SGS Product & Process Certification - Marine Stewardship Council

ass‖ is irrelevant - there are probably no bass there. Within the known distribution of bass surely the availability is high risk = 3 (not 2 as in Table 8),
which equates to the FAM guidance of >30% overlap. Although the commercial bass fishery around England and Wales and in French waters has
developed over the last 30 years to exploit the population over most of its seasonal distribution, the development of bass fishing in the North Sea has
lagged behind the stock‘s production and range extension. Many gears used for commercial fishing there are unsuited to catch bass (other than as an
incidental by catch), and the level of overlap with the species‘ distribution (both across the ground and in the water column) is much less than for
fisheries for e.g. cod, plaice, herring etc.
Quote ―For the rod and line fishery it was considered that the rod and line fishery directly targets the bass on the spots where they are most abundant.
Therefore like for trawl and gill net fishery a score of 2 was given.‖ If they target spots where they are most abundant then surely for encounterability
there is a ―high overlap with fishing gear‖ (FAM, Table B4.3) resulting in ―high susceptibility‖ and justifying an encounterability high risk score of 3, not a
score of 2 (Table 8). Text amended to clarify
Quote for selectivity ―Strict application of the attributes in this table would result in a high risk score (bait used is attractive to bass and the fish cannot
break the line) which does not seem appropriate for this metier since the hook and line fishery is highly selective in catching larger fish. The choice of
fishing spots (wrecks) were larger fish aggregate contributes highly to this high selectivity. Undersized fish are rarely caught and always released alive.
The team therefore awarded medium risk score of 2.‖ Table B4.4 (FAM) states that if there are conflicting answers, then the higher risk score should be
used, i.e. in this case a score of 3. Selectivity attribute scores tend to be contentious (MSC guidelines are not always helpful), but adult bass are known
to be less vulnerable to fishing gears than most other main commercial species. The evidence for this is the relatively low F values in assessments
(consistently around 0.3) and the decline in modelled selectivity-at-age after ages 6-7. Text amended to clarify.
If these suggested changes to the scores are implemented then the overall PSA score will need to be revised. After considering the reviewer‘s
comments, and reviewing the evidence presented (with a number of important amendments to the text for clarification), the assessment team has
concluded that no score needs changing (other than where there are inconsistencies in the report).
Page 48, last paragraph. The scores in the text do not agree with those in Table 9. This leaves the reviewer very uncertain as to what was the correct
overall MSC score (given as 87 for P1.1.1. [text bottom of page 48, and in Table 10]). The scores given in the text have been corrected, and the foot
note has now been incorporated in the text for clarification.
Figure 7. Explain the significance of this plot, assuming the scores plotted are correct. Text amended accordingly.
Table 10. 1.2.2 scores 75 in the Scoring Table, but 70 in Table 10 and Summary. There is a need to check all the scores allocated, especially where
changes have been made, to ensure that they are all consistent, and more importantly, that the final overall scores for P1-3 are correct. I have NOT
checked them all, only ones that my attention was drawn to in evaluating scores and comments. This has been checked and scores amended where
necessary.
Page 129 of 151