Document: MSC Pre-Assessment Reporting Template page 66
Date of issue: 15
th
August 2011 © Marine Stewardship Council, 2011
d. Management strategy
evidence of success
There is some evidence that the strategy is achieving its
objective.
JustificationRationale
There is a strategy in place to protect seagrass habitats through zoning; and coral reefs through mooring systems DMCR, Sept. 2011. It is not clear how wide spread damage to other assemblages may be.
The strategy is likely to be effective for trap fisheries.
Likely Scoring Level passpass with conditionfail Potentially a pass, but
greater knowledge required on some benthic interactions
by gillnet. Will pass for traps.
Component Habitats
PI 2.4.3 Information
monitoring 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 issues SG60
SG80 SG100
a. Information quality
There is a 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
area 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.
b. Information adequacy for
assessment of impacts
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.
c. Monitoring 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.
JustificationRationale Information is known on habitat types and species interactions. The nature, distribution and vulnerability of all
main habitat types in the fishery area is not known.
Likely Scoring Level passpass with conditionfail PASS with a Condition
Document: MSC Pre-Assessment Reporting Template page 67
Date of issue: 15
th
August 2011 © Marine Stewardship Council, 2011
Component Ecosystem
PI 2.5.1 Outcome Status
The fishery does not cause serious or irreversible harm to the key elements of ecosystem structure and function.
Scoring issues SG60
SG80 SG100
a. Ecosystem status
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.
JustificationRationale Trap: The catch of large numbers of pre-adult crab is likely to impact the ecosystem structure by causing greater
truncated size composition, reducing the rate of recovery for all crab species caught by trap. These issues would largely have to be dealt with under harvest strategy. The impacts are likely to be minimal in offshore areas
where juveniles are not caught. Removing, as opposed to returning female crabs may also be a consideration. Gillnet: The fishery is likely to cause a detrimental impact on the target stocks and their predators, especially
sharks and rays. However, the fishery is as likely to be affected by changes in exogenous environmental parameters, especially salinity. But, the trophic inter-dependencies on the target and allied crab stocks are less
likely to be affected. It could be argued that lower levels of predation may benefit stock status as a whole. A critical issue would be to assess the relative damage caused to top predators from the gillnet fishery as
opposed to other methods. Thai statistics show that the catches of shark and ray account for 3 and 2 of the total catch by the Thai fleets operating in both the Gulf of Thailand and the Andaman Sea, respectively DoF,
2008. Evidence would have to show that trophic cascades in these retained species have not occurred, but given their relative low fecundities, greater attention might be required to mitigating impacts in areas of high
interaction. How this may be achieved in a gillnet fishery would be unclear. The fisheries are less likely to change the evenness in species spread and dominance, given the combination in
catches of predator and prey. All these issues would require careful consideration in a specific ecosystem orientated study.
Trap: RBF required?
Likely Scoring Level passpass with
conditionfail
NO PASS Gillnet:
Likely Scoring Level
passpass with conditionfail
NO PASS
Document: MSC Pre-Assessment Reporting Template page 68
Date of issue: 15
th
August 2011 © Marine Stewardship Council, 2011
Component Ecosystem
PI 2.5.2 Management
strategy
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 issues SG60
SG80 SG100
a. Management strategy in
