intertek fisheries certification - sadstia · public comment draft report authors ... 5.7.3 survey...
TRANSCRIPT
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
10A Victory Park
Victory Road
Derby
DE24 8ZF
UK
www.intertek.com/food/msc-certification
INTERTEK FISHERIES CERTIFICATION
February 2015
Ref: 82007
South African Hake Trawl Fishery
Public Comment Draft Report
Authors
J. Andrews, J. Groeneveld, M. Pawson
Client name and address
Johann Augustyn
South African Deep Sea Trawling Industry Association - SADSTIA
Pearl House
Heerengracht
PO Box 2066
Cape Town 8000
South Africa
Tel: +27 (0) 21 425 2727
Fax: +27 (0) 21 419 0785
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 1
Contents 1 Glossary .......................................................................................................................................... 9
2 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 10
3 Authors and peer reviewers........................................................................................................... 13
3.1 Assessment team ................................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Peer Reviewers ...................................................................................................................... 15
4 Description of the Fishery ............................................................................................................. 16
4.1 Unit(s) of Certification and scope of certification sought ..................................................... 16
4.1.1 Scope of Assessment with respect to MSC Standard .................................................... 19
5 Overview of the fishery................................................................................................................. 20
5.1 Principle One: Target Species Background .......................................................................... 20
5.2 History of the Fishery ........................................................................................................... 22
5.2.1 Fishing capacity control ................................................................................................ 25
5.3 Fleet and Gear Description ................................................................................................... 25
5.4 Management Unit .................................................................................................................. 26
5.5 Monitoring of stock status..................................................................................................... 27
5.5.1 Abundance indices ........................................................................................................ 29
5.5.2 Assessment Modelling .................................................................................................. 31
5.6 Management advice .............................................................................................................. 33
5.7 Assessment of current stock status ........................................................................................ 34
5.7.1 The assessment model ................................................................................................... 35
5.7.2 Population Dynamics .................................................................................................... 35
5.7.3 Survey biomass indices ................................................................................................. 36
5.7.4 Stock–recruitment function ........................................................................................... 36
5.7.5 Model parameters .......................................................................................................... 39
5.7.6 Survey fishing selectivity at length: .............................................................................. 39
5.7.7 Commercial fishing selectivity at length: ..................................................................... 39
5.7.8 Input parameters and other choice for application to hake ........................................... 39
5.7.9 Results of the 2013 assessment ..................................................................................... 40
5.7.10 Stock status in relation to reference points ................................................................... 40
5.8 Other fishery removals .......................................................................................................... 43
6 Principle Two: Ecosystem Background ........................................................................................ 44
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 2
6.1 Interactions with non-target fish species ............................................................................... 44
6.1.1 A note on terminology .................................................................................................. 44
6.2 Catch composition ................................................................................................................ 45
6.2.1 Pilot Observer Programme: 1995-2000 ........................................................................ 45
6.2.2 Government Observer Programme, OROP: 2002–06 .................................................. 45
6.2.3 Management of non-target species................................................................................ 56
6.2.4 Status of the observer programme................................................................................. 61
6.2.5 Status of “Main” non-target catch species .................................................................... 62
6.2.6 Retained catch ............................................................................................................... 75
6.2.7 Discarded catch ............................................................................................................. 76
6.3 ETP Species .......................................................................................................................... 78
6.3.1 Trends in bird population status .................................................................................... 83
6.4 Habitat Interactions ............................................................................................................... 85
6.5 Ecosystem Interactions ......................................................................................................... 94
7 Principle Three: Management System Background ...................................................................... 95
7.1 Management framework ....................................................................................................... 95
7.2 Management and research institutions .................................................................................. 95
7.3 Recognized interest groups ................................................................................................... 96
7.4 Management objectives......................................................................................................... 97
7.5 Decision-making process ...................................................................................................... 98
7.6 Incentives to fish sustainably ................................................................................................ 98
7.7 Monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) ........................................................................ 99
7.8 Illegal, Unreported Unlicensed (IUU) fishing ...................................................................... 99
7.9 Research Planning ............................................................................................................... 100
7.10 Monitoring and evaluation of management performance ................................................... 100
8 Evaluation Procedure .................................................................................................................. 101
8.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment ........................................................................................ 101
8.2 Previous assessments .......................................................................................................... 101
8.3 Assessment Methodologies ................................................................................................. 101
8.4 Evaluation Processes and Techniques ................................................................................. 112
8.4.1 Site Visits .................................................................................................................... 112
8.4.2 Consultations ............................................................................................................... 112
8.4.3 Evaluation Techniques ................................................................................................ 114
8.4.4 Scoring components and elements .............................................................................. 115
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 3
8.4.5 Risk Based Framework ............................................................................................... 115
8.5 Assessment of the Units of Certification ............................................................................ 117
9 Traceability ................................................................................................................................. 119
9.1 Eligibility Date .................................................................................................................... 119
9.2 Traceability within the Fishery ........................................................................................... 119
9.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody ................................................................... 120
9.4 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practically Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further Chains of
Custody ........................................................................................................................................... 120
10 Evaluation Results .................................................................................................................. 122
10.1 Principle Level Scores ........................................................................................................ 122
10.2 Summary of Scores ............................................................................................................. 122
10.3 Summary of Conditions ...................................................................................................... 122
10.3.1 Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 125
10.4 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement ........................................................... 127
10.5 Changes in the Fishery Prior to and Since Pre-Assessment ................................................ 127
11 References ............................................................................................................................... 128
11.1 Publications cited ................................................................................................................ 128
11.2 Legislation cited .................................................................................................................. 133
12 Scoring and Rationales............................................................................................................ 134
12.1 Principle 1 Evaluation Tables ............................................................................................. 134
12.2 Principle 2 Evaluation Tables (Both Units of Certification) ............................................... 152
12.3 Principle 3 Evaluation Tables ............................................................................................. 184
13 Risk Based Framework (RBF) Outputs .................................................................................. 205
14 Conditions of Certification...................................................................................................... 206
14.1 Conditions for UoC1, M. paradoxus ................................................................................... 206
14.1.1 Condition 1: stock status ............................................................................................. 206
14.1.2 Condition 2: ETP species information ........................................................................ 207
14.1.3 Condition 3: Habitat impact management................................................................... 209
14.2 Conditions for UoC2, M. capensis. ..................................................................................... 211
14.2.1 Condition 4: ETP species information ........................................................................ 211
14.2.2 Condition 5: Habitat impact management................................................................... 213
15 Client Action Plan ................................................................................................................... 215
16 Peer Review Reports ............................................................................................................... 228
16.1 Peer Review Reports ........................................................................................................... 228
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 4
16.1.1 Peer Reviewer A ......................................................................................................... 228
16.1.2 Peer Reviewer B.......................................................................................................... 252
17 Stakeholder submissions ......................................................................................................... 272
17.1 Stakeholder interviews conducted during the site visit ....................................................... 272
17.1.1 Bird Life South Africa ................................................................................................ 272
17.1.2 CapFish ....................................................................................................................... 276
17.1.3 Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries ..................................................... 280
17.1.4 Marine Resource Assessment and Management Group, MARAM ............................ 285
17.1.5 OLRAC ....................................................................................................................... 289
17.1.6 South African Deep Sea Trawling Industry Association (SADSTIA) and South East
Coast Inshore Fishing Association (SECIFA) ............................................................................ 293
17.1.7 South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON) ................................. 298
17.1.8 South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) ............................................. 300
17.1.9 University of Cape Town ............................................................................................ 304
17.1.10 WWF-South Africa ................................................................................................. 307
18 Surveillance Frequency ........................................................................................................... 311
19 Client Agreement .................................................................................................................... 313
20 Objections Process .................................................................................................................. 314
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 5
List of Figures
Figure 1: Map of the unit of certification area showing distribution of the two hake species, M.
paradoxus (deep water cape hake) and M. capensis (shallow water cape hake). ............. 17
Figure 2: Generalised distribution of the two Cape hake species, Merluccius capensis and M.
paradoxus (after M. Smith, CapFish). .............................................................................. 21
Figure 3. Distribution of trawling effort for hake around the RSA coast for the period 2002–2007
(Figure. S. Wilkinson, CapFish) ....................................................................................... 23
Figure 4: (a): Total catches (thousand tonnes) of Cape hakes split by species over the period 1917 –
2013 and the TAC set each year since the implementation of the OMP approach in 1991.
Prior to 1978, where the data required to split the catch by species are not available, the
split is calculated using an algorithm that assumes 1958 as the centre year for the shift
from a primarily M. capensis to a primarily M. paradoxus offshore trawl catch. (b):
Catches of Cape hakes per fishing sector for the period 1960 – 2013. Prior to 1960, all
catches are attributed to the deep-sea trawl sector. ........................................................... 24
Figure 5: Recent trends in the GLM-standardised commercial CPUE and abundance indices for M.
paradoxus (open circles) and M. capensis (black diamonds) from trawl surveys that are
used in the TAC computation. The survey abundance estimates shown incorporates the
calibration factors specified in the OMP for the years in which the new gear was used on
the RV Africana. ............................................................................................................... 30
Figure 6: Estimated stock–recruitment curves for each of the 15 OMs of the revised set for M.
paradoxus and M. capensis, grouped by level of natural mortality. In each plot, the "data"
are plotted for a single OM, corresponding to the modified Ricker stock-recruitment
curve and 1958 centre-year. .............................................................................................. 38
Figure 7: Trajectories of female SSB for South African hake (in terms of pre-exploitation level) for
the five assessments. The horizontal lines represent BMSY (i.e. Maximum Sustainable
Yield Level, MSYL). ........................................................................................................ 41
Figure 8: Output from 11 assessment models showing the ratio of female spawning stock biomass
(Bsp
) relative to MSYLsp
(~ BMSY) for M. paradoxus. The solid line shows the median
estimate. Colours denote 80, 90 and 95% confidence levels. [Source: OLRAC, pers
comm, 2014]. .................................................................................................................... 43
Figure 9 Map of the distribution of offshore hake trawl activity (shaded cells) compared with
observer coverage over the period 2002-2006 [Source: Daneel & Attwood, 2013]. ........ 50
Figure 10: Map of the South African hake offshore trawl grounds showing grid cells coloured
according to similarity “clusters” identified from analysis of catch composition. [Source:
Daneel & Attwood, 2013]. ................................................................................................ 50
Figure 11: Patterns in species composition among grid squares as indicated by cluster analysis of
observer catch data for the period 2008-13. Each group indicates 50% Bray-Curtis
similarity. Axes indicate latitude and longitude of each grid square. [Source: Attwood,
2014]. ................................................................................................................................ 54
Figure 12: Existing and proposed spatial management measures that contribute to bycatch
management in the inshore demersal trawl fishery in South Africa, including proposed
Fishery Management Areas (FMAs). [Source: Sink et al, 2013]. .................................... 59
Figure 13: Kingklip closed area established off Cape St Francis (shaded red) to protect spawning
aggregations from trawling between September and November each year. [Source: Smith
et al, 2013]. ....................................................................................................................... 60
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 6
Figure 14: Spatial distribution of average annual monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) catch per year over
the period 2004-10. [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. ............................................................. 63
Figure 15: Total catch (tonnes) and catch rate (kg/hr) for monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) on the west
and south coast of South Africa over the period 2000-2010. [Source: Smith et al, 2014].
63
Figure 16: Fishery-independent survey abundance estimates for monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) off
the west and south coasts of South Africa, 1984-2012 (note that the different symbols
indicate surveys carried out using different methods). [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. ....... 64
Figure 17: Median annual estimates of abundance and associated 90% probability intervals for the
biomass of monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) off the west coast and south coast of South
Africa for the period 2009-13. [Source: Glazer, 2013]. ................................................... 65
Figure 18: Coast specific catches of monkfish over the period 1991-2012. The current aggregate
Precautionary Upper Catch Limit (PUCL) of 7,000t for both coasts is shown as a
horizontal line. [Source: Glazer, 2013]. ........................................................................... 66
Figure 19: Bayesian posterior medians of abundance over the last five years for the West coast
kingklip resource off South Africa. 90% probability interval envelopes are shown as
dashed lines. [Source: Brandão & Butterworth, 2013]. ................................................... 67
Figure 20: Survey abundance estimates for silver kob, Argyrosomus inodorus on the South Coast of
South Africa [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. ......................................................................... 68
Figure 21: Spatial distribution of silver kob annual catch (kg) per fishing grid block for the period
2004-10. [Source: Smith et al, 2010]. .............................................................................. 69
Figure 22: Distribution of fishing effort and fisheries targeting horse mackerel, Trachurus trachurus,
in South African Waters. [Source: Japp & Smith, 2013]. ................................................ 71
Figure 23: Catch of horse mackerel, Trachurus trachurus in the demersal and midwater trawl
fisheries for 2000-2013 (note that 2013 data were incomplete). The PUCL for this
species is set at 44,000t. [Source: Singh et al, 2013]. ...................................................... 72
Figure 24: Survey abundance estimates for snoek, Thyrsites atun on the West and South Coast of
South Africa [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. ......................................................................... 73
Figure 25: Trends in catch (t) and CPUE (kg/hr) for snoek, Thyrsites atun, on the west and south
coasts of South Africa. [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. ........................................................ 74
Figure 26: Spatial distribution of snoek (Thyrsites atun) annual average catch per grid block for the
period 2004-2010 [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. ................................................................. 74
Figure 27: Diagram showing the relative species composition of the discards from the South African
trawl fishery from observer records and landings data for the period 2005-2012 (total
discards estimated to be 150t pa). [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. ....................................... 77
Figure 28: Spatial distribution of discarding activity, showing total weight discarded per grid block
from observer data for the period 2005-2012. [Source: Smith et al, 2013]. .................... 77
Figure 29: Specification of the tori lines taken from a copy of the trawl fishery licences issued to
both offshore and inshore trawlers in South Africa [Source: DAFF, 2014]. .................... 79
Figure 30: The distribution of SADSTIA-funded bird observer trips carried out from June 2012-July
2013 superimposed on the distribution of commercial trawling effort. [Source: Smith,
2013]. ................................................................................................................................ 81
Figure 31: Boundary of “ring fenced” hake trawl footprint (mapped by Wilkinson & Japp, 2008;
figure reproduced from Sink et al, 2012). ......................................................................... 88
Figure 32: The habitat composition within the 70,160km² South African hake trawl footprint. (Note
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 7
that the percentages indicate the relative proportion of each habitat type within the
footprint, but not how much of the total extent each habitat type is trawled). [Source:
Sink et al, 2012]. ............................................................................................................... 89
Figure 33: Priority habitats (based on extent & vulnerability of habitats and intensity of fishing) on
the west coast within the trawl footprint area. [Source: Sink et al, 2012]. ....................... 90
Figure 34: Priority habitats (based on extent & vulnerability of habitats and intensity of fishing) on
the south coast within the trawl footprint area. [Source: Sink et al, 2012]. ..................... 91
Figure 35: Map showing current Marine Protected areas in South Africa. [Source: SANBI, 2014]. 92
Figure 36: Map showing the location of the experimental trawl exclusion area on the west coast.
[Source: SADSTIA, 2012]. ............................................................................................... 93
List of Tables
Table 1: List of eligible vessels. ...................................................................................................... 18
Table 2: Fleet-disaggregated catches (in thousand tonnes) of hake M. paradoxus and M. capensis
from the south and west RSA coasts for the period 1966–2013. (source Butterworth, pers
comm.). ............................................................................................................................. 28
Table 3: Summary of offshore trawl fishery observer programme (OROP) coverage over the
period 2002-06. [Source: Daneel & Attwood, 2013]. ....................................................... 49
Table 4: Summary of bycatch composition (including both retained and discarded individuals) for
the most abundant non-target species from 13,030 offshore trawl hauls monitored
between 2002 and 2006 [Source: Daneel & Attwood, 2013]. .......................................... 49
Table 5: Annual average catch for the inshore trawl fleet, 2003-06, based on unsorted samples
taken by independent observers. [Source: Attwood et al, 2011]. ..................................... 51
Table 6: Catch of non-target species (“bycatch rate”) as a proportion of the catch of the two hake
species, and ranking of the top 5 non-target (i.e. non-hake) species for the period 2008-
13. [Source: Attwood, 2014]. ............................................................................................ 52
Table 7: The ten species that made up 99% of unsorted catch of hake-directed trawlers over the
period 2008-13 (in descending order). [Source: Attwood, 2014]. ................................... 53
Table 8: Contribution of non-target species to the total trawl catch for the areas illustrated in
Figure 11. [Source: Attwood, 2014]. ............................................................................... 54
Table 9: Average annual catch estimates and the percentage of each non-target species in the catch
for the period 2000-2010. [Source: Smith et al, 2013]..................................................... 55
Table 10: Total observed heavy interactions and mortalities of bird species in the South African
deep-water hake trawl wet-fish fishery, 2006-10 [Source: Maree et al, 2014]. ................ 80
Table 11: Total numbers of interactions between seabirds and trawl warps during the setting and
trawling period from SADSTIA observer records between June 2012 and July 2013. A
high level of interaction is almost certain to cause mortality; medium interactions are not
assumed to cause significant injury; and a low level of interaction is considered harmless.
[Source: Smith, 2013]. ...................................................................................................... 82
Table 12: Summary of Assessment methodology used. .................................................................. 101
Table 13: Summary of Previous Assessment Conditions for the South African Hake Trawl fishery.
......................................................................................................................................... 102
Table 14: List of meetings carried out during the site visit, with date, activity and attendance. .... 113
Table 15: Scoring components and elements considered in this assessment. Decisions on whether
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 8
or not a particular PI is data deficient have been taken using the guidance set out in Table
AC2 of the MSC Certification Requirements v 1.3. ....................................................... 116
Table 16: Proposal for progressing Units of Certification (UoC) at Full Assessment against the
MSC standard. ................................................................................................................. 118
Table 17 Summary of MSC Principle level scores for the South African Hake Trawl fishery UoC 1
(M. paradoxus) and UoC2 (M. capensis) ........................................................................ 122
Table 18: Scores for the South African Hake Trawl Fishery. Scores shaded green attain the
unconditional pass level. Yellow shading indicates a conditional pass, and red shading
would indicate a fail. ....................................................................................................... 123
Table 19 Summary of Conditions for the South African Hake Trawl Fishery. ............................. 124
Table 20: Surveillance Score for the Fishery .................................................................................. 311
Table 21: MSC Fishery Surveillance levels .................................................................................... 311
Table 22: Fishery Surveillance Plan ................................................................................................ 312
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 9
1 GLOSSARY
BLSA Birdlife South Africa
Client South African Deep-Sea Trawling Industry Association
DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries
DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. The research and management
function of MCM is now integrated and have been absorbed into the general structure
of DEAT. Similarly, the compliance function (referred to as the ‘inspectorate’) has
also being absorbed in the overall structure of MCM with specific subdivisions such as
Offshore and Inshore.
DWG Demersal Working Group
ICSEAF International Commission for South East Atlantic Fisheries
IFC Intertek Fisheries Certification
MARAM Marine Resource Assessment and Management Group, University of Cape Town
MCM Marine and Coastal Management which was formerly called the Sea Fisheries Branch
(the research component was formerly known as the Sea Fisheries Research Institute).
MCM has separate directorates responsible for example for Research, Resource
Management, Coastal Management, Compliance and Administration. The primary
directorates responsible for hake are Research and Resource Management (offshore sub
directorates), compliance and administration.
MSC Marine Stewardship Council
MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield
MSYLsp
Spawning biomass at which the resource, if fished on a sustainable basis, delivers MSY
(i.e. BMSY)
OMP Operational Management Procedures
OROP
RMWG Resource Management Working Group
RSA Republic of South Africa
SADSTIA South African DeepSea Trawling Industry Association
SAEON South African Environmental Observation Network
SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute
SECIFA South East Coast Inshore Fishing Association
UCT University of Cape Town
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 10
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. This report sets out the results of the assessment of the South African Hake Trawl Fishery against
the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Fishing. The
assessment started in January 2014.
2. The assessment was carried out by a team of three assessors: Jim Andrews, Johan Groeneveld and
Mike Pawson. A full account of the assessment team members’ relevant experience is set out in
section 3.1 of this report.
3. The evaluation process for this assessment involved gathering information relevant to the fishery
during a site visit in March 2014; discussions with experts and stakeholders; and reviewing
relevant literature. The assessment team then compiled a draft report, and met to ‘score’ the
performance of the fishery. The draft report that was produced by the team has been considered
by the client, subject to peer review, and then published for stakeholder comment in February
2015 before being published as a Final Report on the MSC website.
4. The main strengths of this fishery are that the hake stocks are well monitored and managed, with a
well-developed management regime that provides opportunities for participation by a wide range
of stakeholders. The fishery is managed under South African legislation, which meets the
requirements of international conventions. Hake are caught by a fleet that is limited in size by a
restrictive licensing scheme; hake trawling is limited to a self-imposed “trawl footprint” (this is in
the process of becoming a formal permit condition, so that right-holders can be penalized in the
event of contravention); and all vessels are subject to a quota and limitations on days at sea.
Under this management regime some historical concerns about the fishery (notably impacts of the
fishery on bird species) have been successfully addressed by management measures that have
been developed through partnership between the fishing industry, government and environmental
NGOs.
5. The team identified very few weaknesses in the fishery. This is a reflection of the work that the
client and fishery managers have carried out in response to the conditions raised when the hake
fishery was certified in 2005 and re-certified in 2010. Some areas where performance could be
improved were identified. These related to the need for rebuilding of the M. paradoxus stock
(which is already being managed under rebuilding strategy); a requirement for more information
about the impacts of the inshore fishery on bird species; and action to address the management of
potential impacts of trawling on benthic habitats. Conditions of certification have been drawn up
in response to these findings, and the client has produced an action plan to ensure that progress is
made to address these weaknesses.
6. MSC certification requires that each of the three MSC Principles have aggregated scores of 80 or
higher; that no individual performance indicator score less than 60; and that the client provides a
“client action plan” to improve the performance of indicators with scores less than 80 for which
conditions have been prescribed. The fishery has met these three requirements. The assessment
team has therefore recommended that this fishery should be certified according to the Marine
Stewardship Council Principles and Criteria. The MSC Principle scores were calculated
according to the procedures set out in the MSC Certification Requirements v1.3 and are set out in
the table below.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 11
7. Some scores of less than 80 and more than 60 were awarded for individual Performance
Indicators. Conditions of certification were identified by the assessment team that would lead to
an improvement in performance to a level consistent with or better than a score of 80 for these
Performance Indicators. The client has produced an Action Plan that should lead to these scores
being attained within the 5 year period of certification for this fishery. The full conditions and
Action Plan are listed in section 14 of this report. The conditions of certification are summarised
in the table below
Number Condition Performance
Indicator
Unit of Certification 1 – M. paradoxus
1 Stock status
The M. paradoxus stock is below its target reference
point; evidence of ongoing implementation of the
established rebuilding strategy is required.
1.1.1
2 ETP Species - information
Information should be gathered to allow fishery related
mortality of bird species and the impact of fishing on these
species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake trawl
fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m).
This could be achieved by continued implementation of the
recently established bird observer programme for inshore
areas and analysis of observer data so that bird mortality and
trends in mortality can be quantified.
2.3.3
3 Benthic habitats - management
There should be further investigation of the options for
protecting benthic habitats from hake trawl fishery impacts.
This investigation could consider, inter alia, the relative
merits of both statutory measures and self regulation and also
the areas that may require or might benefit from such
measures (for instance the South Benguela Canyon). It is
noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the
condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action,
evidence of progress with the implementation of the favoured
2.4.2
UoC 1 UoC 2
M. paradoxus M. capensis
Principle 1 - Target species PI 1.1.3 Not scored NA 98.8
PI 1.1.3 Scored 92.1 NA
Principle 2 - Ecosystem 84.0 84.0
Principle 3 - Management 92.5 92.5
Overall weighted Principle-level scores
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 12
Number Condition Performance
Indicator
management measures would be required.
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl
experiment will provide information from the hake trawl
fishery on the type of management measures that may be
appropriate.
Unit of Certification 2 – M. capensis
4 ETP Species - information
Information should be gathered to allow fishery related
mortality of bird species and the impact of fishing on these
species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake trawl
fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m).
This could be achieved by continued implementation of the
recently established bird observer programme for inshore
areas and analysis of observer data so that bird mortality and
trends in mortality can be quantified.
2.3.3
5 Benthic habitats - management
There should be further investigation of the options for
protecting benthic habitats from hake trawl fishery impacts.
This investigation could consider, inter alia, the relative
merits of both statutory measures and self regulation and also
the areas that may require or might benefit from such
measures (for instance the South Benguela Canyon). It is
noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the
condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action,
evidence of progress with the implementation of the favoured
management measures would be required.
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl
experiment will provide information from the hake trawl
fishery on the type of management measures that may be
appropriate.
2.4.2
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 13
3 AUTHORS AND PEER REVIEWERS
3.1 Assessment team
A brief biography of the assessment team members is given below. Full CVs of the team members
can be downloaded from the MSC website or obtained on request from Intertek Moody Marine.
Jim Andrews
Jim is a marine biologist with over 20 years’ experience working in marine fisheries and
environmental management. He currently works as an independent fisheries and marine
environmental consultant. His previous experience includes running the North Western and North
Wales Sea Fisheries Committee as its Chief Executive from 2001 to 2005, and previously working as
the SFC's Marine Environment Liaison Officer. During this time he was responsible for the
regulation, management and assessment of inshore finfish and shellfish stocks along a 1,500km
coastline. He has an extensive practical knowledge of both fisheries and environmental management
and enforcement under UK and EC legislation. Jim has formal legal training & qualifications, with a
special interest in the policy, governance and management of fisheries impacts on marine ecosystems.
He has worked as an assessor and lead assessor on more than 20 MSC assessments within the UK, in
Europe and in India since 2007. In 2008 he worked with the MSC and WWF on one of the pilot
assessments using the new MSC Risk Based Assessment Framework, and has subsequently used the
Risk Based Framework in three fishery assessments. Jim has carried out numerous MSC Chain of
Custody assessments within the UK.
Johan Groeneveld
Johan is a Senior Scientist at the Oceanographic Research Institute in Durban, South Africa. He has
detailed professional experience of South African fisheries and their management gained over 18
years of employment as a research scientist and fisheries manager by 2 governments and in the private
sector. He has worked extensively on collaborative fisheries development projects and has a strong
publication record in a range of peer-reviewed journals. He has participated as an assessor in the MSC
Certified Tristan da Cunha spiny lobster fishery, a peer reviewer for the Normandy and Jersey Lobster
fishery, and also in several MSC Pre-Assessment projects in southern and eastern Africa. Johan has
also attended and given presentations at MSC training workshops in South Africa.
Dr Michael Pawson.
Mike Pawson retired as senior fisheries advisor at Cefas, Lowestoft, after 39 years carrying out
biological research and providing scientific advice to Defra, the EC and other national and
international organisations on fish stock abundance (marine teleosts, elasmobranches, salmonids and
eels), technical conservation measures and fisheries management regulations, and on related
monitoring, sampling, survey and research programmes. Between 1974 and 1980, he initiated and
led acoustic surveys for blue whiting and mackerel and trawl surveys in the North Sea (1975-1979),
and then spent 1 year working as an UNESCO Expert in Ichthyology in Tripoli, Libya. From 1980 to
1990, Mike designed and managed MAFF's coastal fisheries programme, implementing biological
sampling, trawl surveys, a fishermen’s logbook scheme and socio-economic evaluation of sea bass
fisheries, and between 1990 and 2000 he led the Cefas Western demersal team, providing analytical
assessments and management advice for 12 finfish stocks, including hake. During this time he was
co-ordinator of the Anglo-French English Channel Fisheries Study Group (1989-1997) and chairman
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 14
of the ICES Southern Shelf Demersal Stock Assessment Working Group (1996-98), the ICES Seabass
Study Group (2000-04) and Elasmobranch Study Group (2001-02), and he led the scientific input to
development of the European hake recovery plan on behalf of the Commission (1999-2000) . He has
initiated and managed EU-funded multi-national projects on methods for egg-production stock
biomass estimation, bio-geographical identity of English Channel fish stocks, bio-economic
modelling of Channel fisheries, development of assessment methods for elasmobranchs, marine
recreational fishing in Europe etc.
Mike has provided scientific evaluation, quality assurance and advice to several national and EC-
funded projects on fisheries biology, monitoring and assessment, and one of his major roles over the
last 15 years has been peer-reviewing papers, reports and manuscripts in preparation. Since 2002,
Mike directed and managed the assessment of salmon and eel stocks in England and Wales and
provided scientific advice on their conservation. All of Mike's work has been published in refereed
Journals, in ICES and EC working group reports, and in contract reports.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 15
3.2 Peer Reviewers
Stephen Lockwood
Stephen Lockwood is an independent marine environment consultant with over 40 years’
experience of marine fishery and environmental research, and fishery management. From 1967 to
1999 he was a government fishery scientist at the Fishery Laboratory (now Cefas) Lowestoft and
then Conwy, North Wales. His research covered fishery coastal ecology, stock assessment and
management, and fishery interests in coastal zone management. For ten years (2001–2011) he
served on the UK inshore fisheries management body for the eastern Irish Sea). From 2001 to
2007 he was a non-executive director of the Sea Fish Industry authority (Seafish). As an
independent consultant he has prepared fishery environmental assessments for a variety of coastal
and offshore developments and contributed as an P1, P2 and P3 assessor, peer reviewer and
annual auditor for numerous UK, European and North American fisheries seeking MSC
certification.
Andrew Payne
Dr Andrew I.L. Payne is an honours graduate of the University of London and completed post-
graduate degrees at the Universities of Stellenbosch and Port Elizabeth in South Africa. He worked in
Namibia for five years, South Africa for 25 years (eventually leaving in 2000 as Director of the Sea
Fisheries Research Institute), and retired in 2013 from the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and
Aquaculture Science (Cefas), UK, where he was initially Science Area Head for Fisheries and then
"roving" international fisheries consultant in which role he managed a large commercial contract
evaluating sites for future nuclear power stations to be built in the UK, and the Fisheries Science
Partnership, an initiative bringing scientists and fishers together in a common aim to produce
information of use to those charged with managing Europe's fish stocks. Most of his research was
conducted in South Africa, and he has published widely in the scientific literature, mainly about
fisheries management and demersal fish in particular. He was an active player in the Benguela
Ecology Programme, was involved in drafting South Africa's first democratic fisheries policy (which
later became enshrined as the Marine Living Resources Act), and was a leading player in the
establishment of the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem project and the BENguela
Environment, Fisheries, Interaction, and Training (BENEFIT) project, the latter two concentrating on
three countries, Angola, Namibia and South Africa. From 2003 to 2011, he was Editor-in-Chief (and
from 2000 to 2003 editor) of the ICES Journal of Marine Science, was the founding editor/editor-in-
chief (and now international panel member) of the (South) African Journal of Marine Science, and is
Series editor of the Springer book series Humanity and the Sea. He has also conducted peer expert
review of fisheries in Argentina, South Africa and the USA, and was involved in the EU's TACIS
project on Sustainable Management of Caspian Fisheries, among other EU projects. He has conducted
several accreditation reviews for the Marine Stewardship Council, the full ones being the first
certification exercise for Antarctic krill and another for Russian pollock, has acted as expert reviewer
of the report on US Limited Entry Groundfish Trawl fishery recertification, and has twice acted as
condition-meeting evaluator for the South Africa deep-sea trawl fishery for hake.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 16
4 DESCRIPTION OF THE FISHERY
4.1 Unit(s) of Certification and scope of certification sought
This assessment considers two units of certification. The difference between the two units of
certification lies in the target species of hake. A description of the two species and their distribution is
given in section 5.1 of this report.
The units of certification are:-
Unit of Certification 1: Deep water cape hake
Species: Deep water cape hake, Merluccius paradoxus
Geographical Area: South Atlantic
Method of Capture*: Demersal otter trawl
Stock Deep water cape hake stock
Management: South African Government Department of
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Eligible Fishers Members of SADSTIA and SECIFA
Unit of Certification 2: Shallow water cape hake
Species: Shallow water cape hake, Merluccius capensis
Geographical Area: South Atlantic
Method of Capture*: Demersal otter trawl
Stock Shallow water cape hake stock
Management: South African Government Department of
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Eligible Fishers Members of SADSTIA and SECIFA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 17
Figure 1: Map of the unit of certification area showing distribution of the two hake species, M.
paradoxus (deep water cape hake) and M. capensis (shallow water cape hake).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 18
Table 1: List of eligible vessels.
SADSTIA Member Vessels
African Queen Harvest Miriam Makeba
Allin Harvest Nandi
Andromeda Harvest Saldanha
Armana Harvest Selina
Avro Warrier Harvest Veronica
Basani Isabella Marine
Beatrice Marine Khulisa Eyethu
Bluebell Laverne
Boetie Bert Lee Anne
Boronia Lepanto
Codesa 1 Lezandi
Compass Challenger Lincoln
Echalar Lobelia
Esra Cruz Lucerne
Flame Thorn Maria Marine
Forest lily Marretje
Foxglove Monie Marine
Freesia Nerine
Fuchsia Portunity
Harvest Atlantic Leader Realeka
Harvest Florita Sandile
Harvest Gardenia Sistro
Harvest Gavina Stevia
Harvest Georgina Svein Jonsson
Harvest Kirstina Toralla
Harvest Krotoa Vuna Elita
Harvest Lindiwe
SECIFA Member Vessels
Amsteldiep Locqueran
Cape Cross Mary Ann
Cape Maclear Oupa Joewie
Cape Vidal Santa Isobel
Christelle Sisters
Elke M St Blaize
Leeukop St Croix
Leonora Vuna Imbongi
Lindiwe Vuna Liesa
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 19
4.1.1 Scope of Assessment with respect to MSC Standard
IFC considers that the fishery is within the scope set out in the MSC Certification Requirements v.1.3
at §27.4.4.
Specifically:-
• Controversial unilateral exemptions §27.4.4.1 - there are currently no controversial
unilateral exemptions.
• Destructive fishing practices §27.4.4.2 – no destructive fishing practices are used in this unit
of certification.
• Controversial disputes §27.4.5 – there are understood to be mechanisms in place for
resolving disputes between the fishery and the management system.
• Previous failed assessments / certificate withdrawals §27.4.7 – the hake fishery has
successfully been assessed against the MSC Standard before.
• Inseparable or practically inseparable catches §27.4.9 – The two hake species under
assessment have an overlapping distribution (see Figure 1), and although the two species are
readily distinguished by trained operators, it is not commercially feasible to separate them
when they are caught together due to the practical operation of the fishery. IFC have
therefore considered whether it is appropriate to implement the procedures set out in the CR
(v1.3) at 27.4.9 concerning IPI species.
The most recent analysis for the fishery indicates that the overall species split is 79% M.
paradoxus and 21% M. capensis (Rademeyer, 2012). The MSC Certification Requirements’
stipulate that there is a limit of 15% of the total catch for any species to be eligible for
assessment as an “IPI” stock. It is therefore inappropriate to assess the M.capensis catch in
this way (CR at 27.4.9.1c).
The stock assessment for the fisheries takes full account of their overlapping distribution and
the mixed catch. Observer data from fishing vessels, biological information about the catch,
and mathematical models are used to assess the status of the stocks independently.
IFC conclude that the IPI procedures cannot be applied to the fishery, and that the information
about catch composition is adequate to allow the assessment of each UoC independently.
• Enhanced fishery §27.4.12 – these are not enhanced fisheries.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 20
5 OVERVIEW OF THE FISHERY
5.1 Principle One: Target Species Background
The Cape hakes are the most commercially valuable species in South Africa’s fisheries, and much
research effort has been directed at understanding the biology of both the deep-water (Merluccius
paradoxus) and the shallow-water (M. capensis) Cape hake (Botha, 1970; Payne, 1986; Payne et. al
1987, Punt et. at 1992, Punt and Leslie, 1991).
The shallow-water hake (M. capensis) is found predominantly on the South African south coast from
30m to about 400m and the deep-water hake (M. paradoxus) from about 250m to about 800m. The
two species overlap in their distribution in the depth range 250-400m and both species are found
around the entire South African coast, extending northwards into Namibian waters. Large M. capensis
are found seasonally on the central Agulhas Bank and inshore (shallower than 100m), particularly in
autumn. M. paradoxus is the mainstay of the offshore (or deepwater) trawl fishery, whilst M.
capensis is targeted by the inshore trawl and longline fisheries.
The general biology of the two Cape hake species is very similar to that of other hake species.
Growth in both species is relatively slow, with the oldest fish reaching about 14 years and about
115cm total length. Generally, females of both species are the largest and most frequently found at
the extremes of their depth range. There are no obvious morphometric differences between males and
females, and the two species are difficult to separate in commercial landings. Because of the overlap
in depth distribution between the two species, which coincides with distinct size differences, predation
between species and intra-specific predation (cannibalism) occurs. These inter- and intra-specific
predation effects have been modelled, although the outcome is not presently used in assessments. The
assessment methodology separates the two hake species based on their known depth distribution -
research in this area is ongoing, particularly relating to the spatial-depth and seasonal variability on
the distribution of the two species. These characteristics can have a profound influence on the
modelling and interpretation of the status of the respective stocks.
The Cape hakes are reported to be serial spawners, aggregating to spawn predominantly in early
summer, with a second spawning period in autumn (Osbourne et al. 1999). A relationship between
fecundity at size/age has been established, though research in this area is ongoing and has been
identified as an important factor in the resource assessment (Field et. al. 2008). Spawning is known to
occur on the shelf edge on the West and South coasts, with M. capensis spawning in shallower water
than M. paradoxus. Hake eggs are bouyant after fertilisation and the larvae quickly develop and
become free swimming during a short pelagic period, when currents play an important role with
passive egg and larval drift. Juveniles of both hake species migrate to the sea bed in shallow waters,
and recruit to nursery areas around the South African coast, mostly in bay areas, moving offshore into
deeper waters as they grow. Fish under 25 cm total length (used throughout) in their second year of
growth (1+) are found mostly in water shallower than 200m, and fully recruited hake (2+) in water
deeper than 200m. First spawning is believed to occur in their third year at a length of about 25-30
cm. A generalised picture of Cape hake life history is shown in Figure 2, below.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 21
AGULHAS CURRENT 75 – 250cm/sea
BE
NG
UE
LA
CU
RR
EN
T
Shallow water Merluccius capensis
Deep water M. paradoxus
Migration routes
Hake nursery areas
Juvenile (+1 yrs) and Adult (+2 yrs)
migration into deeper water with age
and recruitment to the fishery
Northward drift - Egg and Larval Transport –
settlement in bays (nursery) 0+ yrs
Spawning Offshore 3+ yrs
Figure 2: Generalised distribution of the two Cape hake species, Merluccius capensis and M.
paradoxus (after M. Smith, CapFish).
Both hake species are thought to undertake horizontal migrations, moving with changes in
environmental conditions and availability of prey. During daylight hours hake aggregate and remain
close to the bottom (hence trawlers target them at this time). At night hake disperse, moving higher in
the water column where both species feed on zooplankton when juveniles and becoming mostly
piscivorous in their adult stages. They are the dominant predator in the demersal niche (Mann et al.,
2013).
It is assumed that the stocks of both species are found in the waters of the Benguela and southern
Agulhas systems. There is no strong evidence for extensive migrations of Cape hake along the West
and South Coasts, though limited movements occur driven by environmentally-induced conditions
such as wind stress and turbidity. The management implications of incomplete information on
transboundary movements are addressed to some extent by joint programmes (e.g. ECOFISH, run by
the Benguela Current Commission and the EU) in which comparable assessment methods are used
and similar management benchmarks are employed.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 22
5.2 History of the Fishery
The offshore and inshore trawl sectors that are directed at hake and take an associated by-catch
contribute just over 40% of the total value of all fisheries in the Republic of South Africa (RSA).
RSA's most commercially-valuable fishery is the deepwater demersal trawling sector that targets M.
paradoxus. M. capensis are largely caught by the inshore trawl, longline and handline hake sectors.
The hake-directed trawl fishery developed at the start of the 20th century and grew rapidly after World
War II to peak in the early 1970s at more than 300,000 tonnes (t), less than half of which was
accounted for by the domestic RSA fleet. Historically, this fishery targeted M. paradoxus using stern
trawlers and factory vessels on the West Coast (about 60 vessels). The fishery then went into decline,
which prompted the implementation of a larger minimum mesh size (110mm) in 1975 and declaration
of a 200 nautical mile exclusive fishing zone in November 1977. A few foreign vessels still operated
in RSA waters until 1992, but by 1993 the only foreign quota was 1,000t of hake awarded for a joint
venture with Mozambique through a bilateral fishing agreement.
The exclusion of foreign vessels and a conservative management strategy with effect from 1983 led to
a gradual recovery in catch rates. At that time, the RSA hake fishery was split between two trawl
sectors, ‘deep-sea’ and ‘inshore’; the essential difference being that the inshore fleet also enjoyed
rights to sole (Austroglossus pectoralis), whilst the deep-sea fleet is prohibited from trawling
shallower than 110m water depth (the “inshore” fleet often fishes in deeper water). The deep-sea trawl
sector operates primarily on the shelf edge in waters deeper than 300m, from the Namibian border
southwards to the South Coast, including the whole Agulhas Bank and up to Algoa Bay, the eastern-
most limit of the hake fishery (Figure 3). Greater proportions have been taken on the West than on the
South Coasts (split at 20ºE). Products are mostly frozen and landed both wet (on ice) and frozen.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 23
.k.
Figure 3. Distribution of trawling effort for hake around the RSA coast for the period 2002–2007
(Figure. S. Wilkinson, CapFish)
Since the late 1970s the hake fishery has been controlled largely by means of company-allocated
quotas within a Total Allowable Catch (TAC), limits on the number of vessels, and closed areas. The
hake TAC peaked at 165,000t in 2001 and has since been reduced and was set at 155,280 t in 2014.
Catches (Figure 4) were close to the TAC between 1991 and 2011, and below the TAC in the last two
full years..
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 24
Figure 4: (a): Total catches (thousand tonnes) of Cape hakes split by species over the period 1917
– 2013 and the TAC set each year since the implementation of the OMP approach in
1991. Prior to 1978, where the data required to split the catch by species are not
available, the split is calculated using an algorithm that assumes 1958 as the centre year
for the shift from a primarily M. capensis to a primarily M. paradoxus offshore trawl
catch. (b): Catches of Cape hakes per fishing sector for the period 1960 – 2013. Prior to
1960, all catches are attributed to the deep-sea trawl sector.
(a)
(b)
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 25
Allocations in the deep-sea sector have formed the backbone of the hake fishery and were originally
dominated by a few large operators. Since 1994, however, this sector has undergone considerable
change with the inclusion of many new entrants, from 6 in 1979 to 57 in 2001 after the
Transformation Council was introduced. With the allocation of long-term fishing rights in 2005, the
deep-sea trawl sector was reduced to 52 rights holders.
The inshore trawl fishery1 (17 rights holders with long-term rights) operates along the RSA South
Coast and comprises mostly of small side-trawlers from the ports of Mossel Bay and Port Elizabeth
working in waters shallower than 110m on the Agulhas Bank. Historically, this fishery has been
directed at both sole and M. capensis, and hake and sole rights are always linked in this sector, in
which regard it differs from the larger offshore deep-sea fishery. The inshore fishery landed only
2.3% of the national hake catch in 2013, and was also allocated a sole TAC of 872t.
The inshore sector has undergone rationalisation of both the number of rights holders and strict effort
control in terms of vessel size and capacity. The allocation of rights in the hake sector has, however,
become increasingly complex with the recent increase in exploitation of the shallow-water hake by
longlining.
5.2.1 Fishing capacity control
The inshore trawl fishery has historically controlled both capacity and fishing effort by “boat
limitation” restricting vessels by size and power and length. Since the introduction of long-term
fishing rights in 2008, the two trawling industry bodies, collectively working with Marine and Coastal
Management (MCM), introduced supplementary input controls in the form of vessel effort limitation
in addition to TACs. Vessel operators are now allocated trawling days on the basis of TAC allocation
and vessel configuration (size and power). This input control mechanism (sea days) is combined with
output control (TAC) such that there is an adjustment of vessel power annually or whenever a permit
is renewed. In this way effort-creep is accommodated and continually monitored without additional
potential impacts on the resources exploited.
5.3 Fleet and Gear Description
There are two fleets of vessels that trawl for hake in South African waters. The deep-sea trawl fleet
comprises both wet-fish vessels that vary from 25–40m and factory freezers up to 70m. There is also
a fleet of inshore wet-fish trawlers up to 30m in length. Vessels larger than 30m overall length are not
permitted to fish in waters shallower than 110m.
1 Note that the Unit of Certification for MSC includes both the Inshore and Deepsea trawl sectors which are served by the
Industrial Bodies SADSTIA (Deepsea) and SECIFA (Inshore)
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 26
Most vessels use demersal trawl gear with a considerable variation in size and shape of otter boards as
well as warp thickness. Cod-end mesh size is controlled; 110mm stretched mesh for the deep-sea
fishery (set by the Hake Deep Seat Trawl Permit Conditions), and 90mm for hake-directed (75mm for
sole directed) inshore vessels (set by the Hake Inshore Trawl (Hake & Sole) Permit Conditions). The
industry and observers report that the inshore vessels all use 110mm mesh cod-ends when fishing for
hake, and that the inshore fleet use 75mm mesh when fishing for sole.
Since 1991 there have been restrictions on the construction of trawl fishery footropes. These
restrictions are set out in licence conditions for both inshore and offshore trawlers. The licence
condition applying to the inshore fleet (working in waters shallower than 110m) is: “No bobbins,
nylon rollers or other devices whatsoever, with a diameter in excess of 375 mm or a weight in excess
of 200kgs may be deployed with, or as part of, the trawl gear, except for floats and the single pair of
trawl doors.”. The equivalent requirement for the offshore fleet (working in waters deeper than
110m) is: “No bobbins, nylon rollers or other devices whatsoever, with a diameter in excess of 750
mm or a weight in excess of 200kgs may be deployed with, or as part of, the trawl gear, except for
floats and the single pair of trawl doors and the device separating trawls in the case of twin
trawling.”
5.4 Management Unit
At the time of the original MSC assessment in 2004, two “stocks’ of hake were defined for both
assessment and management purposes: the RSA West Coast and South Coast stocks. Both “stocks”
comprised both deep-water hake M. paradoxus and shallow-water hake M. capensis, although M.
paradoxus is the dominant species on the West Coast, whilst the South coast has a larger proportion
of M. capensis. Because separation of the shallow and deep-water species in commercial hake catches
was not possible at that time, the stocks within these two areas were assessed as if they were a single
species.
The above implicitly assumes that there are no important differences in the life history parameters of
growth, reproduction, mortality and movements between the two species within a stock, which is
clearly a weakness. Data on the proportions of the two hake species within the research vessel survey
catches, available on a spatial scale since 1978, were used to form the basis of a “species splitting”
model that has been used to partition the commercial catch into separate species (Rademeyer et al.,
2008; OLRAC, 2013), which has allowed separate assessments to be developed for M. paradoxus and
M. capensis. The SADSTIA observer programme also gathers data on the ratio of species in
commercial catches, and informs the implementation of this management approach.
The along-shore distribution of shallow-water hake M. capensis (in terms of its occurrence both in
surveys and in the commercial catch) shows a hiatus in the density near the Namibia–RSA border.
The deep-water hake M. paradoxus shows a less pronounced decline in density near the Namibia–
RSA border. The International Commission for South East Atlantic Fisheries (ICSEAF) used these
characteristics to originally define hake stocks in the 1970s, which have been slightly modified since
that time. For the purposes of recent stock assessments, the stock boundaries of the RSA West Coast
stock is taken as the Namibia–RSA border (Orange River), and in the Indian Ocean east of the
distribution of the hake (ICSEAF Areas 2.1 and 2.2).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 27
The possible sharing of the hake stocks between RSA and Namibia has recently been under review
(BENEFIT), and workshops will be held during 2014 to further clarify this. However, the outcome of
these workshops and associated studies was not felt to be likely to affect the RSA stock assessment to
a great extent. The most likely scenario is that the Namibian catch of M. paradoxus could be
producing some effect on the RSA M. paradoxus resource that is currently not taken into account in
the assessment.
The two UoC target species stocks in this MSC assessment are defined as being the two hake species
(M. paradoxus and M. capensis) throughout their range in RSA.
5.5 Monitoring of stock status
The stocks are monitored using a suite of fisheries-dependent, fisheries-independent and biological
data integrated into various standardization and assessment models (discussed in the next section).
The basic data include landings by size category (within important strata) for the commercial fisheries
sectors, catch per haul from research surveys and growth rate information.
Landings of M. paradoxus increased considerably from the 1950s, peaking in the early 1970s at about
200,000t and decreasing substantially in the next decade to a low of about 80,000t. Decreased foreign
activity accounted for most of this drop as RSA declared its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in 1977,
assumed control from ICSEAF, and phased out foreign fisheries. Subsequently, catches have been
relatively stable through the 1990s and early 2000s at about 115,000t, falling to around 105,000t
between 2008 and 2012, with a rise to 130,500t in 2013 (Table 2). Landings of M. capensis show a
similar pattern, peaking at about 90,000t in the early 1970s, then gradually falling (after the phasing
out of foreign fisheries and introducing the OMP) to a relatively stable 25,000t since 2005 .
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 28
Table 2: Fleet-disaggregated catches (in thousand tonnes) of hake M. paradoxus and M. capensis
from the south and west RSA coasts for the period 1966–2013. (source Butterworth, pers
comm.).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 29
5.5.1 Abundance indices
A mesh size limit was imposed on the trawl fishery in 1975 as the fishery had been taking large
catches of small fish. Even then, approximately 80% of M. paradoxus individuals in the catch were
less than three years old in 1978 (Rademeyer et al. 2007b), possibly because some in the industry
subverted the mesh size limit by implementing “liners” within the trawls. There was undoubtedly
some misreporting, which caused difficulty in interpreting landings reports and catch-per-unit effort
(CPUE) during that period. However, it is generally acknowledged that the practice ceased in the
early 1980s. The market, and adoption of responsible industry practices, have evolved such that small
fish are no longer targeted. Catch-at-age data for the South Coast (predominately M. capensis) are
only available after 1988, subsequent to the phasing-out of “liners.”
CPUE data have been recorded since the 1950s for the West coast and since the late 1960s for the
South coast. Detailed effort data were not available prior to the late 1970s, and nominal CPUE was in
tonnes per day (with some gross adjustments for vessel power). Additionally, these early CPUE data
are aggregated over species and there is no way to disaggregate them. Subsequently, data were
recorded by day and by spatial grid and currently the trawl CPUE is standardised using General
Linear Modelling (GLM) approaches (discussed under the Modelling section, 5.5.2).
Historical species-aggregated CPUE for the West coast (predominately M. paradoxus) declined by
about 75% from 1955 to the late 1970s, whilst South coast species-aggregated CPUE (predominately
M. capensis) declined by about 65% during the same period. Since then, the M. paradoxus
standardized CPUE varied without trend for twenty years and appears to have been lower but stable
(West coast) or increasing (South coast) in the last decade (Figure 5.). M. capensis standardized
CPUE increased somewhat from 1977, was stable throughout the 1980s and 1990s, and has been
increasing since at least 2007 on both coasts.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 30
Figure 5: Recent trends in the GLM-standardised commercial CPUE and abundance indices for M.
paradoxus (open circles) and M. capensis (black diamonds) from trawl surveys that are
used in the TAC computation. The survey abundance estimates shown incorporates the
calibration factors specified in the OMP for the years in which the new gear was used on
the RV Africana.
Fishery-independent surveys on the West coast and on the South coast are also used to monitor stock
status. West coast surveys were completed bi-annually (summer and winter) from 1983 to 1990, and
in summer only from 1991 onwards. During the summer survey of 1989, the research vessel (RV)
Africana broke down after only 25 stations were completed and the survey was aborted. Surveys
subsequent to this were successfully completed with the exception of 1993 (where portions of the
inshore strata were not adequately surveyed) and 1998 (when no surveys were completed as the RV
Africana was undergoing a complete re-fit). In 2000 and 2001 the RV Dr Fridtjof Nansen was used to
conduct the surveys due to further technical problems with the RV Africana.
The first of the south coast surveys was completed in spring (September) 1986 and the first autumn
(April/May) survey was completed in 1988. The following two autumn surveys were only completed
within the 200m depth contour, as were the spring surveys from 1990 to 1995. With the exception of
2001 and 2002, surveys of the entire south coast shelf up to 500m have been completed every autumn
since 1999 (although the Dr Fridtjof Nansen was used in 2000).
In 2002 the Africana resumed operations, completing all surveys until April 2012, subsequent to
which the vessel has not been operational. The “new” gear has been used on all surveys since 2004,
with the exception of 2006 and 2010 when the “old” gear was used for calibration purposes. The
commercial fishing vessel Andromeda, considered equivalent to the Africana in terms of trawling
efficiency, was used in 2013 (summer west coast) and 2014 (summer west coast and autumn south
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 31
coast surveys).
The research vessel surveys use standardized net tows in specified area strata to compute “swept area”
estimates of total hake biomass present. Detailed data on the catch samples include catch-at-size
(which is converted to sample catch-at-age and selectivity for the surveys) and proportion of each
species in the catch (which is used for proportioning the commercial catch into the two species).
Swept area methods in fisheries surveys are seldom considered to be absolute measures of total
biomass, and survey cpue is more usually interpreted as an index of biomass. This is the case in the
RSA hake stock assessments, which include examination of efficiencies relative to swept area
methods. The surveys show considerable annual variability, to the extent that it is not possible to
distinguish trends between the survey indices and the commercial CPUE on a purely statistical basis.
It can be seen for Figure 5 above that recent M. paradoxus survey indices showed no trend (as did
commercial cpue) on the West Coast, but decreased slightly on the South Coast, where commercial
cpue increased, whilst survey indices for M. capensis varied but with no trend on both coasts, in
contrast to commercial cpue which increased in both areas. Note that the commercial cpue carries
more weight in the stock assessments.
5.5.2 Assessment Modelling
The assessment of the two RSA hake stocks involves multiple levels of modelling, including:
1. GLM models constructed for the standardisation of CPUE;
2. population models constructed to represent hypotheses on how the stocks are growing and
reproducing (to compare to the empirical data);
3. Maximum likelihood model fitting procedures to estimate parameters that provide the best
match between the population model and the empirical data;
4. Projections of stock status using alternative future management approaches
5. The development of Operational Management Procedures (OMPs) to examine uncertainties
and to structure the management advice.
A detailed account of the historical development of the RSA hake stock assessment approach is
provided in the first MSC re-assessment report (MM, 2004), and will not be repeated here. As
mentioned above, at the time of the original MSC certification management and assessments were
conducted for West and South coast hake “stocks” in which the two species were aggregated. The
assessment model used was an Age-Structured Production Model (ASPM). This is a common
modelling approach used when the data series of catch is relatively long compared to the catch-at-age
data series , and is usually measured with error. An ASPM generates an annual series of population
data based upon estimates of:
a) stock size in the initial year of the analysis
b) annual catch that is removed by the relevant fisheries; the selectivity (vulnerability at each
age) of the fish to each fishing gear
c) weight-at-age of fish in the catch
d) stock–recruitment relationship
e) natural mortality rate (M) at age.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 32
The ASPM “reconstructs” an annual time series of a population’s biomass, catch-at-age and other
population parameters. Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) methods are then used to estimate
the most appropriate set of population parameters that will maximise the match between the observed
(empirical: indices of abundance, catch at age) and the predicted reconstructed population (ASPM-
generated) data. The estimated values of the parameters are used to compute management quantities,
such as the level of depletion relative to initial population biomass and relative to Maximum
Sustainable Yield (MSY) levels.
The basic modelling approach continues to be the ASPM, but with the improvement in species-
specific data the assessments are now separate for M. paradoxus and M. capensis, rather than separate
for West Coast versus South Coast with species combined. However, the assessments are integrated
through the same modelling procedure, which allows species–disaggregated data to be utilized where
they are available and species-aggregated data to be used when they cannot be apportioned by species.
In the hake assessments, the empirical data are the annual catches; the catch-at-age for selected years
both from the trawl fleet and from the fishery-independent surveys; GLM standardised CPUE
estimates of indices of abundance; and fishery-independent survey indices of abundance. The
parameters estimated are the unexploited stock size; selectivity-at-age models for the commercial and
fishery-independent indices; natural mortality rate at age; and the stock–recruitment relationship and
residuals. While the baseline assessment is now species-specific, a species–combined assessment is
done for purposes of historical comparison.
Rademeyer (2013) states that the models fit the index data reasonably well, whereas the fits to catch at
age data were less well defined. Anomalies in the assessment results, which do not limit the
immediate management use of the assessment, include estimated mortality rates at age, recruitment
productivity and the annual recruitment variability. The assessment indicated uncertainties in several
factors which were evaluated through sensitivity analysis and more formally through management
strategy evaluation in the context of development of the OMP discussed below.
The assessments models developed and implemented by MCM and its contractors are subjected to
various reviews through MCM’s Demersal Working Group. Industry, through their consultants,
participate in the debates of the Working Group and have been influential in guiding the research.
Additionally, external reviews have been obtained through the BENEFIT stock assessment
workshops, which facilitates the development of Angolan, Namibian and South African capacity for
quantitative assessment of their fish stocks through this programme.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 33
5.6 Management advice
Management advice and the associated TAC’s for South African hake have been developed through
OMPs, which are designed to develop robust management based upon projections of management
alternatives under the range of uncertainties in the assessment. Various management objectives, risks
and constraints are agreed upon, tested in the simulations, and then form the basis of management
actions. An OMP is built on the premise that major changes are unlikely to occur in an assessment
from one year to the next; that full assessments conducted annually, accompanied by debates and
management negotiations, may be counter-productive to long-term management strategies; and that
human resources (government managers, scientists and industry) are limited.
The South African hake OMP specifies a set of data to be used in the OMP, the formulae and models
that use those data to determine the TAC, and the associated process of selection. This includes
extensive simulation testing of the consequences of alternative assumptions about population
dynamics and how management quantities react to those alternatives. The simplified formulae are
updated annually in order to determine the TAC. By so doing, the need for a full assessment every
year is avoided, but there is a requirement that the formulae do not deviate greatly from the
assessment projections.
Originally, the OMP focused on West Coast hake where the “stock” was determined to be in need of
recovery. In 1998, the broad guidelines for the OMP were that there be a high probability of the
biomass recovering to the MSY level within 10 years, and that there be a low probability of any
decline in biomass or of a reduction in TAC during the initial years of recovery. These objectives
were evaluated with alternative assumptions about different hake dynamics. The alternatives included
levels of recruitment variability, bias in the CPUE indices as indicators of abundance trends; different
discarding levels; absence of future surveys; different natural mortality rates at age; and regime shifts
(changes in overall productive capacity of stock). Currently, the species-specific stock assessments
indicate that the chief concern for the West coast is that M. paradoxus is below MSY levels. M.
capensis has been above MSY level since about 1980.
The objectives that were identified for this fishery are essentially three-fold:
improve catch rates quickly in the short-to-medium term: catch rates for offshore trawlers
have decreased appreciably since the turn of the century. Given an increasing fuel price, it
would become increasingly difficult for this fishery to operate profitably unless catch rates
improve substantially;
increase the M. paradoxus biomass level to close to the MSY level over 20 years; and
after likely large initial cuts to achieve improvements in catch rates, maintain TAC stability
over time.
Given these objectives, the OMP de facto became a formal recovery plan for the M. paradoxus
resource, and was constrained to assure not only the recovery of M. paradoxus within the required
time frame, but also that there is a small probability that the resource declines any time within that
time frame. The OMP selected in 2010 placed a limitation on the maximum allowed inter-annual
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 34
TAC change of 10% after a fixed three-year phase down of 7.5% per annum in the TAC.
The recommended TAC for 2014 was 155,280t (156,075t in 2013), of which 119,549t relates to. M.
paradoxus and 35,730t to M. capensis (Rademeyer, 2013). Note that, currently, regulation of the hake
fishery cannot practically be done separately by species, and catch allocations by species are
integrated into a single TAC.
The stock assessment analyses and the OMP development have attempted to develop appropriate
recovery strategies for M. paradoxus, as reflected in the management advice outlined above. As in
many recovery plans, however, the recovery period is lengthy. It is, therefore imperative that the
recovery process be closely monitored through periodic assessments and, perhaps more importantly,
through monitoring the fishery and survey cpue (a key design feature of the OMP).
5.7 Assessment of current stock status
The OMP used in RSA hake management and assessments is philosophically different from the usual
stock assessment procedures, in which the assessors choose a “base case” that reflects some
perception of median or mean tendency of the status of the stock. The OMP process avoids this by
focusing on a large set of possible biological scenarios (a “reference set”) without assigning them
some arbitrary probability. The OMP evaluation objectives are to develop the management actions
which most robustly address the uncertainties identified in the reference set and in further robustness
tests.
The Reference Case assessment of the RSA hake resource was updated in 2013, using the same
methodology as that used in developing the existing OMP (Rademeyer and Butterworth, 2010), but
with revised and updated data sets. Compared with the 2012 assessment (Rademeyer, 2012), the 2013
assessment included new commercial data (catches, length distribution and CPUE), but no new survey
data are available (see 5.7.3). The main change is the inclusion of new long-line catch-at-length data
subsequent to 2000.
The methodology (details are provided in Appendix B of Rademeyer and Butterworth, 2013) involves
comparing 6 assessments that incorporate the updated data. These are:
1. RS1-2012: the 2012 routine update (Rademeyer, 2012);
2. RS1-2013a: a comparable assessment to RS1-2012 with updated catches and CPUE data to
2012;
3. RS1-2013b: as RS1-2013a, with updated maturity-at-length (Singh et al. 2011) and length–
weight parameters (Singh 2013);
4. RS1-2013c: as RS1-2013b, with further commercial offshore trawl catch-at-length data
(details in Appendix 1 of Rademeyer and Butterworth, 2013);
5. RS1-2013d: as RS1-2013c, with further commercial longline catch-at-length data (details in
Appendix 1 of Rademeyer and Butterworth, 2013);
6. RS1-2013e: as RS1-2013d, with different selectivity curves estimated for the longline fleet on
the West and South Coasts for M. capensis.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 35
The last assessment (6) is termed the “new Reference Case” (new RC) and was used for estimating
stock status in 2013 and the 2014 TAC.
Because the assessment methodology used for the RSA hake fishery is unique [it is not a simple
virtual population analysis, and its output reflects the objectives of balancing resource sustainability –
risk - with fishing opportunities – reward], we have presented a synopsis of the model below. Readers
wishing to skip this technical section should move forward to section 5.7.9.
5.7.1 The assessment model
The model used is a sex-disaggregated Age-Structured Production Model (ASPM), which is fitted
directly to age-length keys (ALKs) and length frequency distributions. The model assesses the two
hake species as two independent stocks and is fitted to species-disaggregated data as well as species-
combined data. The general specifications of the overall model are set out below, together with some
key choices in the implementation of the methodology. Details of data and parameterisation can be
found in Appendix B of Rademeyer and Butterworth (2013).
5.7.2 Population Dynamics
The resource dynamics of the two RSA hake populations (M. capensis and M. paradoxus) are
modelled using information on the number of hake by sex and age caught in each year by fleet; the
recruitment (of 0-year-old fish) of fish by sex at the start of each year; a maximum age considered
(taken to be a plus-group); natural mortality rate by sex and age; and fishing mortality.
Two species-aggregated commercial CPUE indices are available: the ICSEAF West Coast and the
ICSEAF South Coast series. Catchability (q) for each species (and zone) are forced to be in the same
proportion. Commercial proportions at length cannot be disaggregated by species and gender. The
model is therefore fit to the proportions at length as determined for both species and sex combined.
The number of recruits is assumed to be related to the corresponding female spawning stock biomass
(SSB), on the assumption that there are always sufficient males to provide adequate fertilisation. The
recruitment and corresponding female SSB are related by means of the Beverton–Holt (Beverton and
Holt 1957) or a modified (generalised) form of the Ricker stock–recruitment relationship.
The model estimate of the mid-year exploitable biomass for each hake species and fleet is calculated
by converting the estimated numbers-at-age into mid-year biomass-at-age and applying natural and
fishing mortality for half the year.
The model estimates the survey biomass at the start of the year (summer) on the basis that both the
spring and autumn surveys are taken to correspond to winter (mid-year). It is assumed that the
resource is at the deterministic equilibrium that corresponds to an absence of harvesting at the start of
the initial year considered, i.e., 1917 when catches commence.
To estimate model parameters, the model is fit to CPUE and survey biomass indices, commercial and
survey length frequencies and survey ALKs, as well as to the stock-recruitment curve.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 36
5.7.3 Survey biomass indices
Data from the surveys are treated as biomass indices in a similar manner to the species-disaggregated
commercial CPUE series, with survey selectivity function replacing the commercial selectivity.
Though an estimate of sampling variance is available for most surveys, these estimates probably fail
to include all sources of variability, and unrealistically high precision (low variance and hence high
weight) could hence be accorded to these indices.
In June 2003, the trawl gear on the RV Africana was changed and a different value for q is taken to
apply to the surveys conducted with the new gear. Calibration experiments have been conducted
between the RV Africana with the old gear (hereafter referred to as the “old Africana”) and the RV Dr
Fridtjof Nansen, and between the RV Africana with the new gear (“new Africana”) and the RV Dr
Fridtjof Nansen. A large decrease in catch efficiency for M. capensis was estimated for the new
research survey trawl net, for which no plausible explanation has yet been found. It was recommended
(BENEFIT 2004) that the ratio of the catchability of the new to the old Africana net is taken as 0.8.
The survey’s coefficients of catchability (for the survey with the old Africana gear) are constrained to
values below 1 (i.e. it is assumed that the nets do not herd the hake).
The survey proportions at length are disaggregated by species and, for some years, further
disaggregated by gender.
ALKs are derived under the assumption that fish are sampled randomly with respect to age within
each length-class. Note that only one trained otolith reader is available at present.
5.7.4 Stock–recruitment function
The stock–recruitment residuals are assumed to be log-normally distributed and are estimated for
years 1985 to 2006, with recruitment for other years being set deterministically (i.e. exactly as given
by the estimated stock–recruitment curve) as there is insufficient catch-at-age information to allow
reliable residual estimation for earlier years. A limit on the recent recruitment fluctuations is set by
progressively forcing recruitment over the more recent years to lie closer to the stock–recruitment
relationship curve. Stock–recruitment residuals are estimated separately for each species from 1985 to
the present, and set to zero pre-1985 because there are no catch-at-length data for that period to
provide the information necessary to inform estimation. The results for the reference set of operating
models (OM) for testing the 2014 OMP revision for the South African hake resource (Rademeyer and
Butterworth, May 2014) are shown in Figure 6.
The design for this proposed reference set covered three major areas of uncertainty: 3 centre-years for
the change in the preponderance from M. capensis to M. paradoxus in the catch (1950, 1958 and
1965); 3 natural mortality vectors ("Mmed": M2-=0.75 and M5+=0.375, "Mlow": M2-=0.6 and
M5+=0.25 and "Mhigh": M2-=0.9 and M5+=0.5); and 3 stock–recruitment relationship models (Ricker:
modified Ricker and Beverton–Holt) (see Rademeyer 2014).
Testing showed that when the BH stock–recruitment function is assumed, if spawning biomass drops
below the lowest levels that occurred in the past (Bmin) under catch limits set unduly high, there is
hardly any consequent penalty to future resource prospects as a result of “recruitment overfishing”. To
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 37
allow for this possibility, a less optimistic relationship of recruitment to spawning biomass is assumed
when this biomass falls below its lowest previous level. This makes no difference in terms of the fit of
the assessment model, but if for the original fit Bmsy/K fell below Bmin, MSY decreases although Bmsy
and Fmsy remain unchanged.
Secondly, it was decided to reduce the number of OMs (27) in the initial reference set (there were 10
OMs used in 2010) by including only combinations where both the natural mortality vector and the
year of the reversal in species dominance are changed from their central choices. This leads to a
revised set of 15 OMs.
Figure 6 shows the estimated stock-recruitment curves for each of the 15 OMs of the revised set for
M. paradoxus and M. capensis, grouped by level of natural mortality (R&B 2014). Whichever
scenario is chosen, it is apparent that recruitment levels of both M. paradoxus and M. capensis are
sustained even at the lowest SSB levels recorded, and that this level (in 2007) could taken as a proxy
for Blim. The actual SSB value depends on the reference set of OMs used.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 38
Figure 6: Estimated stock–recruitment curves for each of the 15 OMs of the revised set for M.
paradoxus and M. capensis, grouped by level of natural mortality. In each plot, the "data"
are plotted for a single OM, corresponding to the modified Ricker stock-recruitment
curve and 1958 centre-year.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 39
5.7.5 Model parameters
The primary parameters estimated in the model are the species-specific female virgin SSB (B0) and
“steepness” of the stock-recruitment relationship.
The species- and gender-specific von Bertalanffy growth curve parameters (l∞, and t0) are estimated
directly in the model fitting process, as well as B0 and values used to compute the standard deviation
of the length-at-age.
5.7.6 Survey fishing selectivity at length:
The survey selectivities are estimated directly for seven pre-determined lengths for M. paradoxus and
M. capensis and are survey specific (at constant intervals between the minus and plus groups).
Between these lengths, selectivity is assumed to change linearly.
For the South Coast spring and autumn surveys, gender-specific selectivities are estimated for M.
paradoxus. Furthermore, the female selectivities are scaled down by a parameter estimated for each of
these two surveys to allow for the male predominance in the survey catch.
5.7.7 Commercial fishing selectivity at length:
The fishing selectivity-at-length (sex-independent) for each species and fleet is estimated in terms of a
logistic curve, and may be modified to include a decrease in selectivity at larger lengths. Periods of
fixed and changing selectivity have been assumed for the offshore trawl fleet catches to take account
of the change in the selectivity at low ages over time, due (probably) to the phasing out of the (illegal)
use of net liners.
On the South Coast, the female M. paradoxus offshore trawl selectivity (only the trawl fleet is
assumed to catch M. paradoxus on the South Coast) is scaled down by a factor taken as the average of
those estimated for the South Coast spring and autumn surveys. Although there is no gender
information for the commercial catches, the South Coast spring and autumn surveys catch a much
higher proportion of male M. paradoxus than female (ratios of about 7:1 and 3.5:1 for spring and
autumn respectively). This is assumed to reflect a difference in distribution of the two sexes that
would therefore affect the commercial fleet similarly.
5.7.8 Input parameters and other choice for application to hake
The proportion of fish by hake species, sex and length that are mature is assumed to follow a logistic
curve with the parameter values l50 41.53 cm and delta = 2.98 for female M. paradoxus , and l50 53.83
and delta = 10.14 for M. capensis (from Singh et al. 2011).
The RC assumes natural mortality is fixed at 0.75 for ages 0 and 1 and at 0.375 for ages 6 and above,
with a linear trend between these two values for ages 2 to 5.
The weight at length for each species and gender is calculated from the functions published by
Fairweather (2008), averaged for the West and South coasts.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 40
Finally, the OMP was developed based upon the Beverton-Holt rather than a Ricker function. The net
effect is that the estimated status relative to carrying capacity (K=B0) and relative to BMSY are smaller
than would have been if those modeling modifications had been made. These actions were
implemented with a precautionary intent in the OMP evaluation.
5.7.9 Results of the 2013 assessment
Rademeyer and Butterworth (2013) report that the fits to the CPUE and survey abundance indices for
RS1-2012 and the 2013 new Reference Case (RC) are reasonable for all series. The estimated
commercial selectivity curves for the new RC show a decrease for large fish, apart for the South Coast
offshore trawl fleet for M. paradoxus. For M. capensis, this decrease is estimated for all fleets apart
from the offshore trawl and South Coast handline fleets. The fits to the survey sex–aggregated and
gender-disaggregated catch-at-length data, and to the commercial catch-at-length data, averaged over
all the years for which data are available, are “reasonable”.
Although results do change with the inclusion of the updated catches, CPUE (RS1-2013a), with the
change in the maturity-at-length and length weight relationships (RS1-2013b) and with the inclusion
of the new offshore trawl catches (RS1-2013c), the changes is small. The current status of the
resources appears to be broadly unchanged, with M. paradoxus close to the MSY level and M.
capensis well above it (see Figure 7).
The picture is rather different for M. paradoxus when the new longline catch-at-length data are
included (RS1-2013d and RS1-2013e), when it is evident that a change in selectivity over time is
necessary for the model to fit to the data. Two changes have been made to the manner in which
longline selectivities are modelled compared to preceding analyses. With the availability of species-
disaggregated longline data for the West Coast, a selectivity curve can be estimated directly for M.
capensis, rather than assuming the same selectivity curve as on the South Coast. Also, three periods of
differing selectivities have been assumed to better reflect the patterns in these catch-at-length data,
namely pre-2000, 2000–2005 and 2006 onwards, which are taken to apply to both M. paradoxus and
M. capensis. These changes are justified in that the patterns in the residuals are much reduced in the
new RC compared with RS1-2013d, and that over time this fishery has shifted its focus to include
more of the smaller hake.
It is not clear why including new longline catch-at-length data results in a rather different perception
of the current status of M. paradoxus. In changing from the survey abundance indices to the
commercial catch-at-length data, the fits improve for both the commercial trawl (slightly) and the
longline data, and the net weight accorded to these data increases relative to the abundance index data,
leading to the change in results.
5.7.10 Stock status in relation to reference points
The 2013 assessment estimates that current M. paradoxus female SSB is about 21% of the initial
(unexploited) SSB (B0) and about 98% of the SSB at MSY. The current estimate of MSY is about
111,000t.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 41
The 2013 assessment estimates that current M. capensis female SSB is about 68% of B0 and 3.17
times the SSB at MSY. The current estimate of MSY is about 62,000t.
Figure 7: Trajectories of female SSB for South African hake (in terms of pre-exploitation level) for
the five assessments. The horizontal lines represent BMSY (i.e. Maximum Sustainable
Yield Level, MSYL).
Subsequent to the assessment results submitted to the International Workshop (IWS) held in 2013 to
review the management of the hake fishery, SADSTIA provided a revised assessment in May 2014
(the site visit was in March 2014). The estimate of M. paradoxus SSB at 68% of the MSYL, rather
than the estimate of 98% produced during a routine update of the assessments earlier in 2013, was due
to the inclusion of catch-at-length (CAL) data for the longline fishery. However these longline CAL
data were included in their sex aggregated form, and the IWS panel of international peer reviewers
recommended that these data be treated in sex disaggregated form (among other recommendations,
including accommodation of the change in survey catchability associated with the use of a new gear
by RV Africana (see Table 1, Model 1 of Smith et al., 2013)). The new assessment reflected work
carried out in response to the panel’s recommendations, as part of the redevelopment of the OMP
scheduled in September 2014, and the following summarises the results of a number of papers
submitted to the DWG during 2014 which address this.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 42
OLRAC-SPS (2014) repeated the assessments submitted to the IWS in 2013, but used sex
disaggregated longline CAL data and changed the logistic/exponential longline fishing selectivity
function to double normal functions. Their “best estimate” was that the M. paradoxus SSB is 3%
above the MSYL.
Rademeyer (2014) implemented a number of changes to the assessment model in a sequential fashion,
incorporating the IWS panel recommendations about calibration factors; sex disaggregated longline
CAL data, with sex specific double–normal selectivity functions; extending the use of the double–
normal selectivity function to all commercial fleets; and utilising more recent estimates of longline
catches by species and coast (West or South). The modifications used either improved the LLF or
were deemed to be more scientifically defensible. The estimate of M. paradoxus SSB was at 93% of
MSYL (-LLF = -180.2), and this was approved by all parties as the reference case for the future
redevelopment of the OMP.
Finally, following input from a specially appointed task team, Rademeyer and Butterworth (2014)
produced a proposed reference set that had a slightly better fit to the reference case (-LLF = -181.3),
and which changed the estimate of the 2013 spawning biomass relative to MSYL from 93% to 98%.
The estimated M. paradoxus female SSB in 2013 is 147,000t (Bsp MSY = 153,000t) and MSY is
estimated at 111,000t.
For M. capensis, the estimated female SSB in 2013 is 188,000t (Bsp MSY = 68,000t) and MSY is
estimated at 62,000t.
Figure 7 shows the median and range (minimum and maximum) SSB trajectories for three sets of
operating models (full initial set; the revised set = reference case assessment; and for the equivalent to
the 2010 RSa) for M. paradoxus and M. capensis. It is apparent that there has been a recovery of M.
paradoxus since the low point in 2007, whilst M. capensis continues to fluctuate at a relatively high
level.
The assessment team note that as this assessment report was being completed, a revised OMP was in
development, and that the outputs from this show that under certain assumptions the female M.
paradoxus SSB may have attained BMSY (i.e. MSYLsp
) in 2012/13. The projections also indicate that
having attained a level at or just below BMSY, the stock biomass is likely to fall, reaching a low point
in 2017 before making a sustained recovery in the longer term (see Figure 8).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 43
Figure 8: Output from 11 assessment models showing the ratio of female spawning stock biomass
(Bsp
) relative to MSYLsp
(~ BMSY) for M. paradoxus. The solid line shows the median
estimate. Colours denote 80, 90 and 95% confidence levels. [Source: OLRAC, pers
comm, 2014].
5.8 Other fishery removals
As noted above, some hake are taken by longlines, and this is addressed in the stock assessment. A
small quantity of hake are also caught in the midwater trawl fishery for horse mackerel (Trachurus
trachurus). A catch allocation is made to the midwater trawl sector to allow for this catch to be
landed (this was set at 560t in 2010).
There are no other commercial fishery removals from the hake stocks in South African waters.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 44
6 PRINCIPLE TWO: ECOSYSTEM BACKGROUND
6.1 Interactions with non-target fish species
Fisheries can interact with non-target species in two main ways: one is through these species
becoming caught and retained by fishing vessels (“Retained catch”) and the other is through non-
target species becoming trapped in fishing gear and then later discarded (“Discarded catch”). These
retained and discarded catches have the potential to adversely affect the stocks of the non-target
species concerned.
There is a considerable amount of information available on the catch of non-target species in South
African trawl fisheries and their management. Much of this information has been generated by the
client during the current (second) period of MSC certification to a condition of certification that
required an improved understanding of the quantity of non-target species caught in the fishery, their
status, and the introduction of appropriate management measures. The client’s actions over the past 5
years have included the funding of an independent fishery observer programme; research into both the
character of the non-target catch; assessments of stock status; and the development of management
proposals.
The text below summarises the key findings of the wealth of work that has been carried out in the past
few years.
6.1.1 A note on terminology
There is some potential for confusion to arise in the discussion of the interaction between this fishery
and non-target species because of the differences in the use of terminology between the MSC
Certification Requirements and workers in South Africa.
Most of the South African workers use the term “bycatch” to denote the catch of non-target species in
a fishery prior to any sorting of the catch. By contrast, the MSC use the term “bycatch” to denote the
species discarded from the fishery (excluding the discards of undersized target species).
To avoid confusion in this document, we have used the terminology below:-
Non-target species – this describes the catch of non-target species. It is equivalent to the
South African usage of the term “bycatch”.
Retained species – these are the non-target species that are retained aboard fishing vessels
and subsequently landed by them.
Discarded species – these are the non-target species that are thrown back into the sea after
capture, and which are not landed. This term is equivalent to the MSC CR usage of the term
“bycatch”.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 45
6.2 Catch composition
The catch composition of South African trawl fisheries has been examined through several different
observer programmes over the past 19 years, starting with a pilot programme in 1995. With the
exception of 2007 there is now a continuous record of the catch of non-target species for the hake-
directed trawl fishery since 2003, with a minimum of 1,000 observed trawls per annum. These data
show that the overall catch of non-target species in the hake trawl fishery varies between 12 and 27%.
The bulk of trawling occurs on the outer continental shelf, where the catch is dominated by the
deepwater hake M. paradoxus and catches of non-target species are generally low. Inshore areas
where M. capensis predominates typically have a higher catch rate of non-target species.
The findings of each programme have been analysed and published in reports and in peer-reviewed
scientific papers. A brief summary of the relevant findings of these observer programmes is presented
below.
6.2.1 Pilot Observer Programme: 1995-2000
During the period 1995-2000 fishery observers collected data on the total catch composition of over
1,000 trawl hauls in the South African EEZ (614 hauls off the south coast and 479 off the west coast).
The findings of this programme are reported in Walmsley et al, 2007 and summarised here.
This observer programme recorded 70 species from trawl samples, including the target species (M.
capensis and M. paradoxus and also the Agulhas sole (Austroglossus pectoralis) which is targetted by
the trawl fleet in inshore areas. The hake directed trawl fishery in inshore areas (using 110mm mesh
cod-ends) was found to catch 54% M. capensis, and the sole-directed fishery (using 70mm mesh cod-
ends) caught 61% M. capensis and 17% A. pectoralis.
Catch composition was found to vary considerably between areas. Off the south coast, in inshore
waters, species other than hake made up between 12% and 47% of the catch, but further offshore in
deeper waters and along the west coast the catch was dominated by hake.
Discarding rates were monitored in this observer programme. Discards of all species (including the
target species) were estimated to be 5.4% in the inshore hake trawl fishery and 19.2% in the sole-
directed fishery time.
The findings of this pilot observer programme were used to inform a more extensive and improved
observer programme which was established in 2002, and which is considered next.
6.2.2 Government Observer Programme, OROP: 2002–06
In mid-2002 the South African Government’s Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries
(DAFF) established an observer programme for the trawl fishery. This Offshore Resource Observer
Programme (OROP) ran from 2002–2011 and gathered data on the catch of non-target species from
2002–06.
OROP examined the species composition of trawl catches (100kg samples of the catch taken direct
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 46
from the cod-end before sorting). The programme therefore provided information about the catch of
target and non-target species.
The data gathered by the OROP observer programme has recently been analysed to provide details of
catch composition in the inshore trawl fishery (analysis set out in Attwood et al, 2011) and the
offshore trawl fishery (analysed in Daneel & Attwood, 2013). The key findings of these two studies
are summarised below.
6.2.2.1 Offshore trawl area: 2002-06
Over the period 2002-2006 the OROP observer programme resulted in over 700 observer trips aboard
80 offshore trawlers, and monitored over 13,000 trawls on the main hake trawl grounds in the South
African EEZ (see Table 3 and Figure 9). The data gathered by these observers has been examined in
detail by Daneel & Attwood (2013) and some of the key findings of this analysis are summarised
briefly below.
The OROP observers examined catch composition from the trawls, and recorded a total of 170
different species in trawl catches, of which hake comprised over 73% of the total catch overall. Most
of the catch in the offshore trawl fishery comprised hake and a few other species. The average annual
catch composition from the observations make over this period is shown in Table 4. None of the non-
target species observed during this period made up more than 5% of the catch. The catch was
examined for spatial and temporal patterns.
The spatial analysis of catch data found that there were five distinct “clusters”, where the catch
composition was significantly different from other areas. Most of the offshore zone catch
composition belonged to “Cluster C” (see Figure 10). In most of the offshore trawl zone the catch is
dominated by the hake species. The only area that is an exception to this trend is “Cluster D”, an area
off Saldanha Bay in the Western Cape, where the catch composition is reversed (due to high catches
of snoek and other non-target species), and hake make up just over 17% of the catch here.
6.2.2.2 Offshore trawl area: 2007-12
Over the period 2002-2011 the OROP observer programme resulted in over 1150 observer trips
aboard 101 offshore trawlers, and monitored over 26,000 trawls on the main hake trawl grounds in the
South African EEZ (see Table 3 and Figure 9). The data gathered by these observers has been
examined in detail by Daneel & Attwood (2013) and some of the key findings of this analysis are
summarised briefly below.
The OROP observers examined catch composition from the trawls, and recorded a total of 170
different species in trawl catches, of which hake comprised over 73% of the total catch overall. Most
of the catch in the offshore trawl fishery comprised of hake and a few other species. The average
annual catch composition from the observations make over this period is shown in Table 4. None of
the non-target species observed during this period made up more than 5% of the catch. The catch was
examined for spatial and temporal patterns.
The spatial analysis of catch data found that there were five distinct “clusters”, where the catch
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 47
composition was significantly different from other areas. Most of the offshore zone catch
composition belonged to “Cluster C” (see Figure 10). In most of the offshore trawl zone the catch is
dominated by the hake species. The only area that is an exception to this trend is “Cluster D”, an area
off Saldanha Bay in the Western Cape, where the catch composition is reversed (due to high catches
of snoek and other non-target species), and hake make up just over 17% of the catch here.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 48
Table 3. Summary of offshore trawl fishery observer programme (OROP) coverage over the period November 2002- October 2011. [Source: Daneel &
Attwood, 2013 and updated by Smith 2014].
OROP data Nov
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Oct
2011
Over all
years
Over all years
(excluding 2002
and 2011)
Number of trawl
monitored 686 4501 3858 3820 4472 946 2888 3394 1847 208 26620 25726
% of the years total
trawls monitored 1.6 9.9 7.6 7.1 9.1 2.2 8.3 14.2 8.0 0.8 6.3 7.3
Number of vessels
monitored 22 61 58 60 56 25 46 48 32 9 101 101
% of total vessels
monitored 22.7 58.1 56.3 56.1 56.0 25.5 54.1 72.7 47.1 14.1 75.9 79.5
Number of trips with an
observer 30 191 179 167 190 36 126 139 77 15 1150 1105
% of trips with an
observer 1.2 7.2 6.6 6.1 7.5 1.6 6.7 9.4 5.2 0.9 4.9 5.7
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 49
Table 3: Summary of offshore trawl fishery observer programme (OROP) coverage over the
period 2002-06. [Source: Daneel & Attwood, 2013].
Table 4: Summary of bycatch composition (including both retained and discarded individuals) for
the most abundant non-target species from 13,030 offshore trawl hauls monitored
between 2002 and 2006 [Source: Daneel & Attwood, 2013].
Scientific Name Common Name Estimated annual catch,
2002-2006 (kg)
Percentage of catch*
Merluccius paradoxus Deep water hake 71,553,353.98 65.0% 80%
Merluccius capensis Cape hake 14,623,479.44 13.3%
Merluccius spp. Unidentifed hake 2,261,651.03 2.1%
Lophius vomerinus Monkfish 4,308,903.86 3.9% 3.9%
Genupterus capensis Kingklip 3,904,501.70 3.5% 3.5%
Lepidopus caudatus Ribbonfish 3,449,887.71 3.1% 3.1%
Thyrsites atun Snoek 2,695,564.03 2.4% 2.4%
Helicolenus dactylopterus Jacopever 1,710,662.00 1.6% 1.6%
Trachurus trachurus Horse mackerel /
Maasbanker
1,272,562.21 1.2% 1.2%
Zeus capensis Cape Dory 1,071,335.77 1.0% 1.0%
Squalus spp. Dogfish 755,777.01 0.7% 0.7%
Brama brama Atlantic pomfret /
Angelfish
743,366.46 0.7% 0.7%
Coelorinchus simorhynchus Rough rattail 741,649.84 0.7% 0.7%
Malacocephalus laevis Softhead grenadier 573,413.82 0.5% 0.5%
Toderopsis spp. Red squid 393,252.40 0.4% 0.4%
* Note that this percentage has been calculated from the estimated annual catch of the top 15 catch
components, and not all 170 species recorded; all percentages given here are therefore slightly higher
than those in the source publication.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 50
Figure 9 Map of the distribution of offshore hake trawl activity (shaded cells) compared with
observer coverage over the period 2002-2006 [Source: Daneel & Attwood, 2013].
Figure 10: Map of the South African hake offshore trawl grounds showing grid cells coloured
according to similarity “clusters” identified from analysis of catch composition. [Source:
Daneel & Attwood, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 51
6.2.2.3 Inshore trawl area: 2002-06
A study of the catch composition from OROP observer trips aboard inshore trawlers over the period
2002-06 has been published (Attwood et al, 2011). The key findings of this study are summarised
here.
The inshore trawl vessels target both hake (M. capensis) and Agulhas sole (Austroglossus pectoralis).
Most of the trawling activity is for hake; only 3% of the inshore catch is of sole. A total of 137
species (including hake and sole) were recorded by observers on inshore trawl vessels targeting both
hake and sole during the period 2002-06. The catch of non-target species was examined independent
of the target species (i.e. the sole fishery data could not be separated from the hake fishery data; the
authors considered that this gave a more precautionary view of the catch composition in that the sole
fishery caught more non-target species than the hake fishery).
Thirteen of the species caught by inshore trawlers made up 1% or more of the total catch (see Table
5). These species also comprised 95% of the total catch, and included M. capensis (55.37%) and M.
paradoxus (2.45%). Two non-target species made up more than 5% of the catch in the inshore
fishery: horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) and Panga (Pterogymnus laniarius).
Table 5: Annual average catch for the inshore trawl fleet, 2003-06, based on unsorted samples
taken by independent observers. [Source: Attwood et al, 2011].
LCI = Lower Confidence Interval
UCI = Upper Confidence Interval
Discarding practices were examined by Attwood et al (2011) by examining the composition of the
species discarded (which were mostly small hake) and from comparisons of the observers’ catch
estimates and the reported landings. Although it was not possible to compute the total discards or the
discard rate, it was reported that discarding rates were low. This is because most of the fish caught in
the inshore trawl fishery are marketable. The retained catch of non-target species is locally termed
“joint product” and can comprise between 15-36% of the value of total landings.
It is noted in the discussion of the findings of this paper that in the period of time since these data
were gathered a number of new management measures have been introduced to manage the catch of
the more abundant non-target species in the hake trawl fishery.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 52
6.2.2.4 Industry funded observer programme: 2006-13
Over the period 2006-13 the fishing industry sponsored an observer programme, established initially
to determine the split of M. capensis and M. paradoxus in catches from different areas, and then
extended in 2008 to cover the whole trawl catch (in lieu of the OROP observations, which ceased to
examine the catch of non-target species in 2006).
This observer programme examined the species composition of a 100kg sample of the catch from
each haul observed. A total of 6,064 trawl catches were sampled. The results from this programme
have been analysed by Attwood (2014), for the period 2008-2013, and the key conclusions of this
report are summarised below.
This observer programme included data from inshore and offshore areas, and from both the directed
hake trawl fishery and the Agulhas Sole trawl fishery (prosecuted using 70mm cod-end mesh nets and
in shallower waters than the hake trawl fishery). The sole catch is fixed by a quota at around 500t per
year (Attwood et al, 2011). This equates to around 3% of the total trawl catch in inshore waters (see
Table 5), and is around 0.5% of the total trawl landings from the South African hake and sole
fisheries. Attwood (2014) has not removed data gathered from the sole fishery from the catch
analysis and considers that this provides a more precautionary view of the trawl catch composition,
since the sole fishery is conducted in inshore waters and catches a greater range of non-target species.
A total of 92 species of fish were reported to be caught in trawls during the period of this observer
programme (this is a lower number than the OROP programme reported above and a higher number
than the pilot project, the differences being thought to be a reflection of the sample size of each
programme). Non-target species made up an average of 14% of the hake catch with a range of 12-
16% (see Table 6). Ninety nine percent of the unsorted catch was made up of 10 species of fish, all of
which are landed and marketed (listed in Table 7). The top-ranking non-target species are reported to
have been consistent over the past 18 years.
Table 6: Catch of non-target species (“bycatch rate”) as a proportion of the catch of the two hake
species, and ranking of the top 5 non-target (i.e. non-hake) species for the period 2008-
13. [Source: Attwood, 2014].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 53
Table 7: The ten species that made up 99% of unsorted catch of hake-directed trawlers over the
period 2008-13 (in descending order). [Source: Attwood, 2014].
Spatial analysis of the data from this observer programme showed a similar pattern to the earlier
OROP observer data. Including the inshore grounds, there were 6 distinct spatial “clusters” based on
catch composition (see Figure 11). The proportion of non-target species in the catch varied
considerably between these areas, as did their contribution to the total catch from the trawl fishery.
Over 96% of the catch falls into the “cluster c”, where the average catch of non-target species is 16%
(by weight). The highest percentage of non-target species observed was 44% in “cluster f”, which
contributed less than 0.0001% of the total catch (see Table 8).
The more recent data suggest that the catch of non-target species is lower than in the earlier period. It
is considered that this may be due to an increase in hake abundance, a decrease in the abundance of
the other species, or the shift in effort from shallow to deeper fishing grounds.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 54
Figure 11: Patterns in species composition among grid squares as indicated by cluster analysis of
observer catch data for the period 2008-13. Each group indicates 50% Bray-Curtis
similarity. Axes indicate latitude and longitude of each grid square. [Source: Attwood,
2014].
Table 8: Contribution of non-target species to the total trawl catch for the areas illustrated in
Figure 11. [Source: Attwood, 2014].
Cluster Estimated contribution to total trawl
catch (%)
Proportion of non-target
species (%)
a 0.8 7
b 0.3 61
c 96.2 16
d 0.4 8
e 2.0 30
f <0.0001 44
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 55
6.2.2.5 Analysis of catch data: 2000-2010
A review of the catch of non-target species in the RSA hake trawl fishery has been set out in Smith et
al (2013). This review draws together data from fish landings and from observer trips in both the
inshore and offshore hake trawl areas and from both the government and industry-funded observer
programmes. It also examines the status of the main non-target species in the catch.
This review found that hake make up just over 79% of the overall catch. The non-target species that
make up more than 1% of the catch are monkfish, horse mackerel, ribbonfish, kingklip and snoek.
Only one species (monkfish, Lophius vomerinus) made up more than 5% of the catch (see Table 9).
Table 9: Average annual catch estimates and the percentage of each non-target species in the
catch for the period 2000-2010. [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 56
6.2.3 Management of non-target species
The only species caught in the trawl fishery that are managed through a TAC and quotas for
individual operators are two hake species (combined TAC, see section 5.6 above) and Agulhas sole.
There has been no system in place for managing the catch of non-target species until recently. These
management measures are described below.
6.2.3.1 Precautionary Upper Catch Limits (PUCLs)
“Precautionary Upper Catch Limits” (PUCLs) have been introduced for three non-target species
(kingklip, monkfish and horse mackerel) as part of fishing licence conditions for both the offshore and
inshore trawl fleets. These PUCLs set a ceiling on fleet removals of these species for each fishing
year and also require each fishing vessel to reduce the catch of kingklip and monkfish to a level not
exceeding its average catch over the period 1998-2002 (with an additional requirement that the
inshore fleet should reduce its catch of kob to 80% of the average catch for that period).
If either the PUCL or the average catch is exceeded, DAFF may prevent the permit holder(s) in the
offshore fleet from fishing for hake. For the inshore fleet, there is a requirement to take a scientific
observer on board for the remainder of the fishing trips authorised by the permit.
The inshore trawl bycatch task team have recently reported on current management measures and
proposals for future management of the catch of non-target species (DAFF 2014). Options for
implementing limits are being considered for other species. “Experimental thresholds” have been
proposed for 7 more species / species groups (panga, silver kob, carpenter, chokka squid, St Joseph
sharks, skates, and gurnards). This pilot programme has been developed to determine the level at
which the PUCL could be set for each species. This programme would also trial an administrative
system for monitoring and managing PUCL uptake across the fleet (see DAFF, 2013). It has been
proposed that this system should be tested during 2014-15 with a view to formal implementation of a
wider PUCL system in 2016 if appropriate.
During the site visit it was reported that during the 2013 the PUCL uptake for kingklip was higher
than anticipated. After a review of stock status (Brandão & Butterworth, 2013) an upwards revision
of the PUCL limit was made. Some concerns were raised by WWF that this ad-hoc reassessment of
the kingklip stock in 2013 may have lacked rigour and that this event may also have revealed
shortcomings in the management system underpinning the PUCL approach. The status of the kingklip
stock is considered further in section 6.2.5.2.1 of this report.
6.2.3.1.1 Industry-imposed measures
It is noted that SECIFA has imposed its own “PUCL” for the silver kob fishery, limiting the catch to
200t pa.
6.2.3.2 Landing composition
Fishing licence conditions require that offshore trawl permit holders must not direct fishing at any
non-target species. The total amount of hake harvested is required to account for a minimum of 50%
of each landing in terms of landed (processed weight).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 57
For the inshore fleet there is a similar but less onerous condition in place:
5.2 The Department intends instituting a per trip limit on by-catch. It is suggested that
the authorised target species (hake, horse mackerel and Agulhas sole) must account
for a minimum of 50% (by weight) of each landing for hake-directed fishing
calculated over the period of validity of this permit.
[Hake Inshore Trawl (Hake & Sole) Permit Conditions]
6.2.3.3 Move–on rules
There are “move on” rules in place for snoek (for offshore trawlers) and silver kob (for inshore
trawlers). These have been implemented as fishing licence conditions for each fleet.
For the offshore fleet, there is a requirement that if the snoek catch exceeds 20% (processed weight)
of the catch of any trawl haul, the fishing vessel should move to a location with a depth at least 50m
different from the fishing position where that catch was taken.
For the inshore fleet, the requirement is that if the catch of cob in any one trawl haul is more than 20%
of the sole catch (when fishing for sole) or 2% of the hake catch (when fishing for hake) then the
vessel must move to an area at least 5 nautical miles from the position where that catch was taken.
6.2.3.4 Restricted areas
The fishing licences issued to the trawl fleet specify certain areas where trawling is not permitted.
There are extensive trawl restrictions along the coast, preventing the offshore fleet from operating in
waters shallower than 110m or within 20 nautical miles of the RSA coast, and also preventing the
inshore trawl fleet from operating in many nearshore areas to protect nursery grounds, areas of high
diversity, and areas fished using lines (these areas are illustrated in Figure 31).
Four areas were proposed as “Fishery Management Areas” (FMAs) in 2013, where restrictions would
help to protect non-target species, particularly silver kob Argyrosomus inodorus, geelbek Atractoscion
aequidens, panga Pterogymnus laniarius, gurnards Chelidonichthys spp, skates Raja spp., carpenter
Argyrozona argyrozona and white stumpnose Rhabdosargus globiceps. (Sink et al, 2013). The FMAs
were proposed at De Hoop, Tsitsikamma, Algoa Bay and Stilbaai, and were identified on the basis of
multiple criteria, primarily minimising the closure of existing fishing grounds while maximising the
representation of by-catch species in protected areas and addressing the protection of benthic habitats.
The De Hoop and Tsitsikamma FMA areas have been established as no-trawl areas through licence
conditions for the inshore and offshore trawl fleet (these are in place to protect both fish and marine
habitats; both areas are Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)). Another no-trawl area has been established
off Cape St Francis to protect spawning kingklip between September and November (see Figure 13).
Trawling is also prohibited within the Bird Island MPA.
The Tsitsikamma MPA was formally established in 2013 and has now been formally established and
extended as an FMA through its designation as a no-trawl area in the 2014 fishing permits. This area
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 58
covers over 1,357km² of sea, over 1,000km² of which are within the trawl footprint area.
The proposal for the Stillbaai FMA is reported to have been deferred while further work is carried out;
and the Algoa Bay FMA area proposal has been dropped as this area is due to form part of the Addo
Elephant Park Marine Protected Area.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 59
Figure 12: Existing and proposed spatial management measures that contribute to bycatch management in the inshore demersal trawl fishery in South
Africa, including proposed Fishery Management Areas (FMAs). [Source: Sink et al, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 60
Figure 13: Kingklip closed area established off Cape St Francis (shaded red) to protect spawning
aggregations from trawling between September and November each year. [Source:
Smith et al, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 61
6.2.3.5 Effort limitation
The number of vessels operating in the trawl fishery is limited by the rights allocation; there is no
prospect of the number of vessels in the trawl fleet increasing.
A sea-day limit is now imposed on all trawlers. This is calculated for each vessel on the basis of its
fishing capacity (calculated from its power) and its quota allocation. The sea-day limit is intended to
prevent the use of excess fishing effort to catch non-target species if the hake quota is fully utilised.
6.2.3.6 Other proposals
A range of other measures for managing the catch of non-target species have been proposed,
including the possibility of establishing a system of Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs)
(Greenston, 2013). These proposals are being kept under review by a By-catch Task Team (Attwood,
2012; DAFF, 2014).
6.2.4 Status of the observer programme
The observer programmes for the hake trawl fishery have provided a valuable source of information
that enables the catch of both target and non-target species to be assessed with confidence.
During the past few years there have been some problems with the government observer programme.
At the 2013 surveillance audit it was noted that the government observer programme had lapsed and
was due to be reinstated. In 2014 it was found that the contract for the observer programme had not
yet been filled, due to problems with government procurement procedures.
In response, SADSTIA extended its own independently funded observer programme, and has
continued to invest in a higher level of observer coverage in the trawl fishery in lieu of the
government programme.
Information from the SADSTIA-funded programme has been presented during annual surveillance
audits for the fishery over the past few years. Evidence of the SADSTIA programme has been
presented from recent observer trips and from the ongoing analysis of historical data from both the
SADSTIA and government observer trips (see Attwood, 2014; Smith, 2013).
Attwood (2014) reports that
“With the exception of 2007, we now have continuous record of bycatch estimates for the
hake-directed trawl fishery since 2003, with minimum of 1000 observed trawls per annum.
The rate of bycatch lies between 12 and 27%.”
This level of observer coverage under the SADSTIA programme is reported to be higher than that
previously achieved under the government programme, and the SADSTIA observers have also
recorded all species from the catch since 2008.
The information available also shows that SADSTIA observer coverage extends to the inshore fleet as
well as offshore vessels. It is clear that the level of observer coverage and range of information
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 62
provided under the SADSTIA scheme is capable of detecting any change in the risk status of both
target and non-target species in the trawl fishery.
6.2.5 Status of “Main” non-target catch species
The MSC considers that in general only species that make up 5% or more of the total catch should be
considered “main” non-target species (either as retained or discarded species).
The only species that emerges from the analyses of catch composition (presented in Daneel &
Attwood, 2013; Attwood, 2014; and Smith et al 2013) as contributing more than 5% of the total
(inshore and offshore) catch composition of the South African trawl fishery is the monkfish, Lophius
vomerinus.
6.2.5.1 Monkfish, Lophius vomerinus
Monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) occur from northern Namibia (south of 21°S latitude), around the
southern coast of South Africa, up to Durban (Walmsley et al 2005). They are found mostly on muddy
and sandy substrata across the continental shelf and shelf edge (to about 800m). They are a long-
lived, slow-growing species with a life span of at least 17 years.
The general distribution of the monkfish catch in the hake trawl fishery is shown in Figure 14. The
main catch of monkfish is in waters deeper than 500m and mainly off the western coast. The catch
and catch rate (kg caught per hour of fishing) of monkfish from the commercial fleet are shown in
Figure 15.
There is no directed monkfish survey in South African waters. Stock status can, however, be inferred
from commercial fishery data and also from the annual fishery-independent scientific hake trawl
surveys carried out by DAFF. These data are illustrated in Figure 16.
An assessment of the stock status of monkfish has been carried out (Glazer, 2008; 2011; 2013). This
assessment addressed the limitations in the data available by using a replacement yield model. The
most recent replacement yields for monkfish have been estimated at 7,900t for the west coast and 417t
for the south coast (note that the relative proportion of the catch was adjusted with the boundary
between “west” and “south” coast areas was altered (Glazer et al, 2013). The most recent catch data
indicate that 6,452t of monkfish were caught off the west coast and 301t off the south coast in 2012.
An aggregate Precautionary Upper Catch Limit (PUCL) of 7,000t has been set for the trawl fishery.
The relationship between the PUCL and recent catches is shown in Figure 18.
Trends in the biomass of monkfish off the west and south coasts of South Africa have been most
recently examined by Glazer (2013). The available information suggests that biomass is stable on the
south coast and probably increasing on the west coast (Figure 18).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 63
Figure 14: Spatial distribution of average annual monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) catch per year over
the period 2004-10. [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
Figure 15: Total catch (tonnes) and catch rate (kg/hr) for monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) on the west
and south coast of South Africa over the period 2000-2010. [Source: Smith et al, 2014].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 64
Figure 16: Fishery-independent survey abundance estimates for monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) off
the west and south coasts of South Africa, 1984-2012 (note that the different symbols
indicate surveys carried out using different methods). [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 65
Figure 17: Median annual estimates of abundance and associated 90% probability intervals for the
biomass of monkfish (Lophius vomerinus) off the west coast and south coast of South
Africa for the period 2009-13. [Source: Glazer, 2013].
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
Bio
mas
s (t
)
a) West Coast
p05 median p95
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
Bio
mas
s (t
)
b) South Coast
p05 median p95
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 66
Figure 18: Coast specific catches of monkfish over the period 1991-2012. The current aggregate
Precautionary Upper Catch Limit (PUCL) of 7,000t for both coasts is shown as a
horizontal line. [Source: Glazer, 2013].
6.2.5.2 Other non-target species of interest
Although the threshold set by the MSC for “main” non-target species are those making up more than
5% of the catch, there are some other non-target species that are caught in lower quantities than this in
the hake fishery that are of interest. This is either because they are of interest to other fishers, or
because they form a high proportion of the catch in certain areas.
6.2.5.2.1 Kingklip, Genypterus capensis
During 2013 the PUCL uptake for kingklip was higher than anticipated. During 2013 a review of
kingklip stock status was prepared (Brandão & Butterworth, 2013) which resulted in an upwards
revision of the PUCL limit.
During the site visit some concerns were raised by WWF that the ad-hoc reassessment of the kingklip
stock in 2013 may have lacked rigour and that this event may also have revealed shortcomings in the
management system underpinning the PUCL approach. The assessment team has reviewed the
revised assessment (Brandão & Butterworth, 2013) and the previous assessment (Brandão &
Butterworth, 2008).
The initial assessment in 2008 used an age-structured production model. It found that the south coast
stock biomass was declining, but that the west coast stock biomass was increasing after having
reached a low point in the late 1980s. Combining the stocks suggested a stable or slightly increasing
trajectory.
The 2013 assessment used examined total annual catches and survey abundance indices for the two
kingklip stocks off the south and west coasts over the period 1986 to 2012 using a replacement yield
model. This suggested a steady upward trend in biomass for both the south and west coast stocks
(Figure 19), and resulted in a proposal to set the PUCL at 1,408t for the south coast and 3,856t for the
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
Cat
ch (
ton
s)
WC SC PUCL
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 67
west coast.
Figure 19: Bayesian posterior medians of abundance over the last five years for the West coast
kingklip resource off South Africa. 90% probability interval envelopes are shown as
dashed lines. [Source: Brandão & Butterworth, 2013].
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Bio
ma
ss
(t)
Year
West coast
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Bio
ma
ss
(t)
Year
South coast
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 68
6.2.5.2.2 Silver Kob, Argyrosomus inodorus
Silver kob are retained by trawlers working on inshore grounds. This species is mainly targeted by
the commercial linefish sector, and there have been concerns about the overall rate of exploitation of
this species since the 1980s. The estimated abundance from DAFF surveys is shown in Figure 20.
The stock was estimated at 447t in 2010.
Figure 20: Survey abundance estimates for silver kob, Argyrosomus inodorus on the South Coast of
South Africa [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 69
Figure 21: Spatial distribution of silver kob annual catch (kg) per fishing grid block for the period
2004-10. [Source: Smith et al, 2010].
A more detailed assessment of the status of the silver kob stocks is presented in Winker et al (2012).
This assessment found that normalised CPUE for silver kob has increased steadily since 2000, in
response to effort controls. This study estimated that the biomass of the south and south-east silver
kob stock was just over 7,500t in 2010.
In response to concerns about the status of this species, SECIFA has implemented a PUCL for silver
kob per year for the trawl vessels working on inshore hake grounds (in 2014 this was 146t, which was
not attained); and a “move–on” rule has also been introduced for the trawl fishery that requires vessels
to move away from areas where they catch more than 2% by weight of silver kob in a single haul.
Most of the silver kob catch is reported to be associated with fishing for Agulhas sole on grounds
shallower than 100m. No silver kob are caught in the west coast hake fishery. On the south coast,
catches of silver kob made up less than 0.2% of the hake catch (Smith et al, 2013). The higher value
shown in Table 5 is a result of the aggregation of the sole trawl catch with the hake trawl catch.
6.2.5.2.3 Panga, Pterogymnus laniarius
Catch data for the inshore fleet over the period 2003-06 indicated that panga represented just over 6%
of the unsorted catch (Table 5). More recent data indicated that panga represent less than 0.2% of the
combined (M. capensis and M. paradoxus) trawl fishery catch.
Panga are an important target species in the inshore commercial line fishery, and there has been some
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 70
concern about stock status. This species is also proposed for inclusion in the proposed extension to
the PUCL system for managing catch of non-target species (see section 6.2.3.1). It is therefore
appropriate to consider the status of this species in South African waters.
A brief summary of history of commercial fishing for panga and current stock status of is presented in
Mann (2013), drawing on recent catch data and also earlier work by Booth & Punt (1998), Booth et al
(1999) and Donovan (2007). This information is summarised here.
Between 1964 and 1991 there was a directed foreign trawl fishery for panga in South African waters,
with landings of up to 18,000t pa. Between 1992 and 1995 (after closure of South African waters to
foreign trawlers), panga made up 63% of the South African demersal inshore trawl fishery catch and
11% of the offshore catch. The proportion of panga in the catch has fallen in subsequent years.
In the SE cape panga made up an average of 16.5% of linefish landings between 1985-2007. This
value peaked at around 26% in the late 1980s, falling to around 16% in the late 1990s and more
recently has been observed at around 5% in 2007.
The current assessment of stock status is that the panga stock has been steadily recovering from the
historically high fishing effort prior to 1991. Increased catches of panga are considered to be
sustainable. The decline in catches and landings in recent years is attributed to changes in fishing
behaviour and economics, rather than a decline in stock abundance.
Panga are one of the species that have been proposed for inclusion in the PUCL management system
(see section 6.2.3.1 of this report).
6.2.5.2.4 Horse mackerel, Trachurus trachurus
Although recent data indicate that horse mackerel contribute only 3.1% of the total catch (Table 9),
over the period 2002-06 this species comprised 7.7% of the catch from the inshore fleet (Table 5).
Horse mackerel are caught in South African waters in a targeted mid-water trawl fishery (prosecuted
in by just one dedicated trawler, the MFV Dessert Diamond). They are caught as a non-target species
in the small pelagic purse-seine fishery targeting anchovies and sardines and also in the demersal hake
trawl fishery (see Figure 22).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 71
Figure 22: Distribution of fishing effort and fisheries targeting horse mackerel, Trachurus
trachurus, in South African Waters. [Source: Japp & Smith, 2013].
The current PUCL for horse mackerel adults is set at 44 000t, of which 31 500 is allocated to the
midwater trawl fishery while the remaining 12 500t forms the demersal trawl bycatch reserve. The
catch of horse mackerel over recent years has consistently been less than the PUCL
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 72
Figure 23: Catch of horse mackerel, Trachurus trachurus in the demersal and midwater trawl
fisheries for 2000-2013 (note that 2013 data were incomplete). The PUCL for this
species is set at 44,000t. [Source: Singh et al, 2013].
6.2.5.2.5 Snoek, Thyrsites atun
Snoek make up a relatively small proportion of the overall hake catch, but are notably very abundant
in catches off Saldanha Bay in the Western Cape (see Figure 10). It is therefore appropriate to
consider the status of this species.
Although DAFF survey data show considerable inter-annual variation (Figure 24) the trend in both
catch and CPUE is be positive (Figure 25). The distribution of snoek catch for the period 2004-10
shows that most of the catch came from waters between 2-500m deep.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 73
Figure 24: Survey abundance estimates for snoek, Thyrsites atun on the West and South Coast of
South Africa [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 74
Figure 25: Trends in catch (t) and CPUE (kg/hr) for snoek, Thyrsites atun, on the west and south
coasts of South Africa. [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
Figure 26: Spatial distribution of snoek (Thyrsites atun) annual average catch per grid block for the
period 2004-2010 [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 75
6.2.6 Retained catch
Information on the retained catch is available from catch declarations, landings records, and also from
the reports of fishery observers on both the larger (offshore) vessels and the inshore vessels. These
sources of information indicate that nearly all of the catch is retained, with very little discarding (see
below). The catch data presented above (under section 6.2) are therefore considered representative of
the retained catch from the fishery.
6.2.6.1 Factors influencing catch composition
The studies of catch composition have examined the influence of season and location on catch
composition. The most important factor determining the composition of the catch appears to be the
location of fishing activity. The offshore catch is typically “cleaner” than the inshore catch, which
contains a greater diversity of non-target species and a relatively lower proportion of the target
species.
There are two units of certification under assessment: the fishery for the shallow-water hake, M.
capensis; and the fishery for the deep-water hake, M. paradoxus. It has already been noted that the
distributions of these species overlap (see Figure 2). Broadly speaking, M. capensis is caught in
shallower inshore areas than M. paradoxus. However it is also clear that the overlap between the two
species means that M. capensis are caught in offshore areas (making up around 13% of the offshore
trawl catch (see Table 4)); and some M. paradoxus are caught in inshore waters (making up around
2.4% of the total catch and 4% of the inshore hake catch (Table 5)). In terms of weight, more M.
capensis are caught in the offshore areas (an average of 14,600t pa) than in inshore areas (an average
of 9,653t pa).
Another potential influence on catch composition is the type of trawl gear that is used. Attwood et al
(2011) note that the inshore trawl catch data includes catches taken when vessels are fishing for
Agulhas sole (Austroglossus pectoralis). The data for the sole fishery could not be separated from the
hake trawl data, and the authors considered that this gave a more precautionary view of the trawl
catch composition from inshore areas.
It is noted that trawlers targetting sole are permitted to use a cod end mesh size of 70mm. These
vessels fish for sole at night. Small trawlers licensed to fish for hake in inshore areas are permitted to
use a cod end mesh size of 90mm in waters shallower than 110m. All trawlers are required to use a
110mm cod-end mesh waters deeper than 110m. The established practice of the smaller vessels is to
only use 110mm cod-ends when fishing for hake irrespective of water depth, even though the smaller
mesh is permissible. This means that there is essentially only one type of gear and one mesh size used
in the hake trawl fishery.
The information presented to the assessment team therefore indicates that the key factor determining
catch composition is not the hake species targeted, nor any difference in fishing gear between
different sized fishing vessels..
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 76
6.2.7 Discarded catch
Discarding rates in the hake trawl fishery reported by all observer trips have consistently been very
low (Walmlsey et al, 2007; Attwood et al, 2011; Daneel & Attwood, 2013; Attwood, 2014). The
explanation for this is that the catch from the offshore areas is very clean, comprising mostly hake
with a small quantity of marketable non-target fish (notably monkfish and kingklip). Although the
catch from inshore areas contains many more species, it is still composed almost entirely of
marketable fish. Trawlers from both the offshore and inshore areas tend to retain and land most of the
non-target species caught as “joint product”.
Smith et al (2013) have examined the quantity of fish discarded from the trawl fishery and the species
that are discarded, using observer and landings data for the period 2005-12. Annual discards were
estimated to be around 150t per year (equivalent to 1% of the total hake catch, and less than 1% of
total landings).
The relative proportions of different species in the discarded catch is shown in Figure 27. Rat tails
(Coelorinchus braueri, C. simorhynchus & Malacocephalus laevis) were the dominant discard species
comprising 32% of the total discarded catch. Dory (Zenopsis conchifer & Neocyttus rhomboidalis)
made up 28% followed by dogshark (Deania spp, Centroscymus crepidater, Squalus megalops & S.
mitsukurii) at 19% and catshark (Holohalaelurus regini, Poroderma panterinum & Scyliorhinus
capensis) at 7%.
The spatial distribution of discarding activity has been determined from observer data; it is
predominantly along the shelf edge in the offshore fishery (Figure 28).
Smith (2013) notes that monitoring of discard composition was most thorough over the period 2002-
06 and has declined in recent years (particularly on inshore fishing grounds). Nevertheless, the
monitoring of catch composition in subsequent years provides a measure of the quantity of the species
that are typically discarded from the fishery.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 77
Figure 27: Diagram showing the relative species composition of the discards from the South African
trawl fishery from observer records and landings data for the period 2005-2012 (total
discards estimated to be 150t pa). [Source: Smith et al, 2013].2
Figure 28: Spatial distribution of discarding activity, showing total weight discarded per grid block
from observer data for the period 2005-2012. [Source: Smith et al, 2013].
2 Horse fish are Congiopodus torvus
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 78
6.3 ETP Species
The MSC define Endangered Threatened & Protected (ETP) species as those that are recognised by
national ETP legislation and those species that are listed in Appendix 1 of the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)3.
There is no evidence from observations of the hake trawl catch that any ETP species are caught within
trawl nets. However there is evidence that in the past the fishery had an adverse interaction with
seabird species, notably large albatrosses, such as the black-browed albatross, Thalassarche
melanophris and Shy-type albatrosses Thalassarche cauta. Observations carried out during 2004 and
2005 aboard SADSTIA trawlers suggested that around 18,000 birds were killed annually in the South
African hake trawl fishery (Watkins et al, 2008).
Observations of interactions between birds and the trawl gear found that fatal injuries arose when the
trawl warp struck the birds, or when birds became stuck to bitumen-lubricated trawl warps (so-called
“sticky warps”) and dragged underwater. These interactions were most prevalent at times when the
trawl gear was being shot or recovered, and particularly when offal from fish processing was being
discharged into the water.
In response to these findings the fishing industry adopted the use of bird-scaring lines (BSLs or tori
lines) in 2006. These lines are deployed from the stern of the fishing vessel to the outside of the trawl
warps. A drogue at the end of the line (typically a road–traffic cone) keeps the line under tension,
while the vessel is towing, and streamers hung from the line deter seabirds from coming close to the
trawl warps. The use of these BSLs is required by trawl fishing licences (the pattern specified in the
licences is illustrated in Figure 29).
Observations of interactions between trawl vessels and seabirds have been monitored aboard
SADSTIA trawlers over the period between April 2006 and May 2011 by observers from BirdLife
South Africa’s Albatross Task Force (ATF). The findings of this work have recently been published
(Maree et al, 2014). Observations were made on 64 trips aboard 19 different trawlers and 782 trawl
hauls (around 0.3-1.3% of annual wet-fish trawl effort). The key finding over this period was that
bird mortality fell from the estimate of 18,000 birds pa in 2004 to around 990 birds pa in 2010 as a
result of the use of BSLs. Albatross mortality in the South African hake trawl fishery is now
considered to be negligible (83 birds in 2010) (Maree et al, 2014).
BirdLife South Africa have encouraged the adoption of BSLs in the trawl fleet by setting up a project
with Total South Africa to provide funding for the production of BSLs by people from the Ocean
View Association for Persons with Disabilities. This project provides a benefit to the community
while at the same time producing BSLs that reduce the impact of the trawl (and longline) fisheries on
seabirds.
3 MSC Certification Requirements v1.3 at §CB3.11.1.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 79
Although the concerns about albatross mortality due to warp strikes now appear to have been
addressed, there are still some concerns about interactions between the hake trawl fishery and
seabirds. The first concern is that the success at scaring albatrosses away from trawl warps may have
resulted in an increased impact on smaller birds species, notably pintado petrels (Daption capense),
White-chinned Petrels (Procellaria aequinoctialis) and Cape Gannets (Morus capensis) (Maree et al,
2014). The second concern is that there is a limited understanding of the level of interaction between
seabirds and hake trawl vessels operating on the inshore fishing grounds.
Figure 29: Specification of the tori lines taken from a copy of the trawl fishery licences issued to
both offshore and inshore trawlers in South Africa [Source: DAFF, 2014].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 80
Table 10: Total observed heavy interactions and mortalities of bird species in the South African
deep-water hake trawl wet-fish fishery, 2006-10 [Source: Maree et al, 2014].
Key:
EN = Endangered
VU = Vulnerable
NT = Near Threatened
(IUCN Classifications of species status)
In response to concerns about the limited bird observer coverage in both the inshore and offshore
trawl fishery, the fishing industry commissioned two dedicated seabird observers in 2012 to work on
commercial trawlers in the main fishing areas. One of these observers is based at Saldanha and the
other in Cape Town, and both have been trained by BirdLife South Africa to detect seabird
interactions. The observer coverage during this period of observation is shown in Figure 30 below.
The frequency and nature of interactions with different bird species over this period is shown in Table
11.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 81
Figure 30: The distribution of SADSTIA-funded bird observer trips carried out from June 2012-July
2013 superimposed on the distribution of commercial trawling effort. [Source: Smith,
2013].
A feature of both these recent SADSTIA data and the BirdLife SA ATF data is that bird interactions
fall to virtually zero when there is no discharge of offal from fish processing aboard the fishing
vessels (Maree et al, 2014; Smith, 2013).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 82
Table 11: Total numbers of interactions between seabirds and trawl warps during the setting and
trawling period from SADSTIA observer records between June 2012 and July 2013. A
high level of interaction is almost certain to cause mortality; medium interactions are not
assumed to cause significant injury; and a low level of interaction is considered harmless.
[Source: Smith, 2013].
Species SETTING TRAWLING
High Medium Low High Medium Low
Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross 0 1 75 0 2 35
Black-browed Albatross (adult) 0 0 16 0 2 4
Cape Gannet (adult) 0 36 517 0 7 210
Cory’s Shearwater 0 0 21 0 3 28
Giant petrel (southern or northern) 0 0 31 0 0 25
Great Shearwater 0 2 23 0 2 22
Indian Yellow-nosed Albatross 0 0 115 0 0 94
Kelp Gull (Adult) 0 0 141 0 0 116
Pintado Petrel 0 0 38 0 0 11
Shy Albatross (adult) 0 3 67 1 0 15
Shy Albatross (juvenile) 0 3 110 0 0 2
Sub-Antarctic Skua 0 0 2 0 7 53
White-chinned Petrel 0 78 365 0 62 350
TOTAL 0 123 1521 1 85 965
In 2010 the Responsible Fisheries Alliance (RFA), which is an alliance between BirdLife South
Africa, WWF South Africa and the main trawl fishing companies, started work on a project to
improve seabird mitigation measures. Its recommendations were submitted in 2011 and included
changes to enhance tori lines; a proposal to prohibit the use of bitumen in trawl warp lubricants; and a
prohibition on offal discharge until tori lines are deployed (RFA, 2011). The RFA recommended that
these measures should become licence conditions. This recommendation was adopted by DAFF and
now forms part of the trawl licence conditions for both inshore and offshore trawlers.
Each vessel operating in the offshore hake trawl grounds is subject to a Bird Mitigation Plan (BMP)
which sets out the risks to birds from trawling, the mitigation measures that can address these risks,
and the responsibilities of different crew members for implementing mitigation measures. The BMP
also includes a bird identification guide and advice on dealing with entanglement of birds. BMPs are
based on an initial assessment of the vessel and biennial reassessments.
There are no indications that indirect impacts (such as competition for prey) may arise from the
fishery. The bird species that are known to interact with the fishery cannot dive to the depths that the
fishing gear operates, so the catch cannot form part of their natural diet. In such circumstances, the
offal and discards from fishing vessels may have a beneficial effect on birds (Bourne, 1983).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 83
6.3.1 Trends in bird population status
Information about trends in bird population status and threats to bird species is available from the
BirdLife International website. The status of the bird species that could be impacted by the hake trawl
fishery has been considered (we have considered these to be the species that observers have identified
as being subject to a “High” or “Medium” impact in Table 11 above and/or reported as mortalities by
Maree et al, 2014). The BirdLife view of each species is summarised below.
6.3.1.1 Black Browed Albatross, Thalassarche melanophris
This species has been downlisted by IUCN to Near Threatened as it is no longer estimated to be
undergoing very rapid population declines. Survey data from the Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas),
holding over 70% of the global population, showed population increases during the 2000s and
possibly since the 1980s, and the data suggest reclassification as Least Concern, however there
remains a considerable degree of uncertainty over population trends for a significant part of the global
population, and trend estimates are heavily influenced by the extrapolation over 65 years of data from
a ten-year period. In addition, high levels of mortality of this species are reported from longline and
trawl fisheries in the South Atlantic. For these reasons, moderately rapid ongoing declines over three
generations since 1980 are precautionarily suspected until further data are forthcoming.
Evidence from the South African trawl fishery (Maree et al, 2014) have concluded that the impacts of
the UoCs under assessment on this species were once significant but are now negligible.
6.3.1.2 Indian Yellow nosed albatross, Thalassarche carteri
This species is listed as Endangered on the basis of an estimated very rapid ongoing decline over three
generations (71 years), based on data from the population stronghold on Amsterdam Island. This
decline is the result of adult mortality and poor recruitment owing to interactions with longline
fisheries and disease.
Evidence from the hake trawl fishery indicates that interactions with this species are now rare (see
Table 10).
6.3.1.3 Atlantic Yellow nosed Albatross, Thallassarche chlororhynchos
This species is listed by IUCN as Endangered as it has a very small breeding range and is estimated to
be undergoing a very rapid ongoing decline projected over three generations (72 years) owing to
incidental mortality in longline fisheries. There is no indication that it is adversely affected by the
trawl fishery (see Table 10).
6.3.1.4 White-chinned petrel, Procellaria aequinoctialis
This species is classified as Vulnerable by the IUCN because of suspected rapid declines, although
almost no reliable estimates of historical populations exist. Very high rates of incidental mortality in
longline fisheries have been recorded in recent years; the probability that these circumstances will
continue and its susceptibility to predation and the degradation of breeding habitat indicate that a
rapid and on-going population decline is likely.
The earlier studies of the hake trawl fishery found that 10% of the birds killed in the hake trawl
fishery were white-chinned petrels (Watkins et al, 2007). The more recent study by Maree et al
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 84
(2014) recorded just 3 white-chinned petrel deaths (though nocturnal interactions were not studied).
6.3.1.5 Cape gannet, Morus capensis
This species is listed as Vulnerable by BirdLife International since it has a very small breeding range
on just six islands, and over-exploitation of its prey (epipelagic fish) by human fisheries -
compounded by pollution - is causing a continuous decline in the quality of surrounding waters for
foraging. Other threats include guano collection, displacement by Cape fur seals, predation by great
white pelicans, bycatch in longline fisheries, exploitation of gannets for food in Angola, and flooding
of nests in storms.
The hake fishery is not listed as a threat to this species.
6.3.1.6 Shy albatross, Thalassarche cauta
This species breeds on just three islands. It may be susceptible to stochastic events and human
activities, although one nesting site is moderately widely separated from the other two. For this reason
it is treated as Near Threatened by the IUCN.
Evidence from the South African trawl fishery (Maree et al, 2014) has concluded that the impacts of
the UoCs under assessment on this species were once significant but are now negligible.
6.3.1.7 Pintado petrel, Daption capense
This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable
under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000km2 combined with a declining or
fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or
severe fragmentation). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not
approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten
years or three generations). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the
thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a
continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified
population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern by IUCN.
Maree et al (2014) record 21 mortalities and 612 heavy interactions with pintado petrels. This is the
highest level of interaction recorded with any bird species. The information about population status
provides reassurance that this level of interaction is not adversely affecting this species.
6.3.1.8 Great shearwater, Ardenna gravis
This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable
under the range–size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000km2 combined with a declining or
fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or
severe fragmentation). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not
approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten
years or three generations). The population size is extremely large, and hence does not approach the
thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000 mature individuals with a
continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations, or with a specified
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 85
population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern by the IUCN.
6.3.1.9 Sub-Antarctic skua, Catharacta antarctica
This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable
under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000km2 combined with a declining or
fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or
severe fragmentation). The population trend appears to be stable, and hence the species does not
approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion (>30% decline over ten
years or three generations). The population size may be moderately small to large, but it is not
believed to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion (<10,000
mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three generations,
or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as Least Concern
by the IUCN.
6.3.1.10 Sooty shearwater Puffinus griseus
This species is classified as Near Threatened because although it has a very large global population it
is thought by BirdLife to have undergone a moderately rapid decline owing to the impact of longline
fisheries, the harvesting of its young (unconnected with the fishery under assessment) and possibly
climate change.
The global population of this species is estimated at around 20,000,000 individuals. Observations of
the hake trawl fishery suggest that the level of interaction is now very low (Maree et al, 2014).
6.3.1.11 Cory’s shearwater, Calonectris borealis
This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable
under the range size criterion (Extent of Occurrence <20,000km2 combined with a declining or
fluctuating range size, habitat extent/quality, or population size and a small number of locations or
severe fragmentation). Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline
is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population
trend criterion (>30% decline over ten years or three generations). The population size is very large,
and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population size criterion
(<10,000 mature individuals with a continuing decline estimated to be >10% in ten years or three
generations, or with a specified population structure). For these reasons the species is evaluated as
Least Concern by the IUCN.
6.4 Habitat Interactions
A detailed review of the interactions between the South African trawl fishery and marine habitats is
set out in Sink et al (2012). This document also set out spatial analyses of the interactions and
proposes potential management actions. The main findings of this comprehensive review are briefly
summarised below.
The area of seabed in South African waters that has been trawled has increased from the start of the
inshore trawl fishery in the late 1880s to the current extent of the fishery. Over this time the trawl
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 86
footprint has increased in size in both the inshore and offshore areas. In 2007 the fishing industry
developed a map of the trawl footprint and made a commitment that no further expansion of the
fishing grounds would take place. This footprint covers an area of around 70,160km² (see Figure 31).
All trawl fishing vessels are required, as a statutory fishing licence condition, to fish only within this
trawl footprint. Compliance with the trawl footprint is monitored by DAFF using vessel VMS data.
South Africa recently classified and mapped 136 marine and coastal habitats as part of the National
Biodiversity Assessment 2011. Benthic habitat types were characterised on the basis of the seabed
substratum (such as mud, sand, gravel and rock); depth; topography (such as shelf, canyon, or mound)
and information on marine benthos (such as cold water corals, gorgonians, sponges and soft corals)
where this was available.
Sink et al (2012) examined information from a wide range of sources to identify the spatial extent of
the interaction between the trawl fishery and benthic habitat types. A total of 27 different habitat
types occur within the trawl footprint area (see Figure 32). The dominant habitat types are the
Southern Benguela Sandy Outer Shelf (21% of the footprint) and the Southern Benguela Sandy Shelf
Edge (14%).
Information about the location of these habitats and their vulnerability (based on the structural
complexity of the benthos and Vulnerable Marine Ecosystem (VME) indicator species) was related by
Sink et al (2012) to data describing trawling intensity to allow “habitats of concern” to be identified
(these being those that are vulnerable to trawling; occur largely within the trawl footprint; and that are
subject to significant trawling activity).
Following this analysis a total of 17 habitat types of concern were identified based on one criterion,
and 9 habitat types based on multiple selection criteria. Only one habitat type met all of the criteria
(the Southern Benguela Canyon).The location of these “priority habitats” is shown in Figure 33 &
Figure 34, and they are listed below:-
Southern Benguela Canyon
Southern Benguela Muddy Shelf Edge
Southern Benguela Hard Shelf Edge
Agulhas Canyon
Southern Benguela Gravel Shelf Edge
Agulhas Gravel Outer Shelf
Southern Benguela Gravel Outer Shelf
Southern Benguela Submarine Bank
Southern Benguela Sandy Shelf Edge
These habitats of concern were recommended for management actions: proposals for mitigation
included the review and strengthening of trawl licence conditions; spatial management measures
including experimental closures; seabed protection zones and offshore Marine Protected Areas.
Research recommendations have also been identified to improve the understanding of trawl impacts
on hard grounds and muds; assess recovery of the dominant habitat types on the trawl grounds; and to
identify and protect examples of sensitive habitats that have not been trawled.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 87
In February 2014 work began on a benthic trawl experiment near to Childs Bank on the outer shelf of
the west coast where the Southern Benguela Sandy Shelf Edge habitat is prevalent (over 70% of this
habitat type is within the trawl footprint, and it also makes up around 14% of the total trawl footprint
area). This work was a response to a condition of certification raised at the last assessment of this
fishery in 2010. It has taken several years to agree a research programme that would address this
condition, and to secure the funding, equipment and staff resources required. This experiment is
being conducted with industry (SADSTIA) funding, and all of their member vessels (i.e. all of the
hake trawl fleet operating in this area) have been directed by SADSTIA to comply with the
experimental restrictions (on a non-statutory basis).
In 2014 a towed camera and van Veen grab were deployed from the research vessel Ellen Khuzwayo
and used to take samples from a 6 x 15km experimental area within the trawl footprint. This area has
been divided into “lanes” and fishing vessels operating in the area are now trawling in some lanes
while leaving others unfished, in order to observe how the seabed recovers after a period of trawling.
The location of the experimental area and the trawl lanes is shown in Figure 36.
From a management perspective, marine habitats in South Africa can be protected by Marine
Protected Areas established under the Marine and Living Resources Act (1998). There are currently
20 MPAs in the South African EEZ (see Figure 35). Inshore trawl licences prohibit trawling within
these MPAs. The South African National Biodiversity Act (2004) and the Protected Areas
Amendment Act (2004) call for the creation of a “representative” network of protected areas in the
sea. Proposals for developing this network of MPAs have been set out in several reports and papers
(such as Sink & Attwood, 2008; Solano-Fernandez et al, 2012).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 88
Figure 31: Boundary of “ring fenced” hake trawl footprint (mapped by Wilkinson & Japp, 2008; figure reproduced from Sink et al, 2012).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 89
Figure 32: The habitat composition within the 70,160km² South African hake trawl footprint. (Note
that the percentages indicate the relative proportion of each habitat type within the
footprint, but not how much of the total extent each habitat type is trawled). [Source:
Sink et al, 2012].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 90
Figure 33: Priority habitats (based on extent & vulnerability of habitats and intensity of fishing) on the west coast within the trawl footprint area. [Source:
Sink et al, 2012].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 91
Figure 34: Priority habitats (based on extent & vulnerability of habitats and intensity of fishing) on the south coast within the trawl footprint area. [Source:
Sink et al, 2012].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 92
Figure 35: Map showing current Marine Protected areas in South Africa. [Source: SANBI, 2014].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 93
Figure 36: Map showing the location of the experimental trawl exclusion area on the west coast.
[Source: SADSTIA, 2012].
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 94
6.5 Ecosystem Interactions
The key feature of the ecosystem in which the hake fishery takes place in is the influence of the cold
Benguela current that flows from the south. The upwelling of this cold, nutrient rich water fuels
phytoplankton growth which in turn nourishes a highly productive ecosystem. The Benguela current
is driven by the South Atlantic gyre.
The role of hake in the Benguela ecosystem and the effects of fishery removals on this ecosystem
have been modelled, including the potential combined effects of climate change and fishing activity
(Gasche et al, 2012; Shannon et al, 2000; Travers-Trolet et al, 2014). The outcome of this work
demonstrates that there is a good understanding of the main components and elements of the Benguela
current ecosystem, as well as an understanding of how these different components and elements may
interact with one another.
The study of the potential effects of increased hake trawling on the ecosystem suggested that the
effect of heavy fishing for hake (for example, a four-fold increase in fishing mortality for a period of 5
years) would reduce hake biomass and increase the abundance of hake prey species (mesopelagic fish
and cephalopods). Such a change was considered likely to adversely affect horse mackerel, which
compete with the hake prey species for food. The model also suggested that within a period of 10-20
years after such a period of intense fishing, all groups are likely to return to their original levels
(Shannon et al, 2000).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 95
7 PRINCIPLE THREE: MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BACKGROUND
7.1 Management framework
South Africa’s natural environment is governed by a wide range of national legislative acts, including
the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996), National Environmental Management Act
(No. 107 of 1998), the Environmental Conservation Act (No. 73 of 1989) and the Marine Living
Resources Act (MLRA; No. 18 of 1998). All fisheries in South Africa are managed in terms of the
MLRA and the regulations promulgated in terms of this Act. The regulations are amended on a
regular basis to facilitate the incorporation of updated management measures, or implement
management strategies based on best scientific advice. These amendments are published in the
Government Gazette.
The Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) is the Management Authority
responsible for implementing the MLRA, and it is committed to international law (UNCLOS; UN
Convention on the Law of the Sea;) and a precautionary approach is prescribed when uncertainty
prevails. The Republic of South Africa is a signatory to the Convention on Biodiversity, MARPOL
(International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships), the London Convention
(regulating the dumping of waste at sea), Bonn Convention (conservation of migratory species, incl.
seabirds), CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species), SEAFO (SE
Atlantic Fisheries Organization) and is member of ICCAT. The management framework is
demonstrably compliant with all relevant international conventions and agreements. National
legislation and the systems that support it are binding, both within the Management Authority and
relative to the fisheries that they manage.
The management framework incorporates a transparent mechanism for legal dispute resolution, which
has been tested and proven to be effective. Disputes within the system are first discussed directly with
DAFF resource managers but can proceed to ministerial level. Beyond ministerial level, disputes may
be resolved in court, within the national judicial system. In recent years, major disputes have regularly
been resolved through legal challenges – for instance disputes regarding the allocations of fishing
rights. The opportunity to mount a legal challenge to the system is seen as a positive aspect,
demonstrating a well-developed and fully tested process of dispute resolution, the outcomes of which
reflects legislative compliance.
7.2 Management and research institutions
The DAFF houses Chief Directorates for:
a) Monitoring Control and Compliance - to ensure that fish resources are protected through
effective and efficient utilisation of the Fisheries Protection Vessels and other relevant
equipment and systems; and to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Marine Living
Resources Act of 1998.
b) Marine Resources Management - to ensure the sustainable utilization and equitable and
orderly access to nearshore, offshore and High Seas fisheries resources through improved
management and regulation.
c) Fisheries Research and Development - to provide scientific research and advice on fisheries
resources.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 96
The DAFF structure is supplemented by other national organs. Monitoring Control and Compliance
is assisted by customs, police/navy and provincial authorities, but the process is coordinated by
DAFF. Fisheries Research and Development is likewise supplemented by the Department of
Environmental Affairs (DEA), which undertakes research on ecosystems and environmental impacts
of fisheries.
At least two formally constituted working groups within DAFF deal with all aspects of the hake trawl
fishery, namely a Scientific Working Group, and a Resource Management Working Group. These
working groups guide the science underlying management strategies (i.e. research direction and data
production; development of mathematical models; Operational Management Procedures) and
implement management strategy through official interaction between DAFF fisheries managers and
representatives of the fishing industry. The functions, roles and responsibilities of the scientific and
management working groups are clearly defined.
7.3 Recognized interest groups
Several interest groups that may influence decisions through direct or indirect means have developed
over the 10 years of MSC certification. The primary interest groups are the two industry associations,
SADSTIA and SECIFA, which represent all rights holders (fishing units) in the deep-sea hake trawl
fishery. Eligible vessels of SADSTIA and SECIFA members are listed in Table 1. SADSTIA and
SECIFA are active in the DAFF Scientific and Resource Management Working Groups, as members
or observers, where they participate by imparting up-to-date operational information, assist with
decision-making by explaining economic and logistical matters affecting fleets, operations, and
markets, and also contribute to the development of mathematical models and the OMP through
retaining the services of consultants at OLRAC. SADSTIA and SECIFA manage the operational
aspects of the fishing fleet, including a supporting role to DAFF in ensuring that permit conditions are
adhered to. The associations fund an independent fisheries observer programme, and additional
research projects on recovery of environmental impacts of the trawl fishery, and bycatch mitigation.
Other recognized interest groups are as follows:
a) World Wide Fund for Nature South Africa (WWFSA) – an environmental NGO; pressure
group with influence on perceptions of stock status, environmental impacts and management
of the fishery;
b) Birdlife South Africa (BLSA) - an environmental NGO and the largest bird conservation
organization in South Africa. BLSA is the local partner of BirdLife International and a
member of the Responsible Fisheries Alliance. BLSA initiated an Albatross Task Force team
in 2006, and is responsible for drawing up the Bird Mitigation Plans required by fishing
vessels in South Africa, in collaboration with the fishing industry;
c) South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) - responsible for implementing the
National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act 10 of 2004. SANBI coordinates
research, and monitors the state of biodiversity in South Africa. It provides planning and
policy advice and pilots best-practice management models in partnership with stakeholders, in
the present case, SADSTIA. SANBI engages in ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation.
d) The South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON) - a business unit of the
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 97
National Research Foundation, and accountable to the Department of Science and
Technology. SAEON is mandated to detect, predict and react to environmental change within
South Africa through long-term observation. SAEONs vision is to deliver long term, reliable
data for scientific research and to inform decision making.
e) Marine Resource Assessment and Management Group, University of Cape Town (MARAM)
– mathematical modelling unit that developed the resource assessment models and the OMP
for the management of the deep-sea hake trawl fishery. Funded by DAFF.
f) University of Cape Town, Zoology Department – Dr Colin Attwood provides scientific
advice to SADSTIA on bycatch species and its management, and on a benthic trawl
experiment to assess recovery / rehabilitation potential.
g) CapFish – Independent provider of fisheries observers to SADSTIA, to collect information on
hake species and size composition and biology, and of bycatch of the hake trawl fishery.
Provides data capture and reporting services, and ad hoc consulting.
h) The Responsible Fisheries Alliance (RFA), which provides a forum for environmental NGOs
and responsible fishing companies to work together to secure the health of the ecosystems
which underpin the business purpose of both sectors.
7.4 Management objectives
Clear long-term management objectives guide decision-making, and are consistent with MSC
Principles and Criteria and the precautionary approach. These include objectives relative to Principle
1 (the hake stocks under reassessment), Principle 2 (important bycatch species and the environment)
and Principle 3 (the management system). Some objectives have performance indicators (limit and
target reference points), notably those applied to the target species (TAC) and some bycatch species
(i.e. PUCLs).
Management objectives relative to the hake stocks are to increase the weaker M. paradoxus biomass
level to close to the MSY level over 20 years; to improve catch rates in the short to medium term; and
to maintain a stable TAC over time. These objectives are implicit in the OMP, which responds to
measures of stock changes on an annual basis, and is geared to achieve stock rebuilding to a pre-
agreed level over the long-term. A specific OMP formulation is revisited every 4 years, when
improvements are made. The OMP incorporates the precautionary principle, in that it will output a
more conservative TAC in the event of higher risk scenarios.
Long-term objectives are also in place for important by-catch species (i.e. monkfish; kingklip; sole),
and where these are identified as being depleted, appropriate management strategies are being
developed and implemented to promote/assist rebuilding of affected populations to specified levels
within specified timeframes. These include bycatch management areas and PUCLs.
Long-term environmental objectives relative to the hake fishery include the establishment of Marine
Protected Areas, where the objective is to protect and preserve examples of representative habitat
types. The policy basis for the MPA programme lies in the Convention of Biological Diversity, which
aims for the protection of 10% of representative and vulnerable habitats, and the draft South African
Ocean Policy which refers to representative MPAs. Biodiversity targets are being developed based on
species-area relationships. A major objective is maintenance of the trawl footprint, which restricts
trawl operations to a limited depth range and area – thus spatially limiting impacts on benthic habitats.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 98
Only 2 habitats (southern Benguela gravel habitat and southern Benguela muddy shelf) are not also
present elsewhere, outside of the footprint or in existing MPA’s.
Another objective, the reduction of seabird mortalities caused by fishing operations, has been
achieved to a large degree by successful introduction of tori lines. Although none of the affected
seabirds are ETP species, some of them are listed on the IUCN red list. A trawl recovery experiment
has been initiated to assess whether, and how fast historically trawled areas can recover – the
completion of this experiment is considered to be a short to medium term objective, and potentially its
outcome can be incorporated into fishery management over a longer term.
Social and economic objectives include equitable redistribution of fishing rights. Theoretically, a
system of long-term fishing rights will provide participants in the fishery with a sense of “ownership”
of the resource. Maintaining Marine Stewardship Council certification is an important economic
objective related to marketing strategy.
7.5 Decision-making process
In most cases decision-making processes respond to important issues identified in relevant research,
monitoring, evaluation and consultation, in a transparent and adaptive manner. A formal Scientific
Working Group, constituted by DAFF and comprising scientists from DAFF, MARAM and those
retained by SADSTIA, decide on a TAC level for the fishery after interpreting the outcome of an
OMP. The OMP is an agreed formulation set for a 4-year period, and cannot be over-ridden unless in
“exceptional circumstances” (under Section 61 of the MLRA). The decision-making process uses the
precautionary approach; this is demonstrated by the long-term stock rebuilding strategy implicit in the
OMP calculations, where the TAC is set to protect the weaker of the two stocks (presently M.
paradoxus). The best available information is used, including logbook information, survey data, and
data collected by fisheries observers at sea.
The TAC recommendation is considered by the DAFF Chief Directorate: Marine Resource
Management, taking into account factors such as legislation, socio-economics, the ecosystem
approach to fisheries management (EAF), and stock advice. It is then submitted to the decision maker
(normally the Minister) in line with Departmental protocols. After signature by the Minister, the TAC
is allocated to rights holders, proportionally, according to their share of the rights allocated. A DAFF
fisheries manager dedicated to the hake fishery then meets with industry to prepare annual fishing
plans, and prepare permit conditions.
7.6 Incentives to fish sustainably
There is a high degree of confidence that fishers comply with the management system under
assessment, and this is supported by very few transgressions observed over the past year. All of these
were minor administrative issues. Sanctions to deal with non-compliance exist, and are effective in
the fishery being assessed. The reason for this is that non-compliance can potentially result in the
suspension or loss of fishing rights under Section 28 of the MLRA. An example of a successful
Section 28 ruling, followed by the closure and prosecution of a major fishing company, is the case of
Hout Bay Fishing. Although not for hake, it was a similar industrial scale fishery targeting deep-water
lobsters. Whereas a Section 28 sanction is a major deterrent for capital-intensive industrial fisheries
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 99
with good long-term prospects (such as the hake fishery), it is less so for small scale (subsistence)
fishers preying on nearshore resources such as abalone and rock lobsters in South Africa.
7.7 Monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS)
Monitoring, control and surveillance is the responsibility of DAFF, supplemented by the police, navy
and customs offices. All catches are inspected and weighed at off-loading points by monitors and/or
fisheries inspectors, to ensure that rights-holders remain within their hake quotas, that bycatch species
do not exceed PUCLs, and that no gear or other restrictions had been exceeded. All fishing vessels
are tracked in real time through a VMS system, operated from an operations room at the DAFF
offices. Fishing vessel tracks showed that vessels have been fishing exclusively within the trawl
footprint. Four ocean-going patrol vessels do inspections of vessels at sea – these patrols are logged,
together with records of inspections, infractions and boarding data.
DAFF has a compliance auditing plan for all sectors of the fishing industry. The hake sector is one of
the 4 compliance priorities in South Africa. Over the course of the past year they aimed to audit 8 of
the deep sea trawl fishery rights holders (SADSTIA), and 16 of the inshore trawl fishery rights
holders (SECIFA). As well as remote surveillance (VMS) and monitoring at sea by patrol vessels,
DAFF inspects landings when catches are discharged, and audits the catch, landings and processing
records for the fishery to ensure compliance with effort (TAC) controls. DAFF enforcement activity
directed at the hake fishery detected only 7 minor administrative errors over the past year, which had
been well documented. The vessels were fined for these transgressions.
Mobile scanners are used to inspect the contents of containers. Fisheries observers accompany fishing
vessels to sea at request (permit condition), although the task of observers is data collection (catch of
target and non-target species, and interactions with ETP species) instead of compliance monitoring.
Skippers return logbooks of each trip, detailing fishing effort and catches. They also report the
numbers of sea-bird fatalities.
About 70% of cases brought by DAFF are successful; as part of its work, DAFF officials provide
training to the judiciary and prosecuting counsel about fisheries legislation and regulation.
Some weak points in MCS enforcement do still exist, and these include too few staff and that one of
the four fishery patrol vessels is presently out of action. The conclusion is that the MCS system is well
established, and works well for the fishery under assessment (a large commercial fishery that offloads
in ports in major centres), especially in a co-management setup with SADSTIA, but that some
attention should be given to its consistency (i.e. all vessels active, etc.).
7.8 Illegal, Unreported Unlicensed (IUU) fishing
DAFF has recently had significant enforcement successes (all outside of the hake fishery) including
detecting, apprehending and seizure of 10 IUU vessels, and intercepting, seizing and repatriating
consignments of illegally shipped fish products (no hake involved). No IUU fishing activities have
been reported for the deep-sea hake trawl fishery.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 100
7.9 Research Planning
A research plan is in place for the fishery which identifies priorities so that resources can be targeted
appropriately. Research priorities are reviewed by DAFF scientists annually. The research plan
includes aspects that relate to P1 (i.e. biomass surveys; ageing; length composition; diet of hake;
genetic population structure of M. capensis and M. paradoxus), P2 (status and biology of retained
non-target species; composition of discarded non-target species; benthic habitat surveys; seabird /
gear interactions) and P3 (OMP development; development and testing of the PUCL system; species-
splitting algorithms).
Whereas the research plan itself is coherent, strategic and well-conceived, it is sometimes affected by
logistical or administrative holdups. For instance, there have been ongoing difficulties with the RV
Africana (the main DAFF survey vessel), so that some surveys were cancelled and another vessel, the
FV Andromeda, had to be leased to carry out trawl surveys. The inter-calibration issues associated
with this have been considered in detail and addressed in the stock assessment. Continuity in the
DAFF fisheries observer programme has been affected by administrative issues, and to compensate
for this, SADSTIA funds its own observer programme, through an independent service provider. A
survey to assess the recovery of benthic habitats was postponed several times, but it has now started,
and a further survey is planned for March 2015.
7.10 Monitoring and evaluation of management performance
Both internal and external review mechanisms exist, which measure progress of the management
system against its objectives. The mechanisms include formal Resource Management and Scientific
Working Group meetings, auditing of fisheries sectors by the Compliance section, and international
stock assessment workshops. The OMP is integral in evaluating stock status and provides the primary
mechanism for generating consistent management advice for longer term management and a stock
rebuilding strategy: the OMP is reviewed each 4 years. Management of bycatch is still a grey area, but
being addressed presently.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 101
8 EVALUATION PROCEDURE
This assessment report has been presented in format set out in the MSC’s reporting template v1.3,
subject to minor (and permissible) changes in the formatting and numbering of sections that have been
made to incorporate the IFC report style and improve the accessibility of information to the reader.
8.1 Harmonised Fishery Assessment
There are no overlapping MSC-certified fisheries and thus no need to apply the harmonisation
procedure to this fishery.
8.2 Previous assessments
This fishery was awarded an MSC certificate in March 2005 and re-certified in March 2010.
Certification in 2010 was subject to 7 conditions and 4 further conditions were added in subsequent
surveillance audits. A summary of the conditions and progress with them is presented in Table 8
below. All but one of these conditions were closed by the end of the fourth surveillance audit.
The only condition that remains open from the previous period of certification concerns the impact of
the fishery on benthic habitats (condition 2). A new condition of certification has been proposed that
relates to this aspect of the fishery after scoring against the assessment tree set out in the MSC
Certification Requirements v1.3.
8.3 Assessment Methodologies
The MSC Certification Requirements (v1.3 at §27.8.11-27.8.13) specify that the assessment
methodology shall be stated in the assessment report. This information is set out in the table below.
Table 12: Summary of Assessment methodology used.
Item Detail
Version of MSC Certification Requirements Version 1.3, 14th January 2013
Version of Full Assessment Reporting Template Version 1.3
Default Assessment Tree Used Yes
Adjustments made to Assessment Tree Not applicable.
Risk Based Framework Not used
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 102
Table 13: Summary of Previous Assessment Conditions for the South African Hake Trawl fishery.
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
Condition 1. Rebuilding of M. paradoxus stock
Action required: A rebuilding plan has been implemented
for M. paradoxus within the OMP.
Indications of species-specific improvements in stock status
should show trends of recovery in line with the overall
rebuilding scenario within the current assessment.
Candidate methods for demonstrating improvement might
be through revised biomass estimates resulting from
periodic assessments within the certification period and/or
monitoring of catch per unit effort in the fishery and
surveys relative to the OMP projections, or other methods.
Additionally, this progress should be reported in relation to
OMP targets (implicit target reference points of recovery)
and implicit limit reference points (the probability that
recovery trajectories are outside the original OMP design
features).
Timescale: Indices for rebuilding should show
improvement of M. paradoxus stock status within the
bounds of the current rebuilding projection as identified
during annual and bi-annual reviews of the stock status.
Overall rebuilding should progress in line with the overall
Y There is clear evidence that stock rebuilding measures for M. paradoxus
continue to be implemented, and that abundance indices show that rebuilding
has continued since the low point in 2007. The client has taken actions with
respect to all elements of the action plan. Indications of species-specific
stock status do show trends of recovery in line with the overall rebuilding
scenario within the current assessment, which has been used to provide
periodic biomass estimates within the certification period using catch per unit
effort in the fishery and surveys relative to the OMP projections. This
progress has been reported in relation to OMP targets (implicit target
reference points of recovery) and implicit limit reference points (the historic
low SSB in 2007).
Overall improvement of M. paradoxus stock status has been demonstrated
within the bounds of the current rebuilding projection and in line with the
overall timeframe for stock recovery. Note that achieving SSB>BMSY for M.
paradoxus was not the target of this condition, which is that a rebuilding plan
has been implemented for M. paradoxus within the OMP.
Recent TAC and catch data demonstrate that the TAC is set in line with the
OMP requirements, and that catches are consistent with the TAC.
The team therefore conclude that progress with this condition has achieved
the target, and that this condition as it stands should be closed. It will be
necessary to continue to demonstrate stock recovery in M. paradoxus if
certification is renewed in 2015.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 103
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
timeframe for stock recovery as currently defined.
Relevant Scoring Indicators: 1.1.6.1, (1.2.1 also applies)
Condition 2. Benthic habitat
Action required: Significant progress has been achieved in
determining and managing impacts of the fishery on
benthic habitat. The current MSC re-assessment process
has, however, identified remaining gaps in knowledge,
particularly in relation to the longer-term significance of
impacts (e.g. the ability of habitats to recover from
disturbance) within existing and any future trawl areas.
These need to be addressed as detailed below. The SG
requirements for the SG 80 scoring are:
2.1.3.1 SG 80 scoring is: All impacts of gear use on the
habitat are adequately identified including extent, timing
and location of use.
2.1.5.3 SG 80 scoring is: Information is available on the
effects of the fishery on habitat within major fishing areas.
This does not indicate any unacceptable impacts.
2.1.5.4 SG 80 scoring is: Information is available on the
effects of the fishery on biological diversity, community
structure and productivity. This does not indicate any
unacceptable impacts.
Timescale: Within 1 year of certification, remaining gaps
in knowledge of benthic impacts should be reviewed and
N The 4th year milestone was reached, with the start of the experimental work
off the west coast of South Africa.
It is not possible or appropriate to close this condition at this surveillance
audit, as the final milestone for progress is in year 5.
The team concludes that during the process of re-assessing this fishery it will
be necessary to re-evaluate this condition in accordance with the procedures
set out in the MSC Certification Requirements. These procedures will
determine whether or not an equivalent new condition will be required if the
fishery should be re-certified.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 104
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
appropriate actions implemented (through further research
and/or management) to address these, with specific annual
milestones for delivery.
Within 4 years of certification, appropriate research should
be implemented and underway.
Appropriate management actions should be developed and
implemented in line with the precautionary approach and
ecosystem approach to fishery management. Appropriate
management should be in place within 5 years of
certification.
Relevant Scoring Indicators: 2.1.3.1, 2.1.5.3, 2.1.5.4
Condition 3. By-catches (retained and non-retained
species)
Action required: A comprehensive review of significant
by-catch (retained and non-retained) species within the
fishery should be undertaken (including research as
specified in Condition 6). Significant by-catch would be
those species caught in large numbers or those species with
uncertain, depleted or declining population status
(including but not limited to sharks, linefish and retained
species). The review should include the conservation status
of affected species.
Where by-catch species are identified as being depleted,
appropriate management strategies should be developed
Y The information presented at the fourth surveillance audit enabled re-scoring
of the Performance Indicators that are associated with this condition.
The score for three of the four Performance Indicators has been increased to
80. The score of the fourth PI (2.1.5.4) remains less than 80, but this is due to
uncertainties about habitat recovery rather than the status of non-target
species.
On the basis of the information presented it was considered appropriate to
close this condition.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 105
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
and implemented to promote/assist the rebuilding of
affected populations to specified levels within specified
timeframes.
[Note that this condition should build upon the information
gained from a similar condition, on specific bycatch
species, raised in the initial MSC assessment. The current
condition asks for a review of bycatch species and
development of appropriate management strategies].
Timescale: Terms of reference for a by-catch review
should be developed within 6 months of certification.
The review should be completed within 2 years of
certification.
Appropriate management actions should be implemented
within 3 years of certification, including monitoring of the
effectiveness of management actions.
Relevant Scoring Indicators: 2.1.5.2, 2.1.5.4, 2.3.1.2,
2.3.1.3
Condition 4. External Review
Action required: Action required: Mechanisms exist
allowing for external reviews of the management system to
be commissioned. A review was conducted in 2006, but has
not been repeated to date. An external review programme
(independent of the current management authorities,
contractors etc) of the management system should be
Y Regular internal and external reviews of the stock assessment and
management procedure are carried out; the OMP that is used as the basis for
managing stocks of both hake species is adjusted accordingly; and the
recovery of M. paradoxus continues.
This condition was closed at the second annual surveillance audit.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 106
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
commissioned, to include the wider range of management
areas, e.g. Monitoring, Control and Surveillance and stock
rebuilding. The external review should monitor the
management responses and actions in relation to previous
reviews.
The timescale for ongoing reviews should be established;
this should be conducted on a periodic basis appropriate to
the development of the management system.
Timescale: A plan for the content and timing of a review
programme should be developed within 1 year of
certification. The first external review should be
commissioned within 2 years of certification and completed
within 3 years of certification.
Relevant Scoring Indicators: 3A.1.4
Condition 5. Precautionary Management
Action required: Current management and harvesting
strategy combines both species of hake as a single
management entity, which permits risks to one or both
stocks and so could be inconsistent with the precautionary
approach.
Also, Condition 6 requires ongoing research, principally in
relation to the stock evaluations. Any significant
uncertainties identified should be encompassed by a
precautionary management approach.
Y There is good evidence that the hake OMP provides a precautionary approach
to the management of the two hake stocks as separate entities within an
aggregated TAC, which is set against the needs of the weakest stock (M.
paradoxus at present).
This condition was closed after rescoring at the third annual surveillance
audit.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 107
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
Timescale: A management strategy to address separate
management for each of the two species should be
developed within 2 years of certification. The strategy for
separate management of the two species should be fully
implemented within the period of this certification.
Additional issues should be addressed within the
management strategy as and when identified.
Relevant Scoring Indicators: 3A.3.4
Condition 6. Research
Action required: There are some areas of weakness
identified in relation to meeting the most significant
information needs of the fishery. Principal amongst these is
continued improvement of ageing of hake stocks, but also
including other biological aspects related to
migration/mixing of stocks, fecundity and recruitment of
the target species. Research directed at understanding the
basic life-history and biology of the most vulnerable
bycatch species should also be prioritised.
Timescale: Research requirements should be reviewed
within 2 years of certification, particularly in relation to
(but not restricted to) the need to develop and improve the
stock assessments.
Y There is evidence of good progress with the development and implementation
of a research plan for the fishery.
It was concluded that a score of more than 80 could be awarded for the
relevant Performance Indicator at the fourth surveillance audit, closing this
condition.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 108
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
A research plan, with associated resource/capacity
commitments, should be developed and implemented
within 4 years of certification.
Relevant Scoring Indicators: 3A.5.2
Condition 7. Appropriate limit and target reference
points for M. paradoxus based on stock biomass and/or
fishing mortality
Action required: The limit reference point is the lower
95% confidence interval of the recovery trajectory in the
2006 OMP meaning the limit reference point is not a
constant, but a level that will vary over time. At its lowest
point, a M. paradoxus spawning biomass might not be low
enough to trigger management override of the default OMP
response, risking recruitment failure.
SG 80 states: ‘Limit and target/precautionary reference
points should be justified based on stock biology (e.g. a
stock-recruitment relationship) and measurable given data
and assessment limitations. Reference points may be
probability based’.
It is anticipated that the OMP will undergo revision during
2010. This condition could be addressed within this
planning process and thereby formally linked to the harvest
Y This conditon was closed at surveillance audit 1 when evidence was
presented that appropriate reference points had been identified and
implemented through the development of the OMP for both hake species.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 109
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
control rules (OMP) that will be used to set TACs for the
period of certification. The OMP revision process in 2010
should explicitly consider limit control rules with that
planning evaluation.
Timescale: Appropriate limit and target reference points
enacted within one year of certification.
Relevant Scoring Indicators: 1.1.3.1
Condition 8: Operational Procedures
Evidence should be provided of an appropriately detailed
plan of delivery and where necessary the reimplementation
of effective procedures to support the fishery management
objectives.
These procedures should include, at least, appropriate ways
of collecting and subsequently handling the scientific and
non-scientific data required to effectively manage the
fishery, including, for example, the target species, fish by-
catch (by-product) species and interactions with ETP
species as well as elements of MCS.
Timescale: Evidence of the development of a viable plan
to deliver the appropriate operational procedures should be
provided within 6 months, and will be reviewed prior to the
next surveillance audit.
Evidence of the effective implementation and functioning
of the planned operational procedures should be provided
within 12 months, and will be reviewed at the next
Y This condition was raised at the second surveillance audit and closed at the
third surveillance audit when evidence was presented that there are
appropriate monitoring procedures in place.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 110
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
surveillance audit.
Relevant Scoring Indicator: 3A.3.2
Condition 9: Monitoring Programme
Evidence should be provided to demonstrate that the
arrangements for monitoring and recording key aspects of
the fishery and its effects have been re-established.
This should include measures to address the key
components of fishery management pertinent to this
fishery, including information representative of the fishery
to apportion catch to the two hake species, length- and age-
frequencies of target and by-catch species, incidental
interaction with an implementation of mitigation measures
to protect ETP species (including seabirds). The developed
monitoring programme may require both on-shore and off-
shore elements.
Timescale: Evidence of the development of a viable plan to
deliver an appropriate monitoring programme for the
fishery should be provided within 6 months, and will be
reviewed prior to the next surveillance audit.
Evidence of the effective implementation and functioning
of the planned monitoring programme should be provided
within 12 months, and will be reviewed at the next
surveillance audit.
Relevant Scoring Indicator: 3A.6.1
Y This condition was raised at the second surveillance audit and closed at the
third surveillance audit when evidence was presented that there is an
appropriate monitoring programme in place.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 111
Condition Closed?
(Y/N)
Justification
Condition 10: Enforcement system
Evidence of the implementation of an effective
enforcement system that provides an appropriate degree of
control and compliance should be provided. This system
should include measures to control IUU fishing and
misreporting.
Timescale: Evidence of the implementation of an
appropriate enforcement system should be provided within
12 months, and will be reviewed at the next surveillance
audit.
Relevant Scoring Indicator: 3A.8.2
Y This condition was raised at the second surveillance audit and closed at the
third surveillance audit when evidence was presented that there is an
appropriate enforcement system in place.
Condition 11: Enforcement Monitoring
Evidence should be provided to demonstrate that the
arrangements for providing rigorous monitoring of
enforcement measures have been re-established.
Evidence should also be provided that, where necessary,
effective actions have been taken in response to any
breaches in regulations that have been detected.
Timescale: Evidence of the implementation of an
appropriate enforcement system should be provided within
12 months, and will be reviewed at the next surveillance
audit.
Y This condition was raised at the second surveillance audit and closed at the
third surveillance audit when evidence was presented that there is an
appropriate enforcement monitoring programme in place.
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 112
8.4 Evaluation Processes and Techniques
8.4.1 Site Visits
A site visit was carried out in Cape Town, South Africa during the week commencing 17th
March
2014. Attendance at the meetings carried out during the site is detailed in Table 14.
8.4.2 Consultations
A record of meetings held is included in Appendix 4. All aspects of the fishery and its management
were discussed in these meetings.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 113
Table 14: List of meetings carried out during the site visit, with date, activity and attendance.
Date Activity Attendance
17th & 21
st
March 2014
Meeting with client group
(SADSTIA)
Tim Reddell, SADSTIA
Roy Bross, SADSTIA
Irvin Esan, Sea Harvest
Jole Gourcia, Echalar
Mr Myawuli, Sea Harvest
Johan Botha, Irvin & Johnson
Colin Attwood, UCT – Scientist
Kobus Maritz, Sea Vana / SECIFA
Craig Bacon, Viking / Secifa.
Rory Williams, SADSTIA
Chris Schooman, SADSTIA
J. Janrough, SADSTIA
Rui Ventura, SADSTIA
Arthur Shipalana, SADSTIA
Felix Ratheb, SADSTIA
Madeda Khumalu, SADSTIA
17th March
2014
Meeting with Birdlife South
Africa*
Bronwyn Maree, Birdlife South Africa
18th March
2014
Meeting with Marine Resource
Assessment and Management
Group (MARAM)
Doug Butterworth, MARAM Scientist
18th March
2014
Meeting with OLRAC*† Mike Bergh, Technical Director,
OLRAC
Philippe Lallemand, Senior Fisheries
Economist, OLRAC.
19th March
2014
Meeting with Department of
Agriculture, Forestry &
Fisheries (DAFF)†
Mortimer Mannya, Deputy Director
General, Fisheries Management
Kim Prochazka, Director, Resource
Research
Deon Durholtz, Scientist, Hake Research
Saasa Pheeha Director, Fisheries
Management
Nambulelo Magqira, Communications
Dennis Frederiks, ACD, MRM
Ceba Mtoba, CD, MCS
Belamane Semole, ACD, CRD
Bernard Liedemann, Acting Director,
Fisheries Patrol Vessels
Nkosinathe Dana, Director, Monitoring
& Surveillance
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 114
Date Activity Attendance
Xolela Wellem, Control & compliance
Andile Mosheni, ADD – FPV
Thabiso Maratsane, ADD – FPV
20th March
2014
Meeting with South African
National Biodiversity Institute
(SANBI)*
Kerry Sink, SANBI Scientist
20th March
2014
Meeting with South African
Environmental Observation
Network (SAEON)*
Lara Atkinson, SAEON
20th March
2014
World Wide Fund for Nature,
South Africa (WWF-SA)*†
John Duncan
Jessica Greenston
Junaid Francis
20th March
2014
University of Cape Town* Colin Attwood, Scientist.
21st March
2014
Capfish Melanie Smith
Victor Ngcongo
Sarah Wilkinson
Notes
* Meeting attended by Melanie Smith, Capfish, Observer.
† Meeting attended by Martin Purves, MSC South Africa Program Manager, Observer.
8.4.3 Evaluation Techniques
This assessment was announced through direct email sent by Intertek Moody Marine to stakeholders,
notification on the MSC website, Fishery Updates sent by the MSC to interested parties globally, and
an advertisement placed in Fishing News International.
The MSC Principles and Criteria set out the requirements of certified fishery. The certification
methodology adopted by the MSC involves the interpretation of these Principles and Criteria into
specific Performance Indicators and Scoring Guideposts against which the performance of Fishery
can be measured. In order to make the assessment process as clear and transparent as possible, these
identify the level of performance necessary to achieve 100, 80 (a pass score), and 60 scores for each
Indicator.
This assessment used the Standard Assessment Tree set out in MSC Certification Requirements v1.3.
Use of this assessment tree has been the subject of stakeholder consultation (direct e-mail from IFC;
notification on the MSC website; and notification via the MSC Fishery Updates). No comments were
received from any stakeholders on the use of this assessment tree.
For each Performance Indicator, the performance of the fishery is assessed as a ‘score’. In order for
the fishery to achieve certification, an overall score of 80 is considered necessary for each of the three
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 115
Principles, 100 represent ideal best practice and 60 a measurable shortfall. A fishery cannot be
certified if a score below 60 is recorded. As it is not considered possible to allocate precise scores, a
scoring interval of five is therefore used in evaluations. Scores are allocated based on the consensus
opinion of the assessment team.
8.4.4 Scoring components and elements
The MSC CR requires that all of the scoring components and elements considered in this assessment
are listed. These are shown in Table 15 overleaf.
8.4.5 Risk Based Framework
The Risk Based Framework has not been used in this assessment.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 116
Table 15: Scoring components and elements considered in this assessment. Decisions on whether
or not a particular PI is data deficient have been taken using the guidance set out in Table
AC2 of the MSC Certification Requirements v 1.3.
Component
Scoring elements Main/not main Data-deficient
or not
UoC 1
1.1.1 - Stock Status Merluccius paradoxus Main No
UoC 2
1.1.1 - Stock Status Merluccius capensis Main No
Both UoCs
2.1.1 M. capensis (for the M. paradoxus
UoC)
Main No
M. paradoxus (for the M. capensis
UoC)
Main No
Lophius vomerinus Main No
Trachurus Trachurus Main No
Pterogymnus laniarius Main No
Argyrosomus inodorus Not main No
Thyrsites atun Not main No
2.2.1 As for 2.1.1
As for 2.1.1 As for 2.1.1
2.3.1 Black Browed Albatross, Thalassarche
melanophris
NA No
Indian Yellow nosed albatross,
Thalassarche carteri
Atlantic Yellow nosed Albatross,
Thallassarche chlororhynchos
White-chinned petrel, Procellaria
aequinoctialis
Cape gannet, Morus capensis
Shy albatross, Thalassarche cauta
Pintado petrel, Daption capense
Great shearwater, Ardenna gravis
Sub-Antarctic skua, Catharacta
antarctica
Sooty shearwater Puffinus griseus
Cory’s shearwater, Calonectris
borealis
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 117
Component
Scoring elements Main/not main Data-deficient
or not
2.4.1 Southern Benguela Canyon NA No
Southern Benguela Submarine Bank
Southern Benguela Gravel Outer shelf
Southern Benguela Gravel shelf edge
Southern Benguela Hard shelf edge
Southern Benguela Muddy shelf edge
Agulhas Canyon
Agulhas Gravel Outer shelf
2.5.1 Trophic interactions NA NA
8.5 Assessment of the Units of Certification
When the South African Hake trawl fishery was first certified against the MSC Standard, and at its
recertification in 2010, the fishery was regarded as a single unit of certification. The impacts of
fishing for M. paradoxus and M. capensis on the target stocks and all non-target (Principle 2)
components were assessed as if there was just a single hake species.
Over the past 5 years the understanding of the status of the two hake species has improved, and it is
now possible to evaluate the status of each hake species separately against the Principle 1 scoring
guideposts. This approach is used for this fishery for the first time in this second re-assessment.
The assessment team has considered whether it is appropriate to extend the separate assessment of the
two UoCs to Principle 2 and Principle 3, or whether the characteristics of the fishery for M. capensis
and M. paradoxus are sufficiently similar to warrant their continuing assessment together.
We have noted that there is a considerable overlap between the two hake stocks. Although M.
capensis is dominant in inshore catches, some M. paradoxus are also caught on inshore trawl grounds;
and the main catch of both M. paradoxus and M. capensis is taken offshore. Environmental impacts
of the hake trawl fishery in South Africa on non-target species, ETP species, marine habitats and
ecosystems have been examined by observers and scientists in South Africa without specific
consideration of the species being targeted, and it is thus impossible to separate impacts arising from
each UoC independently. Likewise, the management regime is not species-specific.
We have concluded that while it is appropriate to assess the two species against the Principle 1
Performance Indicators and Scoring Guideposts separately, the overlap between fishing grounds and
management practices makes it inappropriate to assess the two species separately for Principles 2 and
3. The assessment approach is summarised in the table below.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 118
Table 16: Proposal for progressing Units of Certification (UoC) at Full Assessment against the
MSC standard.
Principle UoC1: M. capensis UoC2: M. paradoxus
Principle 1: Target Stock Stock status can be determined
for this species and should be
assessed independently.
Stock status can be determined
for this species and should be
assessed independently.
Principle 2: Environmental
Impacts
The overlap of species distribution across all fishing grounds
makes separate assessment of each UoC inappropriate. The UoCs
are assessed together.
Principle 3: Management Both UoCs are managed under the same overall management
regime, with minor differences for inshore and offshore fishing
grounds, where both species are caught. The UoCs are therefore
assessed together.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 119
9 TRACEABILITY
9.1 Eligibility Date
This fishery was already certified. With the publication of this PCR the continuity of certified fishery
products is achieved
9.2 Traceability within the Fishery
IFC have evaluated the key elements of traceability within the fishery as required by MSC
Certification Requirements at §27.12.1, below.
a) Tracking & tracing systems
The vessels operating in the Unit of Certification are tracked at all times by satellite VMS systems.
The vessels are also required to report the fishing location, the type of fishing gear used, and the
quantity of fish caught daily using a paper-based logbook system. These reports are reconciled with
landings records. There is therefore a high degree of confidence that the fishing activity carried out
by the vessels under assessment is tracked and recorded by independently verifiable mechanisms.
b) Catch segregation and labelling
In the offshore fleet, the catch is sorted, headed and gutted at sea, then frozen and stored in fish boxes
that are labelled with the date of capture and fishing location.
In the inshore fleet, the catch is sorted, headed and gutted at sea, then stored on ice in fish boxes
before landing.
c) Risk of vessels fishing outside the UoC
The location of all catches and their origin has to be recorded by each fishing vessel. Vessel activity
is monitored using VMS equipment. The risk of a vessel fishing undetected outside the UoC area is
therefore very low.
d) On-board processing
Fish are headed and gutted at sea and landed whole. There is no processing of the fish at sea.
e) Trans-shipment and first point of landing
There is no trans-shipment of fish at sea. All of the catch is landed, mainly to Cape Town and Mossel
Bay in South Arica..
f) Risk of substitution of certified fish with non-certified fish prior to and at the point of
landing.
The offshore fleet target hake all year round, and only use the trawl gear specified in this UoC
(120mm cod end mesh size). All hake caught by the offshore fleet are therefore eligible for
certification. The risk of substitution of certified fish with non-certified fish and comingling of MSC
and non-MSC product is therefore considered to be very low for the offshore fleet.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 120
At certain times of year some of the vessels in the inshore fleet may fish for other species of fish and
in other areas using other types of fishing gear (trawls with a mesh size of smaller than 120mm and as
small as 75mm). Skippers are required to report the type of gear that they have used during a fishing
trip, so it is possible to separate MSC and non-MSC product at the point of landing to avoid the
substitution of certified fish with non-certified fish and the risk of co-mingling of MSC and non-MSC
product is therefore considered to be very low.
9.3 Eligibility to Enter Further Chains of Custody
IFC has evaluated the eligibility of fish from this fishery to enter into further chains of custody as
required by MSC Certification Requirements at §27.12.2, below.
a) Eligibility to enter further certified chains of custody
Tracking and traceability information for this fishery is considered sufficient for product to be eligible
to enter further chains of custody.
b) Parties eligible to use the fishery certificates
The only company eligible to use the fishery certificate is the South African Deep Sea Trawl Industry
Association (SADSTIA). The only vessels eligible to operate within the fishery are those specified in
this report or listed in the current MSC Certificate for the fishery.
c) Eligible points of landing
The eligible points of landing are Cape Town, Saldanha and Mossel Bay in South Africa.
d) Point of change of ownership from which Chain of Custody certification is required
The point of change of ownership for product from the fishery will be acceptance of fish by customers
into their own storage and processing facilities. All merchants and processors wishing to sell MSC
certified fish that has been purchased from this fishery will therefore require their own Chain of
Custody certification.
9.4 Eligibility of Inseparable or Practically Inseparable (IPI) stock(s) to Enter Further
Chains of Custody
The two hake species under assessment have an overlapping distribution (see Figure 1), and when
they are caught together it is not commercially feasible to separate them due to the practical operation
of the fishery. IFC have therefore considered whether it is appropriate to implement the procedures
set out in the CR (v1.3) at 27.4.9 concerning IPI species.
The most recent analysis for the fishery indicates that the overall species split is 79% M. paradoxus
and 21% M. capensis (Rademeyer, 2012). The CR limit for applying the IPI procedures is that there
is a limit of 15% of the total catch for any species to be eligible for assessment this way (CR at
27.4.9.1c).
The stock assessment for the fisheries takes full account of their overlapping distribution and the
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 121
mixed catch. Observer data and mathematical models are used to assess the status of the stocks
independently.
IFC conclude that the IPI procedures cannot be applied to the fishery, and that the information about
catch composition is adequate to allow the assessment of each UoC independently.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 122
10 EVALUATION RESULTS
10.1 Principle Level Scores
The performance of this fishery in relation to MSC Principles 1, 2, and 3 is summarised in the table
below.
Table 17 Summary of MSC Principle level scores for the South African Hake Trawl fishery UoC
1 (M. paradoxus) and UoC2 (M. capensis)
10.2 Summary of Scores
The scores assigned to each Performance Indicator for this fishery are shown inTable 18.
10.3 Summary of Conditions
A score of less than 80 was awarded for 5 Performance Indicators. The assessment team has
therefore set conditions for continuing certification that the client for certification is required to
address. The conditions are applied to improve performance to at least the 80 level within a period set
by the certification body but no longer than the term of the certification.
As a standard condition of certification, the client has developed an 'Action Plan for Meeting the
Conditions for Continued Certification', which has been approved by IFC.
As a standard requirement of the MSC certification methodology, the fishery shall be subject to (as a
minimum) annual surveillance audits. Progress towards the milestones set out in the conditions shall
be reviewed at these annual audits. The annual surveillance audits shall be publicised and reports
made publicly available.
The Conditions, associated timescales and relevant Scoring Indicator are summarised in Table 19
below, and set out in detail in section 14 of this report.
UoC 1 UoC 2
M. paradoxus M. capensis
Principle 1 - Target species PI 1.1.3 Not scored NA 98.8
PI 1.1.3 Scored 92.1 NA
Principle 2 - Ecosystem 84.0 84.0
Principle 3 - Management 92.5 92.5
Overall weighted Principle-level scores
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 123
Table 18: Scores for the South African Hake Trawl Fishery. Scores shaded green attain the
unconditional pass level. Yellow shading indicates a conditional pass, and red shading
would indicate a fail.
UoC 1 UoC 2
M. paradoxus M. capensis
1.1.1 Stock status 70 100
1.1.2 Reference points 100 100
1.1.3 Stock rebuilding 90 NA
1.2.1 Harvest strategy 95 95
1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools 100 100
1.2.3 Information & monitoring 100 100
1.2.4 Assessment of stock status 95 95
2.1.1 Outcome 80 80
2.1.2 Management 95 95
2.1.3 Information 85 85
2.2.1 Outcome 80 80
2.2.2 Management 80 80
2.2.3 Information 85 85
2.3.1 Outcome 80 80
2.3.2 Management 85 85
2.3.3 Information 70 70
2.4.1 Outcome 80 80
2.4.2 Management 70 70
2.4.3 Information 85 85
2.5.1 Outcome 100 100
2.5.2 Management 90 90
2.5.3 Information 95 95
3.1.1 Legal & customary framework 100 100
3.1.2 Consultation, roles &
responsibilities100 100
3.1.3 Long term objectives 100 100
3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing 80 80
3.2.1 Fishery specific objectives 80 80
3.2.2 Decision making processes 95 95
3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement 95 95
3.2.4 Research plan 90 90
3.2.5 Management performance
evaluation
90 90
Principle Component PI No. Performance Indicator (PI)
Habitats
Trophic function
Governance and policy
Fishery specific management
system
One
Two
Three
Outcome
Management
Retained species
Bycatch
ETP species
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 124
Table 19 Summary of Conditions for the South African Hake Trawl Fishery.
Number Condition Performance
Indicator
Unit of Certification 1 – M. paradoxus
1 Stock status
The M. paradoxus stock is below its target reference
point; evidence of ongoing implementation of the
established rebuilding strategy is required.
1.1.1
2 ETP Species - information
Information should be gathered to allow fishery related
mortality of bird species and the impact of fishing on these
species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake trawl
fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m).
This could be achieved by continued implementation of the
recently established bird observer programme for inshore
areas and analysis of observer data so that bird mortality and
trends in mortality can be quantified.
2.3.3
3 Benthic habitats - management
There should be further investigation of the options for
protecting benthic habitats from hake trawl fishery impacts.
This investigation could consider, inter alia, the relative
merits of both statutory measures and self regulation and also
the areas that may require or might benefit from such
measures (for instance the South Benguela Canyon). It is
noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the
condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action,
evidence of progress with the implementation of the favoured
management measures would be required.
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl
experiment will provide information from the hake trawl
fishery on the type of management measures that may be
appropriate.
2.4.2
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 125
Number Condition Performance
Indicator
Unit of Certification 2 – M. capensis
4 ETP Species - information
Information should be gathered to allow fishery related
mortality of bird species and the impact of fishing on these
species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake trawl
fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m).
This could be achieved by continued implementation of the
recently established bird observer programme for inshore
areas and analysis of observer data so that bird mortality and
trends in mortality can be quantified.
2.3.3
5 Benthic habitats - management
There should be further investigation of the options for
protecting benthic habitats from hake trawl fishery impacts.
This investigation could consider, inter alia, the relative
merits of both statutory measures and self regulation and also
the areas that may require or might benefit from such
measures (for instance the South Benguela Canyon). It is
noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the
condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action,
evidence of progress with the implementation of the favoured
management measures would be required.
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl
experiment will provide information from the hake trawl
fishery on the type of management measures that may be
appropriate.
2.4.2
10.3.1 Recommendations
Recommendations are not mandatory requirements of certification, but address any areas where the
performance of the fishery against the MSC standard could be improved. The assessment team has
made one recommendation for this fishery:-
1. Monitoring, control & surveillance (MCS): while the current level of performance of the fishery
meets the SG80 requirements, the team notes that there have been problems with MCS
implementation in recent years. Evidence of effective and ongoing implementation of the MCS
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 126
measures will be sought at annual surveillance audits. (This recommendation relates to the
scoring of PI 3.2.3).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 127
10.4 Determination, Formal Conclusion and Agreement
The fishery attained a score of 80 or more against each of the MSC Principles and did not score less
than 60 against any Indicators.
The assessment team has concluded that the South African Hake Trawl Fishery (as defined in this
report) should therefore be certified according to the Marine Stewardship Council Principles and
Criteria for Sustainable Fisheries.
10.5 Changes in the Fishery Prior to and Since Pre-Assessment
This section is not applicable to this fishery. There has been no pre-assessment prior to this
assessment.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 128
11 REFERENCES
11.1 Publications cited
Atkinson, L., Attwood, C., Sink, K., & Lindholm, J., 2012. Trawl closure experimental design report.
Unpublished report. 28pp.
Atkinson, L.J. (2009) Effects of demersal trawling on marine infaunal, epifaunal and fish
assemblages: studies in the southern Benguela and Oslofjord. PhD Thesis, University of Cape Town.
141pp.
Atkinson, L.J., Field, J.G. and Hutchings, L. (in press). Effects of demersal trawling along the west
coast of southern Africa: I. Multivariate analysis of benthic assemblages.
Atkinson, L.J., Leslie, R.W., Field, J.G. and Jarre, A. (in press). Changes in demersal fish
assemblages on the west coast of South Africa, 1986–2009.
Attwood, C., 2012. Revised bycatch management strategy for South Africa’s inshore trawl fishery.
Discussion document prepared for the Bycatch Task Team. March 2012. 25pp.
Attwood, C. 2014a. Preliminary investigation into patterns of bycatch in the Hake-trawl fishery as
determined from observer records: 2008 to 2013 Report presented to Marine Stewardship Council
Surveillance Team, March 2014
Attwood, C. 2014b. Voyage 111 of the Ellen Khuzwayo 2 to 9 February 2014 Chief scientist’s report
Attwood, C., 2014c. Preliminary Report of the First Survey of the Benthic Trawl Experiment
Attwood, 2014.
Attwood, C., Petersen, S., and Kerwath, S. 2011. Bycatch in South Africa’s inshore trawl fishery as
determined from observer records. ICES Journal of Marine Science (2011), 68(10), 2163–2174.
Attwood, Petersen & Kerwath (2011). Bycatch in South Africa’s inshore trawl fishery as determined
from observer records. ICES J Mar Sci, 68, 2163-2174
Booth, A.J., & Punt, A.E., 1998. Evidence for rebuilding in the panga stock on the Agulhas Bank,
South Africa. Fisheries Research 34, 403-421
Booth, A.J., Brouwer, S.L., & Hecht, T., 1999. Consideration on the feasibility of a directed fishery
for panga Pterogymnus laniarius (Pisces: Sparidae). S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 21, 77-88.
Bourne, W.R.P., 1983. Birds, fish and offal in the North Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 14, 294-
296.
Brandão, A., & Butterworth, D.S., 2008. Updated assessment of the South African Kingklip resource
including an initial attempt at including catch at length data. MCM/2008/NOV/SWG-DEM: 75.
30pp.
Brandão, A., & Butterworth, D.S., 2013. A “Replacement Yield” Model Fit to Catch and Survey
Data for the South and West Coasts Kingklip Resource of South Africa.
FISHERIES/2013/SEP/SWG-DEM/51(rev). 12pp.
Butterworth, D.S. & Geromont, H.F., 2011. Issues that need to be addressed in revision of estimates
of bird kills in trawling operation. FISHERIES/2011/MAY/SWG-DEM/11 1pp.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 129
Capfish, 2008. Technical Report Ring-fencing of Trawl Grounds within the R.S.A. EEZ Produced for
: The South African Deep-sea Trawling Industry Association (SADSTIA)
Capfish, 2011. Description and evaluation of the hake directed trawling intensity on benthic habitat in
South Africa. Prepared for the South African Deepsea Trawling Industry Association in fulfilment of
the Marine Stewardship Council certification of the South African Hake-Directed Trawl Fishery :
Condition 4
Capfish, 2013. Review of Significant Bycatch and “Joint Product” Species in the South African Hake-
Directed Trawl Fishery. Prepared for the South African Deep Sea Trawling Industry Association,
SADSTIA
DAFF, 2011. Demersal Research Strategy, 2011-2014. FISHERIES/2011/MAR/SWG-DEM/04
DAFF. 104pp
DAFF, 2014. Report from the Inshore Trawl By-catch Task Team. March 2014.
FISHERIES/2014/MAR/SWG-DEM/03. 6pp.
Daneel, C., & Attwood, C., 2013. Bycatch in South Africa’s Offshore Trawl Fishery as Determined
from Observer Records. Draft DEG report, January 2013. 45pp.
Donovan, B., 2010. A retrospective assessment of the Port Alfred linefishery with respect to changes
in the South African fisheries management environment. MSc thesis. Rhodes University,
Grahamstown, South Africa, 147pp.
Fairweather, T., Booth, A., Sauer, W. and Leslie, R. 2006. Spatial description of hake-directed
fishing activity off the west coast of South Africa. African Journal of Marine Science, 28(1): 13–24.
Field, J. Attwood, C., and Jarre, A. 2013. Cooperation between scientists, NGOs and industry in
support of sustainable fisheries: the South African hake Merluccius spp. trawl fishery experience.
Journal of Fish Biology (2013)doi:10.1111/jfb.12118, available online at wileyonlinelibrary.com
FISHERIES/2010/OCTOBER/SWG-DEM/59. The 2010 Operational Management Procedure for the
South African Merluccius paradoxus and M. capensis Resources. Rademeyer, Fairweather, Glazer,
Leslie and Butterworth
Fisheries_2013_NOV_SWG-DEM_68. Use of commercial vessels for hake surveys, calibration
versus gear replication for achieving short term continuity. OLRAC,
Gasche, L., Gascuel, D., Shannon, L., & Shin Y.-J., 2012. Global assessment of the fishing impacts
on the Southern Benguela ecosystem using an EcoTroph modelling approach. J. Mar. Sci. 90, 1-12.
Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924796311001709
Glazer, J., 2013. An updated assessment of the South African Monkfish resource, Lophius
vomerinus. FISHERIES/2013/SEPT/SWG-DEM/42. 9pp.
Glazer, J.P., Fairweather, T.P., & Cooper, R., 2013. Summary of monkfish catches from different
sources. FISHERIES/2013/SEPT/SWG-DEM/41. 7pp.
Greenston, J.D., 2013. Assessing the suitability of an Individual Transferable Quota System to
address unregulated by-catch in South Africa’s inshore trawl fishery. M. Phil. Thesis, University of
Cape Town. 69pp.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 130
Groeneveld JC (2003) - Under-reporting of catch of South Coast rock lobster (Palinurus gilchristi)
with implications for the assessment and management of the fishery. Afr. J. Mar Sci. 25: 407-411.
Japp, D.W., Smith, M. and Wilkinson, S. (2009). An Overview of Marine Protected Areas in South
Africa and Alternatives for the Application to Offshore Fisheries Management Areas Report to
SADSTIA. 23pp
Jennings, S. & Kaiser M.J., 1998. The effects of fishing on marine ecosystems. Marine Biology 34,
201-352.
Leslie, R., & Glazer, J., 2012. Trends in swept-area abundance indices for various commercial and
non-commercial species from trawl surveys on the west and south coasts. Unpublished DAFF report.
Leslie, R., & Glazer, J., 2013. Trends in abundance indices from West and South Coast trawl
surveys. FISHERIES/2013/FEB/SWG-DEM/72. 12pp.
Lombard. M., Attwood, C., Sink, K. & Grantham, H. (2010). Use of Marxan to identify potential
closed areas to reduce bycatch in the South African inshore trawl fishery. Report to WWF South
Africa and the Responsible Fishery Alliance. 11 pages.
Mann, B.Q., 2013. Southern African Marine Linefish Species Profiles. Oceanographic Research
Institute, Durban. Special Publication No. 9, September 2013. 357pp.
MARAM IWS/DEC13/General/4. International review report for the 2013 international stock
assessment workshop. UCT. Smith, Cox, Parma and Punt
MARAM IWS/DEC13/General/3 Document list for the International Stock Assessment Workshop.
Butterworth
Maree, B.A., & Wanless, R.M., 2011a. Seabird bycatch rates and an extrapolated estimate of the total
annual mortality of albatrosses and other seabirds in the South African deep-water hake trawl fishery.
FISHERIES/2011/MAY/SWG-DEM/19. 13pp.
Maree, B.A., & Wanless, R.M., 2011b. Response to Butterworth and Geromont (2011): “Issues that
need to be addressed in revision of estimates of bird kills in trawling operations
(FISHERIES/2011/MAY/SWG-DEM/11)”. FISHERIES/2011/MAY/SWG-DEM/19. 3pp.
Maree, B. A., Wanless, R. M., Fairweather, T. P., Sullivan, B. J. and Yates, O. (2014), Significant
reductions in mortality of threatened seabirds in a South African trawl fishery. Animal Conservation.
doi: 10.1111/acv.12126
MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT 18 OF 1998; Gazette No. 18930, Notice No. 747.
Commencement date: 1 September 1998 [Proc. No. 80, Gazette No. 19148)
OLRAC (undated). Principles and imperatives for modifying effort limitations in the offshore trawl
sector of the South African hake fishery. Report to SADSTIA. 2pp.
OLRAC, 2012. Re-appraising the CPUE database for the South African hake. Unpublished report,
11pp.
Parma, A., Punt, A.E. & Stefansson, G., 2010. International review panel report for the 2010
international fisheries stock assessment workshop. 29 November – 3 December 2010, UCT. Unpubl
report. 14pp. MARAM IWS DEC10 Rep 1
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 131
Payne, A.I.L, 2011. External report of the management system for the South African Hake trawl
fishery. Unpublished report prepared for SADSTIA by Cefas. 39pp.
R.A. Rademeyer, T. Fairweather, J.P. Glazer, R.L. Leslie and D.S. Butterworth, 2010. The 2010
Operational Management Procedure for the South African Merluccius paradoxus and M. capensis
Resources. 36pp. FISHERIES/2010/OCTOBER/SWG-DEM/59
Rademeyer, R.A & Butterworth, D.S., 2010a. Proposed Reference Set for the South African hake
resource to be used in OMP-2010 testing. 68pp. MCM/2010/FEB/SWG-DEM/05.
Rademeyer, R.A & Butterworth, D.S., 2010b. A Note on the Sensitivity of Hake Assessments to the
Choice of the Central Year for the Shift from a Primarily M. capensis to Primarily M. paradoxus
Fishery. 4pp. MCM/2010/FEB/SWG-DEM/10.
Rademeyer, R.A., 2011a. 2011 Routine Update of the South African Hake Base Reference Case
Assessment. FISHERIES/2011/AUGUST/SWG-DEM/39.
Rademeyer, R.A., 2011b. Output from the South African Hake OMP-2010 for the 2012 TAC
recommendation. FISHERIES/2011/AUGUST/SWG-DEM/40.
Rademeyer, R.A., 2012a. 2012 Routine Update of the South African Hake Base Reference Case
Assessment. FISHERIES/2012/OCT/SWG-DEM/22.
Rademeyer, R.A., 2012b. Output from the South African Hake OMP-2010 for the 2013 TAC
recommendation. FISHERIES/2012/SEPT/SWG-DEM/21.
RFA, 2011. Recommended amendments to Hake Deep-Sea Trawl Permit Conditions prepared by
SADSTIA re: seabird mitigation. FISHERIES/2011/JUL/SWG-DEM/32. 5pp.
Shannon, L.J., Curry, P.M. & Jarre, A., 2000. Modelling effects of fishing in the Southern Benguela
ecosystem. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57, 720-722. Available from:
http://iod.ucsd.edu/courses/sio278/literature/shannon_et_al_00.pdf
Singh, L., Cooper, R., & van der Westhuizen, J., 2013. Update on commercial catches and length
frequencies for 2013 horse mackerel assessments. FISHERIES/2013/AUG/SWG-DEM/24. 4pp.
Sink, K. & Attwood, C.G. (2008) Guidelines for offshore marine protected areas in South Africa.
SANBI Biodiversity Series 9. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria, South Africa:
18 pp.
Sink, K., Attwood, C. and Malebu, S. (2012). Spatial management to support by-catch management in
the inshore component of the South African demersal trawl fishery. Unpublished DAFF Scientific
Working Group document FISHERIES/2013/APR/SWG-DEM/ITBTT/04 Proposed FMAs.
Sink K.J, Wilkinson S., Atkinson L.J, Sims P.F, Leslie R.W. and Attwood C.G. 2012. The potential
impacts of South Africa’s demersal hake trawl fishery on benthic habitats: historical perspectives,
spatial analyses, current review and potential management actions. Unpublished report, South African
National Biodiversity Institute, 84pp. Available from:
http://www.sanbi.org/sites/default/files/documents/documents/benthic-report-sadstia-sink-et-al-2012-
draft.pdf
Sink K.J., Attwood C. and Malebu T. 2013. Spatial management to support bycatch management in
the South African demersal hake fishery. Unpublished Report. March 2013. 7pp.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 132
Sink KJ, Attwood CG, Lombard AT, Grantham H, Leslie R, Samaai T, Kerwath S, Majiedt P,
Fairweather T, Hutchings L, van der Lingen C, Atkinson LJ, Wilkinson S, Holness S, Wolf T. 2011.
Spatial planning to identify focus areas for offshore biodiversity protection in South Africa. Final
Report for the Offshore Marine Protected Area Project. Cape Town: South African National
Biodiversity Institute. 79pp.
Sink, K., Wilkinson, S., Atkinson, L., Sims, P., and Leslie, R. 2012. The potential impacts of South
Africa’s demersal hake trawl fishery on benthic habitats: Historical perspectives, spatial analyses,
current review and potential management actions.
Sink, Lombard, Grantham, Attwood, Leslie, Samaai, Kerwath, Fairweather, van der Lingen,
Atkinson, Wolf, & Majiedt. (2010). Systematic Biodiversity Planning to identify a potential offshore
Marine Protected Area network for South Africa. Unpublished Draft Report, SANBI, 34 pp.
Smith M., 2010. Using the observer data to calculate the Catch-At-Length estimates for the South
African hake stock assessments. Report to SADSTIA 9pp.
Smith, M., 2013. Progress report of the SADSTIA observer seabird data. Capfish, July 2013. 5pp.
Smith, A.D.M., Fernandez, C., Parma, A., & Punt, A.E., 2011. International review panel report for
the 2011 international fisheries stock assessment workshop. 28 November – 2 December 2011, UCT.
Unpubl report. 18pp. MARAM IWS DEC11 Rep 1
Smith, A.D.M., Fernandez, C., Parma, A., & Punt, A.E., 2012. International review panel report for
the 2011 international fisheries stock assessment workshop. 26-30 November 2012, UCT. Unpubl
report. 12pp. MARAM IWS DEC11 Rep 1
Smith, M. & Japp, D. (2009). A review of the life history of Merluccius paradoxus and M. capensis
with emphasis on spawning, recruitment and migration. Report to SADSTIA 29pp.
Smith, M., & Japp, D., 2013. Namibian and South African Horse mackerel resource: September 2013
update. Available from:
http://oceana.co.za/sites/default/files/South_African_Namibian_Horse_mackerel_2013.pdf
Smith, M., 2012. SADSTIA Observer Program: Progress Report. Report for the Deep Sea Trawling
Association (SADSTIA).
Smith, M., Cochrane, K., & Japp, D, 2013. Review of significant bycatch and “joint product” species
in the South African Hake-Directed trawl fishery. Prepared for the South African Deep Sea Trawling
Industry Association by Capricorn Fisheries Monitoring. 69pp.
Sofía Solano-Fernández, Colin G. Attwood, Russell Chalmers, Barry M. Clark, Paul D. Cowley,
Tracey Fairweather, Sean T. Fennessy, Albrecht Götz, Trevor D. Harrison, Sven E. Kerwath, Stephen
J. Lamberth, Bruce Q. Mann, Malcolm J. Smale And Lieze Swart (2012). Assessment of the
effectiveness of South Africa's marine protected areas at representing ichthyofaunal communities.
Environmental Conservation, 39, pp 259-270. doi:10.1017/S0376892912000070.
South Africa Environment Outlook: A Report on the State of the Environment (2006). Chapter 7:
Marine and Coastal Resources. Department of Environment and Tourism. Pp 169-198.
Travers-Trolet, M., Shin Y.-J., Shannon, L.J., Moloney, C.L., & Field, J.G., 2014. Combined fishing
and climate forcing in the Southern Benguela upwelling ecosystem: an end-to-end modelling
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 133
approach reveals dampened effects. Plose One 9 1-9. Available from:
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.009
4286&representation=PDF
Watkins, B.P, Petersen, S.L., & Ryan, P.G., 2008. Interactions between seabirds and deep water hake
trawl gear: an assessment of impacts in South African waters. Animal Conservation 11, 247-254.
Winker, H., Kerwath, S.E. & Attwood, C.G., 2012. Report on stock assessments of important South
African linefish resources. LSWG – February 2012 #3. Unpubl report. 65pp.
WWF and Ventura, 2013. Responsible Fisheries Training Programme RFA Rationale for Responsible
Fisheries Training.
Yemane, D., Field, J.G. and Leslie, R.W. (2010). Spatio-temporal patterns in the diversity of demersal
fish communities off the south coast of South Africa. Mar. Biol. 157:269-281.
11.2 Legislation cited
MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT 18 OF 1998; Gazette No. 18930, Notice No. 747.
Commencement date: 1 September 1998 [Proc. No. 80, Gazette No. 19148)
National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004. (No. 10 of 2004). Available from:
http://www.speciesstatus.sanbi.org/pdf/a10-04.pdf
REGULATIONS IN TERMS OF THE MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT, 1998. Published
under Government Notice R1111 in Government Gazette 19205, dated 2 September 1998.
Commencement date: 2 September 1998.
Threatened or protected species Regulations 2007 (R152 of 2007). Available from
http://www.speciesstatus.sanbi.org/pdf/regs_23feb07.pdf
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 134
12 SCORING AND RATIONALES
12.1 Principle 1 Evaluation Tables
Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.1 M. paradoxus
PI 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low
probability of recruitment overfishing
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost It is likely that the stock
is above the point where
recruitment would be
impaired.
It is highly likely that the
stock is above the point
where recruitment would
be impaired.
There is a high degree of
certainty that the stock is
above the point where
recruitment would be
impaired.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The best estimates of the current (2013) M. paradoxus SSB is 147 kt, which is
about 21% of the initial (unexploited) SSB and represents a recovery from a low
point in 2007 (= Blim). Because there is no sign of recruitment failure at the lowest
SSB observed in the stock-recruitment relationship, there is a high degree of
certainty that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired.
This meets the SG60, 80 and 100 requirements..
b Guidepost The stock is at or
fluctuating around its
target reference point.
There is a high degree of
certainty that the stock
has been fluctuating
around its target reference
point, or has been above
its target reference point,
over recent years.
Met? N N
Justification The best estimates of the current (2013) M. paradoxus SSB is 147 kt, which is
about about 98% of the spawning biomass at MSY (153 kt). Whilst it is apparent
that there has been a recovery of M. paradoxus since the low point in 2007, and the
reference set of operating models indicate that the stock was close to its target
reference point in 2013 (SG80), the stock has not been fluctuating around its target
reference point (the SG80 requirement), nor has it been above its target reference
point, over recent years (SG100 not met).
References Rademeyer and Butterworth (2014)
Stock Status relative to Reference Points
Type of reference point Value of reference point
Current stock status
relative to reference
point
Target reference point Bmsy 153,000t female
spawning stock biomass
(fSSB)
147,000/Bmsy=0.98
Limit reference point Blim Value varies depending
on OMs used in reference
Above fSSB 2007
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 135
PI 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low
probability of recruitment overfishing
set, but fSSB in 2007
represents proxy Blim
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 1
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 136
Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.1 M capensis
PI 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of
recruitment overfishing
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost It is likely that the stock is
above the point where
recruitment would be
impaired.
It is highly likely that the
stock is above the point
where recruitment would be
impaired.
There is a high degree of
certainty that the stock is
above the point where
recruitment would be
impaired.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The best estimates of the current (2013) M. capensis female SSB is 188,000t, which is
about 62% of the initial (unexploited) SSB. Because there is no sign of recruitment failure
at the lowest SSB observed in the stock-recruitment relationship, there is a high degree of
certainty that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired. The SG60.
80 and 100 requirements are therefore fully met.
b Guidepost The stock is at or fluctuating
around its target reference
point.
There is a high degree of
certainty that the stock has
been fluctuating around its
target reference point, or has
been above its target
reference point, over recent
years.
Met? Y Y
Justification The best estimate of the current (2013) SSB for M. capensis is 188 kt, which is 3.17 x the
spawning biomass at MSY (68,000t). The current estimate of MSY is about 62,000t
(landings in 2013 were 12,604t). It is apparent that M. capensis continues to fluctuate at a
level well above its target reference point over recent years. The SG80 and 100
requirements are therefore fully met.
References Rademeyer and Butterworth (2014)
Stock Status relative to Reference Points
Type of reference point Value of reference point Current stock status
relative to reference point
Target reference
point
Bmsy 68,000t female spawning
stock biomass (fSSB)
188,000/Bmsy=3.17
Limit reference
point
Blim Value varies depending on
OMs used in reference set,
but fSSB in 2007 represents
proxy Blim
Well above fSSB 2007
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 137
Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.2 both M. paradoxus and M. capensis
PI 1.1.2 Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Generic limit and target
reference points are based
on justifiable and reasonable
practice appropriate for the
species category.
Reference points are
appropriate for the stock and
can be estimated.
Met? Y Y
Justification The assessment estimates stock status (female SSB) in relation to MSY, current biomass
relative to initial unexploited biomass (B0,1917) and to biomass at MSY, exploitation rates
and time trends in recruitment. Additionally, estimates of uncertainty (variance) are
determined for most of these quantities.
Targets and limits have de facto been established through development of the OMP, and
proxies for limit (lowest observed fSSB, in 2007) and long-term target (SSB at MSY)
reference points are justified based on stock biology, some elements of uncertainty and
variability and data limitations and statistical simulations of these factors. These reference
points meet the SG80 and 100 requirements.
b Guidepost The limit reference point is
set above the level at which
there is an appreciable risk
of impairing reproductive
capacity.
The limit reference point is
set above the level at which
there is an appreciable risk
of impairing reproductive
capacity following
consideration of
precautionary issues.
Met? Y Y
Justification The stock-recruitment model used in the assessment is estimated separately for each species
from 1985 to the present, and the reference set of operating models (OM) for testing the
2014 OMP revision for the South African hake resource covers three major areas of
uncertainty: 3 centre-years for the change in the preponderance from M. capensis to M.
paradoxus in the catch (1950, 1958 and 1965); 3 natural mortality vectors; and 3 stock-
recruitment relationship models (Ricker: modified Ricker and Beverton-Holt). Whichever
scenario is chosen, it is apparent that recruitment levels of both M. paradoxus and M.
capensis are sustained even at the lowest SSB levels recorded, and that this level (in 2007)
could be taken as a proxy for Blim. The limit reference point is defined as the lower 95%
confidence interval of the recovery trajectory included in the 2010 OMP (see section 5.7.1).
This means that the limit reference point is not a constant, but a level that will vary over
time depending on the reference set of OMs used.
In the case of M. paradoxus, the biomass of the stock has been determined to be below BMSY
until 2013 (when it is estimated to be close to BMSY), and a recovery plan was established
through the OMP that uses interim targets (trajectories of biomass as the stock recovers
toward BMSY) and interim limit reference points (conditions and actions to be taken should
trajectories perform below the probability interval of the OMP projections).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 138
PI 1.1.2 Limit and target reference points are appropriate for the stock
Information from the fishery therefore demonstrates that the limit reference point for each
species is set above the level which would impair recruitment, and takes account of
precautionary issues, meeting the SG80 and 100 requirements.
c Guidepost The target reference point is
such that the stock is
maintained at a level
consistent with BMSY or
some measure or surrogate
with similar intent or
outcome.
The target reference point is
such that the stock is
maintained at a level
consistent with BMSY or
some measure or surrogate
with similar intent or
outcome, or a higher level,
and takes into account
relevant precautionary issues
such as the ecological role of
the stock with a high degree
of certainty.
Met? Y Y
Justification The target reference point is the female SSB in relation to MSY (fBMSY), against which the
current estimate of biomass can be compared.
The target has de facto been established through development of the OMP, and the long-
term target (SSB at MSY) reference point is justified based on stock biology, some elements
of uncertainty and variability and data limitations and statistical simulations of these factors.
The SG80 and 100 requirements are therefore fully met.
d Guidepost For key low trophic level
stocks, the target reference
point takes into account the
ecological role of the stock.
Met? Not relevant
Justification Cape hakes are not a key LTL species
References Rademeyer 2014
Rademeyer and Butterworth, May 2014
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 139
Evaluation Table for PI 1.1.3 M. paradoxus
PI 1.1.3 Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a specified
timeframe
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Where stocks are depleted
rebuilding strategies, which
have a reasonable
expectation of success, are
in place.
Where stocks are depleted,
strategies are demonstrated
to be rebuilding stocks
continuously and there is
strong evidence that
rebuilding will be complete
within the specified
timeframe.
Met? Y Y
Justification M paradoxus biomass has been below its long-term target since the early 1970s and a
recovery plan was established through the 2010 OMP. The recovery plan established
recovery trajectories which are in effect interim targets, as well as implicit limit reference
points. The 2010 OMP indicated a high probability of increases in biomass from 2007-2012
and beyond, based on probabilistic projections, and defined the actions required if those
trajectories are not realized, including both target and limit reference points during recovery.
The most recent assessments have shown that the OMP’s spawning biomass recovery
trajectory, indicating a high probability that the SSB of M. paradoxus will increase from
2007 to 2012, has been vindicated, and fSSB is currently – 2013 - at around 98% of the
biomass at MSY.
Appropriate rebuilding strategies are being implemented and there is good evidence that
rebuilding will be complete within the specified time frame (10 years from 2010). This will,
however, be subject to careful scrutiny at ensuing annual surveillance audits. The
rebuilding strategy therefore meets both the SG60 and SG100 requirements.
b Guidepost A rebuilding timeframe is
specified for the depleted
stock that is the shorter of 30
years or 3 times its
generation time. For cases
where 3 generations is less
than 5 years, the rebuilding
timeframe is up to 5 years.
A rebuilding timeframe is
specified for the depleted
stock that is the shorter of 20
years or 2 times its
generation time. For cases
where 2 generations is less
than 5 years, the rebuilding
timeframe is up to 5 years.
The shortest practicable
rebuilding timeframe is
specified which does not
exceed one generation time
for the depleted stock.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The projected recovery for M. paradoxus under the OMP recognised that it was unrealistic
for socio-economic reasons to get M. paradoxus biomass to BMSY within a ten year period
(approx. 2 x the generation time for M. paradoxus), with the expectation that the OMP
would be periodically redesigned to achieve BMSY shortly thereafter. This, coupled with
the precautionary design (Ricker S/R model not used, species conversion of the fishery later
than the 1950’s and earlier maturity) has been suggested by the assessment scientists as
features that will result in recovery that is in effect more rapid than currently projected in
the OMP.
The rebuilding timeframe is 10 years, meeting the SG60 and 80 requirements. It is not the
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 140
PI 1.1.3 Where the stock is depleted, there is evidence of stock rebuilding within a specified
timeframe
shortest rebuilding timeframe possible, so the SG100 requirements are not met.
c Guidepost Monitoring is in place to
determine whether the
rebuilding strategies are
effective in rebuilding the
stock within a specified
timeframe.
There is evidence that they
are rebuilding stocks, or it is
highly likely based on
simulation modelling or
previous performance that
they will be able to rebuild
the stock within a specified
timeframe.
Met? Y Y
Justification Rebuilding of the M. paradoxus stock is progressing through implementation of the OMP,
which has requirements that assist with monitoring and re-evaluation. These include an
annual review of population and fishery indicators, and any other relevant data or
information on the population, fishery and ecosystem, with which to conduct a routine
updated assessment (likely to be core reference set models, used in the OMP testing, refitted
to take a further year’s data into account).
Every two years an in-depth stock assessment (more intensive than the annual process
above) is conducted, and in particular including the conduct of a range of sensitivity tests.
Also, a full re-evaluation of the OMP will be conducted in September 2014.
The most recent assessments have shown that the OMP’s spawning biomass recovery
trajectory, indicating a high probability that the SSB of M. paradoxus will increase from
2007 to 2012, has been vindicated, and fSSB is currently (2013) at around 98% of the
biomass at MSY). This information provides evidence that the strategy is likely to rebuild
stocks within a specified timeframe, meeting the SG60 and 80 requirements.
References
Rademeyer, 2010
Rademeyer 2014
Rademeyer and Butterworth, May 2014
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 141
Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.1 (both species)
PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost The harvest strategy is
expected to achieve stock
management objectives
reflected in the target and
limit reference points.
The harvest strategy is
responsive to the state of the
stock and the elements of the
harvest strategy work
together towards achieving
management objectives
reflected in the target and
limit reference points.
The harvest strategy is
responsive to the state of the
stock and is designed to
achieve stock management
objectives reflected in the
target and limit reference
points.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification A harvest strategy has been established based upon the stock assessment as integrated
through the OMP. This aims to balance the returns to the fishery (catch) against the
perceived risks to the stock (of fishing). The rules for specifying the TAC are fully specified
and are based upon management strategy evaluations under various hypotheses relating to
hake productivity, uncertainty in data and in the assessments. Appropriate mechanisms are
utilised to contain harvest as and when required to maintain, or allow the hake stocks to be
maintained at, or return to, target levels. Essentially, the OMP is the decision rule used to
establish the TAC, and its objectives of the OMP include reference points and management
targets within the design of the rules. Thus, the harvest strategy is responsive to the state of
the stock and is designed to achieve stock management objectives reflected in the target and
limit reference points.
b Guidepost The harvest strategy is likely
to work based on prior
experience or plausible
argument.
The harvest strategy may not
have been fully tested but
evidence exists that it is
achieving its objectives.
The performance of the
harvest strategy has been
fully evaluated and evidence
exists to show that it is
achieving its objectives
including being clearly able
to maintain stocks at target
levels.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The performance of the harvest strategy has been fully evaluated. The OMP has been
thoroughly tested for robustness against a wide range of uncertainties in the assessment and
management process, both at the time of revision of the OMP (every 4 years) and annually
or more frequently as is considered necessary in light of new information. The rules for
specifying the TAC are based upon management strategy evaluations under various
hypotheses relating to hake productivity, uncertainty in data and in the assessments.
The results of the stock assessments show that the harvest strategy it is achieving its
objectives, including being clearly able to maintain the M. capensis stock at the target level
(>MSY, though the fishery itself aims to maximise CPUE and minimise fishing time), and
to promote recovery of the M. paradoxus stock. The latest assessment suggests that this is
was probably achieved in 2013, but it is not yet clear that the strategy will be able to
maintain this stock at target levels.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 142
PI 1.2.1 There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place
c Guidepost Monitoring is in place that is
expected to determine
whether the harvest strategy
is working.
Met? Y
Justification The OMP requires that monitoring and re-evaluation are in place to determine whether the
harvest strategy is working. These include an annual review of population and fishery
indicators, and any other relevant data or information on the population, fishery and
ecosystem, with which a routine updated assessment is conducted (the core reference set
models, used in the OMP testing, refitted to take a further year’s data into account). Every
two years an in-depth stock assessment (more intensive than the annual process above) is
conducted, with a range of sensitivity tests.
In this sense, the OMP development process is an ex ante test of the strategy relative to
uncertainties. However, retrospective testing in the context of how well previous renditions
of the OMP performed in the context of actual results are less well defined.
d Guidepost The harvest strategy is
periodically reviewed and
improved as necessary.
Met? Y
Justification The harvest strategy, its information and modelling basis, and its utility in sustainably
managing the cape hake fishery is reviewed regularly. The most recent review was
conducted at the International Workshop (IWS) held in 2013, from which the panel of
international peer reviewers recommended a number of improvements (e.g. longline data be
treated in sex disaggregated form; accommodation of the change in survey catchability
associated with the use of a new gear by Africana). New assessment reflected work has
already been carried out in response to the panel’s recommendations, as part of the
redevelopment of the OMP scheduled in September 2014.
e Guidepost It is likely that shark finning
is not taking place.
It is highly likely that shark
finning is not taking place.
There is a high degree of
certainty that shark finning
is not taking place.
Met? Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant
Justification Sharks are not a target species and this scoring issue has not been scored.
References Smith et al., 2013
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 143
Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.2
PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Generally understood
harvest rules are in place
that are consistent with the
harvest strategy and which
act to reduce the
exploitation rate as limit
reference points are
approached.
Well defined harvest
control rules are in place
that are consistent with the
harvest strategy and ensure
that the exploitation rate is
reduced as limit reference
points are approached.
Met? Y Y
Justification Well defined harvest control rules are established within the OMP, and these are
understood and agreed by scientists, the industry and managers. Essentially, the OMP
is the decision rule used to establish a TAC against the objectives that include
reference points and management targets. These rules have been thoroughly tested for
robustness against a wide range of uncertainties in the assessment and management
process. Appropriate mechanisms are utilised to contain harvest as and when required
to maintain, or allow the target stocks to return to, productive levels.
As explained in 1.1.3 above, a recovery plan for M paradoxus was established through
the 2010 OMP, established recovery trajectories which are in effect interim targets, as
well as implicit limit reference points. The TACs set following the 2010 OMP aimed to
restrict exploitation to give a high probability of increases in biomass from 2007-2012,
and the most recent assessments have shown that the OMP’s spawning biomass
recovery trajectory has been achieved: M. paradoxus fSSB is currently – 2013 - at
around 98% of the biomass at MSY.
Whilst the 2010 OMP lacked formal rules to define actions to be taken if the
population were to have fallen below the limit reference point, the 2010 OMP is
currently (2014) being revised and this revision should formally consider those limit
control rules, conditions under which those rules would be invoked and actions to be
taken when they are invoked.
b Guidepost The selection of the
harvest control rules takes
into account the main
uncertainties.
The design of the harvest
control rules takes into
account a wide range of
uncertainties.
Met? Y Y
Justification The rules for specifying the TAC are based upon management strategy evaluations
under various hypotheses relating to hake productivity, uncertainty in current and
future data and uncertainty in controlling exploitation appropriately for the two hake
species though use of a TAC that is aggregated for both species. However, though a
single TAC might give rise to a mismatch in its effect on the two species, the OMP
evaluates the impact of that possibility and uncertainty of management implementation
on the individual hake species.
c Guidepost There is some evidence Available evidence Evidence clearly shows
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 144
PI 1.2.2 There are well defined and effective harvest control rules in place
that tools used to
implement harvest control
rules are appropriate and
effective in controlling
exploitation.
indicates that the tools in
use are appropriate and
effective in achieving the
exploitation levels required
under the harvest control
rules.
that the tools in use are
effective in achieving the
exploitation levels required
under the harvest control
rules.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification
Management tools have been specified to implement decisions of input and/or output
controls, which are generic for the two species although these are addressed within the
OMP. The primary management tool is the output control of a single TAC. Input
controls in the form of sea day limits linked to expected catch rates and the TAC have
been applied (one objective is to maximise CPUE) and are functioning as an effective
effort control. Evidence exists to show clearly that these tools are likely to be effective
in achieving relevant management objectives through continuing monitoring against
the OMP objectives.
Note that practicalities limit management’s ability to establish separate TAC’s for the
two hake species and, thus, the TAC is aggregated for both species. Using a single
TAC might give rise to a mismatch between its effect on the two species. However, the
OMP evaluates the impact of that and uncertainty of management implementation on
the individual hake species.
References
FISHERIES/2010/OCTOBER/SWG-DEM/59.; Rademeyer & Butterworth, 2010;
Rademeyer & Butterworth, 2013.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 145
Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.3
PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Some relevant information
related to stock structure,
stock productivity and
fleet composition is
available to support the
harvest strategy.
Sufficient relevant
information related to
stock structure, stock
productivity, fleet
composition and other
data is available to support
the harvest strategy.
A comprehensive range of
information (on stock
structure, stock
productivity, fleet
composition, stock
abundance, fishery
removals and other
information such as
environmental
information), including
some that may not be
directly related to the
current harvest strategy, is
available.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Catch and stock structure: cape hake are unlikely to be confused with other
species, but the two species are not easily discriminated at sea, and the logistics of
recording catch data have resulted in historical landings data that are aggregated over
the two species, i.e. the individual species have not been recorded separately. More
recently, the two species are recorded separately by observers (examination of gill
and otolith morphology and fin ray and vertebrae counts) and in surveys, and
extrapolated to total commercial catches classified by depth distribution. This has
provided a basis for separating historically aggregated catches into the two species,
which has allowed single-species assessments to be conducted with a reasonable
degree of robustness.
The distribution of both species is well established, though there is still some
uncertainty about transboundary migrations between M. paradoxus populations in
South African and Namibian waters. Stock assessment and management units are
consistent with the majority distribution of the respective species’ stocks. The
management implications of incomplete information on transboundary movements
are addressed to some extent by joint programs (BENEFIT) in which comparable
assessment methods are used and similar management benchmarks are employed.
Productivity: The life history of cape hake is relatively well known and is clearly
documented and understood including key behaviour and ecological interactions. All
the basic population parameters are known and reported, including spawning areas,
age and growth, mortality, fecundity, early development and larval distributions.
Information on fecundity is used in the assessments, which assume that individual
fecundity at age is proportional to weight at age after the age of maturity. This is a
standard assumption in assessments. Accordingly, estimates of reproductive capacity
are based on growth rates, which have been estimated and are re-evaluated from time
to time. Important uncertainties still exist in terms of temporal changes and sex-
specific growth, and the reliance of ageing on a single trained otolith reader who is
not consistent throughout the time-series (lack of validation), but the impacts of these
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 146
PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy
uncertainties on the assessments are relatively well known. Hake behaviour is
relatively well understood and ecological interactions of hake have been modelled.
Fleet composition: Fishing methods, gear types and size and composition of fleet are
recorded and regulated through licensing procedures. Observers carry out in situ
reports on gear type deployed, and all fishing methods and gear types employed in
the fishery are therefore known. Selectivity at size by gear (“partial F’s”: the fishing
mortality rate at age relative to the maximum fishing mortality rate for an age) is
estimated within the assessment. For M. paradoxus as the MSC target species, the
main fisheries are identified and significant catches are either recorded or reliably
estimated, though this has an element of uncertainty given potential mixing of stock
in South African and Namibian waters. For M. capensis, all catches are recorded and
used in the stock assessment. Levels of IUU fishing are estimated to be negligible,
but with an element of uncertainty given the increase of rights holders in the fishery.
Other fisheries in the area include the hake-directed handline and longline fisheries
which collectively account for around 10% of the TAC. A sole-directed fishery in
the inshore sector operates with a joint quota (sole/hake) system, whilst hake may be
taken in the mid-water trawl fishery in which hake bycatch is severely limited (<2%
bycatch allowed) and all boats carry permanent observers.
We conclude that a comprehensive range of information, including some that may
not be directly related to the current harvest strategy, is available. This information
meets the SG60, 80 and 100 requirements.
b Guidepost Stock abundance and
fishery removals are
monitored and at least one
indicator is available and
monitored with sufficient
frequency to support the
harvest control rule.
Stock abundance and
fishery removals are
regularly monitored at a
level of accuracy and
coverage consistent with
the harvest control rule,
and one or more indicators
are available and
monitored with sufficient
frequency to support the
harvest control rule.
All information required
by the harvest control rule
is monitored with high
frequency and a high
degree of certainty, and
there is a good
understanding of inherent
uncertainties in the
information [data] and the
robustness of assessment
and management to this
uncertainty.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Recruitment indices and female spawning stock biomass (fSSB) time series are
estimated within the stock assessment models for both Cape hake species, and
sufficient years of data are available to establish a general relationship between stock
and recruitment. Though there is lack of understanding on causes and extent of the
variability in recruitment, parameter estimates are adequate for developing biological
reference points.
Nevertheless, estimates of recruitment obtained from assessments are unstable until
information on the cohort is accumulated over time. As a consequence, good and bad
year classes are not detected until they have already been exploited for several years,
which imposes the need for precautionary strategies.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 147
PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy
Both fishery-dependent and fishery-independent indices of abundance are available.
The fishery-dependent index is generated from CPUE data that undergoes extensive
standardisation encompassing area, season, vessel power factors, by-catch factors and
the incidence and prevalence of trawl “liners” used to avoid mesh size restrictions in
the late 1970s to early 1980s. The mechanisms by which these are incorporated into
the standardisation are well debated with industry. Note that CPUE data prior to 1988
is aggregated over species, whereas, and dis-aggregated by species subsequently.
Fishery-independent indices of abundance are obtained from “swept area” surveys
and are used in the assessments. This allows one to compute the relative efficiency
(q) of the surveys, which varies considerably especially in view of changes in trawl
(old vs new Africana) and vessel (e.g. Africana vs Fridtjof Nansen, e.g.).
Though the fishery-independent and fishery-dependent indices do not show
consistent patterns and trends (the variability limits discrimination), the indices are
proportionally related to abundance/density of the stock with sufficient time series to
allow trends in abundance to be understood clearly. Where fishery independent
surveys are used (for juveniles and/or adults) the design of the survey(s) is
statistically rigorous and robust, indices are not inconsistent and there is evidence that
they are proportional to the stock size.
There is knowledge of biological and physical factors affecting distribution, survival
and year class strength (including natural mortality). Most information is sufficiently
robust for use in the stock assessment process, in that the structure of the assessment
models used and the OMP has been developed based upon relevant
biological/ecological distributions and uncertainties.
The information available for the fishery and the monitoring of fishery removals
meets the SG60, 80 and 100 requirements for this SI.
c Guidepost There is good information
on all other fishery
removals from the stock.
Met? Y
Justification
Landings and catches are accurately recorded in logbooks and as part of effort
management regime. Hake discards and other mortality (including juveniles) are
monitored through the observer programme and reliably estimated in the stock
assessment. While observer coverage is partial (~15-20%), discarding and incidental
mortality of hake is quite limited. All hake, taken by targeted fisheries or in bycatch
are set against the TAC. No other significant sources of human-induced mortality are
identified (IUU fishing is reliably estimated to be negligible). Therefore, the
estimates of overall hake fishing related mortality are reasonably good, meeting the
SG80 requirements.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 148
PI 1.2.3 Relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy
References
FISHERIES/2010/OCTOBER/SWG-DEM/59.; Rademeyer, 2013; Butterworth, pers
comm; OLRAC, 2012; Smith, 2010.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 149
Evaluation Table for PI 1.2.4
PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost The assessment is
appropriate for the stock and
for the harvest control rule.
The assessment is
appropriate for the stock and
for the harvest control rule
and takes into account the
major features relevant to
the biology of the species
and the nature of the fishery.
Met? Y Y
Justification The assessment model used is a sex-disaggregated Age-Structured Production Model
(ASPM), which is fitted directly to age-length keys (ALKs) and length frequency
distributions. The model assesses the two hake species as two independent stocks and is
fitted to species-disaggregated data as well as species-combined data. The general
specifications of the overall model are set out together details of data and parameterisation
in Appendix B of Rademeyer and Butterworth (2013). The ASPM model has been
extensively reviewed both in the context of this hake application and in stocks around the
world. While all models are approximations, the ASPM /OMP evaluation approach appears
to capture all significant features of the Cape hake species’ biology, the nature of the fishery
and the data at hand.
b Guidepost The assessment estimates
stock status relative to
reference points.
Met? Y
Justification Stock status is expressed relative to both limit and target reference points and with
associated CVs (measures of precision).
Forecasts (for setting TACs) are made for each species separately based upon the OMP (the
harvest rule). These are done in terms of future biomass levels relative to targets and limits
and future catches relative to MSY and relative to harvest stability objectives.
The assessment includes the consequences of current harvest strategies, forecasts future
consequences of these and evaluates stock trajectories under decision rules.
c Guidepost The assessment identifies
major sources of
uncertainty.
The assessment takes
uncertainty into account.
The assessment takes into
account uncertainty and is
evaluating stock status
relative to reference points
in a probabilistic way.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification
The assessment models have been evaluated for significant uncertainties and functional
relationships by examining likelihood, sensitivity analyses (relative to output management
quantities), assumptions of basic model structure and the significance of timing of fishery
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 150
PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status
events. While some of these uncertainties are not yet fully understood, in particular the
quality of data and methods used to perform the apportioning of catch and CPUE into
species, growth rates and lack of recruitment variability and the stock-recruitment steepness
(stock productivity), in many cases the direction of the bias, the range of the variance and
the significance to management are reasonably well-known.
The modelling approaches (likelihood fits, sensitivity analyses, Bayesian approaches,
multiple population models and OMP development through simulation) are all mechanisms
to estimate and evaluate uncertainty. Additionally, the OMP specifically addresses
uncertainties and their effect on the management controls (TACs). Major uncertainties and
assumptions are addressed in the management advice and through the appropriate decision
rules to address those limitations.
The hake assessment process clearly documents the steps taken in these evaluations which
are part of the formal record leading to the management advice to the governmental
decision-makers.
Whilst scientific debate continues about the best way to estimate the probability
distributions, the methods employed for hake are well-known and are considered to be
reliable. More structural uncertainties do not lend themselves easily to the construction of
probability distributions and were evaluated through sensitivity analyses and (more
recently) through Bayesian approaches.
The assessment makes a probabilistic evaluation of the stock status relative to the reference
points (MSY) and projects these into the future over appropriate timescales. Harvest
strategy rules are stochastically evaluated.
d Guidepost The assessment has been
tested and shown to be
robust. Alternative
hypotheses and assessment
approaches have been
rigorously explored.
Met? N
Justification The harvest strategy, its information and modelling basis, and its utility in sustainably
managing the cape hake fishery is reviewed regularly, with a view to ensuring that the most
robust basis for the OMP is being used. New work reflecting improvements to the
assessment has already been carried out as part of the redevelopment of the OMP scheduled
in September 2014. It is not clear, however, whether other assessment approaches (for
example, a simple VPA that estimates stock status and provides catch forecasts) would not
be equally suited to an OMP that provided the required management guidance.
It is also not clear whether all existing uncertainties that might affect the estimation of stock
status are adequately accounted for. For example, the recent inclusion of longline data has
led to a change in perception of the stock status for M. paradoxus, varying from 68% to
103% of BMSY depending on the level of dis-aggregation of the catch-at length data. These
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 151
PI 1.2.4 There is an adequate assessment of the stock status
revisions to the assessment have yet to be peer reviewed (presumably that will happen by
the time the OMP is revised in Oct. 2014), and there remains some uncertainty about the
stock status of deep-water hake.
e Guidepost The assessment of stock
status is subject to peer
review.
The assessment has been
internally and externally
peer reviewed.
Met? Y Y
Justification The assessment models have been extensively reviewed both in the context of this hake
application and in stocks around the world. While all models are approximations, the ASPM
/OMP evaluation approach appears to capture significant features of the species biology, the
nature of the fishery and the data at hand. The harvest strategy, its information and
modelling basis, and its utility in sustainably managing the cape hake fishery is reviewed
regularly. The most recent review was conducted at the International Workshop (IWS) held
in 2013, from which the panel of international peer reviewers recommended a number of
improvements on which new assessment work has already been carried out in as part of the
redevelopment of the OMP scheduled in September 2014.
References Rademeyer and Butterworth (2013).
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 152
12.2 Principle 2 Evaluation Tables (Both Units of Certification)
Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.1
PI 2.1.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species
and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained species
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Main retained species are
likely to be within
biologically based limits
(if not, go to scoring
issue c below).
Main retained species are
highly likely to be within
biologically based limits
(if not, go to scoring issue
c below).
There is a high degree of certainty
that retained species are within
biologically based limits and
fluctuating around their target
reference points.
Met? Y Y N
Justification For the purposes of an MSC assessment, “retained” species are those that are caught in the
fishery and are landed by fishing vessels, even if these species have no commercial value.
The MSC define “main” retained species as those that make up 5% or more of the total
catch (unless the retained species have a high value, are vulnerable, or the fishery is large
(MSC GCR at §GCB3.5.2).
For each UoC it is appropriate to consider the target species of the other UoC as a “retained
non-target species” (i.e. M. capensis is considered as a retained species for the M.
paradoxus UoC (and vice-versa)). The stock status of both hake species is well understood
(see section 5.7 of this report). Both species are within biological limits.
There is a considerable amount of information available about the catch of both target and
non-target species in the South African hake trawl fishery. This information is summarised
in section 6.1 of this report. A key finding of this work is that discarding rates are very low
(around 1%), and that the catch data are therefore representative of the retained catch.
Because of the overlap between the M. capensis and M. paradoxus stocks, it is not possible
or appropriate to consider the catch of non-target species for each unit of certification
independently. It is more appropriate to consider all of the species caught in the hake trawl
fishery for both target species, paying due regard to the spatial difference in catch
composition that are apparent from the observer records.
The only species that has been found to make up more than 5% of the total catch of the hake
trawl fishery in the combined offshore and inshore trawl areas (i.e. for all of the area of both
UoCs) is the monkfish, Lophius vomerinus. The status of this species has been assessed
recently (Glazer, 2013), and stock biomass is considered to be stable or slightly increasing
(see section 6.2.5.1 of this report).
Looking at the offshore trawl areas alone (where M. paradoxus is the dominant target
species), it is clear that there are no individual species that make up 5% or more of the
catch.
In the inshore trawl areas (where M. capensis is the dominant target species), there are two
species that made up 5% or more of the catch in the period 2002-06. These are horse
mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) and panga (Pterogymnus laniarius). Information about the
South African horse mackerel stock indicates that this is within biological limits (Japp &
Smith, 2013; Singh et al, 2013). Information about panga indicates that the stock of this
species is recovering (Mann, 2013) after historically high levels of trawling (landings of up
to 18,000t pa) prior to 1991. Current catches in the hake trawl fishery are around 220t pa.
The status of silver kob and snoek have been reviewed in this assessment. These species
both make up less than 5% of the catch but are considered because there may be some
concern about the potential impact of the trawl fishery on their stock status.
a) Silver kob (Argyrosomus inodorus) are understood to appear in the trawl catch
statistics because they are caught in association with the Agulhas sole trawl fishery
(which cannot be removed from the dataset of non-target species). The catch in the
inshore trawl fisheries are reported to be very low indeed (less than 200t and
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 153
PI 2.1.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species
and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained species
0.15% of the overall catch). Most of the silver kob catch is taken on grounds that
are both inshore and to the east of the hake trawl grounds (Figure 21). The stock of
silver kob in the vicinity of the fishery is estimated at over 7,500t. The inshore
trawl fleet have set a PUCL (146t for all trawling (i.e. hake and sole) in 2014),
which was not attained. This species is therefore highly unlikely to be affected by
the hake trawl fishery and is considered no further.
b) Snoek (Thyrsites atun) are abundant in trawl catches off Saldhanha Bay, where
hake make up just 17% of the catch. The trend in both catch data and CPUE data
from trawl surveys are both positive. Snoek make up around 1.5% of the catch in
the hake fishery overall. The species is therefore considered to fall below the
“main retained species” threshold, and stock status appears to be improving, so it is
considered no further.
The assessment team has applied a cautious approach to the assessment of this SI. We have
considered the status of the species that may make up more than 5% of the catch in either
inshore or offshore areas and for each UoC. These are the non-target hake species for each
UoC (i.e. M. capensis in the M. paradoxus UoC and vice-versa), monkfish (L. vomerinus);
the horse mackerel (T. trachurus) and panga (P. laniarius). The available information for
each scoring element indicates that they are all highly likely to be within biologically based
limits. The SG60 and SG80 requirements are therefore met.
The SG100 requirement is not met because the status of the other retained non-target
species (i.e. those making up less than 5% of the catch) with respect to biologically based
limits has not been determined.
b Guidepost Target reference points are defined
for retained species.
Met? N
Justification Under the MSC Certification Requirements, “Target Reference Points” should be set at a
level compatible with MSY (such as 40% of the unfished biomass or an appropriate proxy).
Although catch limits (PUCLs) have been set for some of the retained non-target species,
there is no evidence that TRPs compatible with MSY have been set for any of them. The
SG100 requirement is therefore not met.
c Guidepost If main retained species
are outside the limits
there are measures in
place that are expected to
ensure that the fishery
does not hinder recovery
and rebuilding of the
depleted species.
If main retained species
are outside the limits
there is a partial strategy
of demonstrably effective
management measures in
place such that the fishery
does not hinder recovery
and rebuilding.
Met? NA NA
Justification Scoring of this issue is conditional on the scoring of SI(a) above. The main retained species
are not considered to be outside biological limits. It is not, therefore, necessary to score this
SI.
d Guidepost If the status is poorly
known there are
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 154
PI 2.1.1 The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the retained species
and does not hinder recovery of depleted retained species
measures or practices in
place that are expected to
result in the fishery not
causing the retained
species to be outside
biologically based limits
or hindering recovery.
Met? NA
Justification The status of the main non-target species is known. It is not, therefore, necessary to score
this SI.
References Mann, 2013; Smith et al, 2013; Brandão & Butterworth 2008 & 2013; Glazer, 2013; Japp &
Smith, 2013; Singh et al, 2013; Attwood et al, 2011; Daneel & Attwood, 2013; Winker et al,
2012. Section 6.1 of this report.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 155
Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.2
PI 2.1.2 There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to ensure
the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
A Guidepost There are measures in place,
if necessary, that are
expected to maintain the
main retained species at
levels which are highly
likely to be within
biologically based limits, or
to ensure the fishery does
not hinder their recovery and
rebuilding.
There is a partial strategy in
place, if necessary, that is
expected to maintain the
main retained species at
levels which are highly
likely to be within
biologically based limits, or
to ensure the fishery does
not hinder their recovery and
rebuilding.
There is a strategy in place
for managing retained
species.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Under the MSC CR, the terms “measures”, “partial strategy” and “strategy” have a
particular meaning:-
Measures – are individual actions that are in place either to manage an impact
directly or coincidentally;
Partial strategy – represents a cohesive arrangement which may comprise one or
more measures and an understanding of how they work but which may not have
been designed to manage the specific impact; and
Strategy – this is a cohesive and strategic arrangement of measures that are
designed to manage an impact of the fishery.
Summarising MSC Guidance on CRv1.3, §GCB3.3
There are management measures in place for the key retained non-target species currently
caught in the hake trawl fishery (monkfish, kingklip and horse mackerel), and also measures
that are designed to manage the overall catch of non-target species. These measures have
emerged after discussions between scientists, managers, the fishing industry and
stakeholders at the “By-catch Task Team” meetings, and form part of a deliberate strategy
to manage the impact of the hake trawl fishery on non-target species.
Throughout the hake trawl grounds, Precautionary Upper Catch Limits (PUCLs) have been
determined for monkfish, kingklip and horse mackerel. These PUCLs have been based
upon independent assessments of stock status based on the best available information and
are intended to deliver a sustainable yield of each non-target species. The PUCLs are
statutory, and are implemented through fishing licence conditions.
During 2014 proposals have been put forward to trial the possible extension of the PUCL
strategy to a further 7 species (panga, silver kob, carpenter, chokka squid, St Joseph sharks,
skates, and gurnards).
In addition to these species-specific management actions, there are also controls on fishing
effort and spatial restrictions on trawling activity that are intended to limit the catch of non-
target species. Examples of these management measures include the restriction of trawling
in coastal waters along much of the South African coast; the creation of fishery management
areas (FMAs); the kingklip closed area off Cape St Francis; and fishing effort limitation (to
match days at sea to target species quota, and thus discourage fishing for non-target
species).
The assessment team also note that SECIFA has imposed a PUCL on its member vessels for
silver kob, a voluntary measure introduced to address concerns about the trawl catch of this
species, which is also important for the inshore line fishery.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 156
PI 2.1.2 There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to ensure
the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species
These management actions represent a strategy for managing impacts on the main retained
non-target species caught when trawling for both M. capensis and M. paradoxus, as well as
some other species that form less than 5% of the catch. The strategy does not applies to all
main non-target species, and also to some species that make up less than 5% of the hake
catch but which are non-trivial components of the catch. This strategy meets the SG60, 80
and 100 requirements.
b Guidepost The measures are considered
likely to work, based on
plausible argument (e.g.,
general experience, theory
or comparison with similar
fisheries/species).
There is some objective
basis for confidence that the
partial strategy will work,
based on some information
directly about the fishery
and/or species involved.
Testing supports high
confidence that the strategy
will work, based on
information directly about
the fishery and/or species
involved.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The recent assessments of stock status for horse mackerel, kingklip and monkfish indicate
that the strategy for managing these species is working. Stock status is evaluated using both
fishery-dependent data (catch composition) as well as fishery-independent data from the
DAFF trawl surveys.
Although this management strategy has been tested for the non-target species currently
managed using PUCLs, it is clear that the implementation of this part of the management
strategy is not yet complete and has not been tested for all of the species for which PUCLs
are proposed.
Other elements of the management strategy have been implemented (such as limits on sea-
days and the introduction of fishery management areas). Again, there is an objective basis
for confidence that these measures will work, but it there is no evidence of testing to
demonstrate that they are working (partly because these measures have only been
introduced recently).
There is therefore an objective basis for confidence that the management strategy will work,
meeting the SG60 and 80 requirements. The limited testing of the strategy does not satisfy
the SG100 requirements. Scoring against this SI may improve as the management strategy
is extended and as its effect become apparent over time.
c Guidepost There is some evidence that
the partial strategy is being
implemented successfully.
There is clear evidence that
the strategy is being
implemented successfully.
Met? Y Y
Justification The management strategy (for PUCLs, closed areas and days at sea) are being implemented
through fishing licence condition, which all licence holders are required to comply with.
DAFF enforcement staff have reported no breaches of either inshore or offshore trawl
licence conditions.
Evidence that the management strategy is being implemented successfully is provided by
the reports that the catch of kingklip, monkfish and horse mackerel have remained below the
PUCL levels. The assessment team note that the PUCL for kingklip was revised upwards
during 2013 as the PUCL was approached, which raised concerns that the management
strategy may not have been working properly. We can find no evidence of anything
untoward in the revised stock assessment that resulted in the PUCL being increased during
2013; it appears to be an appropriate and objective assessment of stock status. The 2013
catch of kingklip was within the PUCL limit.
The available evidence suggests that the strategy is being implemented successfully,
meeting the SG80 and 100 requirements.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 157
PI 2.1.2 There is a strategy in place for managing retained species that is designed to ensure
the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to retained species
d Guidepost There is some evidence that
the strategy is achieving its
overall objective.
Met? Y
Justification Recent stock assessments for the non-target species managed through the PUCLs are
favourable, and there is evidence of good compliance with the PUCLs over several years.
Ongoing observer trips in both inshore and offshore fishing grounds provide confirmation
that the overall catch of non-target species in the hake trawl fishery is relatively low.
Locations where higher catches of non-target species are taken have been identified, and
management measures are being introduced to protect stocks in these areas.
The information available provides some evidence that the strategy is achieving its overall
objectives.
e Guidepost It is likely that shark finning
is not taking place.
It is highly likely that shark
finning is not taking place.
There is a high degree of
certainty that shark finning
is not taking place.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification There is no shark finning in this fishery.
References DAFF, 2013; DAFF, 2014; Smith et al, 2013; Brandão & Butterworth 2008 & 2013; Glazer,
2013; Japp & Smith, 2013; Singh et al, 2013; Attwood et al, 2011; Daneel & Attwood,
2013; Section 6.2.3 of this report.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 158
Evaluation Table for PI 2.1.3
PI 2.1.3
Information on the nature and extent of retained species is adequate to determine the
risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage retained
species
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Qualitative information
is available on the
amount of main retained
species taken by the
fishery.
Qualitative information
and some quantitative
information are available
on the amount of main
retained species taken by
the fishery.
Accurate and verifiable
information is available on the
catch of all retained species and
the consequences for the status of
affected populations.
Met? Y Y N
Justification Observer trips aboard hake trawl vessels over the past 19 years have provided a dataset of
the actual catch of both target and non-target species on all of the hake trawl grounds. This
dataset contains information from thousands of trawl hauls. The observer data has been
analysed to provide information about changes in the catch of non-target species between
different fishing areas and over time.
Fishery-independent information on the status of retained catch species is also available
from the DAFF trawl survey data. These trawls are carried out on the hake fishing grounds,
and the relative abundance of both the target and non-target species is monitored from the
data collected.
These data provide accurate and verifiable information about the catch of all retained
species. The consequence of these catches is known for some, but not all of the affected
species.
The information available meets all of the SG60 and 80 requirements. The information
from observer trips meets the first part of the SG100 requirement, but this SG is not
completely met because the status of many of the populations of non-target species is not
known. A score of 80 is therefore appropriate.
b Guidepost Information is adequate
to qualitatively assess
outcome status with
respect to biologically
based limits.
Information is sufficient
to estimate outcome
status with respect to
biologically based limits.
Information is sufficient to
quantitatively estimate outcome
status with a high degree of
certainty.
Met? Y Y N
Justification For the main retained species in the hake trawl fishery it is possible to determine outcome
status with respect to biologically based limits (i.e. that the stock is above the level at which
recruitment would be impaired). Assessments have been published for monkfish, kingklip
and horse mackerel which demonstrate this.
Information from the observer programme extending back to 2003 (and earlier) provides an
indication about the catch rates for non-target species.
The SG60 and 80 requirements are met by the quality of the information and stock
assessments presented as evidence. The SG100 requirements are not considered to be met
because the level of understanding is limited to a few of the retained species, and the
outcome status of most of the retained species is not known with certainty.
c Guidepost Information is adequate
to support measures to
manage main retained
species.
Information is adequate to
support a partial strategy
to manage main retained
species.
Information is adequate to support
a strategy to manage retained
species, and evaluate with a high
degree of certainty whether the
strategy is achieving its objective.
Met? Y Y N
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 159
PI 2.1.3
Information on the nature and extent of retained species is adequate to determine the
risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage retained
species
Justification The information available about the catch of non-target species in the hake trawl fishery has
formed the basis of the strategy being developed for managing impacts on these species.
The ongoing commitment to continuing to gather this information (either from a reinstated
government scheme of from the continuation of the industry-funded observer programme)
will provide information that will be able to evaluate whether this strategy achieves its
objectives.
The SG60 and SG80 requirements are presently met because the information from the
fishery is supporting the current management strategy (which although more than a “partial
strategy” is nevertheless still in development). The SG100 requirement is not yet met
because it is not yet possible to determine whether this strategy is achieving its objective for
more than a few of the retained species.
d Guidepost Sufficient data continue
to be collected to detect
any increase in risk level
(e.g. due to changes in the
outcome indicator score
or the operation of the
fishery or the
effectiveness of the
strategy)
Monitoring of retained species is
conducted in sufficient detail to
assess ongoing mortalities to all
retained species.
Met? Y Y
Justification The hake trawl fishery continues to be monitored by the industry-funded observer
programme (and there are indications that the government observer programme will also be
reinstated). Both observer programmes are proven to provide information in sufficient
detail to allow changes in risk level and ongoing mortalities of all non-target species to be
assessed. Fishery-independent data (the DAFF trawl surveys) provide a means of
independently verifying trends apparent in the observer data.
The level of fishery monitoring in place meets the SG80 and 100 requirements.
References Attwood et al, 2011; Daneel & Attwood, 2013; DAFF, 2013; DAFF, 2014; Smith et al,
2013; Brandão & Butterworth 2008 & 2013; Glazer, 2013; Japp & Smith, 2013; Singh et al,
2013
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 160
Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.1
PI 2.2.1
The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the bycatch species
or species groups and does not hinder recovery of depleted bycatch species or species
groups
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Main bycatch species are
likely to be within
biologically based limits
(if not, go to scoring
issue b below).
Main bycatch species are
highly likely to be within
biologically based limits
(if not, go to scoring issue
b below).
There is a high degree of certainty
that bycatch species are within
biologically based limits.
Met? Y Y N
Justification For the purposes of MSC assessment, the term “bycatch” means those fish that are discarded
from the catch and are not landed (this distinction is particularly important to make in South
African fisheries, where the term “bycatch” is used to denote all of the non-target species,
including those that are landed). To avoid confusion in the scoring comments, we have used
the descriptive term “discarded species” in describing this element of the catch.
The MSC define “main” discarded species as those that make up 5% or more of the total
catch (unless the discarded species, are vulnerable, or the fishery is large (MSC GCR at
§GCB3.5.2).
All of the observations of the hake trawl fishery from 1995 to the present day indicate that
the discarding rate from the fishery is very low. There are reported to be two reasons for
this. The first is that the catch taken on the offshore grounds is very clean, comprising
mostly hake and a few other marketable species (such as monkfish and kingklip). On the
inshore trawl grounds the catch contains more species and a lower proportion of hake, but
the non-target species are all marketable as “joint product”. There are no quota limits on
any of the non-target species, and hence no requirement to discard them.
The level of discarding from the hake trawl fishery has been estimated by Smith et al
(2013). This study found that around 150t of the catch is discarded per year, equivalent to
around 1% of the total hake catch and less than 1% of total landings. Several species of rat-
tail made up around a third of the discarded catch, followed by Dory, dogsharks and
catsharks.
The available information indicates that there are no “main” discarded species in the hake
trawl fisheries. The SG60 and SG80 requirements are thus met. The SG100 requirements
are not met because this applies to all discarded species, and there is not a high degree of
certainty that all within biological limits.
b Guidepost If main bycatch species
are outside biologically
based limits there are
mitigation measures in
place that are expected to
ensure that the fishery
does not hinder recovery
and rebuilding.
If main bycatch species
are outside biologically
based limits there is a
partial strategy of
demonstrably effective
mitigation measures in
place such that the fishery
does not hinder recovery
and rebuilding.
Met? NA NA
Justification There are no “main” bycatch (discarded) species in this fishery. This SI is not scored.
c Guidepost If the status is poorly
known there are
measures or practices in
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 161
PI 2.2.1
The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the bycatch species
or species groups and does not hinder recovery of depleted bycatch species or species
groups
place that are expected to
result in the fishery not
causing the bycatch
species to be outside
biologically based limits
or hindering recovery.
Met? Y
Justification The status of the discarded species is poorly known; however the quantities discarded are
low (a few tens of tonnes per year), so the fishery is very unlikely to be causing these
species to be outside biologically based limits or to hinder their recovery.
References
Smith et al, 2013; Attwood et al, 2013; Daneel & Attwood, 2013; Walmsley et al, 2007;
section 6.1.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 162
Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.2
PI 2.2.2 There is a strategy in place for managing bycatch that is designed to ensure the fishery
does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to bycatch populations
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost There are measures in
place, if necessary, that
are expected to maintain
the main bycatch species
at levels which are
highly likely to be within
biologically based limits,
or to ensure the fishery
does not hinder their
recovery and rebuilding.
There is a partial strategy
in place, if necessary, that
is expected to maintain
the main bycatch species
at levels which are highly
likely to be within
biologically based limits,
or to ensure the fishery
does not hinder their
recovery and rebuilding.
There is a strategy in place for
managing and minimizing bycatch.
Met? Y Y N
Justification Under the MSC CR, the terms “measures”, “partial strategy” and “strategy” have a
particular meaning:-
Measures – are individual actions that are in place either to manage an impact
directly or coincidentally;
Partial strategy – represents a cohesive arrangement which may comprise one or
more measures and an understanding of how they work but which may not have
been designed to manage the specific impact; and
Strategy – this is a cohesive and strategic arrangement of measures that are
designed to manage an impact of the fishery.
Summarising MSC Guidance on CRv1.3, §GCB3.3
Discarding of quota species (hake and Agulhas sole) in South Africa is illegal.
A strategy is being developed to manage the bycatch (meaning the catch of all non-target
species) for the hake trawl fishery. This strategy is mainly being delivered through
measures that are designed to manage impacts on retained non-target species. Whilst some
of these measures are species-specific (such as the PUCLs that have been set for monkfish,
kingklip and horse mackerel) and thus limited in their effect to the species concerned, other
measures are likely to benefit both retained and discarded non-target species. Such
measures include effort limitation (matching days at sea to hake quota); spatial restrictions
on trawling (in many coastal areas, and also in specific Fishery Management Areas).
The key measure in place for minimising discarding is the industry practice of retaining all
of the marketable catch as “joint product”. This has resulted in a very low level of
discarding, such that there are no “main” discarded species.
The SG60 and SG80 requirements are met because there is a partial strategy in place that
clearly and consistently results in very low levels of discarding.
b Guidepost The measures are
considered likely to
work, based on plausible
argument (e.g. general
experience, theory or
comparison with similar
fisheries/species).
There is some objective
basis for confidence that
the partial strategy will
work, based on some
information directly about
the fishery and/or species
involved.
Testing supports high confidence
that the strategy will work, based
on information directly about the
fishery and/or species involved.
Met? Y Y N
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 163
PI 2.2.2 There is a strategy in place for managing bycatch that is designed to ensure the fishery
does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to bycatch populations
Justification Information directly from fishery observers indicates that discarding from the hake trawl
fisheries are at a very low level (less than 1% of total catch). This low level of discarding
has been seen in all observer trips over the past 19 years. The information provides an
objective basis for confidence that the partial strategy in place (a combination of formal
management measures and industry practices) work effectively to sustain a low level of
discarding. The SG60 and 80 requirements are met, but the SG100 requirements are not
met because there is no evidence that there is a strategy in place for managing discarding, or
any testing.
c Guidepost There is some evidence
that the partial strategy is
being implemented
successfully.
There is clear evidence that the
strategy is being implemented
successfully.
Met? Y N
Justification Evidence from observer trips confirm that the partial strategy (comprising of formal
management measures and industry practices) is being implemented successfully, meeting
the SG80 requirements. There is no formal strategy for discard management in place, so the
SG100 requirements are not met.
d Guidepost There is some evidence that the
strategy is achieving its overall
objective.
Met? N
Justification Although there is a very low level of discarding from the hake trawl fisheries, there is no
evidence of a strategy with clear objectives in place for managing discarding. The SG100
requirement is not met.
References
Smith et al, 2013; Attwood et al, 2013; Daneel & Attwood, 2013; Walmsley et al, 2007;
section 6.1.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 164
Evaluation Table for PI 2.2.3
PI 2.2.3 Information on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to determine the risk
posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Qualitative information
is available on the
amount of main bycatch
species taken by the
fishery.
Qualitative information
and some quantitative
information are available
on the amount of main
bycatch species taken by
the fishery.
Accurate and verifiable
information is available on the
catch of all bycatch species and the
consequences for the status of
affected populations.
Met? Y Y N
Justification Information is available from observer records gathered over several years to describe the
species that are discarded from the hake trawl fisheries, and also the quantities discarded.
This information meets the SG60 and 80 requirements. The consequences of this discarding
for the species concerned have not been formally determined, so the SG100 requirements
are not met.
b Guidepost Information is adequate
to broadly understand
outcome status with
respect to biologically
based limits
Information is sufficient
to estimate outcome
status with respect to
biologically based limits.
Information is sufficient to
quantitatively estimate outcome
status with respect to biologically
based limits with a high degree of
certainty.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The quantitative information available indicates that the combined weight of all discards
from the hake trawl fisheries is under 150t per year. The total weight of the three species of
rat-tail that are discarded is just under 48t. These species have a wide distribution. The
information available about the quantity of each species discarded and the distribution of the
more abundant discarded species is sufficient to estimate that discarding of non-target
species from the hake trawl fisheries is very unlikely to affect the status of the species
concerns. The SG60 and 80 requirements are therefore met. No information has been
presented (for instance about the stock status of the discarded species) to meet the SG100
requirements, even though it seems very likely that it would be met. A score of 80 is
awarded on a precautionary basis.
c Guidepost Information is adequate
to support measures to
manage bycatch.
Information is adequate to
support a partial strategy
to manage main bycatch
species.
Information is adequate to support
a strategy to manage bycatch
bycatch, and evaluate with a high
degree of certainty whether the
strategy is achieving its objective.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The information available from observer trips on trawl vessels is adequate to inform the
partial strategy in place, meeting the SG60 and 80 requirements. In the absence of a formal
strategy for discard management, in particular for any rare species whose populations may
be threatened by the trawl fishery the SG100 requirements are not met.
d Guidepost Sufficient data continue
to be collected to detect
any increase in risk to
main bycatch species
(e.g., due to changes in
the outcome indicator
scores or the operation of
Monitoring of bycatch data is
conducted in sufficient detail to
assess ongoing mortalities to all
bycatch species.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 165
PI 2.2.3 Information on the nature and the amount of bycatch is adequate to determine the risk
posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch
the fishery or the
effectively of the
strategy).
Met? Y Y
Justification The catch in the hake trawl fishery continues to be monitored by the industry-funded
observer programme (and there are indications that the government observer programme
will also be reinstated). Both observer programmes are proven to provide information in
sufficient detail to allow changes in risk level and ongoing mortalities of all non-target
species to be assessed, whether they are retained or discarded. Fishery-independent data
(the DAFF trawl surveys) provide a means of independently verifying trends apparent in the
observer data.
It is noted that monitoring of discard composition has been limited over the past few years.
Despite this, the fact that the composition of the unsorted catch is monitored means that the
SG80 and 100 requirements are met for this SI.
References
Smith et al, 2013; Attwood et al, 2013; Daneel & Attwood, 2013; Walmsley et al, 2007;
section 6.1.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 166
Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.1
PI 2.3.1
The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP
species
The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and
does not hinder recovery of ETP species
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Known effects of the
fishery are likely to be
within limits of national
and international
requirements for
protection of ETP
species.
The effects of the fishery
are known and are highly
likely to be within limits
of national and
international requirements
for protection of ETP
species.
There is a high degree of certainty
that the effects of the fishery are
within limits of national and
international requirements for
protection of ETP species.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The MSC define Endangered Threatened & Protected (ETP) species as those that are
recognised by national ETP legislation and those species that are listed in Appendix 1 of the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)4. The South African
legislation that lists ETP species is the Threatened or protected species Regulations 2007 (as
amended).
Potential ETP species in a demersal trawl fishery could include cetaceans and pinnipeds,
and also ETP elasmobranchs. Such species are vulnerable to capture in trawl nets, and
would be recorded by fishery observers. The other ETP species that can be affected by
trawl fisheries are birds, which may interact with the fishing gear both during fishing, and as
it is deployed and recovered from the vessel.
Observations of the hake trawl fishery indicate no evidence of the capture of potential ETP
species in trawl nets; however the fishery has been observed to have adverse impacts on bird
species in the past.
Appendix 1 of CITES has been accessed at the CITES website (CITES, 2014). There are no
species listed in this Appendix that are known to be affected by the fishery under assessment
or the fishing gear used in this fishery.
National legislation (the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004) and
its daughter legislation (The Threatened or Protected Species Regulations 2007 and their
subsequent amendments) have listed species that are considered to be critically endangered,
endangered, vulnerable and protected in South Africa. The bird species that have been
reported to be adversely affected by the trawl industry and of concern to the NGOs are not
listed in this legislation.
The assessment team notes that a strict application of the MSC CR would result in a
conclusion at this point that there are no ETP species interactions in this fishery. The team
also notes that there has been a concerted effort by the fishing industry and environmental
NGOs in South Africa to address interactions with bird species (particularly albatrosses)
that are considered by the IUCN to be at risk over the past 10 years of MSC certification.
These bird species have to all intents and purposes been regarded as ETP species since the
fishery was first certified.
Because of the long history of concern and concerted action to address impacts of the trawl
fishery on bird species, the assessment team has concluded that it would be appropriate to
continue to regard them as if they met the MSC CR requirements for ETP species (i.e. that
they are listed in CITES Appendix 1 and in relevant national legislation). We conclude that
if we did not consider these as ETP species, we would in any case need to assess impacts on
4 MSC Certification Requirements v1.3 at §CB3.11.1.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 167
PI 2.3.1
The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP
species
The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and
does not hinder recovery of ETP species
bird species under PI 2.5.1 et seq.
As a consequence of NGO concern, the effects of the fishery on the ETP birds species found
on the offshore fishing grounds have been studied in partnership with the fishing industry.
High levels of bird mortality (up to 18,000 birds pa) were recorded in the past. Research
carried out by BirdLife South Africa more recently indicates that the current level of bird
mortality in these offshore areas is no longer considered likely to be having a significant
adverse effect on birds.
This information provides a high degree of certainty (the SG100 requirement) about the
impacts of the hake trawl fishery on birds in offshore areas. There is less certainty about the
impacts of the hake fishery on the bird species (such as cape gannets), but the information
gathered by SADSTIA in 2012-13 indicate that these impacts are relatively minor in nature.
The available information suggests that the SG60 and SG80 requirements are met in all
areas of the hake trawl fishery. Although there is a high degree of uncertainty about impacts
of the hake trawl fishery on birds in offshore areas, there is rather less certainty about the
inshore areas, so it is appropriate to score this SI at a level of 80.
b Guidepost Known direct effects are
unlikely to create
unacceptable impacts to
ETP species.
Direct effects are highly
unlikely to create
unacceptable impacts to
ETP species.
There is a high degree of
confidence that there are no
significant detrimental direct
effects of the fishery on ETP
species.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The only mechanism available for the hake trawl fishery to adversely impact ETP bird
species is through direct physical contact with the fishing gear.
The effects of the hake trawl fishery on the birds found in offshore grounds has been well
studied, and there is a high degree of confidence that direct impacts are not likely to have a
detrimental effect on the bird species in this area.
Again, there is less certainty about the interactions with bird species in the inshore hake
trawl fishery. The available evidence from observer trips in 2012-13 suggests that impacts
are likely to be minor and thus highly unlikely to have unacceptable impacts.
The available information suggests that the SG60 and SG80 requirements are met in all
areas of the hake trawl fishery. Although there is a high degree of uncertainty about impacts
of the hake trawl fishery on birds in offshore areas, there is rather less certainty about the
inshore areas, so it is appropriate to score this SI at a level of 80.
c Guidepost Indirect effects have been
considered and are
thought to be unlikely to
create unacceptable
impacts.
There is a high degree of
confidence that there are no
significant detrimental indirect
effects of the fishery on ETP
species.
Met? Y N
Justification The hake fishery targets fish species that are not otherwise accessible to these bird species,
which are incapable of diving to the depths where fishing takes place. Studies carried out
elsewhere suggest that offal discharged from fishing vessels can be beneficial to seabirds.
Also mention the ecosystem effect of increased pelagic fish & squid.
The nature of the fishery and available information suggests that it is unlikely that the
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 168
PI 2.3.1
The fishery meets national and international requirements for the protection of ETP
species
The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to ETP species and
does not hinder recovery of ETP species
fishery will have adverse indirect impacts on ETP bird species.
References Section 6.3; Bourne, 1983; Maree et al, 2014; Smith, 2013; Watkins et al, 2008; National
Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004; The Threatened or Protected Species
Regulations 2007 (as amended).
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 169
Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.2
PI 2.3.2
The fishery has in place precautionary management strategies designed to:
Meet national and international requirements;
Ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious harm to ETP species;
Ensure the fishery does not hinder recovery of ETP species; and
Minimise mortality of ETP species.
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost There are measures in
place that minimise
mortality of ETP species,
and are expected to be
highly likely to achieve
national and international
requirements for the
protection of ETP
species.
There is a strategy in
place for managing the
fishery’s impact on ETP
species, including
measures to minimise
mortality, which is
designed to be highly
likely to achieve national
and international
requirements for the
protection of ETP
species.
There is a comprehensive strategy
in place for managing the fishery’s
impact on ETP species, including
measures to minimise mortality,
which is designed to achieve
above national and international
requirements for the protection of
ETP species.
Met? Y Y N
Justification All hake trawl vessels are required to use bird scaring lines (BSLs or tori lines) as part of
their licence conditions. These BSLs are proven to have a significant effect on reducing
bird mortality. All vessels are also prohibited from using “sticky” warps as part of their
licence conditions, again with the express purpose of minimising bird mortality. These
measures have been developed by regulators in collaboration with the Responsible Fisheries
Alliance (RFA), a partnership between environmental NGOs and the fishing industry.
The vessels working on offshore grounds are required to manage the discharge of offal from
the vessels to further reduce impacts on birds; again this is proven to significantly reduce
bird mortality. The offshore vessels also carry Bird Mitigation Plans that are based on a
review of each vessel. There are no such similar requirements for the vessels working on
inshore fishing grounds.
It is evident that for all hake trawlers (those working both inshore and offshore) there is a
strategy in place that is designed to reduce impacts on ETP bird species, and which is based
upon observations and knowledge of the fishery and the birds involved. The measures
within this strategy are proven to be effective. The SG60 and 80 requirements are fully
satisfied.
The assessment team notes that the bird mitigation measures adopted by vessels working
offshore areas represent part of a more comprehensive strategy that approaches the SG100
requirements. However, because both inshore and offshore trawlers prosecute both UoCs
an overall score of 80 is appropriate for the hake trawl fishery.
b Guidepost The measures are
considered likely to
work, based on plausible
argument (e.g., general
experience, theory or
comparison with similar
fisheries/species).
There is an objective
basis for confidence that
the strategy will work,
based on information
directly about the fishery
and/or the species
involved.
The strategy is mainly based on
information directly about the
fishery and/or species involved,
and a quantitative analysis
supports high confidence that the
strategy will work.
Met? Y Y N
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 170
PI 2.3.2
The fishery has in place precautionary management strategies designed to:
Meet national and international requirements;
Ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious harm to ETP species;
Ensure the fishery does not hinder recovery of ETP species; and
Minimise mortality of ETP species.
Justification The strategy in place for managing interactions between the trawl fishery and birds is based
on a thorough understanding of both the risks posed by the fishery, the vulnerability of the
birds themselves, and observations of the effectiveness of the management measures within
the strategy.
Observations of the impact of the fishery in offshore areas have been published in peer-
reviewed journals and quantify the impacts of the fishery without mitigation measures,
when around 18,000 birds were reported to be killed per year (Watkins et al, 2008); and
subsequently after the implementation of mitigation measures, when impacts on birds
overall were far less (around 990 per year) and impacts on albatrosses were found to be
negligible (83 birds per year) (Maree et al, 2014).
Observations of the fishery in inshore areas show that the management strategy is working.
There is some quantitative information describing impacts on birds in inshore areas, but
these data have not yet been analysed thoroughly.
Overall it is clear that the strategy in place meets the SG60 and SG80 standards for the
whole South African hake trawl fishery. The information available about the success of the
strategy in offshore areas would meet the SG100 requirements, but there is less known
about inshore areas. An overall score of 80 is therefore appropriate.
c Guidepost There is evidence that the
strategy is being
implemented
successfully.
There is clear evidence that the
strategy is being implemented
successfully.
Met? Y N
Justification Evidence has been provided by both BirdLife South Africa observers and SADSTIA
observers to confirm that vessels implement the measures required by the strategy in place
for minimising bird mortality.
The BirdLife South Africa observer trips have taken place in offshore areas, and provide
very clear evidence that the strategy is being implemented successfully there. The evidence
for inshore areas is less robust, but SADSTIA-funded bird observers have provided
evidence of implementation in this area as well.
The evidence of implementation of the bird impact mitigation strategy meets the SG60 and
SG80 standards for the whole South African hake trawl fishery. The evidence available
about the success of the strategy in offshore areas would meet the SG100 requirements, but
the evidence of implementation in inshore areas is less robust. An overall score of 80 is
therefore appropriate.
d Guidepost There is evidence that the strategy
is achieving its objective.
Met? Y
Justification The evidence from observations of bird mortality in both the inshore and offshore areas
indicates that the strategy is achieving its objectives. Inshore observations indicate that
there is a very low level of interaction with birds. Offshore observations provide very clear
evidence that bird mortalities were very high in the past and are now considered to be
negligible.
This evidence meets the SG100 requirements for both the inshore and offshore areas.
References Section 6.3; Maree et al, 2014; Smith, 2013; Watkins et al, 2008.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 171
PI 2.3.2
The fishery has in place precautionary management strategies designed to:
Meet national and international requirements;
Ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious harm to ETP species;
Ensure the fishery does not hinder recovery of ETP species; and
Minimise mortality of ETP species.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 172
Evaluation Table for PI 2.3.3
PI 2.3.3
Relevant information is collected to support the management of fishery impacts on
ETP species, including:
Information for the development of the management strategy;
Information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and
Information to determine the outcome status of ETP species.
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Information is sufficient
to qualitatively estimate
the fishery related
mortality of ETP species.
Sufficient information is
available to allow fishery
related mortality and the
impact of fishing to be
quantitatively estimated
for ETP species.
Information is sufficient to
quantitatively estimate outcome
status of ETP species with a high
degree of certainty.
Met? Y N N
Justification The information available for impacts on ETP bird species in offshore areas is sufficient to
estimate the overall impact of the fishery on these species to be estimated quantitatively,
which would meet the SG100 requirements. For the inshore areas there is much less
information available. This is sufficient to allow a qualitative estimate of fishery-related
mortality on these species, but not to quantify impacts.
Overall, the SG60 requirements are met for the hake trawl fishery, and this score is
appropriate. With better information about the mortality of birds in inshore areas, the SG80
requirements could be met. A condition has been generated to address this issue.
b Guidepost Information is adequate
to broadly understand the
impact of the fishery on
ETP species.
Information is sufficient
to determine whether the
fishery may be a threat to
protection and recovery
of the ETP species.
Accurate and verifiable
information is available on the
magnitude of all impacts,
mortalities and injuries and the
consequences for the status of ETP
species.
Met? Y Y N
Justification There is sufficient information available from both the inshore and offshore areas to identify
whether the trawl fishery is likely to be a threat to the protection and recovery of ETP bird
species. The quantitative information for the offshore areas provides accurate and verifiable
information on the magnitude of all impacts. The information available for inshore areas is
not of the same quality, but is nevertheless adequate to determine the bird interactions are
generally of a very minor nature and bird mortality is infrequent.
Information is available on the population status of all of the bird species that are known to
interact with the fishery (see section 6.3.1 of this report). This information identifies the
main threats to each species.
Overall, the information available is adequate to meet the SG60 and 80 requirements for the
hake trawl fishery, and a score of 80 is indicated for this SI.
c Guidepost Information is adequate
to support measures to
manage the impacts on
ETP species.
Information is sufficient
to measure trends and
support a full strategy to
manage impacts on ETP
species.
Information is adequate to support
a comprehensive strategy to
manage impacts, minimize
mortality and injury of ETP
species, and evaluate with a high
degree of certainty whether a
strategy is achieving its objectives.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 173
PI 2.3.3
Relevant information is collected to support the management of fishery impacts on
ETP species, including:
Information for the development of the management strategy;
Information to assess the effectiveness of the management strategy; and
Information to determine the outcome status of ETP species.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The information available on the interactions between birds and hake trawlers has been used
to design a management strategy that is applied in both inshore and offshore areas and that
demonstrably maintains interactions with ETP birds species at a low level in all areas. The
SG60 and 80 requirements are therefore met.
Information is available on the population status of all of the bird species that are known to
interact with the fishery (see section 6.3.1 of this report). This information identifies global
population trends and the main threats to each species.
The assessment team notes that the information available for offshore areas meets the
SG100 requirements; however an overall score of 80 for both inshore and offshore areas
seems more appropriate because the information available for the inshore fishery does not
meet the SG 100 requirements.
References Section 6.3; Maree et al, 2014; Smith, 2013; Watkins et al, 2008.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 2 & 4
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 174
Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.1
PI 2.4.1 The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to habitat structure,
considered on a regional or bioregional basis, and function
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost The fishery is unlikely to
reduce habitat structure
and function to a point
where there would be
serious or irreversible
harm.
The fishery is highly
unlikely to reduce habitat
structure and function to a
point where there would
be serious or irreversible
harm.
There is evidence that the fishery
is highly unlikely to reduce habitat
structure and function to a point
where there would be serious or
irreversible harm.
Met? Y Y N
Justification There is a good understanding of both the distribution and sensitivity of marine habitats
(classified on the basis of seabed substratum, topography, depth, and information about
marine benthos) in South African waters, and also the distribution and intensity of fishing
effort. This information has been used to identify those habitats that are particularly
affected by, or vulnerable to, trawling activity.
The result of this analysis is that one habitat type, the Southern Benguela Canyon, that
meets all of the selection criteria for determining vulnerability to trawling (95% of this
habitat type in the region is found within the trawl footprint area, and habitat types (notably
cold water corals) within the canyon are sensitive to trawl impacts). There is, however,
evidence that trawling in this area over the past 40 years has been confined to the edges of
the canyon, and not the canyon itself, where the key habitat features (cold water corals) are
found.
In response to concerns about the expansion of the trawl area, the trawl “footprint” was
frozen in 2007. This action was taken to ensure that untrawled areas in South African
waters remained untrawled. This trawl footprint applies to all trawl vessels (both inshore
and offshore), and compliance is required by the statutory provisions of fishing vessel
licences.
Since 1991 there have been technical measures in place that control the type of ground gear
that can be used in the trawl fishery. There is also information to confirm that some of the
more sensitive habitat areas have been fished using this gear for several decades.
There is thus a great deal of information available about both the fishery and marine habitats
in South African waters. The information indicates that the fishery in its current form is
highly unlikely to cause serious or irreversible harm to the benthic habitats that are currently
found in the trawl footprint area, which meets the SG60 and 80 requirements for this SI.
However there is not yet sufficient evidence available to demonstrate this with the certainty
required at SG100. A project to investigate the recovery of some trawl grounds after the
cessation of trawling has commenced off the west coast of South Africa, and this may
provide the evidence required at SG100 in the future.
The assessment team has noted concern among stakeholders that the MPA network may not
adequately protect habitats from future impacts. This issue is addressed in the scoring of the
next Performance Indicator.
References Section 6.4 of this report. Sink et al, 2012; Wilkinson & Japp, 2008.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 175
Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.2
PI 2.4.2 There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of
serious or irreversible harm to habitat types
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost There are measures in
place, if necessary, that
are expected to achieve
the Habitat Outcome 80
level of performance.
There is a partial strategy
in place, if necessary, that
is expected to achieve the
Habitat Outcome 80 level
of performance or above.
There is a strategy in place for
managing the impact of the fishery
on habitat types.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The principal management measures in place for managing the impacts of the trawl fishery
on marine habitats is the frozen “trawl footprint” that has been developed by the trawl
industry. This management measure is self-imposed (i.e. it is not an enforceable licence
condition); however independent monitoring by DAFF indicates that compliance by the
trawl fleet with the footprint is very good.
The type and weight of the ground gear that can be used on trawls is specified in licence
conditions, and acts to prevent an increase in the size and weight of trawl bobbins and trawl
doors that could increase the potential impact of trawls on marine habitats.
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been declared for parts of the trawl footprint area, and
fishing in these areas is prohibited by the licence conditions that apply to the trawl fleet.
These measures provide a partial strategy that is expected to limit the impacts of the fishery
on marine habitats and thus maintain their quality and extent, which meets the SG60 and
SG80 requirements for the fishery.
There is no evidence of a formal strategy in place (including, for instance, the
implementation of MPAs to protect identified vulnerable offshore habitats within the trawl
footprint), which is what would be required at the SG100 level of performance;
consequently this standard is not attained. A score of 80 is appropriate for this SI.
b Guidepost The measures are
considered likely to
work, based on plausible
argument (e.g. general
experience, theory or
comparison with similar
fisheries/habitats).
There is some objective
basis for confidence that
the partial strategy will
work, based on
information directly about
the fishery and/or habitats
involved.
Testing supports high confidence
that the strategy will work, based
on information directly about the
fishery and/or habitats involved.
Met? Y N N
Justification Information about the fishery shows that the type of fishing gear that can be used is
constrained by fishing licence conditions; fishing effort is limited by quotas and days at sea;
and the areas that can be fished are fixed (by the fishing industry) to the boundary of the
trawl footprint established in 2007. Thus there is a partial strategy in place that constrains
potential fishery impacts on marine habitats.
Information is available about the extent, distribution and sensitivities of marine habitats.
This information from the fishery shows that there has been fishing activity in and around
these habitat types for several decades. Independent information has also been presented by
DAFF to confirm that compliance with both the statutory controls (gear type and effort) and
also the trawl footprint by the trawl fishery has been very good. There is thus a plausible
argument that these management measures will work (based on past experience and the
“freezing” of habitat impacts). This meets the requirements of SG60.
Although there is some objective basis for confidence that these measures will constrain
fishing impacts, there are concerns that the extent of the existing MPA network is not
adequate to provide targeted protection to specific offshore habitats that are within the
existing trawl footprint area. The limitations in the management regime in this respect
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 176
PI 2.4.2 There is a strategy in place that is designed to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of
serious or irreversible harm to habitat types
means that the SG80 requirements for this SI are not presently met.
This shortcoming in the management regime could be addressed by investigating and
confirming the need for establishing further measures to manage trawl fishery impacts on
benthic marine habitats within the existing trawl footprint area (and indeed whether there is
evidence that these would be effective – which will be demonstrated by the trawl impact
study already underway). A condition has been generated to address this issue.
c Guidepost There is some evidence
that the partial strategy is
being implemented
successfully.
There is clear evidence that the
strategy is being implemented
successfully.
Met? Y N
Justification Although it is considered that the partial strategy may not yet be sufficient to work, the
available information indicates that all of the measures that make up this partial strategy
(constraint on gear type and effort and the trawl footprint) are being implemented
successfully. DAFF have confirmed that compliance with these management measures and
also the restrictions on fishing in existing MPAs is good. This evidence demonstrates that
the partial strategy is being implemented successfully, meeting the SG80 requirements.
SG100 is not met because there is no evidence of a strategy in place to manage habitat
impacts.
d Guidepost There is some evidence that the
strategy is achieving its objective.
Met? N
Justification There is no evidence of a strategy in place for managing habitat impacts, so the SG100
requirements cannot be met.
References Section 6.4 of this report. Sink et al, 2012; Wilkinson & Japp, 2008.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 70
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): 3 & 5
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 177
Evaluation Table for PI 2.4.3
PI 2.4.3 Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the fishery and
the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost There is basic
understanding of the
types and distribution of
main habitats in the area
of the fishery.
The nature, distribution
and vulnerability of all
main habitat types in the
fishery are known at a
level of detail relevant to
the scale and intensity of
the fishery.
The distribution of habitat types is
known over their range, with
particular attention to the
occurrence of vulnerable habitat
types.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The report by Sink et al (2012) provides information about the distribution of habitat types
over their range in the South African EEZ, and also considers their vulnerability to trawling
activity. This information fully meets the SG60, 80 and 100 requirements for the fishery.
b Guidepost Information is adequate
to broadly understand the
nature of the main
impacts of gear use on
the main habitats,
including spatial overlap
of habitat with fishing
gear.
Sufficient data are
available to allow the
nature of the impacts of
the fishery on habitat
types to be identified and
there is reliable
information on the spatial
extent of interaction, and
the timing and location of
use of the fishing gear.
The physical impacts of the gear
on the habitat types have been
quantified fully.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The information presented by Sink et al (2012) demonstrates that the nature of the impacts
of the fishery on habitat types can be identified. Reliable information about the timing and
location of the use of the fishing gear is available from VMS and plotter data, and this has
been used to identify the trawl “footprint”. Compliance with the trawl footprint and patterns
of fishing activity are monitored on an ongoing basis by DAFF.
Although there is limited information available about the impacts of the trawl fishery on the
specific habitats found in the South African EEZ, there is generic information available
from studies of trawl impact on similar habitat types elsewhere in the world that enables
likely impacts to be identified (such as, for instance, Jennings & Kaiser 1998)
The SG60 and SG80 requirements are fully met by the information available. The
assessment team note that a pioneering trawl recovery experiment is being carried out on the
west coast of South Africa, and that the data from this work may enable the SG100
requirements to be largely met in future.
c Guidepost Sufficient data continue
to be collected to detect
any increase in risk to
habitat (e.g. due to
changes in the outcome
indicator scores or the
operation of the fishery or
the effectiveness of the
measures).
Changes in habitat distributions
over time are measured.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 178
PI 2.4.3 Information is adequate to determine the risk posed to habitat types by the fishery and
the effectiveness of the strategy to manage impacts on habitat types
Met? Y N
Justification The ongoing monitoring of the distribution of trawl activity by DAFF and compliance with
the trawl footprint area (monitored by DAFF and reported to SADSTIA) is sufficient to
determine if there is any change in the risk of trawling adversely affecting benthic habitats.
This meets the SG80 requirements.
Although evidence has been presented that indicates a clear understanding of the extent of
marine habitats, no information has been presented to demonstrate that changes in habitat
distributions over time are being measured. SG100 is not therefore met.
References Section 6.4 of this report. Sink et al, 2012; Wilkinson & Japp, 2008.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 85
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 179
Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.1
PI 2.5.1 The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key elements of
ecosystem structure and function
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost The fishery is unlikely to
disrupt the key elements
underlying ecosystem
structure and function to
a point where there
would be a serious or
irreversible harm.
The fishery is highly
unlikely to disrupt the key
elements underlying
ecosystem structure and
function to a point where
there would be a serious
or irreversible harm.
There is evidence that the fishery
is highly unlikely to disrupt the
key elements underlying
ecosystem structure and function
to a point where there would be a
serious or irreversible harm.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The MSC Certification Requirements stipulate that this PI should consider the impacts of
the fishery on the key characteristics of ecosystem structure and function rather than the
sum total of impacts on the other components of the assessment (i.e. target species, retained
and discarded species, ETP species and habitats). The assessment should consider whether
the fishery has any serious or irreversible effect on the capacity of the ecosystem to deliver
ecosystem services.
The key characteristic of the ecosystem supporting the fishery is the Benguela current that
flows northwards from the Antarctic. This current causes an upwelling of cold, nutrient rich
water that supports the highly productive Benguela ecosystem. Although the hake
distribution extends eastwards and beneath the Agulhas current that flows at the surface
down the eastern coast of South Africa, the two hake species under assessment are
principally dependent upon the deep, cold water of the Benguela current.
The physical activity of trawling for hake cannot prevent the Benguela current from flowing
and providing these ecosystem services.
The effects of fishery removals on the hake stock and subsequently on the function of the
ecosystem have been modelled. This suggests that even after a sustained period of high
fishing pressure (for example 5 years of fishing at 4 times current levels of fishing
mortality), the resulting ecosystem impacts (an increase in abundance of prey species, with
potential beneficial effects on their predators and adverse effects on competitors such as
horse mackerel) would be corrected within a period of 10-20 years.
The information available provides evidence that the fishery is highly unlikely to disrupt
ecosystem structure and function to the point at which there would be serious or irreversible
harm, meeting the SG60, 80 and 100 requirements.
References Section 6.5; Gasche et al, 2012; Shannon et al, 2000; Travers-Trolet et al, 2014
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 180
Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.2
PI 2.5.2 There are measures in place to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or
irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost There are measures in
place, if necessary.
There is a partial strategy
in place, if necessary.
There is a strategy that consists of
a plan, in place.
Met? Y Y N
Justification It is evident from modelling of the ecosystem effects of fishing for hake that impacts may
arise if fishing mortality rises and the hake stock becomes depleted. This will result in an
increase in the abundance of prey species (small pelagic fish and squid) and a likely decline
in the abundance of the species (horse mackerel) that compete with these prey species for
food.
The strategy and supporting measures in place for rebuilding and sustaining the hake stock
biomass will ensure that such ecosystem effects are appropriately managed. This strategy is
focused on sustaining the hake stock rather than addressing ecosystem impacts, so in this
context it can only be regarded as a “partial strategy” (because the consequences are a happy
coincidence rather than deliberately intended). The SG60 and SG80 requirements are met
by this partial strategy, but SG100 is not met.
b Guidepost The measures take into
account potential impacts
of the fishery on key
elements of the
ecosystem.
The partial strategy takes
into account available
information and is
expected to restrain
impacts of the fishery on
the ecosystem so as to
achieve the Ecosystem
Outcome 80 level of
performance.
The strategy, which consists of a
plan, contains measures to address
all main impacts of the fishery on
the ecosystem, and at least some of
these measures are in place. The
plan and measures are based on
well-understood functional
relationships between the fishery
and the Components and elements
of the ecosystem.
This plan provides for
development of a full strategy that
restrains impacts on the ecosystem
to ensure the fishery does not
cause serious or irreversible harm.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The partial strategy, achieved by managing the hake stock biomass, takes account of all
available information relating to the hake stock. There is evidence that it is successfully
sustaining and rebuilding hake stocks, and is thus restraining the main impact that the
fishery is likely to have on the ecosystem. This management approach meets the SG60 and
80 requirements for this PI. SG100 is note met in the absence of a formal strategy or plan
for addressing ecosystem impacts specifically.
c Guidepost The measures are
considered likely to
work, based on plausible
argument (e.g., general
experience, theory or
comparison with similar
fisheries/ecosystems).
The partial strategy is
considered likely to work,
based on plausible
argument (e.g., general
experience, theory or
comparison with similar
fisheries/ecosystems).
The measures are considered likely
to work based on prior experience,
plausible argument or information
directly from the
fishery/ecosystems involved.
Met? Y Y Y
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 181
PI 2.5.2 There are measures in place to ensure the fishery does not pose a risk of serious or
irreversible harm to ecosystem structure and function
Justification Information from ecosystem modelling indicates that the maintenance of the hake stock
biomass is likely to prevent the fishery from causing serious or irreversible harm to the
ecosystem. Evidence from the fishery and stock assessment demonstrates that the
management strategy in place for both hake species is likely to work successfully.
The evidence from the fishery and ecosystem modelling is sufficient to meet the SG60, 80
and 100 requirements.
d Guidepost There is some evidence
that the measures
comprising the partial
strategy are being
implemented
successfully.
There is evidence that the
measures are being implemented
successfully.
Met? Y Y
Justification There is evidence from monitoring of quota and TAC uptake, and also monitoring of the
state of the hake stock (where currently M. paradoxus stocks are close to Bmsy and M.
capensis stocks are well above Bmsy), that the measures in place to manage fishery removals
from the hake stock (and hence to restrain the ecosystem impacts of the fishery) are being
implemented successfully. This evidence meets the SG80SG80 and 100100 requirements.
References Section 6.5; Gasche et al, 2012; Shannon et al, 2000; Travers-Trolet et al, 2014
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 182
Evaluation Table for PI 2.5.3
PI 2.5.3 There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Information is adequate
to identify the key
elements of the
ecosystem (e.g., trophic
structure and function,
community composition,
productivity pattern and
biodiversity).
Information is adequate to
broadly understand the
key elements of the
ecosystem.
Met? Y Y
Justification There is a good understanding of the key elements of the Benquela ecosystem which has
been incorporated into ecosystem models. The information available meets the SG60 and
80 requirements.
b Guidepost Main impacts of the
fishery on these key
ecosystem elements can
be inferred from existing
information, and have
not been investigated in
detail.
Main impacts of the
fishery on these key
ecosystem elements can
be inferred from existing
information and some
have been investigated in
detail.
Main interactions between the
fishery and these ecosystem
elements can be inferred from
existing information, and have
been investigated.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The interactions between the fishery and other elements of the ecosystem have been
investigated using ecosystem models (Ecosim and Ecotroph). These investigations meet the
SG60, 80 and 100 requirements.
c Guidepost The main functions of the
Components (i.e., target,
Bycatch, Retained and
ETP species and Habitats)
in the ecosystem are
known.
The impacts of the fishery on
target, Bycatch, Retained and ETP
species are identified and the main
functions of these Components in
the ecosystem are understood.
Met? Y Y
Justification Knowledge of the main functions of the components of the ecosystem has enabled models
to be produced which have enable the impacts of the fishery on these components to be
understood. The key impact of the fishery is on the abundance of hake and subsequently the
abundance of prey species, which may in turn adversely affect the abundance of competitor
species (horse mackerel).
As noted earlier in this assessment, there is good information available from this fishery
about impact on target, non-target, ETP species and marine habitats that enables the impacts
of the fishery to be identified and understood.
The level of understanding of the impacts of the fishery on these other ecosystem
components through these trophic interactions meets the SG80 and 100 requirements.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 183
PI 2.5.3 There is adequate knowledge of the impacts of the fishery on the ecosystem
d Guidepost Sufficient information is
available on the impacts
of the fishery on these
Components to allow
some of the main
consequences for the
ecosystem to be inferred.
Sufficient information is available
on the impacts of the fishery on
the Components and elements to
allow the main consequences for
the ecosystem to be inferred.
Met? Y Y
Justification The information available from ecosystem models indicates that the main effect of the hake
fishery is to affect the abundance of hake, which in turn affects the abundance of prey
species and their competitors. This modelling enables the main consequences of the hake
fishery on the components and elements of the ecosystem to be inferred, meeting the
SG80and 100 requirements.
e Guidepost Sufficient data continue
to be collected to detect
any increase in risk level
(e.g., due to changes in
the outcome indicator
scores or the operation of
the fishery or the
effectiveness of the
measures).
Information is sufficient to support
the development of strategies to
manage ecosystem impacts.
Met? Y N
Justification The main risk to the ecosystem that emerges from modelling the impacts of the hake fishery
is that the depletion of the hake stock will alter the abundance of prey species and in turn the
abundance of species that compete with those prey species for food. An increase in the
level of risk to the ecosystem would be detected by changes in the abundance of hake,
which is monitored carefully. The fishery therefore meets the SG80 requirements.
The SG100 requirement is not met because although there is a strategy in place to manage
the hake stock, its purpose is to sustain the stock biomass rather than deliberately address
ecosystem impacts – so it is, from an ecosystem perspective, just a “partial strategy”.
References Section 6.5; Gasche et al, 2012; Shannon et al, 2000; Travers-Trolet et al, 2014
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 184
12.3 Principle 3 Evaluation Tables
Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.1
PI 3.1.1
The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary
framework which ensures that it:
Is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC
Principles 1 and 2; and
Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of
people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and
Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework.
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost There is an effective
national legal system and
a framework for
cooperation with other
parties, where necessary,
to deliver management
outcomes consistent with
MSC Principles 1 and 2
There is an effective
national legal system and
organised and effective
cooperation with other
parties, where necessary,
to deliver management
outcomes consistent with
MSC Principles 1 and 2.
There is an effective
national legal system and
binding procedures
governing cooperation
with other parties which
delivers management
outcomes consistent with
MSC Principles 1 and 2.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification South Africa’s natural environment is governed by a wide range of national
legislative acts, including the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996),
National Environmental Management Act (No. 107 of 1998), the Environmental
Conservation Act (No. 73 of 1989) and the Marine Living Resources Act (MLRA;
No. 18 of 1998). All fisheries in South Africa are managed in terms of the MLRA
and the regulations promulgated in terms of this Act.
The Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) is the authority
responsible for implementing the MLRA, and it is committed to international law
(UNCLOS; UN Convention on the Law of the Sea) and a precautionary approach is
prescribed when uncertainty prevails. South Africa is a signatory to the Convention
on Biodiversity, MARPOL (International Convention for the Prevention of
Pollution from Ships), the London Convention (regulating the dumping of waste at
sea), Bonn Convention (conservation of migratory species, incl. seabirds), SEAFO
(SE Atlantic Fisheries Organization) and is member of ICCAT. The Management
Authority is well aware of relevant conventions and there are no specific
conventions relevant to the hake fishery.
Access to commercial fishing is restricted to rights holders, and fishing rights are
only allocated after applicants have gone through a sophisticated legal application
and screening process. Fishing rights are allocated to applicants that can
demonstrate compliance to a set of criteria (i.e. civil obedience; the means to
involve in fishing; historical participation).
Fisheries regulations are incorporated into a set of permit conditions that are geared
towards delivering sustainable fisheries and conserving habitats / ecosystems that
support biological resources, in accordance with MSC Principles 1 and 2. The
regulations are regularly amended to update management measures, or implement
management strategies based on best scientific advice. Amendments are published
in the Government Gazette.
It is therefore clear that the national legal system is well organized, and that it
complies with relevant international conventions and agreements.
The SG60, SG 80 and SG 100 requirements are all met because the national legal
system is effective, with clear and binding procedures that govern cooperation with
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 185
PI 3.1.1
The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary
framework which ensures that it:
Is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC
Principles 1 and 2; and
Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of
people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and
Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework.
other parties, to deliver management outcomes consistent with MSC Principles 1
and 2.
b Guidepost The management system
incorporates or is subject
by law to a mechanism
for the resolution of legal
disputes arising within
the system.
The management system
incorporates or is subject
by law to a transparent
mechanism for the
resolution of legal
disputes which is
considered to be effective
in dealing with most
issues and that is
appropriate to the context
of the fishery.
The management system
incorporates or subject by
law to a transparent
mechanism for the
resolution of legal
disputes that is
appropriate to the context
of the fishery and has
been tested and proven to
be effective.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Disputes within the system are first discussed directly with DAFF resource
managers but can proceed to ministerial level. Beyond ministerial level, disputes
may be resolved in court, within the national judicial system. In recent years, major
disputes have regularly been resolved through legal challenges – for instance
disputes regarding the allocations of fishing rights.
The opportunity to mount a legal challenge to the system is seen as a positive
aspect, demonstrating a well-developed and fully tested process of dispute
resolution, the outcomes of which reflects legislative compliance. DAFF has access
to a strong legal team, the purpose of which is to review legislative issues and deal
with challenges. The dispute resolution process (both internally and through the
courts) is appropriate to the context of the fishery.
The above shows that the management system incorporates a transparent
mechanism for legal dispute resolution, which has been tested and proven to be
effective. Therefore the SG60, SG80 and SG100 are all met.
d Guidepost The management system
has a mechanism to
generally respect the legal
rights created explicitly
or established by custom
of people dependent on
fishing for food or
livelihood in a manner
consistent with the
objectives of MSC
Principles 1 and 2.
The management system
has a mechanism to
observe the legal rights
created explicitly or
established by custom of
people dependent on
fishing for food or
livelihood in a manner
consistent with the
objectives of MSC
Principles 1 and 2.
The management system
has a mechanism to
formally commit to the
legal rights created
explicitly or established
by custom of people
dependent on fishing for
food and livelihood in a
manner consistent with
the objectives of MSC
Principles 1 and 2.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Customary rights or traditional dependence on the fishery for food or livelihood
cannot be demonstrated for the hake fishery, which has only been prosecuted since
the advent of mechanical trawling in the early 20th
century.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 186
PI 3.1.1
The management system exists within an appropriate legal and/or customary
framework which ensures that it:
Is capable of delivering sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC
Principles 1 and 2; and
Observes the legal rights created explicitly or established by custom of
people dependent on fishing for food or livelihood; and
Incorporates an appropriate dispute resolution framework.
Nevertheless, there is a policy to redress historical disadvantage in the fisheries
sector, within an appropriate legal framework. The mechanism to commit to legal
rights is well-developed, as illustrated by an open and transparent process of rights
allocations, which takes place within the legal and political framework.
Legal rights to commercial fishing are explicitly vested in so-called “Fishing
Rights”. These are only allocated by the Management Authority after applicants
have gone through a sophisticated legal application and screening process. Fishing
rights are allocated to applicants that can demonstrate compliance to a set of criteria
(i.e. civil obedience; the means to involve in fishing; historical participation).
Rights holders are aware of management legal requirements through a clearly
documented and communicated mechanism. The granting of fishing rights formally
commits the rights holder and the Management Authority to a consistent system of
fisheries management, guided by the MLRA, regulations and permit conditions.
The management system formally commits to legal rights, created explicitly, and
consistent with the objectives of MSC Principles. The SG60, SG 80 and SG100
guidelines are therefore all met.
References MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT 18 OF 1998; REGULATIONS IN TERMS
OF THE MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT, 1998; South Africa Environment
Outlook: A Report on the State of the Environment (2006); Field et al, 2013.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 187
Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.2
PI 3.1.2
The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to
interested and affected parties.
The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are
involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant
parties
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Organisations and
individuals involved in
the management process
have been identified.
Functions, roles and
responsibilities are
generally understood.
Organisations and
individuals involved in
the management process
have been identified.
Functions, roles and
responsibilities are
explicitly defined and
well understood for key
areas of responsibility
and interaction.
Organisations and
individuals involved in
the management process
have been identified.
Functions, roles and
responsibilities are
explicitly defined and
well understood for all
areas of responsibility
and interaction.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification DAFF is the relevant Management Authority, and within this organization, the
relevant Chief Directorates are for:
(a) Monitoring Control and Compliance - to ensure that fish
resources are protected through effective and efficient
utilisation of the Fisheries Protection Vessels and other
relevant equipment and systems; and to ensure compliance
with the provisions of the Marine Living Resources Act of
1998.
(b) Marine Resources Management - to ensure the sustainable
utilization and equitable and orderly access to nearshore,
offshore and High Seas fisheries resources through improved
management and regulation.
(c) Fisheries Research and Development - to provide scientific
research and advice on fisheries resources.
The DAFF structure is supplemented by other national organs, e.g. Monitoring
Control and Surveillance are assisted by customs, police/navy and provincial
authorities, but the process is coordinated by DAFF.
At least two formally constituted working groups within DAFF deal with all
aspects of the hake trawl fishery, namely a Scientific Working Group, and a
Resource Management Working Group. These working groups are appropriate for
guiding the science underlying management strategies (i.e. development of
mathematical models; Operational Management Procedures) and for implementing
management through official interaction between DAFF fisheries managers and
representatives of the fishing industry. The functions, roles and responsibilities of
the scientific and management working groups are clearly defined.
Organisations and individuals involved in the formal management process have
been clearly identified and functions, roles and responsibilities are explicitly
defined for all areas of responsibility and interaction, thus achieving the SG100
requirement.
b Guidepost The management system
includes consultation
processes that obtain
The management system
includes consultation
processes that regularly
The management system
includes consultation
processes that regularly
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 188
PI 3.1.2
The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to
interested and affected parties.
The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are
involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant
parties
relevant information from
the main affected parties,
including local
knowledge, to inform the
management system.
seek and accept relevant
information, including
local knowledge. The
management system
demonstrates
consideration of the
information obtained.
seek and accept relevant
information, including
local knowledge. The
management system
demonstrates
consideration of the
information and explains
how it is used or not used.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Consultation takes place at various levels, including the Scientific and Resource
Management working groups mentioned in 3.1.2(a). The main role players in the
consultation process are DAFF, SADSTIA and SECIFA – the industry associations
are active in the DAFF Scientific and Resource Management Working Groups, as
members or observers. At these meetings, they participate by imparting up-to-date
operational information, assist with decision-making by explaining economic and
logistical matters affecting fleets, operations, and markets, and also contribute to
the development of mathematical models and the OMP through retaining the
services of consultants at OLRAC. Decisions and recommendations made at
working groups are based on best available information and long-term policy, and
are debated within these fora, where industry associations are represented; thus it
demonstrates consideration of information provided and explains how it is used or
not used.
Over the 10 years of MSC certification of the fishery, the consultation process has
expanded greatly, and interested and affected parties that may influence decisions
through direct or indirect consultations (i.e. through SADSTIA), or provide
information, or act as pressure groups to bring about change in fishing methods (for
instance the introduction of tori, or bird-scaring lines on trawl warps) include
WWF, BLSA, SANBI, SAEON and retained scientists (UCT) or fisheries observers
(CapFish).
The management system includes wide consultation processes that regularly seek
and accept relevant information, and demonstrates how it is used, or not, at various
levels, including at formal working groups. The SG100 requirements are therefore
met.
c Guidepost The consultation process
provides opportunity for
all interested and affected
parties to be involved.
The consultation process
provides opportunity and
encouragement for all
interested and affected
parties to be involved,
and facilitates their
effective engagement.
Met? Y Y
Justification Examples of outcomes resulting from effective consultations include the reduction
in bird mortalities, benthic habitat experiments, trawl footprint, and PUCLs for
main bycatch species. The consultation process provides opportunity and
encouragement for all interested and affected parties to be involved, often through
NGOs (WWF, BLSA, SANBI, SAEON), or as observers at working groups. The
SG100 requirement is therefore met.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 189
PI 3.1.2
The management system has effective consultation processes that are open to
interested and affected parties.
The roles and responsibilities of organisations and individuals who are
involved in the management process are clear and understood by all relevant
parties
References
MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT 18 OF 1998; Field et al, 2013.
http://www.daff.gov.za/daffweb3/About-Us/Structure-and-Functions
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 190
Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.3
PI 3.1.3
The management policy has clear long-term objectives to guide decision-
making that are consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria, and
incorporates the precautionary approach
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Long-term objectives to
guide decision-making,
consistent with the MSC
Principles and Criteria
and the precautionary
approach, are implicit
within management
policy
Clear long-term
objectives that guide
decision-making,
consistent with MSC
Principles and Criteria
and the precautionary
approach are explicit
within management
policy.
Clear long-term
objectives that guide
decision-making,
consistent with MSC
Principles and Criteria
and the precautionary
approach, are explicit
within and required by
management policy.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The long-term management policy for South African fisheries rests on two main
objectives: optimization of long-term social and economic benefits to the nation;
and promotion of sustainable utilization and the replenishment of living marine
resources. The latter includes objectives that are consistent with the Principles and
Criteria of the MSC.
At policy level, the allocation of long-term fishing rights provides an incentive to
successful applicants to view the resource as a long-term asset – thus a strong
motivation to ensure its sustainability.
Relative to Principle 1, the long-term objective is stock recovery to a pre-defined
level. To achieve this, decision making is based on the outputs of an appropriate
OMP, that responds to measures of stock changes on an annual basis, and is geared
to achieve the above stock rebuilding. The OMP incorporates the precautionary
approach, in that it will output a more conservative TAC in the event of higher risk
scenarios.
For Principle 2, long-term objectives are in place for important by-catch species
(i.e. monkfish; kingklip; sole), and where these species are identified as being
depleted, appropriate management strategies are being developed and implemented
to promote/assist rebuilding of affected populations to specified levels within
specified timeframes.
Long-term environmental objectives include the establishment of Marine Protected
Areas, to protect and preserve examples of representative habitat types from
trawling. The policy basis for the MPA programme lies in the Convention of
Biological Diversity, which aims for the protection of 10% of representative and
vulnerable habitats, and the draft South African Ocean Policy which refers to
representative MPAs. Biodiversity targets are being developed based on species-
area relationships.
Decision-making is therefore guided and required by clear and explicit long-term
objectives, which are consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria and the
precautionary approach: the SG100 is achieved.
References Attwood et al, 2011; Attwood, 2014; MARAM IWS/DEC13/Hake/P7; Capfish,
2013. FISHERIES/2010/OCTOBER/SWG-DEM/59.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 191
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 192
Evaluation Table for PI 3.1.4
PI 3.1.4
The management system provides economic and social incentives for
sustainable fishing and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to
unsustainable fishing
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost The management system
provides for incentives
that are consistent with
achieving the outcomes
expressed by MSC
Principles 1 and 2.
The management system
provides for incentives
that are consistent with
achieving the outcomes
expressed by MSC
Principles 1 and 2, and
seeks to ensure that
perverse incentives do not
arise.
The management system
provides for incentives
that are consistent with
achieving the outcomes
expressed by MSC
Principles 1 and 2, and
explicitly considers
incentives in a regular
review of management
policy or procedures to
ensure they do not
contribute to
unsustainable fishing
practices.
Met? Y Y N
Justification Fishing rights are seen as a long-term asset by SADSTIA, and hence there is a
strong incentive to protect their “investment”. Transgressions of a serious nature
can lead to a Section 28 notice, which could result in the loss of a fishing right, or
removal of a non-compliant fishing company from the fishery, as demonstrated in a
landmark case in the South Coast Rock lobster fishery. This risk is a powerful,
albeit negative, incentive for compliance with the management system.
The achievement and maintenance of MSC certification over the past 10 years is
considered to be a major incentive, to SADSTIA and DAFF, to realize the
outcomes expressed in MSC Principles 1 and 2.
No subsidies exist in the system that would contribute directly or indirectly to
unsustainable fishing (e.g. through creating overcapacity in the trawl fleet).
Incentives (such as MSC certification) are explicitly considered during regular
review of management policy or procedure.
On the down side, the policy regarding redistribution of fishing rights can create
instability in the fishing sector, by making rights holders unsure of their long-term
prospects – and hence eroding their motivation for “taking care of a long-term
investment”.
The management system provides for incentives that are consistent with achieving
the outcomes expressed by MSC Principles 1 and 2, and they are regularly
reviewed, but the redistribution of fishing rights process can contribute to
unsustainable fishing practices. For this reason, the SG60 and SG80 guideposts are
achieved, but not all the aspects of SG100 are met.
References Groeneveld (2003)
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 80
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.1
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 193
PI 3.2.1 The fishery has clear, specific objectives designed to achieve the outcomes
expressed by MSC’s Principles 1 and 2
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Objectives, which are
broadly consistent with
achieving the outcomes
expressed by MSC’s
Principles 1 and 2, are
implicit within the
fishery’s management
system
Short and long-term
objectives, which are
consistent with achieving
the outcomes expressed
by MSC’s Principles 1
and 2, are explicit within
the fishery’s management
system.
Well defined and
measurable short and
long-term objectives,
which are demonstrably
consistent with achieving
the outcomes expressed
by MSC’s Principles 1
and 2, are explicit within
the fishery’s management
system.
Met? Y Y Partial
Justification For Principle 1, short and long-term objectives are to achieve stock recovery to a
pre-determined level, to ensure long-term sustainability of the hake resource, and to
facilitate operational stability within the fishing sector. Stock rebuilding has
progressed significantly since a low-point in 2007. Stock changes are measurable
through a set of abundance indices, and these form the input to an OMP, which is
used to recommend annual adjustments in the TAC, aiming towards a specified
rebuilding goal. The SG100 guidepost is achieved, as it can be explicitly
demonstrated that outcomes expressed in Principle 1 are being achieved. .
In relation to P2, objectives are contained in the MLRA, and several other national
acts and policy documents. They deal with retained and discarded bycatches of the
trawl fishery, seabird mortalities, protection and preservation of examples of
representative habitats, and recovery of areas that have historically been affected by
trawling. The Principle 2 objectives are not always clear in management systems,
for instance, there is no time-scale or stated goal regarding the recovery of habitat
impacts. A trawl recovery experiment has been initiated by SADSTIA to assess
whether, and how fast historically trawled areas can recover – but how would the
outcome be incorporated into management? Some of the objectives (i.e. reducing
seabird mortalities) are generic, or not well defined. Whereas the trawl footprint, to
restrict trawling to a limited area is adhered to by SADSTIA, it has not yet been
formally embraced by DAFF.
The SG60, 80 and 100 requirements are fully met with respect to MSC Principle 1.
For Principle 2, the SG60 and 80 requirements are fully met by the explicit short
and long term objectives in place. The fact that some of the Principle 2 objectives
are generic, and that aims are not always well defined or set against time scales,
prevents all SG100 of being achieved. SG100 is therefore partially met (Principle 1
meets SG100; Principle 2 does not). A score of 90 is therefore appropriate.
References Field, et al 2013; Capfish, 2008, 2011; Attwood, 2012, 2014
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 194
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 195
Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.2
PI 3.2.2
The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making
processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, and
has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under
assessment.
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost There are some decision-
making processes in place
that result in measures
and strategies to achieve
the fishery-specific
objectives.
There are established
decision-making
processes that result in
measures and strategies to
achieve the fishery-
specific objectives.
Met? Y Y
Justification A formal Scientific Working Group, comprising scientists from DAFF, MARAM
and those retained by SADSTIA provide annual management recommendations,
based on the output of an OMP. This recommendation is considered by the
Resource Management Group, taking into account factors such as legislation,
socio-economics, EAF, and stock advice. It is then submitted to the decision maker
(normally the Minister) in line with Departmental protocols. The OMP (which
already contains consideration of socio-economic factors) cannot be over-ridden
unless in “exceptional circumstances” (under Section 61 of the MLRA). The OMP
is agreed and set for a 4 year period. After signature by the Minister, the TAC is
allocated to rights holders, proportionally, according to their share of the rights
allocated.
A DAFF fisheries manager dedicated to the hake fishery then meets with industry
to prepare annual fishing plans, and prepare permit conditions.
The decision making processes for the fishery are well-established, and result in
measures and strategies to achieve fishery-specific objectives – therefore it meets
the SG80 requirements.
b Guidepost Decision-making
processes respond to
serious issues identified
in relevant research,
monitoring, evaluation
and consultation, in a
transparent, timely and
adaptive manner and take
some account of the
wider implications of
decisions.
Decision-making
processes respond to
serious and other
important issues
identified in relevant
research, monitoring,
evaluation and
consultation, in a
transparent, timely and
adaptive manner and take
account of the wider
implications of decisions.
Decision-making
processes respond to all
issues identified in
relevant research,
monitoring, evaluation
and consultation, in a
transparent, timely and
adaptive manner and take
account of the wider
implications of decisions.
Met? Y Y N
Justification Decision-making processes has responded to the main issues affecting the fishery,
such as provision of scientific information for assessment processes, assessment
structure, rights allocations, stock rebuilding, bird mortalities, and monitoring and
enforcement. Responses have taken account of wider implications (i.e. impact of
stock depletion on economics and ecosystems), and have been transparent (through
working groups and publishing outcomes), adaptive (new technologies
implemented, i.e. tori lines) and timely (TAC schedule; research surveys). These
factors satisfy the SG60 and SG80 requirements. There have been hiccups in the
government decision-making process, such as the lapse of the government funded
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 196
PI 3.2.2
The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making
processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, and
has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under
assessment.
observer programme, and the prolonged absence of the RV Africana – this vessel is
the mainstay of the annual biomass surveys. Fortunately, SADSTIA provided
acceptable replacements in both the mentioned cases (i.e. SADSTIA Observer
programme; and the use of the FV Andromeda to replace Africana), thus indicating
a robust fishery-specific management system, when supported by industry. The
lapse in the observer programme and absence of the RV Africana indicates that the
government could not respond adequately to ALL issues, and therefore SG100 was
not fully justified.
c Guidepost Decision-making
processes use the
precautionary approach
and are based on best
available information.
Met? Y
Justification The long-term stock rebuilding strategy is implicit in the OMP calculations, where
the TAC is set to protect the weaker of the two stocks (presently M. paradoxus).
This demonstrates the precautionary approach with respect to Principle 1. In
Principle 2, SADSTIA dealt with bird mortalities and habitat issues in a
precautionary way – ahead of government regulations, and in a response to NGO
alerts. Logbook information, survey data, observer data and VMS data are all used
for decision-making. The SG80 is achieved in terms of precautionary approach and
use of best available information.
d Guidepost Some information on
fishery performance and
management action is
generally available on
request to stakeholders.
Information on fishery
performance and
management action is
available on request, and
explanations are provided
for any actions or lack of
action associated with
findings and relevant
recommendations
emerging from research,
monitoring, evaluation
and review activity.
Formal reporting to all
interested stakeholders
provides comprehensive
information on fishery
performance and
management actions and
describes how the
management system
responded to findings and
relevant
recommendations
emerging from research,
monitoring, evaluation
and review activity.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification There are several channels through which formal reporting of fisheries performance
take place, namely the Scientific Working Group, the Resource Management
Working Group, and Industry–Government meetings. Regulations and permit
conditions are available on government websites. During the recent site visit, it was
clear that SADSTIA and other stakeholders, such as WWF, SANBI, SAEON,
BLSA, CapFish etc. were all very well informed of what is happening in the
fishery, and how management responded to recommendations. At a less formal
level, the SADSTIA website provides up-to-date information on the fishery,
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 197
PI 3.2.2
The fishery-specific management system includes effective decision-making
processes that result in measures and strategies to achieve the objectives, and
has an appropriate approach to actual disputes in the fishery under
assessment.
including information on stock status, environmental impacts and management
regime.
SADSTIA advertises the fact that the fishery is MSC certified very well, including
through sharing of information with stakeholders. The formal reporting system is
successful in disseminating information on fishery performance and management
action, and SG100 is achieved.
e Guidepost Although the
management authority or
fishery may be subject to
continuing court
challenges, it is not
indicating a disrespect or
defiance of the law by
repeatedly violating the
same law or regulation
necessary for the
sustainability for the
fishery.
The management system
or fishery is attempting to
comply in a timely
fashion with judicial
decisions arising from
any legal challenges.
The management system
or fishery acts proactively
to avoid legal disputes or
rapidly implements
judicial decisions arising
from legal challenges.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification There have been no legal disputes or judicial decisions arising from legal
challenges in recent times. DAFF enforcement activity directed at the hake fishery
detected only 7 minor administrative errors over the past year (i.e. the correct
papers not on board, etc.). These vessels were fined for the transgressions.
SADSTIA polices its members very stringently – an example is the monitoring of
the trawl footprint. All vessels have a fully operational VMS system on board,
which is continuously monitored from the DAFF operations room. Any straying out
of the footprint is reported to SADSTIA, for immediate action. Based on VMS
information, no trawling outside the footprint has taken place in the past year. The
fact that the footprint is not yet enshrined in the Act, or its regulations, but that it is
stoically observed and patrolled by SADSTIA and DAFF, is an excellent example
of proactive management.
The severity of a Section 28 ruling (potential loss of long-term fishing rights) acts
as a major deterrent to non-compliance, especially in an industrial scale fishery.
There is ample evidence that the fishery acts proactively to avoid legal disputes,
and that it implements management directives soundly and rapidly. It therefore
achieves SG100.
References
MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT 18 OF 1998; Field, et al 2013. SADSTIA
website http://www.sadstia.co.za/
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 198
Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.3
PI 3.2.3 Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s
management measures are enforced and complied with
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Monitoring, control and
surveillance mechanisms
exist, are implemented in
the fishery under
assessment and there is a
reasonable expectation
that they are effective.
A monitoring, control and
surveillance system has
been implemented in the
fishery under assessment
and has demonstrated an
ability to enforce relevant
management measures,
strategies and/or rules.
A comprehensive
monitoring, control and
surveillance system has
been implemented in the
fishery under assessment
and has demonstrated a
consistent ability to
enforce relevant
management measures,
strategies and/or rules.
Met? Y Y N
Justification The assessment team was shown around the DAFF VMS suite, visited the fisheries
patrol vessel (FPV) Sarah Baartman, and also inspected voluminous enforcement
records for the past year at the DAFF offices. At sea inspections have been resumed
now that the FPVs have re-entered service (3 of the 4 FPVs are now operational). A
file of all patrols at sea was provided, together with records of inspections,
infractions and boarding data.
The VMS suite was fully operational and soon to be upgraded – it was clear from
the fishing vessel tracks on the screens in the ops room that vessels have been
fishing exclusively within the trawl footprint.
DAFF has a compliance auditing plan for all sectors of the fishing industry. The
hake sector is one of the 4 compliance priorities in South Africa. Over the course
of the past year they aimed to audit 8 of the deep sea trawl fishery rights holders,
and 16 of the inshore trawl fishery rights holders. As well as remote surveillance
and monitoring at sea, DAFF inspect landing and audit the catch, landings and
processing records for the fishery to ensure compliance with effort (TAC) controls.
During the past year, DAFF enforcement activity directed at the hake fishery had
detected only 7 minor administrative errors, which had been well documented. The
vessels were fined for these transgressions.
DAFF has recently had significant enforcement successes (outside of the hake
fishery) including detecting, apprehending and seizure of 10 IUU vessels, and
intercepting, seizing and repatriating consignments of illegally shipped fish
products (again not hake).
Mobile scanners are used to inspect the contents of frozen containers.
About 70% of cases brought by DAFF are successful; as part of its work, DAFF
officials provide training to the judiciary and prosecuting counsel about fisheries
legislation and regulation.
In combination, the above supports a SG80 score, as it demonstrates that a
monitoring, control and surveillance system has been implemented in the fishery
under assessment, with the ability to enforce relevant management measures,
strategies and/or rules.
Some weak points do still exist, relative to the operation of the system as a whole.
These include too few staff and that some of the FPVs are still out of action (1 out
of four). The conclusion is that the MCS system is well established, and works well
for the fishery under assessment (a large commercial fishery that offloads in ports
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 199
PI 3.2.3 Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s
management measures are enforced and complied with
in major centres), especially in a co-management setup with SADSTIA, but that
some attention should be given to its consistency (i.e. all vessels active, etc.). A
SG100 was therefore not fully justified.
While the assessment team considers that the SG80 requirements are presently met,
it is evident that there have been difficulties with compliance monitoring over
recent years. The performance of the fishery with respect to this particular issue
will be kept under careful review. The team has made a recommendation that
evidence of the implementation of, and compliance with, the monitoring, control
and surveillance measures in place should be made available for scrutiny at future
surveillance audits.
b Guidepost Sanctions to deal with
non-compliance exist and
there is some evidence
that they are applied.
Sanctions to deal with
non-compliance exist, are
consistently applied and
thought to provide
effective deterrence.
Sanctions to deal with
non-compliance exist, are
consistently applied and
demonstrably provide
effective deterrence.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Non-compliance can potentially result in the suspension or loss of fishing rights
under Section 28 of the MLRA. An example of a successful Section 28 ruling,
followed by the closure and prosecution of a major fishing company, is the case of
Hout Bay Fishing. Although not for hake, it was a similar industrial scale fishery
targeting deep-water lobsters. Whereas a Section 28 sanction is a major deterrent
for capital-intensive industrial fisheries with good long-term prospects (such as the
hake fishery), it is less so for small scale (subsistence) fishers preying on nearshore
resources such as abalone and rock lobsters in South Africa. Sanctions to deal with
non-compliance exist, and are highly effective in the fishery being assessed – thus
justifying a SG100.
c Guidepost Fishers are generally
thought to comply with
the management system
for the fishery under
assessment, including,
when required, providing
information of
importance to the
effective management of
the fishery.
Some evidence exists to
demonstrate fishers
comply with the
management system
under assessment,
including, when required,
providing information of
importance to the
effective management of
the fishery.
There is a high degree of
confidence that fishers
comply with the
management system
under assessment,
including, providing
information of
importance to the
effective management of
the fishery.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The movements of the entire hake fishing fleet are under continual observation in
the VMS operations room at DAFF, confirming that the trawl footprint is strictly
complied with. A high degree of cooperation has been achieved among SADSTIA,
DAFF and the scientific community – this is clearly based on a shared desire for a
responsibly managed fishery, adhering to MSC Principles.
Fishers (and the infrastructure set up to manage the fishery; i.e. VMS system)
provide information of importance to the effective management of the fishery on a
daily or trip-by-trip basis. The observer programme provides data on catch
composition, length composition, bycatch quantities and seabird interactions.
Discards are sampled to determine their composition and quantities. Vessels
provide logbook data of fishing effort and catches after each trip, including the
position and depth of trawling. Seabird interactions are reported through both the
government and the industry-funded observer programmes. DAFF inspectors
monitoring landings at offloading points and factories, to reconcile with logbook
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 200
PI 3.2.3 Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s
management measures are enforced and complied with
estimates of catches and with quota allocations.
In combination, these streams of information instil a high degree of confidence that
the management system is complied with, leading to a SG100 score.
d Guidepost There is no evidence of
systematic non-
compliance.
Met? Y
Justification See above. There is no evidence of systematic non-compliance.
References Field, et al 2013; Marine Living Resources act, 1998; WWF and Ventura, 2013.
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 95
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 201
Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.4
PI 3.2.4 The fishery has a research plan that addresses the information needs of
management
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost Research is undertaken,
as required, to achieve the
objectives consistent with
MSC’s Principles 1 and
2.
A research plan provides
the management system
with a strategic approach
to research and reliable
and timely information
sufficient to achieve the
objectives consistent with
MSC’s Principles 1 and
2.
A comprehensive
research plan provides the
management system with
a coherent and strategic
approach to research
across P1, P2 and P3, and
reliable and timely
information sufficient to
achieve the objectives
consistent with MSC’s
Principles 1 and 2.
Met? Y Y N
Justification A research plan is in place for the fishery that identifies priorities so that resources
can be targeted appropriately. Research priorities are reviewed by DAFF scientists
annually. The research plan includes aspects that relate to P1 (i.e. biomass surveys;
ageing; length composition; diet of hake; genetic population structure of M.
capensis and M. paradoxus), P2 (status and biology of retained non-target species;
composition of discarded non-target species; benthic habitat surveys; seabird / gear
interactions) and P3 (OMP development; development and testing of the PUCL
system; species-splitting algorithms).
Whereas the research plan itself is coherent, strategic and well-conceived, it is
sometimes affected by logistical or administrative holdups. For instance, there have
been ongoing difficulties with the RV Africana (the main DAFF survey vessel), so
that some surveys were cancelled. Continuity in the DAFF fisheries observer
programme has further been affected by administrative issues.
In both the above cases, SADSTIA provided back-up assistance, by leasing another
vessel (FV Andromeda) to undertake the surveys, and by developing the
SADSTIA-funded observer programme. It is therefore clear that the research plan
is supported by robust contingency measures that ensure reliable and timely
information sufficient to achieve MSc objectives.
Nevertheless, the slow response of DAFF with regard to the RV Africana and the
lapse of the government sponsored offshore observer programme places the
reliability of DAFF to provide timely information in doubt, and therefore SG100 is
not fully justified.
b Guidepost Research results are
available to interested
parties.
Research results are
disseminated to all
interested parties in a
timely fashion.
Research plan and results
are disseminated to all
interested parties in a
timely fashion and are
widely and publicly
available.
Met? Y Y Y
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 202
PI 3.2.4 The fishery has a research plan that addresses the information needs of
management
Justification The research plan and results are disseminated to all interested parties in a timely
fashion and are widely and publicly available – this is elaborated on in section
3.2.2d. A SG100 score is appropriate. .
References FISHERIES_2013_NOV_SWG-DEM_68; Capfish, 2011, 2013; Sink et al, 2013;
Fairweather et al, 2006; Atwood, 2014. http://www.sadstia.co.za/
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 90
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 203
Evaluation Table for PI 3.2.5
PI 3.2.5
There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-
specific management system against its objectives
There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system
Scoring Issue SG 60 SG 80 SG 100
a Guidepost The fishery has in place
mechanisms to evaluate
some parts of the
management system.
The fishery has in place
mechanisms to evaluate
key parts of the
management system
The fishery has in place
mechanisms to evaluate
all parts of the
management system.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification Both internal and external review mechanisms exist, which measure progress of the
management system against its objectives. The mechanisms include formal
Resource Management and Scientific Working Group meetings, and auditing of
fisheries sectors by the Compliance section. An international stock assessment
workshop is held regularly, when experts are invited to review the assessment
process, from data requirements, through all steps, up to OMP development and
recommendations. The OMP is integral in evaluating stock status and provides the
primary mechanism for generating consistent management advice for longer term
management and a stock rebuilding strategy: it is reviewed each 4 years.
The evaluation of the management system extends to the effectiveness of
monitoring, compliance and surveillance activity (kept under review by the
Resource Management and Scientific Working Group). There are also mechanisms
in place to evaluate ecosystem impacts – for instance, the DAFF Bycatch Task
Team; through liaison between industry, government and stakeholders to
successfully address bird impacts; and through the ongoing evaluation of habitat
impacts in the SADSTIA-funded research carried out by SANBI.
The review mechanisms are in place to evaluate all parts of the management
system, and therefore SG100 is achieved.
b Guidepost The fishery-specific
management system is
subject to occasional
internal review.
The fishery-specific
management system is
subject to regular internal
and occasional external
review.
The fishery-specific
management system is
subject to regular internal
and external review.
Met? Y Y Y
Justification The procedures in place for internal and external review of the management system
are considered in turn below.
Internal Review: The management system is subject to regular and frequent
internal review. This includes an evaluation of the assessment methodology (OMP),
and that any recommended changes have been considered and actioned as
appropriate. The OMP review process is undertaken in consultation with
international expert panels, industry and other stakeholders.
A formal Resource Management Working group structure is in place to allow
reviews of performance within sectors, involving participation of relevant
stakeholders (Interested and Affected Parties (IAAPs) including NGOs, Industry,
consultants etc). Meetings are held as required, but minimally twice per annum.
The Scientific Working Groups meet several times per year with a varying agenda
notably including the stock assessment but also other issues which may arise in the
hake fishery. Specific task groups may also be convened.
DAFF has a compliance auditing plan for all sectors of the fishing industry. The
hake sector is one of the 4 compliance priorities in South Africa. Over the course
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 204
PI 3.2.5
There is a system of monitoring and evaluating the performance of the fishery-
specific management system against its objectives
There is effective and timely review of the fishery-specific management system
of the past year they aimed to audit 8 of the deep sea trawl fishery rights holders,
and 16 of the inshore trawl fishery rights holders. Monitoring and evaluation are
ongoing and improvements implemented, although on varying timescales.
External Review: An international stock assessment workshop of invited experts
is held regularly to review fishery specific assessments and management methods.
There is evidence of external review of management measures directed at
ecosystem (Principle 2) impacts of the fishery, such as the DAFF Bycatch Task
Team, the independent work on benthic impacts commissioned by SADSTIA; and
also the work carried out by BLSA to assess the effectiveness of management
measures to address impacts of the fishery on bird species.
The fishery-specific management system is therefore subject to regular internal and
external review, and the SG100 requirements are achieved.
References MARAM IWS/DEC13/General/4; MARAM IWS/DEC13/General/3
OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORE: 100
CONDITION NUMBER (if relevant): NA
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 205
13 RISK BASED FRAMEWORK (RBF) OUTPUTS
The Risk Based Framework (RBF) has not been used in this report.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 206
14 CONDITIONS OF CERTIFICATION
The two units of certification returned a score of less than 80 for 5 performance indicators. One of
these conditions applies to just the M. paradoxus UoC (UoC1). The other four conditions are
associated with the same scoring issues and aspects of the fishery for each UoC.
The conditions are listed below.
14.1 Conditions for UoC1, M. paradoxus
14.1.1 Condition 1: stock status
Performance
Indicator 1.1.1
Score 70
Scoring Issue(s) scoring less than 80
SIb SG60 SG80 SG100
The stock is at or
fluctuating around its target
reference point.
There is a high degree of
certainty that the stock has
been fluctuating around its
target reference point, or
has been above its target
reference point, over recent
years.
N N
Rationale
The best estimates of the current (2013) M. paradoxus SSB is 147 kt, which is about
about 98% of the spawning biomass at MSY (153 kt). Whilst it is apparent that there
has been a recovery of paradoxus since the low point in 2007, and the reference set of
operating models indicate that the stock is close to its target reference point (SG80), the
stock has not been fluctuating around its target reference point (the SG80 requirement),
nor has it been above its target reference point, over recent years (SG100 not met).
Condition
The scoring of this PI at less than 80 triggers PI 1.1.3 (stock rebuilding). Stock
rebuilding is the response required to achieve the SG80 score for PI 1.1.1.
The assessment team has found that there is a stock rebuilding strategy in place, and that
it is working (PI 1.1.3 scores 90).
The condition of certification is therefore continued implementation of the rebuilding
strategy already in place.
Relationship to
previous conditions
This condition builds on the previous condition relating to the stock status of M.
paradoxus, which required than an appropriate rebuilding programme was put in place.
Though that condition was met; the rate of stock recovery has been longer than the
duration of the previous period of certification, so it is appropriate to generate a new
condition with respect to stock status.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 207
Milestones
The OMP has projected the likely recovery for the M. paradoxus stock over the period
2010-2020. The recovery of the stock relative to the OMP projections is monitored
annually by MARAM and provides an independent basis for evaluating progress.
The current rate of recovery indicates that the stock will reach its target reference point
before 2020 (i.e. within the five year period of certification).
The SG80 requirement will be met when stock assessments indicate that the TRP has
been met.
14.1.2 Condition 2: ETP species information
Performance
Indicator 2.3.3
Score
70
Scoring Issue(s) scoring less than 80
SIa SG60 SG80 SG100
Information is sufficient to
qualitatively estimate the
fishery related mortality of
ETP species.
Sufficient information is
available to allow fishery
related mortality and the
impact of fishing to be
quantitatively estimated for
ETP species.
Information is sufficient to
quantitatively estimate
outcome status of ETP
species with a high degree
of certainty.
Y N N
Rationale
The information available for impacts on ETP bird species in offshore areas is sufficient
to estimate the overall impact of the fishery on these species to be estimated
quantitatively, which would meet the SG100 requirements. For the inshore areas there
is much less information available. This is sufficient to allow a qualitative estimate of
fishery-related mortality on these species, but not to quantify impacts.
Overall, the SG60 requirements are met for the hake trawl fishery, and this score is
appropriate. With better information about the mortality of birds in inshore areas, the
SG80 requirements could be met. A condition has been generated to address this issue.
Condition
Information should be gathered to allow fishery related mortality of bird species and the
impact of fishing on these species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake trawl
fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m).
This could be achieved by continued implementation of the recently established bird
observer programme for inshore areas and analysis of observer data so that bird
mortality and trends in mortality can be quantified.
Relationship to
previous conditions
Milestones
There is already a SADSTIA-funded bird observer programme in place. Meeting this
condition will require ongoing implementation of this programme and analysis of
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 208
findings. The anticipated milestones are set out below:-
Year 1: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and
preliminary analysis of findings.
Likely resulting SI Score: 60
Year 2: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and further
analysis of findings.
Likely resulting SI Score: 60
Year 3-4: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and
reporting of findings to show that bird mortality and impact on bird species can be
quantitatively estimated.
Likely resulting SI Score: 80
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 209
14.1.3 Condition 3: Habitat impact management
Performance
Indicator 2.4.2
Score
70
Scoring Issue(s) scoring less than 80
SIb SG60 SG80 SG100
The measures are
considered likely to work,
based on plausible
argument (e.g. general
experience, theory or
comparison with similar
fisheries/habitats).
There is some objective
basis for confidence that
the partial strategy will
work, based on information
directly about the fishery
and/or habitats involved.
Testing supports high
confidence that the strategy
will work, based on
information directly about
the fishery and/or habitats
involved.
Y N N
Rationale
Information about the fishery shows that the type of fishing gear that can be used is
constrained by fishing licence conditions; fishing effort is limited by quotas and days at
sea; and the areas that can be fished are fixed (by the fishing industry) to the boundary
of the trawl footprint established in 2007. Thus there is a partial strategy in place that
constrains potential fishery impacts on marine habitats.
Information is available about the extent, distribution and sensitivities of marine
habitats. This information from the fishery shows that there has been fishing activity in
and around these habitat types for several decades. Independent information has also
been presented by DAFF to confirm that compliance with both the statutory controls
(gear type and effort) and also the trawl footprint by the trawl fishery has been very
good. There is thus a plausible argument that these management measures will work
(based on past experience and the “freezing” of habitat impacts). This meets the
requirements of SG60.
Although there is some objective basis for confidence that these measures will constrain
fishing impacts, there are concerns that the extent of the existing MPA network is not
adequate to provide targeted protection to specific offshore habitats that are within the
existing trawl footprint area. The limitations in the management regime in this respect
means that the SG80 requirements for this SI are not presently met.
This shortcoming in the management regime could be addressed by investigating and
confirming the need for establishing further measures to manage trawl fishery impacts
on benthic marine habitats within the existing trawl footprint area (and indeed whether
there is evidence that these would be effective – which will be demonstrated by the
trawl impact study already underway). A condition has been generated to address this
issue.
Condition
There should be further investigation of the options for protecting benthic habitats from
hake trawl fishery impacts. This investigation could consider, inter alia, the relative
merits of both statutory measures and self regulation and also the areas that may require
or might benefit from such measures (for instance the South Benguela Canyon). It is
noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action, evidence of progress with
the implementation of the favoured management measures would be required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 210
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl experiment will provide
information from the hake trawl fishery on the type of management measures that may
be appropriate.
Relationship to
previous conditions
This condition builds on the previous condition of certification that required information
on trawl fishery impacts to be gathered. The information from the ongoing work on that
condition will be vital to inform work on this condition.
Milestones
A considerable amount of work has been carried out to establish a procedure to identify
“habitats of concern” based on their vulnerability to impacts from the trawl fishery (see
Sink et al, 2012).
The milestones set out below seek to build on that work to improve the performance of
the fishery against this SI.
The anticipated milestones are set out below:-
Year 1: Further evaluation of management options for “habitats of concern” within the
trawl footprint area.
Likely resulting SI Score: 60
Years 2-4: Evidence of implementation of appropriate management measures designed
to protect “habitats of concern” within the trawl footprint area, and evidence of fleet
compliance with the management regime.
Likely resulting SI Score: 80
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 211
14.2 Conditions for UoC2, M. capensis.
14.2.1 Condition 4: ETP species information
Performance
Indicator 2.3.3
Score
70
Scoring Issue(s) scoring less than 80
SIa SG60 SG80 SG100
Information is sufficient to
qualitatively estimate the
fishery related mortality of
ETP species.
Sufficient information is
available to allow fishery
related mortality and the
impact of fishing to be
quantitatively estimated for
ETP species.
Information is sufficient to
quantitatively estimate
outcome status of ETP
species with a high degree
of certainty.
Y N N
Rationale
The information available for impacts on ETP bird species in offshore areas is sufficient
to estimate the overall impact of the fishery on these species to be estimated
quantitatively, which would meet the SG100 requirements. For the inshore areas there
is much less information available. This is sufficient to allow a qualitative estimate of
fishery-related mortality on these species, but not to quantify impacts.
Overall, the SG60 requirements are met for the hake trawl fishery, and this score is
appropriate. With better information about the mortality of birds in inshore areas, the
SG80 requirements could be met. A condition has been generated to address this issue.
Condition
Information should be gathered to allow fishery related mortality of bird species and the
impact of fishing on these species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake trawl
fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m).
This could be achieved by continued implementation of the recently established bird
observer programme for inshore areas and analysis of observer data so that bird
mortality and trends in mortality can be quantified.
Relationship to
previous conditions
Milestones
There is already a SADSTIA-funded bird observer programme in place. Meeting this
condition will require ongoing implementation of this programme and analysis of
findings. The anticipated milestones are set out below:-
Year 1: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and
preliminary analysis of findings.
Likely resulting SI Score: 60
Year 2: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and further
analysis of findings.
Likely resulting SI Score: 60
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 212
Year 3-4: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and
reporting of findings to show that bird mortality and impact on bird species can be
quantitatively estimated.
Likely resulting SI Score: 80
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 213
14.2.2 Condition 5: Habitat impact management
Performance
Indicator 2.3.2
Score
70
Scoring Issue(s) scoring less than 80
SIb SG60 SG80 SG100
The measures are
considered likely to work,
based on plausible
argument (e.g. general
experience, theory or
comparison with similar
fisheries/habitats).
There is some objective
basis for confidence that
the partial strategy will
work, based on information
directly about the fishery
and/or habitats involved.
Testing supports high
confidence that the strategy
will work, based on
information directly about
the fishery and/or habitats
involved.
Y N N
Rationale
Information about the fishery shows that the type of fishing gear that can be used is
constrained by fishing licence conditions; fishing effort is limited by quotas and days at
sea; and the areas that can be fished are fixed (by the fishing industry) to the boundary
of the trawl footprint established in 2007. Thus there is a partial strategy in place that
constrains potential fishery impacts on marine habitats.
Information is available about the extent, distribution and sensitivities of marine
habitats. This information from the fishery shows that there has been fishing activity in
and around these habitat types for several decades. Independent information has also
been presented by DAFF to confirm that compliance with both the statutory controls
(gear type and effort) and also the trawl footprint by the trawl fishery has been very
good. There is thus a plausible argument that these management measures will work
(based on past experience and the “freezing” of habitat impacts). This meets the
requirements of SG60.
Although there is some objective basis for confidence that these measures will constrain
fishing impacts, there are concerns that the extent of the existing MPA network is not
adequate to provide targeted protection to specific offshore habitats that are within the
existing trawl footprint area. The limitations in the management regime in this respect
means that the SG80 requirements for this SI are not presently met.
This shortcoming in the management regime could be addressed by investigating and
confirming the need for establishing further measures to manage trawl fishery impacts
on benthic marine habitats within the existing trawl footprint area (and indeed whether
there is evidence that these would be effective – which will be demonstrated by the
trawl impact study already underway). A condition has been generated to address this
issue.
Condition
There should be further investigation of the options for protecting benthic habitats from
hake trawl fishery impacts. This investigation could consider, inter alia, the relative
merits of both statutory measures and self regulation and also the areas that may require
or might benefit from such measures (for instance the South Benguela Canyon). It is
noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action, evidence of progress with
the implementation of the favoured management measures would be required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 214
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl experiment will provide
information from the hake trawl fishery on the type of management measures that may
be appropriate.
Relationship to
previous conditions
This condition builds on the previous condition of certification that required information
on trawl fishery impacts to be gathered. The information from the ongoing work on that
condition will be vital to inform work on this condition.
Milestones
A considerable amount of work has been carried out to establish a procedure to identify
“habitats of concern” based on their vulnerability to impacts from the trawl fishery (see
Sink et al, 2012).
The milestones set out below seek to build on that work to improve the performance of
the fishery against this SI.
The anticipated milestones are set out below:-
Year 1: Further evaluation of management options for “habitats of concern” within the
trawl footprint area.
Likely resulting SI Score: 60
Years 2-4: Evidence of implementation of appropriate management measures designed
to protect “habitats of concern” within the trawl footprint area, and evidence of fleet
compliance with the management regime.
Likely resulting SI Score: 80
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 215
15 CLIENT ACTION PLAN
Client Action Plan
Action Plan for Meeting Conditions for Continued Certification of the South African Hake
Trawl Fisheries
The South African Demersal Trawling Industry submits this Action Plan for meeting the
Conditions for continued certification of the two Units of Certification (UoC) of the South
African Hake Trawl Fisheries, M. paradoxus (UoC1) and M. capensis (UoC2). The
Recognised Industrial Bodies involved, the South African Deep-Sea Trawling Industry
Association (SADSTIA) and the South-East Coast Inshore Fishing Association (SECIFA),
undertake to implement the spirit and intent of the Conditions as set out in the Certifiers Final
Report determining that South African hake trawl fisheries are being sustainably managed
under the MSC Principles and Criteria.
SADSTIA and SECIFA accept the conditions and will work with both its partners and with
recognised stakeholders to fulfil them. Some Conditions call on SADSTIA and SECIFA to
take on responsibilities that fall outside their full control. SADSTIA and SECIFA have
sought and been given assurances of cooperation and support from their partners. The Clients
will use the resources at their command to ensure that all Actions undertaken in connection
with these Conditions are fully met. We trust that surveillance agencies will take account of
our limitations regarding actions that require a level of commitment from autonomous
partners.
Some of the Conditions and Actions are quite closely interlinked. The Actions we propose
under one heading may go some way in meeting the obligations attached to another
Condition or Action, particularly when the required actions are the same when applied across
the two species (UoC) for two of the Conditions below (i.e. Condition 2 and 4 and Condition
3 and 5 require the same actions for the two species. It should be noted also that limited
resources, both financial and human, may sometimes prevent the Trawling Industry, and/or
government, from directly addressing a Condition, thereby necessitating the parties to seek
the most appropriate alternative approach to fulfilling a requirement. We trust that both these
factors will be recognised in the course of this certification period.
Below we comment broadly on the five Conditions in order to position our proposed Actions
within a framework of our experience and the many lessons learnt during the previous
certification periods. The Trawling Industry continues to take, or has been an active co-
management party to, a number of pre-emptive measures that favourably inform the new
Conditions. We think this fact is eloquent testimony to the enlightening and galvanizing
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 216
effect of MSC Certification. These processes have raised the client’s level of understanding
regarding the benefits of pursuing pre-emptive conservation action. They have also increased
the trawling industry’s preparedness to undertake voluntary measures to maintain the
sustainable use of fishery resources into the future.
UoC1: M. paradoxus
Condition 1. Stock Status
Action required: Evidence of ongoing implementation of the stock rebuilding strategy is
required.
Timescale: The OMP2014 has projected the likely recovery of the stock over the period
2015-2030.
Indices for rebuilding should show improvement of M paradoxus stock status within the
bounds of the current rebuilding projection as identified during annual and bi-annual reviews
of the stock status. Overall rebuilding should progress in line with the overall timeframe for
stock recovery as currently defined.
COMMENT:
The current Hake Operational Management Procedure (OMP2014) deals directly with
matters addressed in Condition 1. An OMP typically lasts for four years implying that the
expected life of the next OMP will coincide with Certification itself. The stock assessment
model for the resource comprises a reference set of 11 specific stock assessments which
reflect a range of assumptions and uncertainty about the dynamics of the resource. The figure
below is an uncertainty envelope for those 11 assessment models with respect to the target
level quantity Bsp
/ MSYLsp
for Merluccius paradoxus. The colours denote the 80, 90 and
95% confidence intervals for this quantity. The solid dark line is the median estimate. This
figure demonstrates that by 2012/2013 the resource had achieved its target level in median
terms (the mean would have reached the target), and that the 90% uncertainty envelope at
that time ranged between about 65% of the target and 164% of the target. The resource
dynamics therefore entered the definition of a resource fluctuating around its target level.
This figure shows that there are some recruitment variability effects which are predicted to
cause a downward fluctuation in the dynamics of the resource, reaching a nadir of between
51% and 106% of the target by 2017. Thereafter the resource continues to grow along a
recovery pathway and achieves a median level of 6% above the MSYL target again by 2024
with a 90% confidence range of between 64% and 196% of target. Although not shown here,
the long term strategy translates to M. paradoxus achieving a median level of 119% of
MSYL target by 2034.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 217
In summary therefore, the resource attained the MSYL target in median terms in 2012/2013,
thereafter it fluctuates about its target, with a long-term strategy of reaching 19% above
target by 2034.
CONDITION 1 - ACTION 1
Stock assessment modelling:
The reference case stock assessment model will be updated annually with the inclusion of the
most recent CPUE and survey data. As part of this process, the spawning biomass trend will
be updated annually using the current stock assessment model which integrates all indices of
resource abundance. Each year a check will be carried out to determine whether the most
recent CPUE and survey based abundance indices lie within the range of the October 2014
rebuilding projections. This determination will be made both for M. paradoxus and for M.
capensis. If abundance indices are outside the 95% probability range, then exceptional
circumstances will be triggered in terms of the OMP rules and the management procedure for
the resource will be reconsidered to ensure continued long-term sustainable use. If the risk is
to the resource, then in the short term management action will involve a more conservative
TAC than would have arisen from the application of the OMP formula. In the medium term
the OMP may have to be revised as recommended by the Demersal Scientific Working
Group of DAFF. Action in short and medium term is to ensure that the resource status levels
are reached on the timeframe specified in 2014 when the current OMP was adopted. This
procedure, which was Appendix D of the attached document
FISHERIES/2010/OCTOBER/SWG-DEM/59 in the context of the 2011 – 2014 OMP has
been adopted for the 2015 – 2018 OMP. (The current version will be sent to the Certifiers as
soon as it has been officially approved by DAFF.)
Safeguard Rule: A “Safeguard Rule” has been enacted for the hake resource. This allows
for more severe reductions in the TAC than are possible under “normal conditions”. Under
normal conditions, TAC reductions may not exceed 5%. However, should the composite
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 218
index of resource abundance, J, fall below 75% of its 2011 level, then TAC reductions
greater than 5% are permissible. The permissible percentage increases on a sliding scale from
5% at the 75% J level (of the composite abundance index relative to 2011) to 25% at the 65%
J level. The maximum permissible TAC reduction that is contemplated in any one year is
25%.
TIMING – This Action will be an ongoing process under regular annual review, and the
responsibility lies with DAFF and the DSWG.
CONDITION 1 - ACTION 2
Estimating Inter- and Intra-specific Predation:
Estimation of the current level of depletion of the M. paradoxus resource remains an area of
active research. In 2012 SADSTIA submitted the results of a study attached hereto,
“Updating the baseline hake stock assessment which incorporates inter- and intra-specific
hake predation into hake stock assessments” authored by OLRAC SPS. At the time that
work was seen as closing out a client action plan related to research into the stock assessment
implications of inter- and intra-specific hake predation. A recent international review panel
(held UCT, December 2014) has recommended as follows in relation to ongoing work in this
regard by a PhD student at UCT:
“The Panel was impressed with the progress made on developing an assessment method that
can take into account both cannibalism between the two hake species and inter-specific
predation. This line of work holds as much if not even more promise than the movement
model in terms of representing hake dynamics, because its results may change perceptions of
stock trajectories for the two hake species - in particular that for M. paradoxus, which is
subject to predation by M. capensis as well as cannibalism. The Panel looks forward to
completion of this work.”
Both OLRAC SPS’s earlier work as well as that submitted to the December 2014
international review workshop by UCT indicates a more optimistic appraisal of the depletion
status of M. paradoxus. SADSTIA will therefore sponsor OLRAC SPS to carry out a further
research project aimed at verifying and improving the methodology for determining the
pristine biomass of M. paradoxus relative to K and MSYL in the context of assessment
methodologies that explicitly incorporate inter- and intra-specific hake predation into hake
stock assessments. The duration for this work will be three years, and this work should be
seen as complementary to the work done by other researchers at UCT. OLRAC SPS’s work
will focus more directly and immediately on the management implications of this new breed
of stock assessment models. This work will build on the earlier work by OLRAC, and will
incorporate new dietary and daily ration information, as well as looking into the
disaggregation of dietary characteristics between the south and west coasts.
TIMING – SADSTIA will submit three research progress reports, in November 2015 (data
and methodological summary), November 2016 (preliminary results) and November 2017
(final report). The project will be completed by November 2017.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 219
CONDITION 1 - ACTION 3
Species splitting for hake in demersal trawl:
The formula used to split hake catches into the two species Merluccius paradoxus and
Merluccius capensis in the commercial trawl fishery was further developed by OLRAC SPS
in 2004 using scientific survey trawl data. The methodology has undergone successive
revisions over the years and forms the backbone of the species disaggregated stock
assessment methodology employed in the management of the fishery. In 2006, SADSTIA
commissioned an observer programme with the objective of, inter alia, collecting hake
species split information. Since then OLRAC SPS has been engaged on an ongoing basis to
compare the models based on survey and observer data, and to refine and improve the species
splitting models.
TIMING - This work will continue on an annual basis and results will be reported according
to the following milestones:
2015 (November): Submission of model refinements, options and preliminary results.
2016 (November): Submission of preferred feasible models and results.
2017 (November): Submission of comprehensive results.
UoC1 – M. paradoxus
Condition 2. ETP Species information
Action required: Information should be gathered to allow fishery related mortality of bird
species and the impact of fishing on these species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake
trawl fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m). This could be achieved by
continued implementation of the recently established bird observer programme for inshore
areas and analysis of observer data so that bird mortality and trends in mortality can be
quantified.
Timescale:
Year 1: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and preliminary
analysis of findings.
Year 2: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and further
analysis of findings.
Year 3-4: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and reporting
of findings to show that bird mortality and impact on bird species can be quantitatively
estimated
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 220
.
COMMENT:
We believe that this condition primarily applies to M. capensis (UoC2) in inshore areas, since
very little M. paradoxus is caught in waters shallower than 110m. We agree that, especially
in the case of M. capensis, it is necessary to gather further information on bird mortality and
impact on bird species.
CONDITION 2 – ACTION 1
Determine the extent of bird mortality in the inshore fleet:
We will be able to determine the extent of bird mortality and impacts on birds in the inshore
sector by i) Doing a desktop study of all available data on bird mortality in the inshore fleet
and ii) implementation of an on-board observer programme on those inshore vessels
equipped to carry an observer.
TIMING – Year 1: The desktop study to be completed and on-board observer programme
commenced.
Year 2: An assessment will be made of existing bird mortality in the inshore fleet using data
collected in year 1 and ongoing observer programme if sufficient data is available; if not, the
observer programme will be continued until sufficient data has been collected to make a
proper assessment of bird mortalities.
CONDITION 2 – ACTION 2
Deployment of bird scaring devices in the inshore fleet:
We should be able to reduce bird mortality and impacts on birds in the inshore sector by
implementation of suitable bird scaring devices similar to those deployed in the offshore
sector, adapted to allow for the smaller-sized vessels
TIMING – Year 1- modifications to be made to bird scaring devices used in the offshore
sector to make them suitable for use on the smaller vessels and testing these.
Year 2-3: As soon as the assessment referred to in Action has been completed all vessels to
be equipped with bird scaring devices and inshore observer programme established on
vessels suitably equipped to carry observers in the inshore trawling sector.
CONDITION 2 – ACTION 3
Assessment of the impact of bird-scaring devices:
Analysis of observer data to quantitatively determine whether the bird-scaring devices
utilized in the inshore sector are having a mitigating impact in terms of reducing bird
mortality and to allow trends in bird mortality to be tracked and monitored.
TIMING – Year 2-4: Annual data analysis and summaries published and communicated.
CONDITION 2 – ACTION 4
Monitoring and review of impact of bird mitigation measures:
Interaction and discussion on the implementation of mitigation of impacts on birds and trends
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 221
in bird mortality with all relevant ETP stakeholders, including Capfish and Birdlife
TIMING – Annual review meeting will be held with stakeholders to discuss issues.
Corrective measures will be applied if agreed to be necessary.
UoC1: M. paradoxus
Condition 3. Benthic Habitat impact management
Action Required: There should be further investigation of the options for protecting benthic
habitats from hake trawl fishery impacts. This investigation could consider, inter alia, the
relative merits of both statutory measures and self-regulation and also the areas that may
require or might benefit from such measures.
It is noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action, evidence of progress with the
implementation of the favoured management measures would be required.
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl experiment will provide
information from the hake trawl fishery on the type of management measures that may be
appropriate.
Timescale:
Year 1: Further evaluation of management options for ‘habitats of concern’ within the trawl
footprint area, and evidence of fleet compliance with the management regime.
Year 2-4: Evidence of implementation of appropriate management measures designed to
protect “habitats of concern” within the trawl footprint area, and evidence of fleet compliance
with the management regime.
COMMENT:
We understand that notwithstanding the work conducted during the current Certification
there remain gaps in knowledge about the intensity of disturbance and potential recovery
rates to pristine level of habitually trawled bottom.
In the previous certification period, this very expensive work was sporadically and
opportunistically carried out via academic programmes, and a PhD was completed on the
subject by Lara Atkinson. A trawl experiment to determine benthic impacts, using a
sophisticated camera monitoring system is now well underway, using DAFF’s 45m research
vessel Ellen Kuzwayo in the Child’s Bank grid area designated for the experiment. In the
experimental grid there are trawled lanes and untrawled sections for comparison and
monitoring of recovery of benthic organisms over a period of 5 years. DAFF has fortunately
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 222
committed the vessel for the full period of 5 years. One full survey was carried out during
2014 and the data from the survey has been analysed. The next survey is scheduled for March
2015. Role players in this project include DAFF, SADSTIA, SANBI, UCT and SAEON.
With previous resource limitations in mind and with the realisation that environmental
impacts need to be limited in the interests of an ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) the
South African Trawling Industry has since 2009 implemented a “ring fencing” initiative
which has fixed the footprint of the South African Trawling Industry for some time to come,
thus addressing the issue of future trawl areas. This has been maintained throughout the
current recertification period. The activities of all trawlers inside and outside the trawl
footprint are monitored and transgressions reported to SADSTIA for action, so that
compliance is enforced.
SADSTIA has been engaging in the process of development of a system of offshore MPAs
since its inception, since it has always been likely that some ecologically sensitive areas
would overlap with the currently designated trawl footprint. The key roleplayers and
stakeholders are DEA, DAFF, DMR, SANBI, UCT and SAEON, SADSTIA and the oil and
gas industry. A recent presidential initiative to develop South Africa’s maritime economic
potential (Operation Phakisa) has spurred the formalization of this process. Stakeholders are
expected to rapidly find consensus on the location and size of MPAs designed to protect
critical marine benthic habitats.
CONDITION 3 - ACTION 1
Benthic impacts trawl experiment:
SADSTIA will continue to participate in and support research related to the benthic impacts
trawl experiment. This includes support for UCT and other researchers to participate in the
annual RV Ellen Kuzwayo research survey and to analyse the camera data from the survey, as
well as possible direct participation in the surveys. Note that this work is dependent on
continued availability of the research vessel and of the SAEON camera sled equipment.
TIMING – Annual surveys to be continued from 2015-2018. Data to be analysed annually to
determine the nature and extent of any damage to the benthic environment caused by trawling
and any recovery thereafter, collated and summarised and outcomes to be reported by mid-
2019.
CONDITION 3 - ACTION 2
Incorporation of trawl ring-fenced trawl grounds in permit conditions:
The existing industry programme to monitor compliance with Ring Fencing will be
continued. A formal request has been made to the DAFF’s Demersal Scientific Working
Group to include in its annual TAC recommendations to the Minister that the area designated
as the trawl footprint be incorporated in the 2015 Permit Conditions. SADSTIA undertakes to
further monitor compliance with the new permit conditions via the Ring-fencing initiative.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 223
TIMING –
Year 1: Implementation of permit conditions to prohibit trawling outside of the designated
footprint and ring-fenced area by 1 January 2015.
Year 1-4: Monitoring of compliance with permit conditions throughout the period of
certification.
CONDITION 3 – ACTION 3
Development of management actions to address critical marine benthic habitats:
Action 3 has strong links with Actions 1 (the trawl experiment) and 2 (Ring-fencing the trawl
grounds). SADSTIA will continue to engage with all role players on the development and
implementation of a system of offshore MPAs that protects critical marine habitats. We know
that identifying such areas and agreeing on these among stakeholders present many
challenges. We will endeavour to address these challenges by engaging with all parties
constructively to find mutually acceptable solutions that satisfy the need for protection of
critical marine benthic habitats while ensuring that the trawling industry is not heavily
impacted economically. Implementation of these offshore MPAs is, however, ultimately in
the hands of the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and the Department of
Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF).
TIMING - Progress with this action depends very much on the other role players in
Operation Phakisa, and SADSTIA is therefore not in control of it. The ultimate objectives,
outcomes and impacts of oil and gas industry developments and the Department of Mineral
Resources remain uncertain. We would, however, hope that the process can proceed as
follows:
Year 1: Engagement with all role players to finalise the proposed offshore MPAs.
Year 2-4: Proclamation and implementation of offshore MPAs to protect and conserve
critical habitats (DEA and DAFF).
UoC2 – M. capensis
Condition 4: ETP species information
Action required: Information should be gathered to allow fishery related mortality of bird
species and the impact of fishing on these species to be quantitatively estimated for the hake
trawl fishery in inshore areas (waters shallower than 110m). This could be achieved by
continued implementation of the recently established bird observer programme for inshore
areas and analysis of observer data so that bird mortality and trends in mortality can be
quantified.
Timescale:
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 224
Year 1: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and preliminary
analysis of findings.
Year 2: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and further
analysis of findings.
Year 3-4: Evidence of continued implementation of bird observer programme and reporting
of findings to show that bird mortality and impact on bird species can be quantitatively
estimated
COMMENT:
We agree that it is necessary to gather further information on bird mortality and impacts on
bird species in the inshore area where mostly M. capensis is caught.
CONDITION 4 – ACTION 1
Determine the extent of bird mortality in the inshore fleet:
We will be able to determine the extent of bird mortality and impacts on birds in the inshore
sector by i) Doing a desktop study of all available data on bird mortality in the inshore fleet
and ii) implementation of an on-board observer programme on those inshore vessels
equipped to carry an observer.
TIMING – Year 1: The desktop study to be completed and on-board observer programme
commenced.
Year 2: An assessment will be made of existing bird mortality in the inshore fleet using data
collected in year 1 and ongoing observer programme if sufficient data is available; if not, the
observer programme will be continued until sufficient data has been collected to make a
proper assessment of bird mortalities.
CONDITION 4 – ACTION 2
Deployment of bird scaring devices in the inshore fleet:
We should be able to reduce bird mortality and impacts on birds in the inshore sector by
implementation of suitable bird scaring devices similar to those deployed in the offshore
sector, adapted to allow for the smaller-sized vessels.
TIMING – Year 1- modifications to be made to bird scaring devices used in the offshore
sector to make them suitable for use on the smaller vessels and testing same.
Year 2-3: As soon as the assessment referred to in Action has been completed all vessels to
be equipped with bird scaring devices and inshore observer programme established on
vessels suitably equipped to carry observers in the inshore trawling sector.
CONDITION 4 – ACTION 3
Assessment of the impact of bird-scaring devices:
Analysis of observer data to quantitatively determine whether the bird-scaring devices
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 225
utilized in the inshore sector are having a mitigating impact in terms of reducing bird
mortality and to allow trends in bird mortality to be tracked and monitored.
TIMING – Year 2-4: Annual data analysis and summaries published and communicated.
CONDITION 4 – ACTION 4
Monitoring and review of impact of bird mitigation measures:
Interaction and discussion on the implementation of mitigation of impacts on birds and trends
in bird mortality with all relevant ETP stakeholders, including Capfish and Birdlife
TIMING – Annual review meeting will be held with stakeholders to discuss issues.
Corrective measures will be applied if agreed to be necessary.
UoC1: M. capensis
Condition 5. Benthic Habitat impact management
Action Required: There should be further investigation of the options for protecting benthic
habitats from hake trawl fishery impacts. This investigation could consider, inter alia, the
relative merits of both statutory measures and self-regulation and also the areas that may
require or might benefit from such measures (for instance the South Benguela Canyon).
It is noted that much of the groundwork for this aspect of the condition has been done.
Having identified appropriate measures and areas for action, evidence of progress with the
implementation of the favoured management measures would be required.
It is anticipated that the information derived from the trawl experiment will provide
information from the hake trawl fishery on the type of management measures that may be
appropriate.
Timescale:
Year 1: Further evaluation of management options for ‘habitats of concern’ within the trawl
footprint area, and evidence of fleet compliance with the management regime.
Year 2-4: Evidence of implementation of appropriate management measures designed to
protect “habitats of concern” within the trawl footprint area, and evidence of fleet compliance
with the management regime.
COMMENT:
We understand that notwithstanding the work conducted during the current Certification
there remain gaps in knowledge about the intensity of disturbance and potential recovery
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 226
rates to pristine level of habitually trawled bottom.
In the previous certification period, this very expensive work was sporadically and
opportunistically carried out via academic programmes, and a PhD was completed on the
subject by Lara Atkinson. A trawl experiment using a sophisticated camera sled monitoring
system is now well underway, using DAFF’s 45m research vessel MV Ellen Kuzwayo in the
Child’s Bank grid area designated for the experiment, which includes trawled lanes and
untrawled sections for comparison and monitoring of recovery of benthic organisms over a
period of 5 years. DAFF has fortunately committed the vessel for the full period of 5 years.
One full survey was carried out during 2014 and the data from the survey has been analysed.
The next survey is scheduled for March 2015. Role players in this project include DAFF,
SADSTIA, SANBI, UCT and SAEON.
With previous resource limitations in mind and with the realisation that environmental
impacts need to be limited in the interests of an ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) the
South African Trawling Industry has since 2009 implemented a “ring fencing” initiative
which has fixed the footprint of the South African Trawling Industry for some time to come,
thus addressing the issue of future trawl areas. The activities of all trawlers inside and outside
the trawl footprint are monitored and transgressions reported to SADSTIA for action, so that
compliance is enforced.
SADSTIA has been engaging in the process of development of a system of offshore MPAs
since its inception, since it has always been likely that some ecologically sensitive areas
would overlap with the currently designated trawl footprint. The key stakeholders and role
players are DEA, DAFF, DMR, SANBI, UCT and SAEON, SADSTIA and the oil and gas
industry. A recent presidential initiative to develop South Africa’s maritime economic
potential (Operation Phakisa) has spurred the formalization of this process.
CONDITION 5 - ACTION 1
Benthic impacts trawl experiment:
SADSTIA will continue to participate in and support research related to the benthic impacts
trawl experiment. This includes support for UCT and other researchers to participate in the
annual RV Ellen Kuzwayo research survey and to analyse the camera data from the survey, as
well as possible direct participation in the surveys. Note that this work is dependent on
continued availability of the research vessel and of the SAEON camera sled equipment.
TIMING – Annual surveys to be continued from 2015-2018. Data to be analysed annually to
determine the nature and extent of any damage to the benthic environment caused by trawling
and any recovery thereafter, collated and summarised and outcomes to be reported by mid-
2019.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 227
CONDITION 5 - ACTION 2
Incorporation of trawl ring-fenced trawl grounds in permit conditions:
The existing industry programme to monitor compliance with Ring Fencing will be
continued. A formal request has been made to the DAFF’s Demersal Scientific Working
Group to include in its annual TAC recommendations to the Minister that the area designated
as the trawl footprint be incorporated in the 2015 Permit Conditions. SADSTIA undertakes to
further monitor compliance with the new permit conditions via the Ring-fencing initiative.
TIMING –
Year 1: Implementation of permit conditions to prohibit trawling outside of the designated
footprint and ring-fenced area by 1 January 2015.
Year 1-4: Monitoring of compliance with permit conditions throughout the period of
certification.
CONDITION 5 – ACTION 3
Development of management actions to address critical marine benthic habitats:
Action 3 has strong links with Actions 1 (the trawl experiment) and 2 (Ring-fencing the trawl
grounds). SADSTIA will continue to engage with all role players on the development and
implementation of a system of offshore MPAs that protects critical marine habitats. We know
that identifying such areas and agreeing among stakeholders present many challenges. We
will endeavour to address these challenges by engaging with all parties constructively to find
mutually acceptable solutions that satisfy the need for protection of critical marine benthic
habitats while ensuring that the trawling industry is not heavily impacted economically.
Implementation of these offshore MPAs is, however, ultimately in the hands of the
Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) and the Department of Agriculture Forestry and
Fisheries (DAFF).
TIMING - Progress with this action depends very much on the other role players in
Operation Phakisa, and SADSTIA is therefore not in control of it. The ultimate objectives,
outcomes and impacts of oil and gas industry developments and the Department of Mineral
Resources remain uncertain. We would, however, hope that the process can proceed as
follows:
Year 1: Engagement with all role players to finalise the proposed offshore MPAs.
Year 2-4: Proclamation and implementation of offshore MPAs to protect and conserve
critical habitats (DEA and DAFF).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 228
16 PEER REVIEW REPORTS
16.1 Peer Review Reports
16.1.1 Peer Reviewer A
Overall Opinion
Has the assessment team arrived at an
appropriate conclusion based on the evidence
presented in the assessment report?
Yes Conformity Assessment Body
Response
Justification:
This is a complex fishery, consisting of two species that are
not easily distinguishable and certainly not capable of being
separated out in commercial catch data, two organizations
representing the various operators, and two geographic areas,
although the latter are no longer considered as individual
stocks in the assessment. The background material and its
evidence is presented in a fair manner, but it is still difficult for
a reviewer to get his head around the species and “stock”
differences, even though in this case I do have some (very
dated) background relating to the fishery.
The evidence is presented in voluminous and comprehensive
fashion, and there is sufficient to substantiate the scorings
given. I do have a (presentational) problem with some (not all)
of the justifications in the scoring sections, however, because
a few are presented in too much of a bullet-point fashion, just
throwing the various evidence at the reader rather than
building the justifications in a contiguous manner that leads to
a clear conclusion based on the most important and MSC-
required criteria.
We agree that this is a complex fishery;
we have presented the information in as
clear a manner as possible.
Comment noted; we have responded to
the reviewer’s comments on the scoring
of individual PIs in response to this.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 229
If included:
Do you think the client action plan is sufficient
to close the conditions raised?
Yes Conformity Assessment Body
Response
Justification:
After ten years of being certified, this fishery and its two client
organizations are used to meeting MSC certification conditions
in an exemplary manner. The Action Plan provided is in my
opinion adequate and, although Condition 1 is aimed at
achieving targeted rebuilding of the M. paradoxus stock so
requires evidence to that end being assimilated (which will be
difficult if the UoC stock does not recover as planned), I am
confident that the will of the clients to close all five conditions
is strong. Hence, I believe that all five conditions will be closed
out within the timeframes specified.
Comment noted, no action required.
General Comments on the Assessment Report (optional)
Do you think the condition(s) raised are
appropriately written to achieve the SG80
outcome within the specified timeframe?
Yes Conformity Assessment Body
Response
Justification:
For such a long-certified fishery (the third time it is being
considered), it is quite surprising to this reviewer that
conditions are still being unearthed that need to be met during
the term of the certification. However, apart from the fact that
MSC criteria are being tightened all the time, it is clear from
the various documentation referred to that scientifically and
administratively, this fishery is one of the best researched and
managed in the world outside the dominant North Atlantic
fisheries, where marine research and good management
practice initially developed. It is also clear that the authorities
and the local (and international) scientists associated with the
various facets of the SA hake trawl fishery are committed to it
remaining at the forefront of good scientific and management
practice, and the assessment team this time (with some
different members from previous assessment teams and
surveillance auditors) have picked this fact up. Hence, the
conditions set now are fair and in my opinion given the
documentation in front of me, they can be met within the
timeframe set. There are actually five listed, but only
Condition 1 is unique to a single UoC (Merluccius paradoxus).
Conditions 2 and 3 are mirror images of Conditions 4 and 5,
each pairing covering one of the UoCs (M. paradoxus and M.
capensis). Therefore, there are realistically only three
conditions needing to be met; the way the two sets of paired
conditions are to be met is similar for each UoC.
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 230
I strongly urge the assessment team to give serious and dedicated attention to finally submitting a
report of high quality in terms of its continuity (within sections and obviously also within scoring
justifications) and even grammar and spelling. I tired of circling minor errors or of wondering why
comments clearly meant as reminders to the drafter(s) were still contained in this report. Everything
that needs to be in the report is there, but quality needs to be enhanced during the team response
period.
Notwithstanding the above comment, I find the report to be a good one.
IFC Response: these comments are welcomed. We have addressed grammar and spelling mistakes
in the report as part of the review process.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 231
Performance Indicator Review
Please complete the table below for each Performance Indicator which are listed in the Conformity Assessment Body’s Public Certification Draft
Report.
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
1.1.1 Yes Yes Maybe for UoC 1, n/a for UoC 2
For UoC 1 (M. paradoxus), the certifying team correctly point out that all scientific evidence points to a high degree of certainty that the stock is not at a point where recruitment can be impaired, but that the stock size has not in recent years been above or fluctuating around the target B reference point. Although the stock is not far beneath that reference point, the inability to score 1.1.1b at all is therefore obvious, and the overall performance score for UoC 1 is therefore correct and a condition has been raised. That condition, however, is merely to provide some evidence of the efficacy of the effectiveness of the rebuilding strategy; in my opinion, proof of the effectiveness of the strategy can only come in a longer time, perhaps even when the target reference point is reached. Perhaps this point can be emphasized?
The assessment team has found that
there is a stock rebuilding strategy in
place for M. paradoxus and that it is
effective (PI 1.1.3 scores 90).
Therefore, the condition is continued
implementation of the rebuilding
strategy within the OMP, which has
projected that the M. paradoxus stock
to will reach its target reference point
before 2020 (i.e. within the five year
period of certification). This will be
monitored annually by MARAM, and
provides an independent basis for
evaluating progress.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 232
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
For UoC 2, the scoring is correctly at 100.
1.1.2 Yes Yes n/a The rigour of the assessment model is tested and proven, and I am comfortable that the background information in the report and the scoring reflect correctly on the status of the stock in terms of both UoCs
Comment noted. No action required.
1.1.3 Yes Yes n/a UoC 2 does not require any rebuilding, as shown clearly by the assessment modelling (1.1.1 above), so does not need to be scored here. UoC 1 is hampered by the decision that socio-economic reasoning makes it impracticable to rebuild the stock in the required 2 × generation time. It is notable from the text provided that some of the scientists interviewed during the site visit believe that recovery may be more rapid than predicted, but actual proof is still lacking, so the score of 80 for 1.1.3b is supported, as is the overall score.
We did not intend to imply that there
was a decision not to effect a recovery
of M. paradoxus biomass to BMSY
within a ten year period for socio-
economic reasons, but that this was a
possibility given way that the OMP is
designed to balance the returns to the
fishery (catch) against the perceived
risks to the stock (of fishing). In the
event, the current OMP is expected to
achieve this objective within the 5-
year certification period.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 233
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
1.2.1 Yes Yes n/a For both UoCs, evidence and moreover gutfeel is that the harvest strategy (which must be one of the most tested in fisheries assessment history!) is both precautionary and robust. It only “fails” in proving that the stocks will be maintained at the target levels. The assessment team are clearly hedging their bets, but the overall score is supported.
Comment noted. No action required.
1.2.2 Yes Yes n/a The report (and scoring table) provides ample evidence that the harvest control rules in place are both (extremely) well-defined and effective. What is particularly gratifying here is the extent of fishery buy-in and support for those HCRs; they have clearly been fully consulted, understand the rules and what they are trying to achieve for the fishery. Scoring supported.
Comment noted. No action required.
1.2.3 Yes Yes n/a So much is already known (and regularly checked and confirmed) about the two UoCs that it would be impossible to score this PI at anything other than 100%. Careful and robust analysis is the hallmark of this fishery
An appropriate comment has been
added to the justification for 1.2.3a in
relation to age determination.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 234
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
and its historical development. I only have one concern here, namely about the information used, but that does not change my perception of the accuracy of the evaluation result – age/length keys are reliant on a single trained otolith reader, who is not consistent throughout the time-series (a dangerous situation for any fishery!) and the material is aggregated over each year, not analysed spatially or temporally. A comment on why such a situation does not affect the efficacy of the harvest strategy being applied would be useful.
1.2.4 Yes Yes n/a Perhaps my inside knowledge of the development of the numerical assessment methodology makes me a bit cynical about the team’s assertion that other assessment approaches (e.g. an age-structured VPA) have not been attempted in the in the OMP. However, given the voluminous information provided in this report and perhaps the slight uncertainty about the stock status of UoC 1, the cautionary scoring is supported.
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 235
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
FROM HERE ON, UoCs 1 AND 2 ARE CONSIDERED TOGETHER
2.1.1 Yes Yes n/a I note the slightly different definitions of retained and bycaught species in South Africa from those generally accepted internationally, and applaud the assessment team for providing that background information in their report. It makes the reviewers’ job much easier. I agree with the way they have drafted their report with this in mind. Given that target reference points have not been set in South Africa for any of the retained species, and that the levels of depletion of those species are not generally known with any degree of accuracy, the scoring of this PI at a and b cannot exceed 80, a score with which I agree.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.1.2 Yes Yes n/a Using MSC definitions for “measures”, “strategy” and “partial strategy”, the South African situation for retained species is in my opinion (and supported by the documentation produced) pretty good. The risk of serious or
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 236
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
irreversible harm accruing to other species does not seem to be very high. However, rigorous testing of the strategy is currently missing, so the overall score of 95 for this PI is fair.
2.1.3 Yes Yes n/a From what is presented, the level of available observations and firm statistics on catches supports the conclusion of the assessment team that the information behind the score for this PI warrants a pass at 80. I do have an issue, as does the team seemingly, with the ongoing level of independent observation effort (manifest in the responsible government agency not contracting this work into the future with any degree of certainty). However, from what is available in terms of observations made to present, I am comfortable with the score assigned – it is only the level of certainty regarding the outcome in terms of retained species that is questioned. Monitoring is good (currently), but it has to be noted that factual knowledge is somewhat lacking for some stocks of
Comment noted, no action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 237
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
retained species, unsurprising given the number of them caught.
2.2.1 Yes Yes n/a Again, the South African definition of bycatch varies slightly from the international norm, but the assessment team have covered that anomaly adequately in their report. Discarding in the fishery is anyway low, although it was apparentl;y not always so, meaning that adjustments to some catches presumably were made (?), but it is impossible to state from the information and statistics available that there is a high degree of certainty that all bycatch species are within biologically based limits; many species are by-caught! Therefore the score given of 80 is the maximum possible
Comment noted. No action required.
2.2.2 Yes Yes n/a The information provided correctly points out that at best there is a partial strategy in place designed to maintain bycatch species within biologically based limits. Therefore, no
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 238
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
scoring above 80 can be accepted, and I agree with the score given by the assessment team.
2.2.3 Yes Yes n/a Here I must I reiterate my cautionary comment (made also by the assessment team) that commitment to ongoing independent observer programmes is not that obvious locally at the government agency. The client organization is attempting to cover that issue, to good effect, but I am not sure that such action is the right (or moral) way forward for observation programmes. However, for now, the level of monitoring and the data collected and analysed are sufficient to be able to quantify catches, to support a partial strategy for managing main bycatch species and to be able to estimate outcome status for those species. The score of 85 is hence justified.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.3.1 Yes Yes n/a It is easy here to conclude that there are no Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 239
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
ETP species related to the fishery, but seabird mortality and interaction has been notable over the years, so the team’s concentration on seabird interactions, including some species of seabird that are under threat globally (IUCN), is warranted. The team also rightly concludes that despite the amount of effort traditionally and recently being devoted to researching the interactions (South Africa has an impressive complement of seabird – and avians in general - research teams), and in mitigating any effects, one cannot with a high degree of confidence state that the fishery is having no detrimental direct or indirect effect on seabird species. A score of 80 is therefore the maximum possible, and is supported.
2.3.2 Yes Yes n/a In terms of the precautionary management strategy currently in place, there is general confidence that it is working and any effects of the fishery on seabirds are being mitigated. Also, the reducing-over-time observations of seabird strikes and
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 240
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
mortalities (with the implementation of amended technologies) demonstrate an improvement in the situation, so a score for this PI above 80 is fair.
2.3.3 Yes Yes Yes The team have concluded that information on ETP seabird interactions inshore is scarce enough to warrant a score for 2.3.3a of just 60. A carefully designed programme of observations will ameliorate this situation, so the condition set is a good one (and it applies to both UoC stocks, although inshore, the UoC 1 component is less relevant). There is an error in the report here. The final line of this PI refers to conditions 2 and 3; it should be 2 and 4, I believe.
Comments on scoring noted. We have
corrected the error concerning the
relevant conditions.
2.4.1 Yes Yes n/a Habitat effects (mainly negative) of bottom trawl fisheries are common and virtually unavoidable worldwide. The client has clearly understood this and invested heavily in improving understanding of the trawl
Comments noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 241
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
“footprint” and how it may be impacting on habitat generally. This effort is laudable, but it still does not allow scoring above 80 for this PI, and the (post-site-visit) widely advertised concern of stakeholders and scientists that the South African MPA network might be under threat from operators in other fisheries wishing to gain entrance to areas currently not being exploited generates even more confidence that the maximum score for this PI at the moment can only be 80.
2.4.2 Yes Yes Yes Formal operating license constraints particularly related to gear type mitigate against management totally eliminating the risk of habitat damage by trawling, so any score for this PI above 80 would be impossible for this fishery. The comment above about the recently advertised threat to the South African MPA network is also relevant here. Habitat impacts by trawl gear are virtually guaranteed, so a condition has to be raised to try to improve the situation during the period of certification. I agree with
Comments on scoring noted. We have
corrected the error concerning the
condition numbers that relate to this
PI.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 242
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
that requirement. Once again I think there is an error in the draft I have – I believe the final line of PI 2.4.2 should refer to Conditions 3 and 5, not just to 3.
2.4.3 Yes Yes n/a Relevant information is being and has been collected in the past, sufficient to support the score awarded of 85, but no more at this point in time.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.5.1 Yes Yes n/a Information collection and analysis over the years has been excellent, resulting in better-than-normal understanding of structure and function within the SA ecosystem within which the fishery operates. The score of 100 is totally supported by the information provided in the report.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.5.2 Yes Yes n/a With any trawl fishery it is impossible to guarantee that there will be absolutely no impact on ecosystem structure or function, but there are measures and a partial strategy
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 243
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
in place to mitigate any impact; the authors of the report highlight the main ones. The score of 90 is supported.
2.5.3 Yes Yes n/a As stated above, South Africa has been privileged to have been served over the years by some outstanding proponents of ecosystem research. The UoC fishery therefore benefits from this, and the understanding of the benthic and demersal parts of the ecosystem is such that a high score of 95 can be supported.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.1.1 Yes Yes n/a South African legislation has been produced to high international standards, many Acts being comparatively recent so having been able to be built on good international practice, and the report outlines the overall framework within which the legislation takes effect. Within South Africa, however, political questions are still being asked about the access rights of those traditionally dependent
Comment noted. No action required.
We note the comment about access
rights of those traditionally dependent
on fishing for their livelihood. This is
addressed in our comments under SId,
where we note that the nature of the
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 244
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
upon the fishery for their livelihood (the second bullet of 3.1.1). Such questions are political and based upon historical national decisions, however, and should not affect the scoring of the team as 100 for this PI.
hake fishery is that it has only been
prosecuted since the advent of
mechanised trawlers capable of fishing
in the deep waters inhabited by the
hake species. There was no traditional
or artisanal hake fishery in the deep
water before this.
3.1.2 Yes Yes n/a This PI is easy to score, and the assessment team found ample proof of the openness of the consultation processes. In particular I note the impressive international manner in which P1 discussions lead to suggestions and potential improvements that are then opened to broad consultation nationally. Few established fisheries enjoy such a broad and transparent airing of methodology and data so regularly.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.1.3 Yes Yes n/a South Africa’s management policy for this fishery (and indeed all its fisheries) has clearly been developed to be consistent with
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 245
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
the MSC’s Principles and Criteria, and the precautionary approach is subsumed in all management decision-making. Hence, with a single scoring issue, this PI scores 100.
3.1.4 Yes Yes n/a It is here that the comments made above in 3.1.1 about political questioning are manifest most strongly. The whole South African fishing rights allocation process can destabilize a fishery by undermining confidence in future access prospects. It will take many years for this problem to work its way through the client fishery, although it is in other South African fisheries that the problem is at its worst. For the client fishery, however, a score of 80 is justified.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.2.1 Yes n/a The assessment team correctly score this PI at 80 for both of MSC Principles 1 and 2, but point out that some of the P2 objectives are too generic to allow them to be evaluated against fixed time-scales. The partial score of
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 246
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
80 for P2 and 100 for P1 MSC principles is therefore correct (overall score 90).
3.2.2 Yes Yes n/a There is an interesting spelling of “hiccough” here! Notwithstanding, the issues raised by the assessment team, such as the inability of the government agency to guarantee the future of the observer programme and its inability to maintain its dedicated sea-based survey programme, on which the assessment is largely based (SI 3.2.2b), do mitigate against a full-house score for this PI. Hopefully, both these important issues can be addressed in the near future.
The spelling has been corrected, but
we have favoured “hiccup” over
“hiccough”.
We note the concerns raised here. Our
findings at the site visit were that AT
PRESENT the observer coverage is
adequate. During the previous period
of certification we generated new
conditions in response to concerns
about the adequacy of observer
coverage and monitoring of the
fishery. We will keep this particular
issue under scrutiny.
We note the endorsement of our
scoring and the caveats we have used
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 247
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
in our rationale.
3.2.3 Yes Maybe Perhaps there should be one
Compliance seems to be good, and effective sanctions are available in national legislation. Like the team, however, I do have a problem here. The objective of this MSC PI is to ensure that there is an effective MCS system in place. The government agency “apparently” understands this necessity (for all its fisheries), but its investment in maintaining its system at the high level needed for this fishery (a distant-water one) is seemingly lacking. Two of the patrol vessels (50%) were out of commission during the site visit (and at-sea MCS other than VMS is crucial for this deep-sea fishery), and the trained staff component essential to supporting the whole system is very thin on the ground. Given those limitations, I question whether SG “a” can score 80 – is the system actually operative at the level required by MSC Principles. I have no problems with the other scorings for this PI, but at the very least I believe that a
We note the concerns raised here. We
found that at the time of the site visit
the MCS system was recovering from
a difficult period and that the systems
in place (just) met the SG80
requirements. We now understand
that 3 out of the 4 patrol vessels are
operational.
Whilst noting and largely agreeing
with the reviewer’s comments, we
consider that the SG80 requirements
are fully met.
We have responded to the comments
made here by making a
recommendation that effective
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 248
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
recommendation on the compliance capacity needs to be raised by the assessment team, if the decision is still that PI3.2.3a does warrant a score of 80. It possibly does, but I need convincing that the government agency really is providing the MCS system the client fishery needs to meet international best practice.
compliance measures should be
implemented, and noting that evidence
to demonstrate progress with this
particular issue will be sought at future
surveillance audits.
3.2.4 Yes Yes n/a As above, the questionable commitment of the government agency to implementing the comprehensive research plan that is certainly in place mitigates against scoring PI3.2.4a above 80. The plan itself is good and it is reviewed internationally, so it is only in the implementation where this PI fails to score a full-house 100.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.2.5 Yes Yes n/a The full-house score is entirely justified for this PI. The review process in place is better and more effective than for many certified fisheries, and the client and government agency (and its contractors) deserve credit for this.
Comments noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 249
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 250
Any Other Comments
Comments Conformity Assessment Body Response
I said initially that this is a complex fishery, and I stand by that statement. I have
raised a couple of issues in my narrative above, and I hope that they will be
addressed in the consideration phase that follows this. My problem with what I see is
simply that everything seems to be in place for the fishery to sail through this
recertification, but there are several areas where actual implementation, or
commitment to implementation, is lacking. This aspect really does need to be looked
at, and the MSC process offers a fantastic opportunity for that to happen.
These comments are noted. We have noted that the client (SADSTIA &
SECIFA) have been proactive in their response to management issues over
the past 10 years, and our scoring reflects this. The continued commitment
of the RSA government to the management of the fishery will be vital to
secure compliance with MSC standards throughout the next period of
certification.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 251
For reports using the Risk-Based Framework:
Performance
Indicator
Does the report
clearly explain
how the process
used to
determine risk
using the RBF
led to the stated
outcome?
Yes/No
Are the RBF risk
scores well-
referenced?
Yes/No
Justification:
Please support your answers by referring to specific
scoring issues and any relevant documentation
where possible. Please attach additional pages if
necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body Response:
1.1.1
NA NA NA The RBF has not been used for this fishery.
2.1.1
2.2.1
2.4.1
2.5.1
For reports assessing enhanced fisheries:
Does the report clearly evaluate any additional impacts that might arise
from enhancement activities?
Yes/No Conformity Assessment Body Response:
Justification:
NA
This is not an enhanced fishery.
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 252
16.1.2 Peer Reviewer B
Overall Opinion
Has the assessment team arrived at an
appropriate conclusion based on the evidence
presented in the assessment report?
Yes Conformity Assessment Body
Response
Whilst numerous points for clarification and possible
shortcomings have been identified, I do not anticipate that any
of them will prove show-stoppers. Even where changes in
scores have been suggested, or might be appropriate
following revision of text, I doubt that any of them will be
sufficient to affect to overall results and conclusion. On this
basis, and subject to the report being strengthened were
necessary (principally with respect to habitats), I am happy to
support this report and its recommendation for certification.
Comment noted. No action required.
If included:
Do you think the client action plan is sufficient
to close the conditions raised?
Yes/No Conformity Assessment Body
Response
On balance, the proposed actions plans appear appropriate for Comment noted. No action required.
Do you think the condition(s) raised are
appropriately written to achieve the SG80
outcome within the specified timeframe?
Yes Conformity Assessment Body
Response
Subject to the CAB response to comments relating to 2.4.1
and 2.4.3, the condition set on 2.4.2 made need modifying to
cover 2.4 as a whole.
On balance, the conditions set seem appropriate for the
shortcomings identified but the conditions relating to habitats
and ETP species would benefit from some clarification and
possible minor additions.
1. All observers should be required to record all bird and ETP interactions (i.e. direct strikes and presence below but astern of the headline).
2. It would be helpful if all observers (and ideally skippers in the official logbook) recorded the occurrence of all macrobenthos in the trawl (e.g. coral, sponges, seapens). This would help to build a more detailed picture of the distribution of potentially sensitive and vulnerable species.
The comments relating to PI 2.4.1 have
been addressed in the scoring rationale
for the PI and the text relating to habitat
interactions.
The comments relating to observing
ETP and habitat interactions are noted.
Our understanding is that observers are
being trained to monitor and record bird
interactions, but that it is unlikely that all
observers will be trained (and
questionable whether this is actually
necessary, providing that fishing trips
are adequately sampled to provide a
sufficiently accurate overview of
impacts).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 253
meeting the conditions set.
General Comments on the Assessment Report (optional)
The main text of the report is clearly written and logical in its presentation, which makes it easy to
follow despite the involvement of two species and, notionally, two fleets. Insofar as there are
significant omissions of information from the report, they concern the description of habitats.
Although a variety of habitat types has been identified and listed, the information is limited to
substrata and topography; there is no information on what biota characterise these habitats, its relative
abundance or distribution. In particular, no indication is given as to where upright fragile species,
species that are most vulnerable to trawl activity, might be found. In view of the condition that has
been set with respect to habitats, it is possible that this information is still not available, in which case
the point should be made clearly and explicitly in the appropriate section of the text report and be
reflected in the scores. Not unrelated to this point is the omission of any description of the trawl gear
used, in particular the ground gear (doors, sweeps and foot rope). This has relevance to the potential
effect that trawling may have on any particular habitat type, including whether or not it is feasible to
trawl in a particular habitat. It is essential that these shortcomings are rectified.
IFC Comment: We have provided more information in the report and scoring rationales about habitat
types and fishing gear to the report to clarify these points.
Other specific points are listed below:
PDF page no. Comment
General Numerous typographic errors and presentational inconsistencies have been drawn to the
assessment team’s attention.
IFC Comment: We have addressed all of the comments provided in an annotated
version of the report submitted by the peer reviewer.
Principle 1
S 5.1; p 23 “They are the dominant predator in the demersal niche.”
Is this an opinion or an established fact? If fact, it would be appropriate to support it with
a reference.
IFC Comment: Reference added.
Legend Fig 5 The nature of the ‘surveys’ is unclear; are they research-vessel surveys and what is the
significance of ‘Africana’? As it happens, I know that it is the principal RSA research
vessel but this should be made explicit for other reviewers who may be less familiar with
such things, not least because it receives many further references throughout the report.
IFC Comment: Caption modified accordingly.
P 32 The paragraph below Fig 5: this might be the place (or better still, earlier when research
surveys are first mentioned) to say a word or two about Africana and Nansen for readers
who are not familiar with the global research –vessel fleet. As far as I am aware, the
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 254
Nansen is a Norwegian RV normally associated with UN/FAO projects in developing
countries. Where does she fit into the RSA scheme of things?
IFC Comment: The Nansen is indeed the Norwegian vessel. The details of how or
why this vessel was used in South African waters is not relevant to the
assessment outcome. The text simply illustrates that there have been
some challenges in the provision of adequate research vessel coverage
over recent years, but that solutions were found.
P 34 ‘While the baseline assessment is now species-species, a species combined---‘ Is this
correct, or should it be species-specific?
IFC Comment: This was a typographic error and has been corrected.
P 35 S5.6 Management plan: a key factor of any management plan that does not come across
clearly is what action, if any, will be taken if the (M. paradoxus) stock goes into (a
sustained) decline. We are told that the current OMP has an inter-year limit on variation
in TAC of 10%, but what if stock decline demands more than this?
IFC Comment: The design of the OMP at each renewal (4-5 years) takes stock status
into account, leaning towards the weaker stock (in this case paradoxus)
in terms of setting TACs that ensure that there is a small probability
that the resource declines any time within that time frame. In the event
of a stock decline, the OMP will respond to this (as it did for paradoxus
over the last 10 years), since a main aim is to ensure profitable catch
rates. Thus, stock sustainability and fishery viability act in harmony.
S 5.7, p 37 “---stock assessment procedures, in which the assessors choose a “base case” that reflects
some perception of median or mean tendency of the status of the stock---“. I confess that
I am far from certain that I understand what this means.
IFC Comment: That is why we suggest “that readers wishing to skip this technical
section should move forward to section 5.7.9”
Principle 2
P 53 What is a ‘joint product’? Is it simply unsorted catch that is landed (p 78, S6.2.7)? A clear
definition at first mention will be helpful.
IFC Comment: The text has been clarified to explain this.
Table 6 Legend: “Catch of non-target species (“bycatch rate”) as a proportion of the catch of the
two hake species, and ranking of the top 5 non-target (i.e. non-hake) species for the
period 2008-13. [Source: Attwood, 2014].” The legend and table column headings appear
to be at odds with each other. If it is the “top 5 non-target (i.e. non-hake) species”, they
should be labelled 1–5 as the hake are the target species. If the current column headings
of 3 – 7 are correct, I don’t understand the table as it implies that hake are 1st and 2
nd non-
target species.
IFC Comment: The legend make sense. The species listed are all non-target species,
and represent the 3rd
, 4th
, 5th
, 6th
and 7th
most abundant retained species after the two
(target) hake species. No change is considered necessary.
P 58 What are St Joseph sharks? The name is not recognised in FishBase.
IFC Comment: They are listed in Table 9. Callorhinchus capensis.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 255
P 78 “The spatial distribution of discarding activity has been determined from observer data
and is shown in Figure 28.” I think that the assessors should express some opinion or
draw some conclusion from what is shown in Fig 28 rather than leave it hanging for the
reader to drawn their own conclusions, conclusions that might be at odds with what the
authors think.
IFC Comment: Comment noted. A brief description has been added.
Fig 27 What are ‘horse fish’? They are not mentioned anywhere in the text.
IFC Comment: they are Congiopodus torvus. We have now mentioned this in the
text.
P 80 “Observations carried out during 2004 and 2005 aboard SADSTIA trawlers suggested
that around 18,000 birds were killed annually in the fishery (Watkins et al, 2008).” If ‘the
fishery’ is the trawl hake fishery, I think ‘trawl hake’ should be inserted so that there is
no misunderstanding. To many readers, albatross mortality is associated with longline
fisheries rather than trawling.
IFC Comment: We have modified the text to remove any possible ambiguity.
Similarly, does “Albatross mortality is now considered to be negligible (83 birds in 2010)
(Maree et al, 2014)” relate specifically to the trawl fishery?
IFC Comment: We have modified the text to remove any possible ambiguity.
P 82 “the fishing industry commissioned two dedicated seabird observers in 2012”. Is there
any reason why all fishery observers should not be required to record bird mortalities?
IFC Comment: It is our understanding that this task requires considerable training and
it may be impractical to train all fishery observers for this work.
P 84 “The frequency and nature of interactions with different bird species over this period is
shown in Table 11.” Some explanatory text should be added. It is far from clear what
constitutes a ‘high’ (medium or low) interaction other than the legend says that a ‘high’
interaction is more likely to result in death.
IFC Comment: The legend of Table 11 explains the different levels of interaction..
P 87 Sooty shearwater Puffinus griseus
“---the harvesting of its young---“. Who by; South Africa? Whichever it is make it clear.
If it is SA, it must lead to a condition.
IFC Comment: We have modified the text to make it clear that the hake trawl fishery
is not connected with harvesting of young sooty shearwaters.
P 88 “--- inshore trawl fishery in the late 1880s to the current extent of the fishery ---” – 1880
or 1980?
IFC Comment: 1880 is correct. In fact the first record of trawling was in 1878.
P 94 Fig 35 At normal screen page size there only appears to be a single no-take MPA whereas there
are more than that; e.g. under the ‘Port’ of Port Elizabeth. It would be helpful to give
some additional indication (arrows perhaps) as to where these sites are
IFC Comment: We have replaced the map with a higher resolution version which
makes the location and name of the MPAs clearer.
S 6.4 Habitat Interactions – it would be helpful, I think if something was said about how the
authorities propose to monitor and enforce the no-trawl zones, both existing and
experimental areas. Without such an explanation one might think that the whole scheme
is dependent on good will.
IFC Comment: Compliance with the trawl footprint is a licence condition.
Numerous habitat types are identified in this section but there is no indication as to how
one or other of them is more or less vulnerable to adverse effects from trawling.
Compared with other trawl fisheries subject to MSC assessment and certification, I have
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 256
no sense of what the vulnerable features are. Are there coral gardens or areas of other
large upright biota; are there extensive areas of sponges that provide complex habitat for
a myriad of other species? The RSA may be a long way off having a detailed map of
seabed habitats (as opposed to substrata) but there must be some idea of what sensitive
and vulnerable species might be found in the various area types named.
IFC Comment: We have amended the text to make it clear that the maps presented are
based on information about marine benthos as well as substrata; they are more like
biotope maps than habitat maps.
In this context, also, it might be helpful to give some indication of exactly what type of
trawls are used. Depending on habitat type, plain footrope, rollers, rock-hopper rig and
tickler-chain ground gear all have different effects.
IFC Comment: We have added some text to section 5.3 of the report in response to
this comment.
Principle 3
P 97 CITES is of specific relevance wrt ETP species; is RSA a signatory?
IFC Comment: Good point. Yes it is. We have now mentioned this in the text.
Monitoring, Control and Compliance - to ensure that fish resources are protected through
--- other relevant equipment and systems---“. What are these? Does it include VMS or is
it wholly dependent on happenchance surveillance by patrol boats (and aircraft)? If
necessary, cross-reference to 7.7.
IFC Comment: The text has been amended in response to this comment.
P 101 If skippers are expected to record seabird mortalities on their logbooks, why (as far as we
can tell from this text) do the fishery observers not keep a record? Without observer data
to cross reference with skippers’ logs, how can the logbook data be verified?
IFC Comment: Yes they do. The text has been amended in response to this comment.
With respect to compliance: is there any post-hoc monitoring through auditing of sales
(and export) records for comparison with logbook declared landings?
IFC Comment: Yes there is. We have amended the text to make this clear.
S 7.8 IUU: the 10 IUU vessels may not have been engaged in the hake fishery but were they
SA-registered vessels? If they were, it would suggest that the monitoring, compliance and
control still leaves something to be desired. If they were all non-SA registered vessels, it
would be as well to make this clear.
IFC Comment: We don’t agree with the reasoning. If there was no evidence of IUU
being detected this could also show that MCS implementation is not working. The flag
state of the vessels is irrelevant. What is relevant is that IUU fishing was detected and
punished, and it did not involve vessels in the UoC.
Conditions
P 105 It is noted that one condition has yet to be closed. It should be noted that this condition
relates to the final points raised above under P2.
IFC Comment: Noted.
P 126 Proposed new condition 3 & 5: Is there any reason why this could not be expanded to
include a requirement for observers (and possibly skipper) to record what non-fish biota
are retained in the trawl and brought onto the deck? Such an approach might help
improve the knowledge of what species and habitats are to be found where.
IFC Comment: Although this is a good idea, the condition is focussed on management
of habitat impacts rather than information (which scores more than SG80).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 257
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 258
Performance Indicator Review
Please complete the table below for each Performance Indicator which are listed in the Conformity Assessment Body’s Public Certification Draft
Report.
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
1.1.1 MP
Yes Yes Yes but see comment.
The information presented is relevant and clear. The condition is appropriate providing recruitment continues to hold up. In the event that poor recruitment results in a downturn in SSB it is not immediately obvious what management action will be taken to maintain stock-rebuilding conditions.
This issue was recognised by both peer
reviewers. There is a stock rebuilding
strategy in place for M. paradoxus that
it is effective (PI 1.1.3 scores 90), and
the condition is continued
implementation of the rebuilding
strategy within the OMP, which has
projected that the M. paradoxus stock
to will reach its target reference point
before 2020 (i.e. within the five year
period of certification). In the event
that there is an unexpected downturn
in recruitment (the assessment
incorporates a stock recruitment
model), the design of the OMP will
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 259
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
respond to this (as it did for paradoxus
over the last 10 years), since a main
aim is to ensure profitable catch rates.
1.1.1 MC
Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
1.1.2 MP + MC
Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
1.1.3 MP
Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
1.2.1 Yes Not entirely N/A I have reservations about scoring 100 for 1.2.1a principally because it is not immediately obvious how the OMP would respond to a (sustained) decline in SSB other than limit inter-year changes in TAC to 10%. What if this is not enough?
See comments against 1.1.1
1.2.2 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 260
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
relevant and clear; it even includes a comment under 1.2.2a acknowledging the concerns expressed above under 1.2.1.
1.2.3 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear but see comments made earlier concerning the origins of IUU catches. Under guidepost c it is stated that “IUU fishing is reliably estimated to be negligible” but nowhere in this report is the derivation of this reliable estimate explained. The information given in S7.8 hardly supports the contention that estimates are reliable. A score of 90 might be more appropriate.
Information from DAFF on IUU
vessels has shown no hake in catches.
The text has been amended to help
clarify this.
1.2.4 Yes No N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.1.1 Yes No N/A The final score is probably correct but the This is a good observation.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 261
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
inclusion of species that do not meet the 5% threshold (or other criteria for main retained species) is confusing – would it be clearer if the two UoC be separated? Specifically – Silver kob: it is said that an annual catch of
c. 200 t by the hake trawlers is unlikely to affect the kob stock. This seems at odds with the evidence presented earlier (Fig 20) that suggest the kob stock is little more than 200 t. Either this needs to be reflected in the scoring here or more information is needed to support this conclusion.
Our text explains that the data on non-
target catch from the inshore area has
some limitations. One of these is that
the analysis of inshore trawl catches
does not distinguish catches from the
Agulhas sole trawl fishery and the
inshore hake trawl fishery. Most of
the silver kob catch is reported to be
landed from the sole fishery.
The text states that the silver kob stock
was estimates at 447t in 2010, and not
“little more than 200t”. We have also
asked the client to confirm stock
status, and have been provided with an
additional source of information
(Winker et al, 2012), which estimates
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 262
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
the silver kob stock at just over 7,500t.
We have cited this information in the
report and the scoring rationale.
The catch distribution (Figure 21)
clearly shows that the main catches of
silver kob are taken both inshore and
to the east of the hake fishing grounds.
We have revised the text to make it
clearer that the abundance of silver
kob in the hake trawl fishery is an
artefact of the data. The score is
considered to be appropriate.
2.1.2 No No N/A Notwithstanding the statement (2.1.1) that the authors do not wish to comment further
We have in fact made further
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 263
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
on silver kob, see comment above re 2.1.1. If the trawl catch for silver kob is c. 200 t p.a. and the current stock abundance is ≥200 t (Fig 20), it is possible that 2.1.2a only just clears 60 rather than 80.
comments about silver kob in this
scoring rationale, and consider that the
scoring is appropriate.
2.1.3 Yes Yes N/A Agreed – subject to clarification with respect to kob stock and catch figures.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.2.1 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.2.2 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.2.3 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 264
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
2.3.1 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.3.2 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.3.3 Yes Yes Yes The information presented is relevant and clear. A score less than 80 is undoubtedly correct but 70 seems a little harsh. With respect to Condition and action plan: I am still unclear whether it is intended to increase just the number of bird observers or whether recording trawl interactions with birds (or, indeed, any ETP species) is to become a routine aspect of the standard observers’ role. I think it should be the latter.
2.4.1 No No Possible condition required
Despite the statement that there is “a good understanding of both the distribution and sensitivity of marine habitats,” the report is
We have added some more
background information in the report,
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 265
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
remarkably coy about presenting any detail. Some information is presented with respect to the relative quantities of various substrata but there is no information about sensitivity to trawl action, and certainly none about the distribution of sensitive or vulnerable benthic species. Without some detail on this, and reassurance that current trawling is not (continueing to) razing all upright species, I fear the rationale does not support a score of 80.
particularly to correct the perception
that the habitat maps are based solely
on seabed substratum; they are based
upon a classification that also takes
account of marine benthos. The text
explains that the vulnerability and
sensitivity of these habitats has been
assessed (in detail in the report by Sink
et al, which is available on the
internet). We have presented a brief
summary of the key findings of this
work, and also presented figures that
support the conclusions drawn in the
report.
2.4.2 Y Y Y Comments at 2.4.1 above still apply re 2.4.2b Comments noted. Our revisions to the
report address this issue.
2.4.3 N N Possible condition The summary of Sink’s (2013) work given in We have revised the report to correct
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 266
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
required the report work only identifies the types of substratum or topographical features. Whilst these are a fundamental part of habitats, the distribution of upright macro benthos such as corals, sea-pen communites, bivalve reefs and sponge beds all provide habitat for other species and therefore are part of the total habitat. It is this part of the overall picture that is missing from the report and scoring.
the perception that the Sink et al report
is limited to a classification based
solely on substratum and topography.
It also takes account of information
available about benthic communities.
2.5.1 No No N/A The concerns about habitat expressed above cast a slight shadow over this PI but the principal concern is with the dependence on modelling the (cold-water) Benguela system. Strictly speaking, this system is to the west of the Cape Agulhas and one might (reasonably) assume that the south-flowing, warm-water Agulhas Current system to the east of the cape might have different characteristics. Even if the (not unreasonable) assumption is made that the
These comments are noted. The hake
stocks are dependent inhabit deep,
colder water rather than the warm
surface waters of the Agulhas current.
We have added text to the report to
clarify this point.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 267
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
Benguela system modelling is a reliable surrogate (in broad principles at least) for the (eastern) Agulhas system, the division merits explicit mention with an appropriate moderation of scores owing to the lack of site-specific information to the east..
2.5.2 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
2.5.3 Yes Yes N/A Agreed but comments at 2.5.1 are relevant.. Comments noted, and addressed by the
clarification added to the scoring of PI
2.5.1.
3.1.1 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.1.2 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 268
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
3.1.3 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.1.4 Yes Yes N/A Agreed but it might be argued that the penalties that can be incurred for non-compliance with the management regime are an incentive, albeit a negative incentive, with respect to 3.1.4a.
We have amended the text in response
to this comment.
3.2.1 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.2.2 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear. It might be helpful to include the SADISTIA fishery-related web page given in the references.
Comment noted. We have added the
link to the SADSTIA website in the
references.
3.2.3 Yes Yes N/A Agreed – but see earlier comments about cross referencing declared (logbook) catches with sales records.
We have amended the text in response
to this comment. We have also added
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 269
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
text concerning the performance of the
MCS regime and have generated a
recommendation about this, in
response to the earlier comments.
3.2.4 Yes Yes N/A Agreed. The information presented is relevant and clear.
Comment noted. No action required.
3.2.5 No No N/A An account has been given of how the science of stock assessment is subject to (international) review and, arguably, the relevant OMP, but are there ‘mechanisms to evaluate all parts of the management system. For example, it is not clear how the performance of the MCS arm of management is reviewed, not least with respect the ongoing problem of out-of-action patrol vessels. What is the review procedure with respect to habitats and ecosystem? Unless it can be shown that the non-fish science and MCS parts of the management
We have amended the text to make it
clear that all of the management
system (including MCS) is subject to
review.
Sufficient evidence is presented in the
scoring rationales for the
“management” aspects of Principle 2
to demonstrate that the management of
ecosystem impacts (i.e. on non-target
fish species, ETP species and marine
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 270
Performance
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)
Justification Please support your answers by referring to specific scoring issues and any relevant documentation where possible. Please attach additional pages if necessary.
Conformity Assessment Body
Response
regime are subject to equally rigorous internal and external review, a score of 80 would seem more appropriate.
habitats) is kept under review. We
have amended the text to make this
clear.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 271
Any Other Comments
Comments Conformity Assessment Body Response
No comments.
No action required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 272
17 STAKEHOLDER SUBMISSIONS
17.1 Stakeholder interviews conducted during the site visit
During the site visit in March 2014, the assessment team met with and interviewed the client and key
stakholders in Cape Town. A summary of each meeting was compiled by the team and sent to each
stakeholder for comment and revision. The edited versions of each interview are reproduced below.
The interview records are presented in alphabetical order.
17.1.1 Bird Life South Africa
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location Cape Town, South
Date 17th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Bronwyn Maree BirdLife South Africa
Melanie Smith Capfish (observer)
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
BirdLife South Africa (BLSA) is an environmental NGO and the largest (and only) bird conservation
organization in South Africa. BLSA is the local partner of BirdLife International and was the first to
initiate an Albatross Task Force team in 2006. Recently BLSA has also become a member of the
Responsible Fisheries Alliance.
BLSA is responsible for drawing up the Bird Mitigation Plans required by fishing vessels in South
Africa (in collaboration with the fishing industry).
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 273
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 274
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
The key issues considered during the meeting are set out in the letter submitted by BLSA to the
assessment team. The discussion is summarised below.
Bird bycatch and mitigation measures
BLSA are shortly due to publish a paper which shows a reduction of overall bird mortality by
90% and albatross mortality by 96% over the period 2006-2010. This is largely due to the use
of tori lines and also the reduction of fishing effort.
BLSA is confident that Tori Lines are being used by the vast majority of the fleet.
Observer programme
BLSA were concerned that the government observer programme (OROP) had not yet been
reinstated (it was understood that the contract for this was out for tender). Although in the
past the observers collected mainly fish-related data, the new programme seeks to also collect
bird-related data.
Currently BLSA continue to collect the majority of seabird-related data within the fishery.
BLSA noted the level of coverage achieved by SADSTIA, but felt that it could be improved
by:-
o Training of more observers to monitor birds (there is currently only one trained
observer in seabird data collection in the SADSTIA programme).
SADSTIA observer data was being made available to BLSA.
BLSA have 3 observers working on trawl vessels; observer effort is focused/increased during
winter months (due to higher bird abundance) when they aim for each observer to work 21
days every two months. During summer months BLSA observers average about 6 days per
month observed.
BLSA observers had made incidental observations of occasional capture of seals (which are
returned alive) and other species such as cat sharks. Some benthic animals (such as starfish)
were observed, but no cold water corals.
Compliance at sea
BLSA were concerned about the level of at-sea and aerial compliance and enforcement
activity in the fishery.
Bird Mitigation Plans
BLSA are responsible for drawing up BMPs for fishing vessels.
BLSA were concerned that they were not being asked to inspect new trawl warps (as outlined
and agreed upon in the BMPs).
All BMPs require that sticky warps (i.e. warps with high grease & bitumen coating) should
not be used.
o Observations aboard vessels suggest that sticky warps are not being used in general,
although one vessel has been observed with sticky warps recently.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 275
Inshore fleet
There is no observer programme in place for the inshore fleet (considered by BLSA to be
those vessels permitted to work in water less than 110m deep as well as in deeper water).
Observer coverage for this fleet should be provided by the government OROP which has not
been operational for several years.
There are currently no BMPs in place for the inshore fleet
BLSA are not aware of the level of use of tori lines by the inshore fleet.
The main bird interaction with the inshore fleet is likely to be with Cape Gannets which
occasionally become entangled in nets but may include offshore/pelagic seabirds as well
Seabird bycatch within this fishery is unknown.
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Update on current level of interaction between the fishery and birds.
Update on observer coverage for bird interactions.
Any other issues that BLSA wish to discuss.
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
BLSA offered to provide:-
An update on the background information on seabirds in this fishery set out in the previous
assessment report.
A copy of the publication in press concerning bird bycatch in the trawl fishery, when this is
available.
A template of a bird mitigation plan.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 276
17.1.2 CapFish
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location Capfish Offices, Cape Town
Date 21st March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Melanie Smith Capfish
Sarah Wilkinson Capfish
Victor Ngcongo Capfish
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
Capricorn Fisheries Monitoring (CapFish) is an international marine monitoring and fisheries
consulting group based in Cape town, South Africa. We train and deploy marine observers for South
African and global maritime activities. The Company works closely with our national marine
management authorities as well as with Regional and International Fisheries Management
organizations (RFMOs). Our activities also working directly with fishers, hydrocarbon exploitation
(i.e. seismic activities) phosphate mining companies and Non-Governmental Organisations such as
WWF, Birdlife and many other groups. Our goal is to provide a professional service supporting both
management and science to maintain the long-term sustainability of marine resources.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 277
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
Observer programme
The procedures associated with the SADSTIA observer programme were explained. These
encourage representative sampling, which are summarised in a document presented to the
team.
o Capfish has 27 SADSTIA dedicated observers, which are allocated at random to
vessels leaving from their local port.
o 2 observers are trained to observe interactions with birds (monitored according to a
protocol which looks at seabird-fishing gear interactions while nets are being set,
during trawling, and whilst hauling the gear). Observations are made for the number
and nature of interactions, and the number of birds observed in the vicinity of the
vessel.
o All observers are fully trained to sample the catch according to a sampling protocol as
well as record catch and effort data, gear and equipment information and
environmental data.
o During a fishing trip, observers take a random sample from each net haul and
examine and measure the species composition of the unsorted catch.
o Most of the observer effort is directed at the offshore fleet; there is less observer
coverage for the inshore fleet.
The OROP observer programme ran from 2002-2011 and covered both the offshore and
inshore fleets.
Discard monitoring
Discard-dedicated sampling took place from 2002-06. Discard monitoring since 2006 has
been sporadic.
Some discard monitoring took place in 2013, in response to comments made by the
International Peer Review Panel. To date, 23 trawl hauls have been sampled, for discard
monitoring .
Otherwise, a comparison between observer catch data and commercial landings data has been
used to identify discarded species and estimate the quantities discarded.
Distinctions between inshore and offshore fleets
The inshore fleet fishes on the Agulhas Bank and uses lighter gear than the offshore fleet.
The inshore fleet is composed of vessels smaller than 30m LOA, which are permitted to fish
in waters shallower than 110m. These vessels are also permitted to use cod-end mesh size of
less than 90mm in these waters.
The results of observer sampling have not been split between the inshore and offshore fleets,
but this can be done.
Trawl ring-fencing
The trawling footprint is based on fishing position records from 1998-2008 and was
implemented in 2009.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 278
A MaxSea file showing the ring-fence boundary was issued to all vessels for use with fishing
vessel navigation equipment.
Compliance is monitored by DAFF using VMS records from the fleet: however, compliance
with the ring-fence is currently does not form part of permit conditions.
Experimental area
The benthic impact experimental area was chosen to be within an area that was heavily
trawled, contained specific seabed habitats, was in a certain depth range, and would be easily
accessed by both patrol and research vessels.
The experimental area is divided into 5 lanes
The location of the boundary of the experimental area has been distributed to all vessels as a
MaxSea file for use in vessel plotters.
The trawl track information was used to optimise the experimental area boundary.
Hake longline fishery
Capfish are working with the hake longline fishery as part of a Fishery Improvement
Programme endorsed by WWF with the aim of improving the performance of this fishery
with respect to the MSC standard.
Observer trips have taken place on 6 vessels to date, as part of a process of developing
protocols for catch monitoring and observing seabird and seal interactions in this fleet.
Information is being provided to help minimise gear conflict with trawlers (e.g. providing
coordinates of longline sets to trawl operators).
The longline fishery footprint is known and catch composition data are available.
Information on seal depredation and damage to the catch, and seabird interactions (which are
chiefly feeding on offal) has been recorded.
A code of conduct for responsible fishing practices has been developed to enforce compliance
with management recommendations and permit conditions..
Observer catch and length data have been provided for use in the hake stock assessment.
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Update on observer programme and any scientific / monitoring work carried out by Capfish
which may be relevant to the MSC assessment.
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
Capfish agreed to split the observer records for discarded fish so that fishing by the inshore
fleet and offshore fleet could be distinguished.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 279
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 280
17.1.3 Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location DAFF offices, Cape Town, South Africa
Date 19th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Mortimer Mannya Deputy Director General, Fisheries Management
Kim Prochazka Director, Resource Research
Deon Durholtz Scientist, Hake Research
Saasa Pheeha Director, Fisheries Management
Nambulelo Magqira Communications
Dennis Frederiks ACD, MRM
Ceba Mtoba CD, MCS
Belamane Semole ACD, CRD
Bernard Liedemann Acting Director, Fisheries Patrol Vessels
Nkosinathe Dana Director, Monitoring & Surveillance
Xolela Wellem Control & compliance
Andile Mosheni ADD – FPV
Thabiso Maratsane ADD – FPV
Martin Purves Marine Stewardship Council (Observer).
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
The Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) are the government department
responsible for managing the hake fishery.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 281
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
Government Policy
The government is working to achieve inclusive growth in all sectors of the economy as part
of its fight against poverty and illegal activity.
There is a growth and development plan to ensure that there is wide participation and benefit
from the natural resources of South Africa whilst ensuring that industry remains competitive.
The government is committed to the sustainable use of shared natural resources as part of its
commitments to international conventions.
South Africa is committed to collaboration with international partners in the fields of
enforcement and research.
It is important to strengthen governance arrangements.
DAFF are developing new plans and policies and will be implementing a rolling 5 year plan
for fisheries.
DAFF acknowledge that there have been problems with research and enforcement vessels in
recent years and have now taken steps to return them to operation.
The government has recently amended the Marine Living Resources Act to establish new
measures to encourage the development of small scale fisheries that will provide
opportunities for meaningful participation of previously excluded people.
Marine Stewardship Council Certification
There was some discussion of how more fisheries in South Africa might be put forward for
MSC assessment and certification.
It was noted that there could be opportunities for pre-assessment of fisheries if funding was
available to meet the associated costs. Pre-assessment could lead to either full assessment or
alternatively the development of a Fishery Improvement Programme for the fishery.
Operation of management systems
The operation and effectiveness of the management systems for the fishery were discussed. The main
points discussed were.
Observer programme
o The tender process for reinstating the OROP observer programme was still underway.
o Funds have been allocated for the observer programme in the budget.
CPUE data
o The process for gathering, inputting and checking data was explained and discussed.
o Log book and landings and length data are inputted to a database, and this
information was appropriately validated before use in management.
o Data are usually input and available for use in the assessment within 6 months.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 282
Stock surveys
o The industry vessel Andromeda is being used to carry out stock surveys in the
absence of the DAFF research vessel FRS Africana, which is currently undergoing
major refitting and repairs. It is anticipated that the Africana will be available during
the second half of 2014.
o DAFF scientists have borrowed an instrument package from the BCC for CTD
monitoring that can be attached to the headline of the trawl to gather environmental
data; DAFF now plan to modify an existing CTD for used in this manner.
o Hake ageing – the Department’s full time otolith ageing technician has been
concentrating on on hake ageing.
Decision making processes
The decision making processes for the fishery were discussed.
The annual preparation of fishing plans and permit conditions was discussed.
The DAFF fishery manager dedicated to the hake fishery works with the industry to agree and
implement these fishery plans.
The process for agreeing the TAC was explained
o A TAC recommendation is made by the Demersal Scientific Working Group
o This recommendation is considered by the Hake Resource Management Working
Group taking into account factors such as legislation, socio-economics, EAF, and
stock advice.
o The recommendation is then submitted to the decision maker (normally delegated by
the Minister to the Deputy Director General) in line with Departmental protocols.
o The OMP (which already contains consideration of socio-economic factors) cannot
be over-ridden unless in “exceptional circumstances” (under s61 of the MLRA).
o The OMP is agreed and set for a 4 year period.
It was explained that there was a problem including resource managers in the SWG, which
now includes many external stakeholders, which can lead to questions being directed at the
manager which can be a distraction from the purpose of the meeting.
Reorganisation of working group meeting composition and flow of information are being
attended to.
Enforcement & Compliance
The assessment team were shown around the DAFF VMS suite, visited the FPV Sarah Baartman, and
also inspected enforcement records at the DAFF offices.
At sea inspections have been resumed now that patrol vessels have re-entered service (2 of the
4 FPVs are now operational5.
5 Update: prior to the publication of the PCDR it was reported by SADSTIA that 3 out of the 4 FPVs are now
operational
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 283
A file of all patrols at sea was provided, together with records of inspections, infractions and
boardings data.
The VMS suite was fully operational and soon to be upgraded.
DAFF have a compliance auditing plan for all sectors of the fishing industry. The hake
sectors is one of the 4 compliance priorities in South Africa. Over the course of the past year
they aimed to audit 8 of the deep sea trawl fishery rights holders, and 16 of the inshore trawl
fishery rights holders.
During the past year, DAFF enforcement activity directed at the hake fishery had detected
only 7 minor administrative errors, which had been well documented. The vessels had been
fined for these transgressions.
Fishing vessels comply very well with fishery regulations – non compliance can result in the
suspension or loss of fishing rights under s28 of the MLRA
DAFF have recently had significant enforcement successes including:-
o Detecting and apprehending 10 IUU vessels
o Intercepting, seizing and repatriating consignments of illegally shipped fish products
(not hake).
o Mobile scanners are used to inspect the contents of frozen containers.
o 70% of cases brought by DAFF are successful; as part of its work, DAFF officials
provide training to the judiciary and prosecuting counsel about fisheries legislation
and regulation.
Discarding of target species is not allowed; all of the target species have to be landed.
Research
An annotated list of research projects was made available to the team which included
priorities and timeframes.
It was confirmed that this research plan covers all priorities and uncertainties in relation to the
hake fishery.
It was noted a more continuous south coast survey might help to reveal the effects of putative
environmental changes in that area on fish stocks.
Information was provided on some specific areas of research, which were discussed. These
included:-
o The Observer programme
o Multi species modelling / predator-prey / ecosystem effects of the hake fishery
o The implications of including data from Namibia in the hake assessment
o The question of changes in day: night fishing behaviour – data for the past few years
shows no evidence in the ratio of fishing during the day or at night.
o Age validation of hake
o Stock status assessments for non-target species
o Stock identification of both the target and also non target species (using genetics,
parasites, meristics, and further analysis of CPUE data)
o Closure of areas to fishing for the purpose of fisheries management and/or benthic
protection.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 284
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Update on enforcement activity
Update on status of observer programme
Discussion of management procedures
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 285
17.1.4 Marine Resource Assessment and Management Group, MARAM
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location Cape Town, South Africa
Date 18th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Professor Doug Butterworth MARAM-UCT
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
MARAM have developed the assessment models and undertake the OMP revision processes which
underlie the management of the hake resource.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 286
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
Reference Points
The reference points used for the fishery were discussed
Target Reference Point
o This is biomass based; it is not fixed
o The target for the fishery is not Bmsy, but is considered to be compatible with MSC
requirements. Bmsy and Bcurrent/Bmsy estimates are relatively sensitive to
assumptions necessary in the assessment process, but for the median over a range of
assessment models in the reference set that was used to test the current (2010) OMP,
the effective targets are above Bmsy for both M capensis and M paradoxus.
o The TRP will be subject to review with the development of the new OMP later in
2014.
Limit Reference Point
o LRP is currently fixed at the 2007 biomass for M paradoxus which is the lowest in
the time series.
Commercial CPUE
The stock assessment uses both commercial CPUE and biomass survey data.
An annual 2% increase in commercial CPUE catchability will be included amongst the
robustness tests for the 2014 OMP revision to allow for the possibility of technology creep.
OMP
2014 OMP Review
o The current OMP revision in scheduled for completion in September 2014. This
regular four-year revision provide an opportunity to review alternative stock
management models and their consequences for long term management of both the
risk to the stock and outputs from the fishery.
o It was noted that the outcome of the OMP revision would be an important
consideration in the ongoing MSC certification of the fishery.
Annual operation
o The operation of the OMP to determine the TAC for each year was discussed.
o The OMP, once agreed, allows a TAC to be determined on an objective basis using
updated information about stock status from monitoring indices (survey abundance
estimates and CPUE).
o The transparency to stakeholders and stability provided by the OMP is felt to be a
central component of the sustainable management of the fishery.
o The OMP revision process includes ongoing internal reviews by the Demersal
Scientific Working Group and also reviews of aspects of the process by an
international peer review panel (which meets annually, and will typically consider
hake-related issues on an average of one year in every two.).
Longline catch
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 287
Longline length data since 2000 have recently been included in the assessments and have led
to a decrease in estimated spawning biomass (and also this biomass in relation to Bmsy) for
M. paradoxus in the 2013 assessment.
The longline hake fishery developed in the mid 1990s when vessels that had previously been
fishing for kingklip moved to hake when the directed longline fishery for kingklip was closed.
The fishery initially operated primarily outside areas fished by trawlers, and caught larger fish
than the trawlers.
The longline fishery is understood to be operating in difficult economic conditions at present.
Survey vessel
Africana has not been available for surveys since early in 2012. There is uncertainty about
future availability.
Commercial CPUE data show less variability and consequent have greater weight and
influence in assessment than the survey estimates of abundance; the same holds for the OMP
formulae.
Survey indices are required by the model and the OMP in future, and intercalibration between
the Africana and industry trawlers used for surveys is indicated; however this is not possible
if the Africana is unavailable, and in any case such direct intercalibration tends to yield high
variance results. It has thus been decided, in lieu of intercalibration studies, to include a prior
on the calibration coefficient which centred on 1 and has a CV of 0.169, based on an analysis
of inter-vessel variation in similar surveys in the eastern North Pacific. The OMP review will
consider future scenarios both with and without the Africana available.
Stock identity
The possible sharing the hake stocks of South Africa and Namibia has been under review.
Workshops will be held during the course of 2014 to develop greater clarity on this.
The outcome of these workshop and associated studies was not felt to be likely to affect the
SA stock assessment to a great extent.
The most likely of the scenarios possible is that the the Namibian catch of M. paradoxus
could be producing some effect on the SA M. paradoxus resource that is currently not taken
into account in the assessment.
Non-target species
The status of non-target species in the hake fishery was discussed briefly.
Kingklip
o A full assessment of kingklip is planned to be carried out later in 2014 or in 2015.
o The stock has most recently been assessed using a replacement yield model.
o The model indicates that stock status is improving for both west and south coasts
components of the resource.
Monkfish
o Monkfish stock status is assessed using a replacement yield model.
o Stock status is indicated to be stable or improving.
Silver Cob
o It was suggested that the team should discuss the status of the silver cob stock with
other workers.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 288
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Update on current stock status
The consequences of limited survey data for the stock assessment(due to the problems with
the Africana)
Discuss the procedure for review of the OMP in 2014.
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 289
17.1.5 OLRAC
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 290
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 291
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 292
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 293
17.1.6 South African Deep Sea Trawling Industry Association (SADSTIA) and South East
Coast Inshore Fishing Association (SECIFA)
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location SADSTIA Offices, Cape Town, South Africa
Date 17th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Tim Reddell SADSTIA
Roy Bross SADSTIA
Irvin Esau Sea Harvest
Jon de Gouveia Echalar
Zuko Mgawuli Sea Harvest
Johann Botha Irvin & Johnson
Colin Attwood UCT – Scientist
Kobus Maritz Sea Vana / SECIFA
Craig Bacon Viking / SECIFA
Melanie Smith SADSTIA Co-ordinator
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
SADSTIA and SECIFA operate a representative industrial bodies for the hake trawling industry.
They are also Recognized Industrial Bodies in terms of Section 8 of South Africa’s Living Marine
Resources Act.
Regarding hake, the differentiation is historical and, in present day terms, largely an artifact of the
system of fishing rights. SECIFA derives from small boat (historically) multi-species activities
conducted within 60 fathoms of the shoreline that are now focused on hake. The deep-sea sector has
long been conducted with larger vessels, fishing almost entirely outside territorial waters. Fishing
rights in the deep-sea sector are of longer duration. There are no practical impediments to exercising
inshore hake trawling rights in the offshore sector provided such trawling is conducted under offshore
regulations. The inshore sector enjoys a nominal 7% of the combined hake trawl allocation.
However it is estimated that ±1.2% of trawled hake was caught inshore in 2013.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 294
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
The key issues discussed during the meeting are summarised below.
Benthic survey work
Survey has been carried out using the DAFF research vessel Ellen Khuzwayo
Closed areas were established as part of the research project on 1st January 2014.
Skippers have been provided with comprehensive information about the location of the closed
areas including inputs on their MaxSea navigational systems.
DAFF have been informed of the location of the closed areas and are monitoring it with the
aid of the Department’s vessel observation facilities
Trawl ringfence
o It was confirmed that compliance with the ringfence was monitored for SADSTIA by
DAFF using its Vessel Monitoring System. There had been no transgressions of the
ringfence area since the last Surveillance. Such transgressions as occurred before
2013 have been successfully dealt with by action within SADSTIA.
o SADSTIA noted that the trawl fishery ringfenced area consisted very largely of soft
and gravelly bottom and covered a limited portion of the hake domain.
Benthic closed areas were discussed. The Benthic Task Team had looked at prospects for
establishing closed areas. The site selected for the trawl impact study had been chosen for the
dual purpose of assessing recovery from trawling and also the issues associated with
establishing protected areas. An additional MPA has been established in the inshore area in
the course of 2013.
Non target species
The management of the Precautionary Upper Catch Limits (PUCLs) for non-target species
was discussed.
o All retained species are governed by collective landing limits
o Deep-water species, such as Alfonsino, Grenadiers, Oreo Dories and Roughy are
controlled by small specific landing limits. Governing “prohibited unavoidable
species”
o Trawled Snoek is subject to a move on regulation
o Horse Mackerel, Kingklip and monkfish PUCL controls are an intrinsic part of the
permit conditions for the offshore fleet.
o Kingklip and Monk uptake is monitored on a monthly basis by external auditors
appointed by SADSTIA.
o Vessels and operators in the inshore area are engaged in an experiment to swap a
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 295
range of “retained species” PUCLs to ensure that they remain compliant with
assessed limits.
o Kingklip PUCL uptake during 2013 was higher than expected; this contributed to a
(overdue) review of information about the stock by DAFF. The stock was found to
be in better condition than previously thought.
o SADSTIA consider there is no need to add PUCLs for other non-target species in the
offshore fishery. The PUCL for one retained species, Monkfish, falls on the 5% cusp;
all other retained species fall well below this threshold.
Inshore bycatch data are available since 1995 and research has been done to establish
temporal and spatial patterns.
PUCLs are being trialled voluntarily in the inshore fleet. As part of the trial all vessels had
signed up to a MoU to comply with the PUCL requirements voluntarily. Depending on test
outcomes, measures are planned to be introduced as licence conditions in 2016.
Patterns in bycatch from the offshore fleet for the period 2008-13 have been examined
recently. There are good landings data for the past 25 years for non-target species in the
offshore fishery.
Institutional and administrative arrangements
Scientific and compliance aspects of fishery management were working well.
Recent changes in senior personnel within DAFF were felt to have compromised progress
with decisions about resource allocation and management.
The procedure for allocating TACs in response to scientific advice was discussed. This has
been unaffected by recent changes at DAFF.
A procedure for improved synchronization of trends in assessed TAC and experiential catch
per unit effort was discussed.
The methodology for secondary controls by way of fishing effort controls (horse power sea
days) was also discussed. It was noted that existing effort controls amounted to a constant
effort regime under variable TACs.
Observer programme
SADSTIA are funding an independent observer programme, outsourced to Capfish. It is
budgeted to achieve 1,000 observer days per year. This is higher than the level of coverage
achieved previously by government. Largely thanks to focus on training the SADSTIA
observer programme gathers more information than the previous DAFF programme and it has
been more productive of scientific outputs including ongoing amendments to species splitting
algorithms.
Stock assessment
Two CPUE surveys have been carried out by the Andromeda, an industry vessel while the
designated survey vessel, “Africana”, undergoes repair..
There is an ongoing debate about the need for cross calibration of different vessels, as
opposed to a need for experimental precision in survey procedure, for the purpose of
standardising abundance indices.
SADSTIA considered ageing to be the least fulfilled priority for hake research .
The annual international review of the stock assessment had taken place in 2013, with a
positive outcome.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 296
Other issues
Trawl warps –
o SADSTIA confirmed that fishing permits specify that warps used in the fishery may
not be sticky i.e. they must be free of high viscosity (bituminous) protective coatings
or lubricants.
o SADSTIA would check whether Bird Mitigation Plans required inspection of new
warps by BLSA.
o SADSTIA has encouraged wire suppliers to ensure that trawl warps used in South
Africa are greased appropriately.
Genetics –
Genetic studies were being carried out by the University of Stellenbosch, but results
concerning stock separation between South Africa and Namibia were currently inconclusive.
While M. capensis exhibited some transboundary mixing in the non contiguous zone, the
genetic evidence for M. paradoxus pointed in the opposite direction.
Learning and Training –
The industry works with NGOs in a notable sustainability initiative. A formal terrestrially
based course, covering fish population dynamics, ecosystem approaches to fisheries,
regulatory philosophy and practical implementation of regulations is available to trawlermen.
The provision of educational enhancement of this kind is reported to have had a favourable
effect on the general attitude of seamen and on sustainable fishing practice and industry feels
that it should be taken into account in the MSC Certification standard
Sustainability Relations
The South African trawling industry has a history of being open to implementing the reasonable
suggestions of Environmental NGOs. Possibly for that reason it has been able to cultivate
comparatively good relations with the mainline NGOs, perhaps to a comparatively unusual degree in
an international context. It has encouraged affordable applied oceanographic research within the
academic establishment and this too seems to have impacted on its general sustainability relations.
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Explain surveillance and re-assessment procedures under the updated FAM
Review progress with conditions
Discuss recent developments relevant to the fishery
Discuss the change that has been made to the criteria for units of certification for the fishery
and whether any further changes were required.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 297
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
The assessment team thanked SADSTIA for the comprehensive array of information that had
been provided in advance of the site visit.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 298
17.1.7 South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON)
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location SANBI Offices, Kirstenbosch, Cape Town
Date 20th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Lara Atkinson SAEON
Kerry Sink SANBI
Melanie Smith Capfish (Observer)
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
The South African Environmental Observation Network (SAEON) is a business unit of the National
Research Foundation, a statutory body developed in terms of the National Research Foundation Act,
accountable to the Department of Science and Technology. SAEON are mandated to detect, predict
and react to environmental change within South Africa through long-term observation. SAEONs
vision is to deliver long term, reliable data for scientific research and to inform decision making
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 299
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
There was a discussion about the start of the trawl recovery experiment that is being conducted on the
West coast. The logistics of organising the survey work that marked the start of the experiment and
the equipment used for the work were discussed. The key points arising from the discussion that are
relevant to the MSC surveillance audit and re-assessment process are summarised briefly below:-
Trawl recovery experiment
This experiment has been initiated in response to the MSC benthic habitat condition.
A survey was successfully completed between the 2nd
& 9th February 2014 using the DAFF
vessel Ellen Khuzwayo (an excellent research platform provided by DAFF at no charge). The
survey examined 15 stations where video, photographs and sediment samples were collected
within the trawl experimental area.
It was emphasised that this work has just started and needs to be continued for at least 4 to 5
years for any meaningful results to be obtained. An ongoing commitment of funding and
resources is required.
It was noted that this work was not done in response to NGO pressure but was a direct
response to the MSC condition.
The team were shown some photographs and video footage from the survey in waters of over
500m depth.
This experiment is taking place in the Southern Benguela sandy shelf edge habitat type which
is the habitat type typically fished by the hake trawl fishery.
A preliminary analysis of results of the epifaunal component is underway and a summary
thereof is due to be presented to the Southern African Marine Science Symposium in July
2014.
Other observations
It was noted that the EAF (Ecosystem Approach to Fishing) working group has not met
recently, last meeting held was May 2013.
It was noted that the trawl footprint for the fishery is not cast in stone, and that it could be
more effective if it was formalised.
Concern was expressed that the area eastwards of the trawl experimental block is likely to
now become vulnerable to increased trawl effort as a result of the closed experimental lanes.
SAEON would therefore support the closure of an area eastward of the experimental block
encapsulating the westward portion of Childs Bank, a potentially vulnerable submarine
mound.
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 300
Update on progress with benthic recovery experiment off the west coast of South Africa.
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
17.1.8 South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI)
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location SANBI Offices, Kirstenbosch, Cape Town
Date 20th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Lara Atkinson SAEON
Kerry Sink SANBI
Melanie Smith Capfish (Observer)
Kirsty McQuaid SANBI intern (Observer)
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
The South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) are responsible for monitoring and
reporting on the state of biodiversity. The Marine Programme is within the Biodiversity Research and
Information Management Division and provides science-based support for marine biodiversity
management.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 301
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 302
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
Kerry Sink gave the team a presentation about the work that SANBI has been doing to assist the
management of South African marine biodiversity.
SANBI have been collaborating with SADSTIA for the past 7 years. SANBI work in the marine
environment that was relevant to this assessment was discussed. The key areas discussed are
summarised below:-
Spatial Biodiversity Management and Marine Protected areas
As ecosystems are place-based, spatial management represents an appropriate approach to
understand ecosystem impacts and recovery and to protect biodiversity. One of several
objectives for MPAs in South Africa is to protect and preserve examples of representative
habitat types.
Benthic habitat report of 2012 reviewed gaps in knowledge for potential benthic impacts
associated with this fishery. The report identified research and management priorities.
Progress with understanding the recovery potential of sandy habitat types is acknowledged in
terms of initiation of the benthic experiment.
Research priorities include the need for an improvement in the knowledge base to support the
identification of VMEs (new data, museum records, observer data, survey samples, and
collaboration with other deep sea research programmes (such as those being conducted for
mineral or petroleum exploration)).
The report identified 9 priority habitat types for management consideration in the South
African demersal trawl fishery
Priorities for protection were:-
o Hard ground (including submarine canyons and Childs Bank – a submarine mound),
gravel and mud habitats. Cold water coral habitats are a priority for protection.
o An
Management priorities were
o To develop management objectives
o Avoid any trawling outside the trawl footprint
o Protect representative habitat types
o Protect Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems.
o Review size and mass limits for trawl gear
SANBI has identified a network of 14 potential seabed management areas that would protect
relevant habitat types exposed to trawling
Some protection for all but two of the habitat types can be achieved outside of the trawl
footprint
o Two habitat types cannot be protected outside of the trawl footprint. Spatial
management areas to protect southern Benguela gravel shelf edge habitat and
southern Benguela muddy shelf edge. These habitat types are not known to be
represented outside the trawl footprint area (based on the best available information).
It was felt that the trawl footprint approach would be made more effective if compliance with
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 303
the area was formalised as a fishing licence condition.
The policy basis of MPAs and marine spatial management lies in:-
o The Convention on Biological Diversity, which aims for the protection of 10% of
representative & vulnerable habitats;
o The EBSA (Ecologically and Biologically Sensitive Areas) process, which links to a
CBD initiative which in turn links to the FAO criteria for VMEs.
o The draft South African Ocean Policy which refers to representative MPAs
o The Protected Area Expansion Strategy, which considers MPAs;
o Biodiversity targets, which are being developed on species-area relationships.
Bycatch Management Areas
3 bycatch management areas were identified and proposed to the DAFF Bycatch Task Team
by SANBI using historical catch data (these are described in Sink et al, 2013a where they are
referred to as the “De Hoop Extension”, “Off Still Bay” and “Within and adjacent to Addo
MPA”). These areas were debated but not taken forward to implementation at this stage.
At present, PUCLs seem to be a more favoured approach to bycatch management than BMAs.
SANBI is interested in supporting spatial management of bycatch, particularly off De Hoop
where there is scope for integrated spatial management to support benthic ecosystem
management and bycatch management for juvenile silver kob and other fish species.
Other observations
SANBI recommends that the implementation of the experimental area off Child’s Bank
should be accompanied by management action to ensure that no additional trawling effort is
displaced onto the potentially vulnerable submarine mound. Cold water corals occur in this
area. The submarine mound and its associated coral habitats should be considered for formal
protection.
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Update on recent work by SANBI to identify & promote marine spatial protection /
management measures within the South African EEZ.
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 304
17.1.9 University of Cape Town
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location Zoology Department, University of Cape Town
Date 20th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Colin Attwood UCT - Scientist
Melanie Smith CapFish (Observer)
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
UCT is…..
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 305
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
Benthic Survey
There was a detailed discussion of the benthic survey which was described in detail in
documents provided to the team.
SADSTIA have played a central role in the survey, by providing the funding for the survey,
and ensuring that the fleet comply with the experimental design (i.e. by trawling in the
designated trawl lanes and not trawling in the closed lanes in the experimental area).
A report on the results of the survey will be prepared as soon as possible.
It was considered that it may take many years for results of recovery of the seabed habitat to
be detected in the area.
It was noted that the inshore hake trawl fleet operate in shallower water and on different
habitat types than the experimental area. There is some information about the inshore trawl
grounds from surveys of mineral resources. A similar experiment on the Agulhas bank would
be informative, but would require additional resourcing.
Retained non target species
There was a discussion and some explanation of the monitoring and management of non-
target species (including the use of TACs and PUCLs).
The offshore fleet generally land all of the fish that are caught.
There is little difference in the composition of the unsorted catch and landed catch for the
inshore fleet (suggesting low discarding rates).
Historical catch composition in trawl fishing areas has been examined, and spatial
distributions investigated.
There was a brief discussion of stock trends for PUCL species. It was noted that kingklip
were recovering well throughout the fishery area.
PUCLs are used to manage the catch of retained non-target species. There are some
differences in the management procedure for the inshore and offshore fleets:-
o For the inshore fleet there is a system of catch reporting and PUCL update monitoring
involving all vessels, rights holders, and a 3rd
party organisation which acts to ensure
that PUCL allocations are not exceeded. Administrative procedures are in place to
allow PUCL quota swapping, “buy back”, closure of fishing grounds and also fines
for landings in excess of PUCL allocations.
o For the offshore fleet, the management procedures are less well defined. It was noted
that during 2013, the kingklip PUCL quota for the fleet was being utilised rapidly.
The response to this was a re-assessment of stock status which resulted in an increase
in the PUCL. There did not appear to be any other mechanism in place to address
this issue.
Discarded non-target species
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 306
There is a discard ban for all species that have a TAC. There is no MLS for these species.
There is no evidence of dumping of catch; there seems to be a market for most of the fish
caught.
Unsorted catch data are gathered in the offshore fleet by SADSTIA observers.
Until 2011, unsorted catch data were gathered by the government under the OROP for the
inshore fleet. This programme has lapsed.
There is currently no estimate available of the level of discarding from either fleet.
Fleet characteristics
Two types of gear are used by the inshore demersal trawl fleet. Each fishery catches a
different array of non-target species. The gear used is
o Sole fishing – trawls with a 75mm cod end are used in this fishery
o Hake fishing – trawlers are required to use 90mm cod end mesh in the inshore area
and 120mm further offshore, but industry practice is to use 120mm mesh at all time.
PUCLs are used to monitor and manage the catch of non-target species both inshore and
offshore. The PUCLs in place for the inshore and offshore fleets are different:-
o Inshore – PUCLs have been set for 10 species, as a 2 year trial, after which they may
become permit conditions. There is a move on rule for silver kob.
o Offshore – PUCLs are set for 3 species (kingklip, monkfish and horse mackerel).
The PUCLs are set as permit conditions. There is a move on rule for snoek.
The inshore: offshore split is determined by rights allocations, licence conditions and vessel
size. Waters shallower than 110m can only be fished by vessels smaller than 30m.
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
Update on current stock status
The consequences of limited survey data for the stock assessment(due to the problems with
the Africana)
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 307
17.1.10 WWF-South Africa
MSC Fishery Assessment Stakeholder Interview Record
Assessment Team Names
Lead Assessor Jim Andrews
P1 Team Member Mike Pawson
P2 Team Member Jim Andrews
P3 Team Member Johan Groeneveld
Meeting Location WWF Offices, Newlands, Cape Town
Date 20th March 2014
Stakeholders Name Affiliation
Jessica Greenston WWF
John Duncan WWF
Melanie Smith Capfish (Observer)
Martin Purves Marine Stewardship Council (Observer)
2. Status
What is the nature of the organisations interest in the fishery (e.g. client / science / management /
industry / eNGO, etc)
WWF-South Africa are an environmental NGO.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 308
3. Stakeholder Key Issues
What, if any, specific substantive issues or concerns are identified regarding the fishery? (P1 – P2 –
P3) and what information is available to allow us to determine the status of the fishery in relation to
each issue?
The main points that WWF wished to raise with the team were set out in a letter. Before addressing
these points, WWF staff queried some aspects of the surveillance and re-assessment procedure. The
key points raised were:-
Conditions of current certification – WWF noted that the deadline for certain conditions
was in year 5 of the period of certification. The procedure for dealing with these conditions
was discussed with the team.
New assessment tree – WWF noted that the re-assessment of the fishery would be conducted
using the Performance Indicators and Scoring Guideposts set out in the current MSC
Certification requirements. WWF agreed to submit comments on the performance of the
fishery with respect to these PISGs.
Information – WWF suggested that it would be very helpful for stakeholders if an update on
progress with the various conditions of certification could be provided to stakeholders before
the site visit.
Achievements
WWF noted that MSC certification of the fishery had stimulated significant activity by the fishery to
address some key issues, notably:-
Impacts on birds – the progress with the implementation of Tori lines and other mitigation
measures have resulted in a major reduction of bird mortality in this fishery.
Management of non-target species – the introduction of the PUCL system for managing the
catch of 10 non-target species in the inshore sector has demonstrated how co-management of
the fishery can have positive results.
WWF feel that the lessons learned from these successes can benefit other aspects of the fishery.
Target species
WWF raised the issue of the hake longline catch data and the need for this to be fully
incorporated into the assessment model for hake, particularly the size selectivity of the
longline fishery. The longline data are understood to results in a less optimistic view of stock
status. WWF consider that it is important to demonstrate that these data have been taken into
account.
Benthic habitat
There was felt to be insufficient information available and insufficient management action
had been taken to enable this condition to be closed.
The progress made with the start of the benthic trawl recovery experimental area was
significant, and long-term funding of this work would be necessary.
More action is required with respect to:-
o Ringfencing of the trawl footprint – it is felt that the ringfence around the trawl
footprintshould be formalised as a permit condition and monitored by a validated
VMS system.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 309
o Benthic subarea closures – there are currently no areas closed in order to protect
benthic habitats, although these have been identified. Action is required to create
formally protected areas.
Non-target species
WWF welcomed the research that has been conducted into non-target species catch in both
the inshore and offshore trawl fisheries.
The steps to develop management measures for the inshore fleet were welcomed. It was felt
that the measures in place for the offshore fleet should be developed to cover all of the (12)
non-target species identified as “significant” in recent research.
Concerns were raised about the adequacy of the recent (2013) re-assessment of the kingklip
stock, which led to an increase in the catch limit (PUCL) for that species.
WWF feel that non-target species should be formally recognised within the OMP for the hake
fishery.
Observer programme
WWF were concerned at the lapse of the government observer programme, and praised
SADSTIA’s response in establishing its own independent programme.
Some shortcomings in observer coverage require attention, including:
o Participation from inshore vessels, where coverage is currently limited.
o Coverage of all vessels in the deep sea sector.
o Random assignment of observers to vessels should be part of the programme.
o Better data on discard quantities is required.
o Routine monitoring of total catches (including discards) of ETP species.
o Observations of seabird interactions on a routine basis in both offshore and inshore
sectors.
Management procedures
WWF were concerned about management and monitoring procedures associated with the
fishery, notably:-
o Research – there is a disconnect between research activities and management within
DAFF.
o Data technicians – contracts for the technicians that enter trawl landings data have
recently lapsed.
o Fishery surveys – the problems with the RV Africana and the use of the FV
Andromeda were noted. There is a need to standardise / calibrate the results gathered
by each vessel, and concern that the wider research programme carried out by
Africana has lapsed.
o Management capacity – WWF note that important positions at DAFF remain unfilled
and that the organisation will face new challenges with the administration of the
small-scale fisheries policy and fishing rights allocations. There are concerns about
the ability of DAFF to manage the fisheries under these circumstances: also how
PUCLs are monitored, and a lack of ring-fencing of funding for core activites.
Reassessment
WWF consider that many of the points raised here will apply to the fishery when it is
reassessed, and asked that these comments should be taken into account during reassessment.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 310
4. IMM Assessment Team Questions
Assessment team questions for stakeholders
WWF views on stock status, environmental impacts and management of the fishery.
5. Other issues
(e.g. any other stakeholders we should contact, any written submissions to follow?)
WWF offered to submit views on the fishery with respect to the PISGs set out in the MSC
Certification Requirements v1.3.
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 311
18 SURVEILLANCE FREQUENCY
(REQUIRED FOR THE PCR ONLY)
1. The report shall include a rationale for determining the surveillance score.
2. The report shall include a completed fishery surveillance plan table using the results from
assessments described in CR 27.22.1
Table 20: Surveillance Score for the Fishery
Criteria Surveillance Score Insert Fishery Name
& score below
1. Default Assessment Tree
Yes 0
No 2
2. Number of Conditions
Zero Conditions 0
1-5 Conditions 1
>5 Conditions 2
3. Principle Level Scores
≥ 85 0
<85 2
4. Conditions on outcome PIs?
Yes 2
No 0
Table 21: MSC Fishery Surveillance levels
Years after certification or re-certification
Surveillance
score
Surveillance level Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
2 or more Normal surveillance On-site
surveillance
audit
On-site
surveillance
audit
On-site
surveillance
audit
On-site
surveillance
audit &
recertification
visit
1 Remote
surveillance
Option
1
Off-site
surveillance
audit
On-site
surveillance
audit
Off-site
surveillance
audit
On-site
surveillance
audit &
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 312
recertification
visit
Option
2
On-site
surveillance
audit
Off-site
surveillance
audit
On-site
surveillance
audit
0 Reduced surveillance Review new
information
On-site
surveillance
audit
Review new
information
On-site
surveillance
audit &
recertification
visit
Table 22: Fishery Surveillance Plan
Score from
CR Table C3
Surveillance
Category
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
[e.g. 2 or
more]
[e.g Normal
Surveillance]
[e.g. On-site
surveillance
audit]
[e.g. On-site
surveillance
audit]
[e.g. On-site
surveillance
audit]
[e.g. On-site
surveillance
audit &
recertification
site visit]
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 313
19 CLIENT AGREEMENT
(REQUIRED FOR PCR)
The report shall include confirmation from the CAB that the Client has accepted the PCR. This may
be a statement from the CAB, or a signature or statement from the client.
(Reference: CR: 27.19.2)
Intertek Fisheries Certification (IFC)
Intertek Fisheries Certification – South African Hake Trawl Fishery
MSC Full Assessment Reporting Template v1.3
Page 314
20 OBJECTIONS PROCESS
(REQUIRED FOR THE PCR IN ASSESSMENTS WHERE AN OBJECTION WAS RAISED
AND ACCEPTED BY AN INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATOR)
The report shall include all written decisions arising from an objection.
(Reference: CR 27.19.1)