Sustainability notes

This is an overview of how the Irish Pelagic Sustainability Group (IPSG) western mackerel pelagic trawl fishery scored in assessment against the MSC standard. For the certifiers evaluation please download the full public certification report with detailed information on the performance of this fishery against the criteria of the MSC environmental standard for sustainable fishing.

The fishery scored as follows in assessment against the MSC standard for sustainable fishing. The highest possible score for each principle is 100 and a fishery must score at least 80 against each principle to get certified: 

Sustainability strengths

Some points on which the fishery scored over 90 are outlined below. 

Principle 1: the state of the fish stock

• The stock is highly likely to be above the point at which recruitment would be impaired. The exploitation rate is close to its target reference point.  Fishing mortality is well below the point at which recruitment overfishing would occur.
  
• The harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the stock. The TAC is evaluated annually and recommendations made by the management based on the decision rule and state of the stock.
  
• The assessment is appropriate for the stock and for the harvest control rule, and is evaluating stock status relative to reference points. The assessment takes uncertainty into account and is subject to peer review.
  

Principle 2: the impact of the fishery on the marine environment

• Information is sufficient to quantitatively estimate outcome status and support a full strategy to manage main retained species.
  
• The fishery does not pose a risk of serious or reversible harm to the bycatch species or species groups and does not hinder recovery of depleted bycatch species or species groups.  The main bycatch issue is the slippage of low value mackerel. The impacts of this slippage are addressed under Principal 1 (unexplained mortality).
• The fishery is highly unlikely to reduce habitat structure and function to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm. Pelagic pair trawling has no impact on the pelagic environment.  Measures are in place to minimise seabed/ fishing gear interactions across the fleet.
• The nature, distribution and vulnerability of all main habitat types in the fishery area are known at a level of detail relevant to the scale and intensity of the fishery. 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, timing and location of use of the fishing gear.
  

Principle 3: the fishery management systems

• The management system for this fishery is consistent with all relevant laws, and is aimed at achieving sustainable fisheries in accordance with MSC Principles 1 & 2.
  
• Organisations with management responsibility are clearly defined, including their areas of responsibility and interactions.
  
• 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.
• Monitoring, control and surveillance mechanisms ensure the fishery’s management measures are enforced and complied with.  There is 100% monitoring of landings.
  

Challenges

In order to ensure its continuing sustainable operation this fishery made a commitment to improving its performance where it scored between 60-80. Some of the actions the fishery has committed to are:  

• 1.2.2 Harvest strategy / management.  This performance indicator requires that there are well defined and effective harvest control rules (HCR) in place. Whilst in the main this is undoubtedly true, the assessors scored the fishery down as a result of the continued unobserved mortality (slippage and illegal catch) in the overall fishery assessment (i.e. for the whole of the NEA mackerel stock).
• 1.2.3 Harvest strategy / management (Information).  This performance indicator requires that relevant information is collected to support the harvest strategy. Once again, this is primarily true for this fishery; however the information on all fishery removals from the stock is incomplete. Notably, slippage is not fully monitored and could be a significant proportion of the catch.
• 2.2.3 Bycatch (Information).  This performance indicator requires that information on the nature and amount of bycatch is adequate to determine the risk posed by the fishery and the effectiveness of the strategy to manage bycatch. Although the level of information about bycatch which is landed is sufficient (dealt with in this assessment under retained species) there remains a lack of scientific data in relation to the scale of bycatch which is not landed – i.e. which is slipped.
• 2.3.1 Endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species (impacts).  This performance indicator requires that the fishery meets national / international requirements for protection of ETP species and does not risk serious or irreversible harm to ETP species or hinder recovery. Whilst the assessors concluded that the known effects are likely to be within limits of national and international requirements for protection of ETP species, further work is required to be fully compliant with all EU regulations.
• 2.3.2 ETP species (management strategies).  This performance indicator requires that precautionary management strategies exist for the fisheries interaction with ETP species. The IPSG vessels have recently introduced Environmental Management Systems which include strategies for ETP species; however the management strategy is undermined by lack of information, reporting, collating and coordination with the relevant bodies, and, at national level, by a lack of observer coverage.
• 2.3.3 ETP species (information).  This performance indicator requires that information is collected to support management of impacts on ETP species. The assessors concluded that mapping of cetacean distribution at national level is insufficient, and that reporting and observer coverage is also insufficient to confidently and quantifiably describe the impact of IPSG vessels on cetaceans and other ETP species.
• 3.1.4 Governance and policy (incentives / subsides).  This performance indicator requires that the management system provides economic / social incentives for sustainable fishing and does not operate with subsidies that contribute to unsustainable fishing. Since the revision of the CFP in 2002, subsides have been reduced to the point where this is no longer thought to contribute to unsustainable fishing. However, the IPSG fleet has considerable capacity, relative to the available quota. The lack of any form of quota trading means that it is difficult to envisage considerable contraction in the overall fleet capacity. Whilst it is not the role of this assessment to recommend how quota should be managed, it can be stated that capacity should remain the same or contract over time, in order to avoid increasing incentives to overfish.
• 3.2.5 Fishery specific management system (monitoring and evaluation).  This performance indicator states that monitoring and evaluating of the performance of the fishery-specific management system should be undertaken with an effective and timely review. Again, the assessors conclude that most of the requirements for fulfilling the performance indicator are in place; however the principle weakness of the monitoring programme is the relatively low observer coverage at sea for corroborating management information.