ANALYSIS

No related analysis

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

7

Managers Compliance:

9

Fishers Compliance:

6

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

8

Future Health:

9


RECOMMENDATIONS

CATCHERS & REGULATORS

1. Start a fishery improvement project to address sustainability issues in this fishery. For advice on starting a FIP, see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs here.
2. Communicate to fishery managers that there are sustainability issues in this fishery that may be affecting the sale of products, and request that they comprehensively evaluate and address such issues.

RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN

1. Encourage your supply chain to start a fishery improvement project. For advice on starting a FIP see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs here.
2. Work with other suppliers and buyers on a pre-competitive basis to start a supplier roundtable to review improvement needs in this and other similar fisheries, catalyze fishery improvement projects, and monitor progress in improvement efforts.


FIPS

No related FIPs

CERTIFICATIONS

No related MSC fisheries

Fisheries

Within FishSource, the term "fishery" is used to indicate each unique combination of a flag country with a fishing gear, operating within a particular management unit, upon a resource. That resource may have a known biological stock structure and/or may be assessed at another level for practical or jurisdictional reasons. A fishery is the finest scale of resolution captured in FishSource profiles, as it is generally the scale at which sustainability can most fairly and practically be evaluated.

DISTRICT MANAGEMENT UNIT FLAG COUNTRY FISHING GEAR
British Columbia North-Central Coast and Haida Gwaii Canada/PSC Canada Trolling lines

Analysis

OVERVIEW

Last updated on 4 October 2011

RECOMMENDATIONS

Last updated on 25 October 2016

Improvement Recommendations to Catchers & Regulators

1. Start a fishery improvement project to address sustainability issues in this fishery. For advice on starting a FIP, see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs here.
2. Communicate to fishery managers that there are sustainability issues in this fishery that may be affecting the sale of products, and request that they comprehensively evaluate and address such issues.

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain

1. Encourage your supply chain to start a fishery improvement project. For advice on starting a FIP see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs here.
2. Work with other suppliers and buyers on a pre-competitive basis to start a supplier roundtable to review improvement needs in this and other similar fisheries, catalyze fishery improvement projects, and monitor progress in improvement efforts.

1.STOCK STATUS

2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

FishSource Scores

MANAGEMENT QUALITY

Click on the score to see subscores

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 9.0.

A transparent, science-based stock assessment model is used to assess scenarios of fishery impacts and establishing management guidelines for coho salmon. The performance of fisheries relative to management objectives are reviewed domestically and within the auspices of the Pacific Salmon Commission's Northern Panel and its Northern Boundary Technical Committee each year.

Click on the score to see subscores

×

Management Responsiveness Subscores

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 8.0.

Coho harvested in the northern BC troll fishery are managed using time and area closures based on in-season indicators. In-season coho abundance is assessed by weekly monitoring of coho CPUE in addition to post- season CWT analysis of the catch. [1.2] North Coast coho currently are managed to a Canadian harvest rate limit in the range of 5 to 10%. The total exploitation rate has been maintained within the overall exploitation rate objective in the last 15 years. A steep decline in coho productivity and abundance in the late 1990’s resulted in substantial restrictions in the coho troll fishery in northern BC. Clear responsiveness to stock status was demonstrated, albeit generally without use of regulatory listings.

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 8.0.

A steep decline in coho productivity and abundance in the late 1990’s resulted in substantial restrictions in the coho troll fishery in northern BC. Clear responsiveness to stock status was demonstrated, albeit generally without use of regulatory listings.

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 7.0.

Management has shown some responsiveness to habitat issues, but there are many mining initiatives being initiated in the transboundary region, most prominently on the Taku and Stikine Rivers. There are concerns that the Canadian National Environmental Policy Act does not require adequate baseline studies and opportunities for public input do not exist.

×

Adequacy of Data Subscores

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 8.0.

There is some illegal, unreported, or unregulated harvest resulting in total harvest that exceeds the catch limit by 12.5% or less. Post-season assessments of illegal harvest volumes are reported in Integrated Fisheries Management Plans for 2008-2010 (e.g. IFMP (2011) Table 4-1). IUU compliance rates for northern BC commercial troll averaged 80% for those years.

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 9.0.

The majority (greater than 70%) of the harvest in this fishery is measured with a catch tracking system or an on-site probability-based survey or census, and very little of the harvest is unmeasured and undocumented on an annual basis. An annual coded-wire-tagging (CWT) system is the basis for estimating the stock composition of the catch. However, not all escapement indicator stocks have a CWT indicator so the catch in the fishery is not known for those stocks (for example, central coast stocks have no CWT indicators).

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 6.0.

There is an indicator stream-based escapement monitoring program in place, but additional indicator stocks and/or in-season estimates of abundance are required for greater precision in managing to higher exploitation rates and/or a finer geographic scale.

STOCK HEALTH:

Click on the score to see subscores

Click on the score to see subscores

×

Stock Status Subscores

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 9.0.

Based on a robust regression method of Geiger and Zhang (2002), the rate of annual change in the aggregate escapements for the 18 Conservation Units has increased by 6%/year over the recent 15-year period (1997-2011). The aggregate escapement has also increased from a record low level in 1997 of 324,000 spawners to a high in 2009 of 2.7 million.

As calculated for 2013 data.

The score is 8.0.

Based on a robust regression method of Geiger and Zhang (2002), the rate of annual change in the aggregate northern BC troll catch (Areas 1-5) increased by 21%/year over the 15-year period 1997-2011 or more than 3-fold for the 15 year period.

×

Hatchery Impacts Subscores

Choose Stock:
To see data for catch and tac, please view this site on a desktop.
No data available for hatchery releases
No data available for hatchery releases
To see data for escapement, please view this site on a desktop.
To see data for management quality, please view this site on a desktop.
To see data for stock status, please view this site on a desktop.
To see data for hatchery impacts, please view this site on a desktop.
DATA NOTES

District profiles are scored according to the complete FishSource salmon scoring method, which can be downloaded here.

Note that the fishery featured in this profile is a mixutre pool management fishery (preseason-managed, occurring in the open ocean). A slightly modified version of the FishSource salmon fishery sustainability criteria is applied to mixture pool fisheries: Criterion 1. Management Responsiveness (Is the management strategy precautionary?) 1.1 Over the last decade, has fisheries management exhibited in-season responsiveness to stock status? 1.2 Has fisheries management maintained catch consistently below the catch limit, if there is one, during the last 15 years? 1.3 Has fisheries management responded appropriately over the last 15 years when/if the stock has failed to meet management objectives and/or maintain yields? 1.4 Has management exhibited responsiveness to concerns regarding the conservation and restoration of the stock’s essential freshwater, estuarine and coastal habitats during the last ten years? Criterion 2. Management Guidelines (Do the managers follow scientific advice?) Are the management guidelines (i.e. catch limits) appropriate and subject to scientific oversight? Criterion 3. Adequacy of Data (Do fishers comply?) 3.1 Is a portion of harvest attributable to illegal, unreported, or unregulated fishing, resulting in official harvest data that is lower than the actual catch? 3.2 Is the fishery’s harvest adequately and accurately measured and reported? 3.3 Have stock identification efforts been undertaken to determine the fishery’s stock composition? 3.4 Is escapement measured in a substantial and well-distributed quantity of stocks harvested by the fishery? Criterion 4. Stock Status (Is the fish stock healthy?) 4.1 Have escapement trends of the fishery’s stock aggregate been level or increasing over the last 15 years? 4.2 Has the catch trend been level or increasing over a 15-year period? Criterion 5. Are hatcheries or other enhancement activities negatively affecting wild stocks? (Will the fish stock be healthy in the future?) 5.0 Do hatcheries account for 10% or less of the fishery’s total production, or are hatchery-produced fish not in substantial contact with wild salmon? If “no,” then the following sub-criteria are analyzed: 5.1 Are managers able to identify and quantify hatchery fish in the mixed-stock aggregate? 5.2 Does hatchery abundance overly influence the determination of the fishery’s catch limit?

The FishSource sustainability criteria as applied to salmon: Criterion 1. Management Responsiveness (Is the management strategy precautionary?) 1.1 Over the last decade, has fisheries management exhibited in-season responsiveness to stock status? 1.2 Has fisheries management responded appropriately over the last 15 years when/if the stock has failed to meet management objectives and/or maintain yields? 1.3 Has management exhibited responsiveness to concerns regarding the conservation and restoration of the stock’s essential freshwater, estuarine and coastal habitats during the last ten years? Criterion 2. Management Guidelines (Do the managers follow scientific advice?) Have appropriate escapement goals or operational equivalents been developed and implemented for the fishery’s wild stocks? Criterion 3. Adequacy of Data (Do fishers comply?) 3.1 Is a portion of harvest attributable to illegal, unreported, or unregulated fishing, resulting in official harvest data that is lower than the actual catch? 3.2 Is the fishery’s harvest adequately and accurately measured and reported? 3.3 Has escapement been adequately and accurately measured and publicly reported? Criterion 4. Stock Status (Is the fish stock healthy?) 4.1 Have escapement measures for the fishery’s wild stocks been maintained above escapement goals or thresholds, or have harvest rates been below the target harvest rates? 4.2 Has the catch trend been level or increasing over a 15-year period? Criterion 5. Are hatcheries or other enhancement activities negatively affecting wild stocks? (Will the fish stock be healthy in the future?) 5.0 Do hatcheries account for 10% or less of the fishery’s total production, or are hatchery-produced fish not in substantial contact with wild salmon? If “no,” then the following sub-criteria are analyzed: 5.1 Are managers able to manage for the (wild) stocks in a fishery that also contains hatchery stocks of salmon? 5.2 Is there a low quantity of hatchery strays in the escapement throughout the freshwater habitat of the wild stock, and is hatchery straying quantified by means of a technically sound data collection and analysis? 5.3 Over the past 10 years, have hatchery strays, hatchery out-plants, or any returning hatchery-produced fish been intentionally allowed to mix with the wild stock during spawning? 5.4 Are there active and effective policies that (1) establish objectives for the conservation of wild salmon, (2) put into place operational systems that limit hatchery impacts on wild stocks, (3) grant sufficient oversight and authority over individual hatchery programs to management agencies, and (4) establish a hatchery evaluation system that monitors the performance of individual hatcheries against wild salmon conservation objectives?

Canada/PSC

This is a mixutre pool management fishery (preseason-managed, occurring in the open ocean); a slightly modified version of the FishSource salmon fishery sustainability criteria is applied to mixture pool fisheries: Criterion 1. Management Responsiveness (Is the management strategy precautionary?) 1.1 Over the last decade, has fisheries management exhibited in-season responsiveness to stock status? 1.2 Has fisheries management maintained catch consistently below the catch limit, if there is one, during the last 15 years? 1.3 Has fisheries management responded appropriately over the last 15 years when/if the stock has failed to meet management objectives and/or maintain yields? 1.4 Has management exhibited responsiveness to concerns regarding the conservation and restoration of the stock’s essential freshwater, estuarine and coastal habitats during the last ten years? Criterion 2. Management Guidelines (Do the managers follow scientific advice?) Are the management guidelines (i.e. catch limits) appropriate and subject to scientific oversight? Criterion 3. Adequacy of Data (Do fishers comply?) 3.1 Is a portion of harvest attributable to illegal, unreported, or unregulated fishing, resulting in official harvest data that is lower than the actual catch? 3.2 Is the fishery’s harvest adequately and accurately measured and reported? 3.3 Have stock identification efforts been undertaken to determine the fishery’s stock composition? 3.4 Is escapement measured in a substantial and well-distributed quantity of stocks harvested by the fishery? Criterion 4. Stock Status (Is the fish stock healthy?) 4.1 Have escapement trends of the fishery’s stock aggregate been level or increasing over the last 15 years? 4.2 Has the catch trend been level or increasing over a 15-year period? Criterion 5. Are hatcheries or other enhancement activities negatively affecting wild stocks? (Will the fish stock be healthy in the future?) 5.0 Do hatcheries account for 10% or less of the fishery’s total production, or are hatchery-produced fish not in substantial contact with wild salmon? If “no,” then the following sub-criteria are analyzed: 5.1 Are managers able to identify and quantify hatchery fish in the mixed-stock aggregate? 5.2 Does hatchery abundance overly influence the determination of the fishery’s catch limit?

Download Source Data

Registered users can download the original data file for calculating the scores after logging in. If you wish, you can Register now.

Fishery Improvement Projects (FIPs)

No related FIPs

Certifications

Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)

No related MSC certifications

Sources

References

    Comments

    This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

    Comments on:

    Coho salmon - British Columbia North-Central Coast and Haida Gwaii, Canada/PSC, Canada, Trolling lines

    comments powered by Disqus