 17 and 18:
This hypothesis was tested in 2000
Page 19 and 20:
also comprised a substantial part o
Page 21 and 22:
3.1 Analytical assessments The firs
Page 23 and 24:
Figure 3.Indices of the abundance o
Page 25 and 26:
short-term forecasts and setting TA
Page 27 and 28:
The landings of cod by the UoC are
Page 29 and 30:
monitoring, landing recording, etc.
Page 31 and 32:
and use only of rod-and-line, with
Page 33 and 34:
7. STANDARD USED The MSC Principles
Page 35 and 36:
a) setting catch levels that will m
Page 37 and 38:
8.2 Public consultation Public anno
Page 39 and 40:
certified as sustainable on 3 rd De
Page 41 and 42:
9.2.2 SICA A SICA proceeds in sever
Page 43 and 44:
Table 4.SICA tables from the MSC Fi
Page 45 and 46:
Table 6. PSA Productivity attribute
Page 47 and 48:
Table 9. FAM Workbook Table with sc
Page 49 and 50:
10.1 Performance 10. ASSESSMENT RES
Page 51 and 52:
controls) that seek to maximise Y/R
Page 53 and 54:
management system responded to find
Page 55 and 56:
Recommendation 4 - Governance and p
Page 57 and 58:
13.1 Logo use 13. MSC LOGO LICENSIN
Page 59 and 60:
APPENDICES APPENDIX A: SCORING TABL
Page 61 and 62:
Scoring criteria Scoring guidepost
Page 63 and 64: Scoring criteria Scoring guidepost
Page 65 and 66: metrics are more appropriate to a s
Page 67 and 68: This is regarded as an implicit har
Page 69 and 70: emovals are apparent in the range o
Page 71 and 72: Audit trace references Insert refs
Page 77 and 78: FAMv2 7.1.10 states ―If it can be
Page 79 and 80: statement of intent about continuin
Page 81 and 82: Expert knowledge and the informatio
Page 83 and 84: Rare fish like skates or sturgeons
Page 85 and 86: Score: 80 Audit trace references Sc
Page 87 and 88: 2.4 Habitat Scoring criteria Scorin
Page 91 and 92: 2.5 Ecosystem Scoring criteria Scor
Page 93 and 94: irreversible harm to ecosystem stru
Page 95 and 96: Page 94 of 151
Page 97 and 98: livelihood; and - Incorporates an a
Page 107 and 108: (2-60) Sanctions to deal with non-c
Page 113: APPENDIX B: PEER REVIEW REPORTS Pee
Page 117 and 118: Performanc e Indicator Has all the
Page 119 and 120: Performanc e Indicator Has all the
Page 121 and 122: Page 120 of 151
Page 123 and 124: ass. If the scores I have questione
Page 125 and 126: 3. Target Stock Status and Harvest
Page 127 and 128: 4.2 Discarding. Quote ―The client
Page 129 and 130: 8.4 Other certification evaluations
Page 131 and 132: Appendix A: Scoring Table. (Comment
Page 133 and 134: 2.3.2. Management Strategy. Quote
Page 135 and 136: Performance Indicator Has all the r
Page 145 and 146: Performance Indicator 1.1.1 2.1.1 2
Page 147 and 148: C4 P3 Fishery Specific Manage ment
Page 149 and 150: 1.2.3 Sportvisserij Nederland stron
Page 151: APPENDIX E: OBJECTION TO DETERMINAT
show all

SGS Product & Process Certification - Marine Stewardship Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?