MSC defends certification of Fraser River sockeye salmon

The conservation groups – the David Suzuki Foundation, Skeena Wild Conservation Trust and Watershed Watch Salmon Society – were outraged that the appointed independent adjudicator (IA) Wylie Spicer did not uphold an objection they filed in the assessment.

In response to the claim that nearly all of the Fraser River's sockeye populations collapsed last year, MSC said: “The Fraser River sockeye salmon fishery has been virtually closed to non-First Nation commercial fishing for the last three seasons because of declines in the stocks returning from open water. Early returns so far this year indicate a strong run. The fishery is managed by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and they determine, based on actual run returns, whether to open the fishery and to what extent; a decision could come in late July and if any fisheries were to open, this would commence during the first week of August at the earliest.

“MSC certification of the BC sockeye fishery is confirmation that it is being well- managed for sustainability and includes specific conditions to improve the stock. Certification is not a conclusion that the stock is currently abundant or that fishing should or shouldn’t be taking place at any given time.

“Certification is not the end of the process; it is a management tool that for this fishery includes a set of 17 improvement actions for the Fraser River that in some cases must be completed in the first year. Mandatory annual surveillance audits will include stakeholder input, will be publicly available and will provide new data on the status of the sockeye salmon stock and the achievements of the management agency in meeting the conditions.”

The conservationists claimed there was no way these kinds of endangered salmon should be considered a sustainable choice...This certification could actually result in well-intentioned consumers buying an endangered Fraser River sockeye with an eco-label on it.

MSC’s response was that no sockeye salmon stock is officially listed as endangered under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in Canada.

“Almost a decade ago, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) listed the Cultus and Sakinaw populations as endangered and proposed each for endangered status under SARA, but after a review of the status of these stocks by Canadian authorities and fishery experts, neither stock was listed as threatened or endangered under SARA,” it said.

“In 2008, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red-listed some sub-populations (stocks) of sockeye within the Fraser and Skeena Rivers. Some were listed as critically endangered, others as endangered, and others as vulnerable. The IUCN red-listings focus on smaller sub populations and their red designations drew criticism from many in the scientific community who most closely work with these populations (Pacific Salmon Commission, DFO).

“It also should be noted that IUCN takes into account a broad range of factors that affect stocks. The MSC assessment process takes into account a wide range of indicators and evaluates management practices and other action plans to address issues such as a decline in fish stocks. In the case of B.C. sockeye, salmon fishing levels affecting sensitive stocks have been reduced or eliminated and the certifier has found that the response has been adequate for the status of the stocks.

Claim: No fishery has ever been denied certification after completing the MSC assessment process…

MSC: “Fisheries typically conduct a confidential pre-assessment to determine if they are ready for a full assessment against the MSC standard. Best estimates are that for fisheries going through pre-assessment, up to 40% of these never enter full assessment. There could be several reasons why, but certainly an impending ‘failure’ against the standard would be one big reason. Many fisheries use pre-assessment to identify shortcomings and make environmental improvements that will then enable them to achieve passing scores in a full assessment to the MSC standard, which is a robust, open process involving stakeholder input throughout. So, while MSC, due to the confidentiality option, does not have complete details of how fisheries fare in pre-assessment, the process does explain the misperception that all fisheries engaging in the MSC programme achieve certification.

“Furthermore, there are examples of fisheries in full assessment that have remained in this status for extended periods of time (or have suspended active assessment temporarily) so as to complete additional scientific analysis, data collection or environmental improvements needed before they could pass the standard.

“Improvements made during pre-assessment and assessment are great examples of the MSC programme driving change at the fishery end that are often overlooked as environmental benefits of the programme.

“For the record, a lobster fishery in the UK did fail assessment. But the pre-assessment process provided an independent and scientific report about the fishery and a set of improvements that would have to be made before reconsidering full assessment.”

Claim: There are serious flaws with the MSC process...

MSC: “The MSC standard, methodologies and procedures were developed by hundreds of fishery scientists, conservation organisations, industry, and others working collaboratively. The MSC has a Board of Trustees, Technical Advisory Board and Stakeholder Council to ensure the MSC programme is regularly reviewed and that it remains the world’s most rigorous and credible environmental standard for the certification of wild capture fisheries. Each of the governing bodies mandates representation from a diversity of sectors, including environmental organizations. Ongoing, active collaboration is a hallmark of the MSC programme.

“Assessments are conducted by an independent third-party certifier who engages scientific experts to conduct the evaluation. The assessment report is also peer reviewed by scientists whose experience is equivalent to the expert team. MSC remains neutral throughout all aspects of a fishery’s assessment. MSC’s role is to ensure proper application of the established methodology, including a meaningful and impactful exchange of information among all stakeholders.”

Claim: In this case, the MSC is simply using a rubber stamp…

MSC: “In the case of assessment of the four fishery units of BC sockeye salmon, the scientific assessment has taken many years and has involved a team of experts, separate peer review and extensive input from conservation organizations and others. Three conservation organisations involved in the assessment did not object to certification of three units of the fishery (Skeena and Nass Rivers, and Barkley Sound) but did file formal objection on the fourth unit (Fraser River). A formal objections procedure over four months was then conducted by an independent adjudicator (IA), providing another layer of scrutiny in the process. The IA held a hearing, reviewed documents and rendered an independent decision. The MSC had no direct role in the process or the outcome. The final conclusion that the BC sockeye fishery meets the MSC standard was reached independently of MSC.”

WF readers should note that most but not all of the claims and responses pertaining to the MSC certification of the Fraser River sockeye salmon are included in this report.