ANALYSIS

Strengths

1. The Kamchatka Peninsula is the world’s only large-volume source of exclusively wild pink salmon. Stock status is fairly robust there. 2. Russian salmon fishery management has transitioned over the last 5 years from quota-based management to escapement-based management informed by pre-season forecasts. This change may result in more flexible, responsive, in-season management of the resource. 3. Beginning in 2008, fishing companies have been awarded long-term leases to fishing plots, reducing incentives to misreport harvest in order to receive a larger allocation in the subsequent season.

Weaknesses

1. Illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing is a serious problem in almost all Russian pink salmon fisheries, particularly on Kamchatka. 2. On Sakhalin Island, large contributions of hatchery fish to harvest in some areas (Southeast Sakhalin, Aniva Bay, Iturup Island) may result in unsustainably high harvest rates on wild stocks, as the hatchery fish are generally not temporally or spatially separate from wild fish. 3. Inadequate information is made publicly available, including information on in-season management decisions, escapement goals and the models upon which they are based, and mark-and-recapture results associated with the recent resurgence of hatchery marking programs.

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

≥ 6 to 8

Managers Compliance:

7 to 10

Fishers Compliance:

< 6 to ≥ 8

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

< 6 to 10

Future Health:

< 6 to 10


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

  • Russian North Sakhalin salmon - trap/net:

    Stage 3, Progress Rating C

CERTIFICATIONS

  • Iturup Island pink and chum salmon:

    MSC Certified

  • Sakhalin Island Northeast trap net pink salmon:

    Suspended

  • VA-Delta Kamchatka Salmon Fisheries:

    MSC Certified

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
Chukhotka Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Fixed gillnets (on stakes)
Traps
East Kamchatka Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Fixed gillnets (on stakes)
Traps
Iturup Island Sakhalin Russia Russian Federation Traps
Khabarovsk Krai and Amur Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Traps
Magadan Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Traps
Northeast Sakhalin Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Traps
Primoriya Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Traps
Sakhalin and Kuril Islands Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Traps
West Kamchatka Russia Russian Federation Beach seines
Fixed gillnets (on stakes)
Traps

Analysis

OVERVIEW

Last updated on 1 July 2008

Strengths

1. The Kamchatka Peninsula is the world’s only large-volume source of exclusively wild pink salmon. Stock status is fairly robust there. 2. Russian salmon fishery management has transitioned over the last 5 years from quota-based management to escapement-based management informed by pre-season forecasts. This change may result in more flexible, responsive, in-season management of the resource. 3. Beginning in 2008, fishing companies have been awarded long-term leases to fishing plots, reducing incentives to misreport harvest in order to receive a larger allocation in the subsequent season.

Weaknesses

1. Illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing is a serious problem in almost all Russian pink salmon fisheries, particularly on Kamchatka. 2. On Sakhalin Island, large contributions of hatchery fish to harvest in some areas (Southeast Sakhalin, Aniva Bay, Iturup Island) may result in unsustainably high harvest rates on wild stocks, as the hatchery fish are generally not temporally or spatially separate from wild fish. 3. Inadequate information is made publicly available, including information on in-season management decisions, escapement goals and the models upon which they are based, and mark-and-recapture results associated with the recent resurgence of hatchery marking programs.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Last updated on 13 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.

Last updated on 28 June 2016

Improvement Recommendations to Catchers & Regulators

1. Work actively to address and close out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery in the agreed timeframe.
2. Report achievements publicly to share progress with buyers.

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain

1. Monitor the progress in closing out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery and if agreed timelines are met.
2. Express your support to help meet conditions that may be at a government/regulatory level (where applicable).

1.STOCK STATUS

STOCK ASSESSMENT

Last updated on 1 July 2008

Assessments of stocks are conducted by measurements of fry emigration (hatchery releases plus fry net sampling near mouths of index rivers), adult escapements monitored at trap nets and from aerial and ground surveys of spawning areas, and commercial catch records. Assessment effort and thoroughness varies by region in the Far East.

Prior to each fishing season, regional branches of the Federal Fisheries Agency forecast the total return of pink salmon to each region based on parent spawning escapements (two years earlier), hatchery releases, and spawner-recruit relationships. The target escapement is based on the proportion of spawning grounds occupied by spawners (see below for description). By subtracting target escapement from total returns, a pre-season Recommended Catch (RC) is calculated.

Since 2009, when the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) limit management system was eliminated and replaced with the RC, the RC is being used for planning purposes only rather than in-season management.

Estimates of total catch in trap nets and gill nets can be uncertain, with evidence of both under- and over-reporting.

Last updated on 11 July 2008

Assessments of stocks are conducted by measurements of fry emigration (hatchery releases plus fry net sampling near mouths of index rivers), adult escapements monitored at eight weirs on the island and through walking surveys of spawning areas, and commercial catch records.

Prior to each fishing season, the Sakhalin Fisheries and Oceanography Institute (SakhNIRO) forecasts the total return of pink salmon based on parent spawning escapements (two years earlier), hatchery releases, and spawner-recruit relationships. The target escapement is based on the proportion of spawning grounds occupied by spawners (see below for description). By subtracting target escapement from total returns, a pre-season Recommended Catch (RC) is calculated. Since 2009, the RC is used for planning purposes only rather than in-season management.

Last updated on 7 January 2011

Assessment of harvest

According to the fishery’s 2012 MSC assessment, “excellent information is collected on harvest in the commercial salmon fishery of the Northeast region (the Smirnykh and Nogliki municipal districts). Changes in the management system over the previous decade have substantially improved the accuracy of catch reporting by removing incentives for inaccurate accounting to avoid taxes or remain within a designated allocation. General information is available on the significance of incidental harvest of pink salmon in the marine drift net fishery and its effects are implicitly included in production estimates based on estimates of juvenile and adult numbers” (MRAG 2012).

Assessment of escapement & fry migration

Stock assessments are conducted by measurements of fry emigration (hatchery releases plus fry net sampling near mouths of index rivers), monitoring of adult escapements at trap nets and from aerial and ground surveys of spawning areas, and commercial catch records. Within each region of Sakhalin, including the Northeast, fry production and adult escapements are monitored from a set of index rivers, and then extrapolated to the entire area.

In the 2012 MSC assessment of the fishery, relevant indicator 1.2.4 (Assessment of stock status) was rated “75.” According to the assessors, “uncertainty is not fully taken into account with respect to the characteristics and status of populations in the larger rivers, the degree of correlation between numbers in monitored and unmonitored systems, and difference in productivity patterns of the even and odd‐year returns of this cycle dominant stock. In particular, it is unclear how the available stock status information is interpreted for even and odd year returns with respect to management of escapement.”

A relevant MSC condition (#3) regarding analysis of historic data and increased spawning and juvenile out-migration monitoring was attached to the fishery’s certificate (MRAG 2012). Field work (escapement and juvenile outmigration surveys) were accomplished in 2013 in the region in the effort to close this condition, still open at this time (June 2014) (MRAG 2014).

Last updated on 4 June 2014

Assessments of stocks are conducted by measurements of fry emigration (hatchery releases plus fry net sampling near mouths of index rivers), adult escapements monitored at trap nets and from aerial and ground surveys of spawning areas, and commercial catch records.Each of six separate management regions is assessed each year: 1) Aniva Bay; 2) Southeastern coast, 3) Terpenie Bay; 4) Northeastern coast; 5) Northwestern coast; and, 6) Southwestern coast (Figure 1). Within each region, fry production and adult escapements are monitored from a set of index rivers, and then extrapolated to entire area. Prior to each fishing season, SakhNIRO forecasts the total return of pink salmon to each region based on parent spawning escapements (two years earlier), hatchery releases, and spawner-recruit relationships. The target escapement is based on the proportion of spawning grounds occupied by spawners (see below for description).By subtracting target escapement from total returns, a pre-season Recommended Catch (RC) is calculated. The quality of the assessment is highest in the southern region based on a higher level of effort and a more robust sampling design. Since 2009, the RC is used for planning purposes only rather than in-season management.

Estimates of total catch in trap nets and gill nets are uncertain, with evidence of both under- or over-reporting.

Last updated on 12 July 2011

Harvest monitoring

A logbook-based catch reporting system captures the majority of harvest in the fishery, albeit without stock-specific data. Illegal fishing may result in inaccuracies in official harvest data.

Escapement monitoring

Aerial index surveys are the main method used in assessment of pink salmon escapement in West Kamchatka. Escapement monitoring data is of high quality for some index systems, but the number of flight hours has decreased over the last decade due to budget cuts (Shevlyakov and Maslov 2011; Vakhrin 2011).

Juvenile surveys

Out-migration surveys are conducted annually on the Utka and Bolshaya Rivers, during which the number of juveniles that emerge from spawning redds and proceed to the ocean are estimated. These estimates, together with escapement and spawner-recruit modeling information, are the main tools used to generate an estimate of the number of returnees in the stock’s next spawning run.

Trawl surveys

In the fall, annual trawl surveys are conducted in the Bering Sea in order to improve estimates of the next season’s return (TINRO 2013).

SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

Last updated on 1 July 2008

Review of data and methods of assessment go through a series of steps. Review of the Recommended Catch (RC) occurs first at the regional scale. Forecasts and the RC are then presented to the Federal Fisheries Agency main branch (Rosrybolovstvo), and the information is subject to final approval by the Prime Minister’s office.

After federal approval, the RC is implemented by regional Commissions for Anadromous Fish Fisheries (CAFFs). In the pre-season, CAFFs allocate the RC first by fishing zone, and then by individual fishing plot. Any in-season RC adjustment recommended by scientists is subject to approval by Federal Fishery Agency regional branches and CAFFs.

During the season, CAFFs can make changes to allocations on the basis of ongoing spawning migration surveys. Fishing pressure is managed with the objective of achieving escapement goals established for main spawning rivers of Sakhalin (Trumble and Lajus 2008; Portley and Geiger 2014). Independent research has indicated that many official escapement goals do not reflect the actual freshwater habitat capacity (i.e. there is greater spawning area in the rivers than that which is reflected by the figures used in fishery management) (Makeev 2011).

Reference Points

Last updated on 01 Jul 2008

Escapement performance against goals is generally strong over the last 15 years (1998-2012) in the main salmon regions of Kamchatka and Sakhalin. See nested fishery profiles for data and references.

However, in Khabarovsk, meanwhile, average escapements throughout the region (excluding the Amur River basin) were at only 18% of reference points in 2010 and 17% in 2009 (Zolotukhin 2009; 2010). Meanwhile, according to Augerot and Foley, pink salmon stocks in Primoriya were at high risk of extinction as of 2005 (2005). Low pink productivity in this region is generally attributed to changes in ocean conditions and Primoriya’s vulnerable southernmost position in the pink salmon habitat range rather than to poor management decisions (Markovtsev 2006; Semenchenko 2010).

Last updated on 19 March 2014

On the basis of escapement counts, juvenile out-migration surveys, and trawl surveys, each year KamchatNIRO (the local branch of the federal fishery and oceanography institute) and Vladiovostok TINRO (the main Far East branch of the same institute) publish forecasted returns and recommended escapement for East Kamchatka pink salmon, as well as Recommended Catches (RCs) for the East Kamchatka commercial fishery sub-zones of Karaginskiy (northeast coast) and Petropavlovsk-Komandorskiy (southeast coast).

Historically, managers have considered 20–30 million spawners to be the desired escapement for odd-year East Kamchatka pink salmon. This concept was challenged in 2009 and 2011 by historic peak harvests generated from higher-than-average escapements (50 million spawners in 2007 and 92 million in 2009). This prompted consideration of whether or not a hydrological regime shift is taking place.

In 2013 an escapement goal of 30 million spawners was recommended, but it is unclear whether or not management considers this a new lower bound below which regional odd-year escapement should not be allowed to fall (TINRO 2013).

Reference Points

Last updated on 19 Mar 2014

Escapement data is not readily available for individual index streams, but aggregate escapement statistics for all of Eastern Kamchatka are available for both even and odd-year stocks. The escapement goal lower bound has only been missed once by the odd-year stock dating back to 1988 (Figure 1). The even-year stock, meanwhile, missed the goal in all but one of twelve years, but this is expected in light of the natural two-year run cycling of pink salmon.


Figure 1: East Kamchatka pink salmon escapement, 1988-2012, number of fish, vs. lower bound of goal for odd-year stock. Regional escapement is extrapolated from aerial overflights of index regions.

Without a separate goal against which to assess the even-year stock, we instead used percent change in escapement as the basis for which to score the stock on this sub-criterion. The stock’s escapement has exhibited a 2.76% annual decline over the last 12 years (when the robust regression method of Geiger and Zhang (2002) is applied), which does not exceed the 5% threshold for meaningful declines.

Last updated on 11 July 2008

Escapement goals are in place for all major systems in the fishery, and escapement monitoring coverage is appropriate to the specificities of the region and the fishery (SCS 2009). While, these escapement goals do not delineate between hatchery and wild stocks, otolith marking underway at local hatcheries since 2009 and associated recapture studies have indicated that there is a low rate of pink salmon straying into wild spawning habitat (SCS 2013).

Reference Points

Last updated on 11 Jul 2008

In both of the main pink-salmon bearing regions of Iturup Island (Prostor Bay and Kurilsk Bay), escapements have exceeded 70% of spawning ground capacity in every year since 2005 (through 2012) (SCS 2013) (Figure 1).


Figure 1: Estimated escpapement into rivers of Kurilsk and Prostor Bays, Iturup Island, 2005-2012. Estimates reflect results of walking surveys on approximately 20 rivers in the two regions. Escapement is expressed as a percent of spawning areas filled, with 70-100% filled considered to reflect healthy escapement.

Last updated on 7 January 2011

Review of data and methods of assessment go through a series of steps. Review of the Recommended Catch (RC) begins at the Research Council of SakhNIRO with information supplied by the research staff in collaboration with Sakhrybvod. Following this, SakhNIRO, in coordination with Moscow-based VNIRO (Federal Fisheries Agency Institute for Fisheries and Oceanography), present forecasts and the RC to the Federal Fisheries Agency main branch (Rosrybolovstvo), and then the information is subject to final approval by the Prime Minister’s office.

After federal approval, the RC is implemented by the Sakhalin Commission for Anadromous Fish Fisheries (CAFF). Any in-season
RC adjustment recommended by scientists is subject to approval by the Federal Fishery Agency Sakhalin regional branch and the CAFF. The CAFF allocates the RC first by fishing zone, and then by individual fishing plot.

During the season, the CAFF can make changes to allocations on the basis of ongoing spawning migration surveys. Fishing pressure is managed with the objective of achieving escapement goals established for all main spawning rivers of Sakhalin (Trumble and Lajus 2008; Portley and Geiger 2014). Independent research has indicated that many official escapement goals do not reflect the actual freshwater habitat capacity (i.e. there is greater spawning area in the rivers than that which is reflected by the figures used in fishery management) (Makeev 2011).

Reference Points

Last updated on 07 Jan 2011

The primary reference points used are regional spawning escapement targets determined by multiplying the available spawning area by the optimal spawner density. The target is stated as full occupancy of spawning ground by spawners at an ‘optimal density’, effectively avoiding both under- or over-escapement levels.Adult escapements are determined across index rivers across the island through aerial or foot surveys of the spawning grounds.

Last updated on 4 June 2014

Review of data and methods of assessment go through a series of steps. Review of the Recommended Catch (RC) begins at the Research Council of SakhNIRO with information supplied by the research staff in collaboration with Sakhrybvod. Following this, SakhNIRO, in coordination with Moscow-based VNIRO (Federal Fisheries Agency Institute for Fisheries and Oceanography), present forecasts and the RC to the Federal Fisheries Agency main branch (Rosrybolovstvo), and then the information is subject to final approval by the Prime Minister’s office.

After federal approval, the RC is implemented by the Sakhalin Commission for Anadromous Fish Fisheries (CAFF). Any in-season
RC adjustment recommended by scientists is subject to approval by the Federal Fishery Agency Sakhalin regional branch and the CAFF. The CAFF allocates the RC first by fishing zone, and then by individual fishing plot.

During the season, the CAFF can make changes to allocations on the basis of ongoing spawning migration surveys. Fishing pressure is managed with the objective of achieving escapement goals established for all main spawning rivers of Sakhalin (Trumble and Lajus 2008; Portley and Geiger 2014). Independent research has indicated that many official escapement goals do not reflect the actual freshwater habitat capacity (i.e. there is greater spawning area in the rivers than that which is reflected by the figures used in fishery management) (Makeev 2011).

Reference Points

Last updated on 04 Jun 2014

The primary reference points used are regional spawning escapement targets determined by multiplying the available spawning area by the optimal spawner density. The target is stated as full occupancy of spawning ground by spawners at an ‘optimal density’, effectively avoiding both under- or over-escapement levels.Adult escapements are determined across index rivers across the island through aerial or foot surveys of the spawning grounds.

Kaev et al. (2007) determined that adult returns in southern Sakhalin are primarily a function of ocean conditions regulating survival. The authors claim that overall production of wild and hatchery fry did not explain variability in adult returns, at least above approximately 200 million fry emigrating from the southern Sakhalin region.

Last updated on 12 July 2011

On the basis of escapement counts, juvenile out-migration surveys, and trawl surveys, each year KamchatNIRO (the local branch of the federal fishery and oceanography institute) and Vladiovostok TINRO (the main Far East branch of the same institute) publish forecasted returns and recommended escapement for West Kamchatka pink salmon, as well as Recommended Catches (RCs) for the West Kamchatka commercial fishery sub-zones of West Kamchatskaya (northwest coast) and Kamchatko-Kurilskaya (southwest coast).

According to the most recent forecast document, the generally recommended target for strong-year (even-year) spawning runs to West Kamchatka is 40 million (TINRO 2013). In assessing this fishery, we took this to be the upper bound of the escapement goal, with the lower bound for acceptable escapement considered to be 70% of the upper bound (28 million).

Reference Points

Last updated on 12 Jul 2011

FishSource scoring of stock status for pink salmon looks at performance against escapement goals over the past 12 spawning runs (24 years). For West Kamchatka, data is available for 22 years (11 spawning runs, 1992–2012). Over that time, the West Kamchatka regional, even-year escapement has fluctuated between 6.7 million and 81 million, and has only three times fallen below 28 million, which can be considered a lower bound escapement goal (70% of the declared “optimum level” escapement of 40 million) (TINRO 2013). These three years of low escapement occurred in 1992, 2000, and 2012.

Odd-year escapement, meanwhile, has maintained a fairly stable level over that same period (Figure 1).


Figure 1: West Kamchatka pink salmon escapement, 1992-2012, number of fish, vs. the lower bound of the escapement goal for the even-year stock. Regional escapement is extrapolated from aerial overflights of index regions. Data is taken from the annual Russian biostatistical information submissions to the NPAFC (e.g., Klovach et al. 2013).

CURRENT STATUS

Last updated on 1 July 2008

Stock status for salmon is reflected by multi-year escapement trends and performance against various escapement targets (see synopsis under reference point section and more detailed information under district profiles). 

While catch and escapement are generally exhibiting increasing trends over the last 15 years (1998-2012) on Sakhalin and Kamchatka, there are particular stocks in the mainland regions of Primoriya and Kamchatka, as well as the Sea of Japan stock of Southwest Sakhalin, that are in a depleted state. See also "Trends" section.

Trends

Last updated on 01 Jul 2008

Russian pink salmon stock productivity is generally healthy, and catches have been increasing since the ocean current regime change of 1989 (Irvine et al. 2009). Sakhalin Island has been the leading region for harvest of pink salmon in the recent past, closely followed by Kamchatka.

Last updated on 14 January 2009

Stock status for salmon is reflected by multi-year escapement trends and performance against various escapement targets (see synopsis under reference point section). 

Trends

Last updated on 14 Jan 2009

According to Ruggerone (2010), the pink salmon stock of eastern Kamchatka has exhibited increasing abundance since the mid-1970’s. These increases may be attributable to favorable ocean conditions. Over the last 24 years (twelve years each for even and odd-year stocks), harvest trends among both stocks have exhibited ≥8% increases (Figures 2 & 3).


Figure 2: East Kamchatka odd-year pink salmon harvest in thousands of metric tons, 1989–2011, with Geiger and Zhang robust regression analysis (red line). Harvest has increased by 14% every two years over this time period. Data taken from Russian annual biostatistical submissions to NPAFC.


Figure 3: East Kamchatka even-year pink salmon harvest in thousands of metric tons, 1990–2012, with Geiger and Zhang robust regression analysis (red line). Harvest has been stable (0% change) over this time period. Data taken from Russian annual biostatistical submissions to NPAFC.

Last updated on 11 July 2008

Stock status for salmon is reflected by multi-year escapement trends and performance against various escapement targets (see synopsis under reference point section). 

Last updated on 7 January 2011

Stock status for salmon is reflected by multi-year escapement trends and performance against various escapement targets (see synopsis under reference point section). 

The Okhotsk pink salmon stock has demonstrated increases in abundance since 1989 (Kaev, 2011). The MSC assessment of the fishery gave a score of “80” for relevant performance indicator 1.1.1 (Stock status). The assessor found that “the wild stock is at or fluctuating around its target reference point based on escapement data for wild populations in index rivers of this district.” However, “while it is highly likely that the fishery does not impair recruitment and the stock is fluctuating around its target reference point, this determination cannot be made with a high degree of certainty due to questions regarding precision of escapement estimation and the accuracy of sample streams in representing other systems within the district” (MRAG 2012).

In the MSC assessment, escapement figures for 2001–2011 are provided for index rivers in the Smirnykh and Nogliki Districts. Escapements averaged 100% of capacity in both districts in odd years. In even years, escapements averaged >50% capacity in Smirnykh and <10% in Nogliki. This is typical of pink salmon with an odd-even cycle dominance pattern (MRAG 2012).

As of the first surveillance audit, the client had not provided escapement information for 2012–2013 to the MSC certification body (MRAG 2014).

Trends

Last updated on 07 Jan 2011

Over the last 15 years, harvest has exhibited increases in both even and oddd years (Figure 1).


Figure 1: Aggregate harvest in the Nogliki and Smirnykh districts, 1999–2012, in tons.

Last updated on 5 June 2014

Stock status for salmon is reflected by multi-year escapement trends and performance against various escapement targets (see synopsis under reference point section). 

The only truly robust estimates of status are those for southern and southeast Sakhalin pink salmon. Estimates of fry (both wild and hatchery-reared) emigration from each index river has been monitored since 1957 using fry traps (Figure 2). In addition, catch and escapements are monitored (Figures 3 and 4). Adults at the hatcheries and on the spawning grounds in the index rivers are also enumerated. Total escapement is estimated by extrapolating based on mean spawning densities to other, non-index river systems. Overall methodological approach is described in Kaev et al. 2004 and Kaev et al. 2007.

More recent harvest and escapement data (Figures 6 and 7) indicate fairly stable escapements and increasing harvests with the exceptions of Southwest Sakhalin and Kunashir Island, where annual declines in harvest exceed 4% when the robust regression method of Geiger and Zhang (2002) is applied to the data series.


Figure 6: Harvest of Sakhalin pink salmon by region in tons, 1993/1999—2012. All regions exhibit increasing harvest trends except Southwest Sakhalin and Kunashir Island.


Figure 7: Estimated escapement of Sakhalin pink salmon by region in numbers of fish, 1993–2012. Most of the stocks exhibit minor declines over this period of time, but only the Southewest Sakhalin (Sea of Japan) even year stock’s decline is viewed as meaningful (>5% annual decline when the robust regression method of Geiger and Zhang is applied to the data series) (TINRO Center and VNIRO 1994-2013).

Trends

Last updated on 05 Jun 2014

Available catch and escapement data suggests that pink salmon returns to the east-side of Sakhalin Island have been relatively stable in recent years (Figures 3, 4 and 5). However, hatchery production makes it difficult to get a clear picture of wild pink salmon status along the southeast coast and Aniva Bay. There are 27 hatcheries located on Sakhalin Island that are collectively permitted to release 400 million pink fry annually, although actual releases are somewhat lower. Direct estimates of hatchery-origin fish in natural spawning areas are not available. Until recently pink salmon hatchery production on Sakhalin was not marked and therefore, hatchery fish could not be identified in the catch and escapement. Relative total hatchery and wild run sizes have been approximated based on hatchery release numbers and wild production inferred from natural escapements and juvenile monitoring (Kaev et al. 2006). Based on this, hatchery contributions to total catch and escapement of pink salmon in recent years approached 50% in the southeastern Sakhalin. See also "Hatchery Impacts" section.

Available catch data suggests that early returning Sea of Japan pink salmon returning to the southwest coast are in severe decline (Figure 3). No focused monitoring of escapement is currently being done on along the southwest coast.

Last updated on 12 July 2011

Trends

Last updated on 12 Jul 2011

Abundance of pink salmon in West Kamchatka experienced a large increase (250%) in 1977–2005 in comparison with 1962-1976. However, after large-scale increases in 1977-1985, declines followed (Bugaev 2002). The region’s largest system, the Bolshaya River, has exhibited these lower abundance trends following 1985, although robust results of juveniles in 2010 resulted in record harvests in 2012 (Shevlyakov 2011; TINRO 2013).

Since 1992, harvest has increased by >10% annually for both odd-year and even-year West Kamchatka pink salmon (Figures 2 and 3).


Figure 2: West Kamchatka even (strong)-year pink salmon harvest in thousands of metric tons, 1992–2012, with Geiger and Zhang robust regression analysis (red line). Harvest has increased by 52% every two years over this time period. Data taken from Russian annual biostatistical submissions to NPAFC.


Figure 3: West Kamchatka odd (weak)-year pink salmon harvest in thousands of metric tons, 1993–2011, with Geiger and Zhang robust regression analysis (red line). Harvest has increased by 10% every two years over this time period. Data taken from Russian annual biostatistical submissions to NPAFC.

2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

MANAGEMENT

Last updated on 1 July 2008

The primary means of managing harvest in the fishery are by setting the length of the season, mandating the size and location of trap nets (no closer than 1 km from the river mouth), and making in-season adjustments to fishing pressure and location through decisions of the CAFFs.

However, there is not publicly available evidence that spatial or temporal closures are being actively enacted by all regional Russian pink salmon fisheries when management objectives are not being met. Inadequate management responsiveness may be partly responsible for declines in the Sakhalin Sea of Japan pink salmon stock (Trumble and Lajus 2008), although these declines are ongoing for two decades. Meanwhile, the West Kamchatka pink salmon fishery had a banner year for catch in 2012, but missed the presumed regional escapement goal of 70% of spawning capacity (Klovach et al. 2013).

Particularly on Sakhalin but elsewhere in the Far East as well, on an annual basis through decisions of the CAFF, in-river weirs are put into place at river mouths to block upriver salmon migration and perceived “over-escapement” that would lead to elevated enroute or pre-spawning mortality or redd superimposition. Questions remain as to whether this over-escapement clause is misused by managers and fishermen to increase harvests (when the weirs are in place, all returning fish are harvested at the river mouth by the owner of the adjacent coastal fishing plot). Independent monitoring has indicated cases where in-river weirs are permitted by the CAFF but escapement for the particular rivers is below 100% of spawning capacity (Sakhalin Environment Watch 2011).

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 01 Jul 2008

Russia’s salmon fishery regulations do not include a stock of regulatory concern listing system nor requirements to develop recovery plans for at-risk stocks.

There is precedence for year-to-year management measures to reduce pressure on at-risk stocks (e.g., Sea of Japan pink), which have been implemented through regional Commissions for Anadromous Fish Fisheries (CAFF). For example, the Sakhalin CAFF closed the Southwest Sakhalin salmon fishery in 2013.

Last updated on 14 January 2009

There is little publicly-available information regarding the extent to which salmon fishery closures are being used in-season in East Kamchatka when escapement goals are not being met. Designated fishery closure days are generally used by the management system to facilitate sufficient escapement. However, judging by escapement and harvest data, even (weak)-year harvest may have come at the expense of escapement in some years of the last decade (particularly in 2008, when the East Kamchatka-wide pink salmon escapement of 2.5 million fish was far below the twelve-year even stock average of 8.4 million fish, but the harvest of 7,911 metric tons was close to the twelve-year harvest average).

A new system of salmon fishery management in Kamchatka was put into place in 2010. Up until 2009, annual Total Allowable Catch (TAC) quotas were the main tool for management of Kamchatka salmon fisheries. However, since March 2010, Pacific salmon were included in a list of species for which coastal and river-based fisheries are regulated by means of Recommended Catches (RCs) rather than TACs. While RCs are estimated using the same methods as TACs, they can be more efficiently adjusted in-season, and are intended more to guide pre-season fishery planning than to regulate fishery harvest. RCs are estimated and approved annually by species and fishing areas. Fisheries institutes are responsible for preparation of RC estimates, which are then considered and approved by the Federal Fisheries Agency (FFA) and implemented by regional Commissions for Anadromous Fish Fisheries (CAFFs). Any in-season RC adjustment recommended by scientists is subject to approval by FFA regional bodies and implementation by CAFFs. Therefore, it is the Kamchatka CAFF that can take regulatory action to limit fishing when returns turn out to be less than what was forecast.

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 14 Jan 2009

There is no information available suggesting the existence of depleted pink stocks in East Kamchatka.

Last updated on 11 July 2008

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 11 Jul 2008

There are no depleted stocks in the fishery.

Last updated on 7 January 2011

The primary means of managing harvest in the fishery are by setting the length of the season, mandating the size and location of trap nets (no closer than 1 km from river mouths), and making in-season adjustments to fishing pressure and location through decisions of the CAFF.

On an annual basis, through decisions of the CAFF, in-river weirs are put into place at river mouths to block upriver salmon migration and perceived “over-escapement” that would lead to elevated enroute or pre-spawning mortality or redd superimposition. Questions remain as to whether this over-escapement clause is misused by managers and fishermen to increase harvests (when the weirs are in place, all returning fish are harvested at the river mouth by the owner of the adjacent coastal fishing plot). Independent monitoring has indicated cases where in-river weirs are permitted by the CAFF but escapement for the particular rivers is below 100% of spawning capacity (Sakhalin Environment Watch 2011).

Relevant indicator 1.2.1 (Harvest strategy) of the fishery’s MSC assessment was rated “95” in the fishery’s MSC assessment report. “There is a robust and precautionary harvest strategy in place involving intensive in‐season monitoring of spawning escapements and real time fishery management. The harvest strategy is responsive to the state of the wild stock and is designed to achieve stock management objectives reflected in stream‐specific objectives for natural spawning escapements.”

However, another relevant indicator, 1.2.2 (Harvest Control Rules and Tools), was rated “75” due to uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of available tools in achieving the exploitation levels required under the harvest control rules across the full range of run sizes. A relevant condition (#1) putting onus on the client to indicate full coordination between in-season escapement trends and harvest control was attached to the fishery’s certificate (MRAG 2012).

The client has provided some information indicating that current harvest control tools are appropriate and effective. However, further information (spawner-recruit information specific to NE Sakhalin streams, harvest and escapement estimates for 2012 and 2013, and CAFF regulatory actions for the NE Sakhalin fisheries in 2013 and 2013) is necessary in order for the MSC certification body to further assess progress against the condition (MRAG 2014).

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 07 Jan 2011

There are no at-risk target stocks in the fishery.

Last updated on 4 June 2014

The primary means of managing harvest in the fishery are by setting the length of the season, mandating the size and location of trap nets (no closer than 1 km from the river mouth), and making in-season adjustments to fishing pressure and location through decisions of the CAFF. The number of nets across Sakhalin ranges anywhere from 340 to 460 a year depending on whether it is an even or odd year pink salmon run.

On an annual basis, through decisions of the CAFF, in-river weirs are put into place at river mouths to block upriver salmon migration and perceived “over-escapement” that would lead to elevated enroute or pre-spawning mortality or redd superimposition. Questions remain as to whether this over-escapement clause is misused by managers and fishermen to increase harvests (when the weirs are in place, all returning fish are harvested at the river mouth by the owner of the adjacent coastal fishing plot). Independent monitoring has indicated cases where in-river weirs are permitted by the CAFF but escapement for the particular rivers is below 100% of spawning capacity.

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 04 Jun 2014

There is no available evidence suggesting that official recovery plans are in place. Year-to-year management measures to reduce pressure on at-risk stocks (e.g., Sea of Japan pink) are implemented through the Commission for Anadromous Fish Fisheries (CAFF). For example, the Southwest Sakhalin salmon fishery was closed in 2013.

Last updated on 12 July 2011

There is little publicly-available information regarding the extent to which fishery closures are being used in West Kamchatka when escapement goals are not being met. Designated fishery closure days are generally used by the management system to facilitate sufficient escapement. However, in 2012, a record peak harvest was achieved, but the escapement goal was missed, suggesting that harvest sometimes comes at the expense of escapement (Klovach et al. 2013).

A new system of salmon fishery management in Kamchatka was put into place in 2010. Up until 2009, annual Total Allowable Catch (TAC) quotas were the main tool for management of Kamchatka salmon fisheries. However, since March 2010, Pacific salmon were included in a list of species for which coastal and river-based fisheries are regulated by means of Recommended Catches (RCs) rather than TACs. While RCs are estimated using the same methods as TACs, they can be more efficiently adjusted in-season, and are intended more to guide pre-season fishery planning than to regulate fishery harvest. RCs are estimated and approved annually by species and fishing areas. Fisheries institutes are responsible for preparation of RC estimates, which are then considered and approved by the Federal Fisheries Agency (FFA) and implemented by regional Commissions for Anadromous Fish Fisheries (CAFFs). Any in-season RC adjustment recommended by scientists is subject to approval by FFA regional bodies and implementation by CAFFs. Therefore, it is the Kamchatka CAFF that can take regulatory action to limit fishing when returns turn out to be less than what was forecast.

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 12 Jul 2011

There is no information available suggesting the existence of depleted pink stocks in West Kamchatka.

COMPLIANCE

Last updated on 1 July 2008

One of the key problems in Russia’s salmon fisheries is lack of compliance of laws and regulations, specifically illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing. One may distinguish two types of illegal fishing for salmon in Russia: 1) exceeding of quota by companies that have a fishing permit (unreported); and 2) poaching, which is performed by persons and teams who have no permit at all (illegal).

Poaching for Pacific salmon is common in all regions of the Russian Far East. Predominantly poachers’ activities include fishing for females on spawning grounds or adjacent parts of rivers to obtain roe (salmon eggs). Once the roe is removed from females, carcasses of fish (both females and males) are often buried in deep pits or just left where they were harvested to decompose. Such poaching was most common in the 1990s because of severe socio-economic conditions, weak enforcement by government, and corruption. There seems to be a correlation between the amount of poaching and deteriorating economic conditions. Anecdotal evidence suggests the scale of poaching may have decreased slightly in recent years as socio-economic conditions of people have improved and because the government has provided more effective protection.

The product of poaching is usually salted roe which is then sold to dealers and sold in local and national markets. Little evidence suggests that illegally harvested roe is shipped overseas. Roe is an important source of income for many local people especially in more remote parts of the Sakhalin Island where the transport system is less developed, control over poaching is weaker and socio-economic conditions are more severe. Poachers use gillnets and seines on the main rivers, blocking portions of, or entire salmon runs, with wire mesh. Under the current fisheries management system that manages the fishery via spawning escapement goals, poaching can result in a decrease of legal catch, but may not affect reproductive capacity of the population assuming the monitoring of spawning grounds indicates that sufficient density of spawning occurs. However, this presumes effective “real time” management. In some areas of Russia, poaching has caused serious depletion of salmon spawning escapement, while in other areas monitoring shows that the escapement regularly reaches escapement goals.

The scale of poaching has not been accurately estimated, and assessments vary by region. A 2008 UNDP document estimated poaching of pink salmon in the Bolshaya River on Kamchatka in 2002-2006 at 22% of the legal catch (UNDP 2008). Meanwhile, the 2008 MSC pre-assessment of the Sakhalin island salmon fishery estimated poaching at 20-25% of the legal catch.

In 2009, salmon fishing plots in the main salmon regions (Kamchatka and Sakhalin) were allocated for the first time to commercial fishermen by long-term (20 year) lease. It was considered that this could reduce illegal fishing volumes by fostering a sense of long-term stewardship among fishermen. The new system has now been in place for four years and, therefore, it is too early for final evaluation of whether or not it has resulted in reduced illegal fishing. No comprehensive studies of illegal fishing volumes have been undertaken in 2010-2013, and government regulatory entities have also not attempted to generate formal estimates. Anecdotal reports do indicate that illegal fishing is still continuing at considerable levels, at least on Kamchatka:

1. http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=41581&year=2013&today=04&month=02;

2. http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=42743&year=2013&today=02&month=04).

Last updated on 14 January 2009

Poaching is a large-scale problem throughout Kamchatka, but a 2008 report indicated that it has been a growing problem for more valuable species of salmon over the last decade, while poaching of pink salmon has stabilized (Dronova and Spiridonov 2008). The Karaginsk and Oliutorsk Districts on the northeast coast of Kamchatka are particularly hard hit by criminal poaching, as are the Kamchatka River and areas in the vicinity of the capital city, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy (Augerot 2009).

In 2009, Kamchatka salmon fishing plots were allocated to commercial fishermen by long-term (20 year) lease. It was considered that this could reduce illegal fishing volumes by fostering a sense of long-term stewardship among fishermen. The new system has now been in place for four years and, therefore, it is too early for final evaluation of whether or not it has resulted in reduced illegal fishing. No comprehensive studies of illegal fishing volumes have been undertaken in 2010-2013, and government regulatory entities have also not attempted to generate formal estimates. Both the Coast Guard and Federal Fisheries Agency Kamchatka branch periodically report the number of inspection raids undertaken, violations recorded, and sanctions imposed for illegal fishing.

Anecdotal reports indicate that illegal fishing is still continuing at considerable levels on Kamchatka (http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=41581&year=2013&today=04&month=02;
http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=42743&year=2013&today=02&month=04). The reports also indicate factors which facilitate illegal fishing such as lack of coordination between inspection efforts of the Coast Guard in coastal sea-side fishing plots and Fisheries Agency inspectors in river-side plots, shortage of inspectors, lack of required enforcement in the sport and subsistence fishing sectors, corruption, and bribery.

Last updated on 11 July 2008

Compliance is reported to be strong in the Iturup fishery, although illegal fishing is widely considered a problem for Sakhalin at large (SCS 2009). Estimates of illegal harvest throughout the Sakhalin region amount to at least 20-25% over the legal harvest (Trumble and Lajus 2008).

Last updated on 7 January 2011

Illegal harvest is a serious concern on Sakhalin, where the magnitude of salmon poaching is estimated at 20-25% of the legal catch (Trumble and Lajus 2008). However, community salmon councils operating in the Nogliki and Smirnihovsk municipalities (the regions included in the MSC certificate) have organized anti-poaching patrols that have yielded results (Sakhalin Salmon Initiative 2010). Despite this, sufficient concerns still exist to warrant scores of “70” on relevant MSC indicators 1.2.3 (Information and monitoring), 3.2.3 (Compliance and enforcement) and 3.2.4 (Research plan). According to the scoring rationale for indicator 3.2.3, “While commercial fishing companies participating in the fisheries appear to be effectively regulated, illegal harvest by others in freshwater erodes the benefits of those efforts. Questions remain regarding the consistency of application and the effectiveness of deterrence for illegal harvest activities in freshwater.” Relevant open MSC conditions #2, #7 and #8 require analysis of historic data regarding illegal fishing (both at the total fishery level and divided by stock subcomponent), implementation of an anti-poaching plan and the development of a fishery research plan (MRAG 2012).

As of the first surveillance audit, progress on one condition (#2) was ahead of scheule—specialists from the local university have been contracted to conduct a pilot study on estimating illegal harvest volume in the certification unit, and fieldwork began in 2013. However, progress on the other two conditions was behind schedule—documentation on government enforcement actions in the region was not provided to the certification body, and the local fisheries and oceanography institute’s (SakhNIRO) strategic research plan for 2012-2016 was also not provided (MRAG 2014).

Last updated on 12 June 2014

One of the key problems in Russia’s salmon fisheries is lack of compliance of laws and regulations, specifically illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing. One may distinguish two types of illegal fishing for salmon on Sakhalin: 1) exceeding of quota by companies that have a fishing permit (unreported); and 2) poaching, which is performed by persons and teams who have no permit at all (illegal). While no quantitative data for exceeding Recommended Catches (RCs) exists, estimates of illegal take equal at least 20-25% over the legal harvest (Trumble and Lajus 2008).

Poaching for Pacific salmon is common in all regions of the Russian Far East. Predominantly poachers’ activities include fishing for females on spawning grounds or adjacent parts of rivers to obtain roe (salmon eggs). Once the roe is removed from females, carcasses of fish (both females and males) are often buried in deep pits or just left where they were harvested to decompose. Such poaching was most common in the 1990s because of severe socio-economic conditions, weak enforcement by government, and corruption. There seems to be a correlation between the amount of poaching and deteriorating economic conditions. Anecdotal evidence suggests the scale of poaching may have decreased slightly in recent years as socio-economic conditions of people have improved and because the government has provided more effective protection.

The product of poaching is usually salted roe which is then sold to dealers and sold in local and national markets. Little evidence suggests that illegally harvested roe is shipped overseas. Roe is an important source of income for many local people especially in more remote parts of the Sakhalin Island where the transport system is less developed, control over poaching is weaker and socio-economic conditions are more severe. Poachers use gillnets and seines on the main rivers, blocking portions of, or entire salmon runs, with wire mesh. Under the current fisheries management system that manages the fishery via spawning escapement goals, poaching can result in a decrease of legal catch, but may not affect reproductive capacity of the population assuming the monitoring of spawning grounds indicates that sufficient density of spawning occurs. However, this presumes effective “real time” management. In some areas of Sakhalin, poaching has caused serious depletion of salmon spawning escapement, while in other areas monitoring shows that the escapement regularly reaches escapement goals.

According to officials, the scale of island-wide poaching is “hundreds if not thousands of tons of roe.” Assuming a minimum amount of poached roe at 1,000 t, a coefficient of transformation from roe to fish wet weight (1:25, actually, roe typically amounts to 4% of wet weight for pink and 7% of wet weight for chum), one can estimate that, overall, salmon poaching in Sakhalin comprises around 25,000 t, which is about 1/4 – 1/5 of total catch.

Last updated on 12 July 2011

Poaching is a large-scale problem in West Kamchatka, particularly in the easily-accessible Bolshaya River. A 2008 UNDP document estimated poaching of pink salmon in the Bolshaya River in 2002-2006 at 22% of the legal catch (UNDP 2008). The new Ust-Bolsheretsk “public salmon council” is drawing attention to the problem. Poaching in the Bolshaya River is a more serious problem for the more valuable salmon species than for pink salmon.

In 2009, Kamchatka salmon fishing plots were allocated to commercial fishermen by long-term (20 year) lease. It was considered that this could reduce illegal fishing volumes by fostering a sense of long-term stewardship among fishermen. The new system has now been in place for four years and, therefore, it is too early for final evaluation of whether or not it has resulted in reduced illegal fishing. No comprehensive studies of illegal fishing volumes have been undertaken in 2010-2013, and government regulatory entities have also not attempted to generate formal estimates. Both the Coast Guard and Federal Fisheries Agency Kamchatka branch periodically report the number of inspection raids undertaken, violations recorded, and sanctions imposed for illegal fishing.

Anecdotal reports indicate that illegal fishing is still continuing at considerable levels on Kamchatka (http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=41581&year=2013&today=04&month=02;
http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=42743&year=2013&today=02&month=04). The reports also indicate factors which facilitate illegal fishing such as lack of coordination between inspection efforts of the Coast Guard in coastal sea-side fishing plots and Fisheries Agency inspectors in river-side plots, shortage of inspectors, lack of required enforcement in the sport and subsistence fishing sectors, corruption, and bribery.

HATCHERY IMPACTS

Large-scale pink salmon hatchery production in Russia is restricted to the Sakhalin-Kuril Islands region (227.1 million releases in 2012). Hatcheries in Magadan release smaller quantities (5-23 million juveniles) annually (Zaporozhets and Zaporozhets 2011). There is currently no hatchery production of pink salmon on Kamchatka, in Khabarovsk, or in Primoriya.

In the Sakhalin-Kurils region, large contributions of hatchery fish to harvest in some areas may result in unsustainably high harvest rates on wild stocks, as the hatchery fish are not temporally or spatially separate from wild fish. Government hatcheries recently re-initiated a thermal marking program, indicating potential for increased commitment to management for wild stock conservation (Trumble and Lajus 2008). However, recapture survey results have not been made public for all years and districts in the fishery (notably, the Iturup MSC client Gidrostroy has established a website to make various reports available for its district fishery, but a similar endeavor has not been realized for the southern portion of the mainland).

Relative total hatchery and wild run sizes have been estimated based on hatchery release numbers and wild production inferred from natural escapements and juvenile monitoring (Kaev et al. 2007). Based on this we can approximate contribution to total catch and escapement of pink salmon in recent years as approaching 50% in the southern Sakhalin. Evidence exists that hatcheries are not necessarily augmenting total production. Kaev et al. (2008) has indicated that above approximately 200 million emigrating fry in southern Sakhalin, returns are primarily a function of ocean conditions. Therefore, increasing production beyond this threshold does not increase the likelihood of stronger returns. Evidence of density dependent effects in hatchery dominant systems suggest numerically more fish but of smaller size.

Additional risks associated with hatcheries include competitive and reproductive interactions between wild and hatchery fry. Reduction of hatchery releases may, in fact, result in a compensatory increase in wild salmon survival. There is currently work underway to develop a more robust estimate of the true contribution of hatchery operations through a marking program in a number of hatcheries. This program is an important step forward in assessing impact of hatchery production on wild salmon in the region. There is active debate among scientist and resource managers around the Pacific Rim about the overall role of hatcheries and whether they serve a net benefit for conservation and long-term sustainability of salmon fisheries.

There is no hatchery production of pink salmon in Eastern Kamchatka (NPAFC 2010; Zaporozhets and Zaporozhets 2011).

Four conditions (#1-3 and 6) relevant to impacts of hatchery activities in the region were opened during the 2009 MSC assessment of this fishery (SCS 2009). One of the conditions remains open as of the end of 2013, and will be carried over into the next certification cycle (SCS 2013). This condition involves ensuring that hatchery impacts on wild stocks are minimized through appropriate broodstock selection and escapement goal setting strategies. However, expected further work is focused upon chum rather than pink salmon (SCS 2013).

Hatchery fish are thought to contribute 27% of the fishery’s pink salmon harvest in the even (more abundant) years (SCS 2009). Of the eight currently operating hatcheries on Iturup Island, four (Kurilsk, Reydovo, Skalnyy, and Kuibyshev Bay) release pink salmon. Kurilsk and Reydovo, the two hatcheries that are owned by the MSC client group Gidrostroy JSC, account for 84% of the total pink salmon releases of these four hatcheries (SCS 2013).

The Iturup pink salmon hatchery programs are intended to be “integrated” systems intended to maintain the genetic characteristics of the local natural populations among hatchery fish by minimizing the genetic effects of selection or domestication. The hatchery programs employ a mixture of hatchery and natural-origin fish as broodstock, include large effective population sizes of broodstock, spawn fish over the duration of the run, avoid selective incubation and rearing practices, and minimize the duration of hatchery rearing (SCS 2013).

At the time of the 2009 MSC assessment, there were only six hatcheries operating on Iturup. Since then, two new chum hatcheries have begun operations, one in Prostor Bay (Olya Bay hatchery) and one in Kurilsk Bay (Kitovyy hatchery). The two new programs will likely double hatchery chum production of the fishery and create additional impacts on wild stocks (SCS 2011 and Russian Federal Government 2006). These developments are of greater concern for wild chum stocks than for wild pink stocks.

Recapture studies on marked Itutup hatchery pink salmon have been ongoing since 2010 (Akinicheva 2011; 2012; 2013). Results demonstrate that: 1) hatchery broodstock does include wild fish, indicating that the hatchery program is in fact “integrated”; 2) substantial numbers of hatchery-origin fish spawn naturally in rivers where hatcheries are located; and 3) hatchery-origin pink salmon comprise a relatively small fraction of natural spawners in rivers not connected to hatchery rivers, with more straying in Kurilsk Bay as compared with Prostor Bay.

It is unknown whether or not the integrated nature of the Iturup pink salmon hatchery program and straying noted particularly in Kurilsk Bay (and associated inter-breeding between hatchery- and natural-origin fish) are negatively impacting productivity of the stock.

There is only one hatchery in the region that releases pink salmon, and hatchery impacts in the region are considered much lower than those in Southern Sakhalin (Springmeyer et al 2007). The hatchery does not conduct marking, but its pink salmon releases are limited in quantity (<100,000 annually). For these reasons, a score of “80” was given for relevant MSC indicator 1.3.1 (Enhancement outcomes) in the fishery’s assessment report. “It is highly likely that the enhancement activities do not have significant negative impacts on the local adaptation, reproductive performance and productivity of wild stocks in…Northeast Sakhalin…At the same time, specific marking and monitoring programs sufficient to estimate proportions of hatchery‐origin fish in the natural spawning escapement are not in place. Thus we cannot determine with a high degree of certainty that the enhancement activities do not have significant localized effects in some areas of natural spawning escapement” (MRAG 2012).

While no otolith marking occurs at Northeast regional hatcheries, 1,000 otolith samples were collected from the Smirnykh commercial harvest in 2013 in order to estimate potential contribution of hatchery pink salmon from southern Sakhalin hatcheres to the district harvest (MRAG 2014).

Hatcheries play a significant role in southern Sakhalin fisheries. Currently there are forty-two salmon hatcheries in the Russian Far East, most owned by the Federal Fisheries Agency, which release 650 million fry annually. Most of these hatcheries (28 facilities) are located on Sakhalin Island and collectively release 400 million pink and chum fry annually. Russian hatchery production represents about 13% of total Pacific salmon hatchery production (Japan produces 40% and Alaska 30%).

Direct estimates of hatchery-origin fish in natural spawning areas are not available but relative total hatchery and wild run sizes have been estimated based on hatchery release numbers and wild production inferred from natural escapements and juvenile monitoring (Kaev et al., 2006). Based on this we can approximate contribution to total catch and escapement of pink salmon in recent years as approaching 50% in the southern Sakhalin. Evidence exists that hatcheries are not necessarily augmenting total production. Kaev et al. (2007) has indicated that above approximately 200 million emigrating fry in southern Sakhalin, returns are primarily a function of ocean conditions. Therefore, increasing production beyond this threshold does not increase the likelihood of stronger returns. Evidence of density dependent effects in hatchery dominant systems suggest numerically more fish but of smaller size.

Additional risks associated with hatcheries include competitive and reproductive interactions between wild and hatchery fry. Various studies have shown that, during peak periods of migration from rivers to the ocean, hatchery fish compete with wild fish for food, resulting in reduced feeding intensity and body size in wild populations (Vvendenskaya and Travina, 2001). Studies conducted on pink salmon in Prince William Sound, Alaska, concluded that wild population abundances had been reduced due to hatchery development (Hillborn and Eggers, 2000). Currently no policies exist on managing hatchery impacts on wild salmon in Sakhalin.

Reduction of hatchery releases may, in fact, result in a compensatory increase in wild salmon survival. There is currently work underway to develop a more robust estimate of the true contribution of hatchery operations through a marking program in a number of hatcheries. This program is an important step forward in assessing impact of hatchery production on wild salmon in the region. There is active debate among scientist and resource managers around the Pacific Rim about the overall role of hatcheries and whether they serve a net benefit for conservation and long-term sustainability of salmon fisheries.

3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

BYCATCH
ETP Species

Last updated on 11 July 2008

There are no outstanding MSC assessment conditions with respect to impacts upon threatened species.

Last updated on 7 January 2011

Fishery impacts to depleted bycatch species (chum, masu, and taimen salmon, as well as sturgeon) have not been adequately quantified (MRAG 2012).

Last updated on 9 July 2010

Available quantitative data on PET species in Russia are limited. Some evidence suggests a number of at risk or endangered species may interact with commercial pink salmon fisheries including:

Kaluga sturgeon (Uso dauricus): Endangered on IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Sakhalin sturgeon (Acipenser mikadoi): Endangered on IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Sakhalin taimen (Hucho perryi/Parahucho perryi): Critically Endangered on IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Other Species

Last updated on 3 November 2011

Chum salmon (O. keta), coho salmon (O. kisutch), sockeye salmon (O. nerka), Chinook salmon (O. tschawytcha), cherry salmon (O. masu), charr (S. leucomanis, S. malma, S. alpinus), and various crab species. Lack of data availability limits our ability to estimate proportion of non target species with regard to pink catch. However, in the MSC full assessment of the Iturup Island pink and chum fishery, non target species represented less than 1% of target species catch. A more robust bycatch monitoring system would afford managers the ability to implement best practices and harvest regimes that target stronger stocks.

HABITAT

Last updated on 9 July 2010

As in much of the Russian Far East, Sakhalin’s freshwater habitat is largely intact and in good condition except in areas immediately around cities and developed areas. Much habitat in these areas has been lost due to urban development and agricultural development.Some river systems have undergone eutrophication in the form of point sources (non-treated sewage) and non-point sources (agricultural runoff).Pipeline development for oil and natural gas on Sakhalin has resulted in deterioration of habitat, both at pipeline stream crossings and benthic dredging in Aniva Bay for tanker transportation of LNG.Fishing practices are thought to have minimal impact on salmon habitat.

Marine Reserves

Last updated on 09 Jul 2010

A number of protected areas on Sakhalin encompass important salmon rivers and spawning grounds (i.e. Vostochnii Reserve). A few of these include small marine protected zones as well.

FishSource Scores

SELECT SCORES

MANAGEMENT QUALITY

Click on the score to see subscores

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 7.0.

Escapement goals in some locations are not specific to wild fish and hatchery fish may be contributing greatly to their achievement in some areas.

Click on the score to see subscores

×

Management Responsiveness Subscores

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 7.0.

A score of "7" was granted to the West Kanchatka fishery due to a record harvest in 2012 despite the fact that escapement goals were missed. The Sakhalin-Kuril Islands fishery also received a "7" due to the practice of placing weirs at river mouths to prevent "overescapement."

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 8.0.

Some gear and opening restrictions have been put into place to counter stock declines, but it is yet unclear whether these measures are sufficient.

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 7.0.

The Sakhalin-Kuril Islands and Northeast Sakhalin fisheries received a "7" due to inadequate management concern regarding impacts of the Sakhalin II oil and gas pipeline on salmon populations.

×

Adequacy of Data Subscores

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 5.9.

The Sakhalin-Kuril Islands fishery received a score of "<6" due to high poaching.

STOCK HEALTH:

Click on the score to see subscores

Click on the score to see subscores

×

Stock Status Subscores

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 6.0.

The Sakhalin-Kuril Islands fishery received a "7" due to failure of the Sea of Japan stock in Southwest Sakhalin to achieve its escapement goal in every year since 1995.

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 7.0.

A "7" was awarded to the Sakhalin-Kuril Islands fishery due to a localized harvest decline in Southwest Sakhalin (>5% annual rate of decline) despite overall increasing harvest in the region.

×

Hatchery Impacts Subscores

Different components of this salmon region score differently at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

As calculated for 2012 data.

The score is 5.9.

Likely high stray rates in parts of Sakhalin earned these fisheries scores of "<6"

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
No data available for escapement
No data available for escapement
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

Scores appearing at the region level reflect the range of scores for the district profiles in the region for each of the five FishSource scoring criteria.  District profiles are scored according to the complete FishSource salmon scoring method, which can be downloaded here. A summary of the method’s scoring criteria for district profiles follows below.

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?

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)

SELECT FIP

Access FIP Public Report

Progress Rating: C
Evaluation Start Date: 7 Dec 2017
Type: Comprehensive

Comments:

FIP younger than a year, transitioned to Stage 3 with ongoing activities, thus rating C.

1.
FIP Development
Nov 17
2.
FIP Launch
Nov 17
Dec 17
3.
FIP Implementation
Jul 18
4.
Improvements in Fishing Practices and Fishery Management
Verifiable improvement in policy/management and fishing practices
5.
Improvements on the Water
Verifiable improvement on the water
6.
MSC certification (optional)
MSC certificate made public

Certifications

Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)

SELECT MSC

NAME

Iturup Island pink and chum salmon

STATUS

MSC Certified on 10 September 2009

SCORES

Principle Level Scores:

Principle Score
Principle 1 – Target Species 83
Principle 2 - Ecosystem 80
Principle 3 – Management System 87

Certification Type: Silver

Sources

Credits
  1. Augerot, X. 2005. Atlas of Pacific salmon; the first map-based status assessment of salmon in the North Pacific. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA. http://www.stateofthesalmon.org/atlas/
  2. Chereshnev, I.A. 2008. Freshwater Fish of Chukhotka. Magadan: NESC FEB RAS: 324 pp.http://vuzer.info/load/shkola_licej_vuz/presnovodnye_ryby_chukotki_chereshnev_i_a/24-1-0-7972
  3. Golub, E.V. and Golub, A.P. 2010a. Materials regarding the Abundance and Biology of Chukhotka Pink Salmon. Tinro Center: Vladivostok, Primorski Krai.http://www.tinro-center.ru/attachments/237_140-146.pdf
  4. Golub, E.V. and Golub, A.P. 2010b. Results of a Ranking of Chukhotka Watersheds Most Important for Salmon Conservation. In Pavlov, D.S., Glubokovskiy, M.K. "Salmon Protected Areas in the Far East." VNIRO. Moscow, pp. 28-41. http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/Salmon%20RFE%20Pavlov.pdf
  5. Golub, E.V. and Golub. A.P. 2011. 2011 Season Harvest and Monitoring Summary for Chukhotka. Chukhotka TINRO: Anadyr, Chukhotka. http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/article/676/33-40.pdf
  6. Makeev, S.S. 2010. Regulating the escapement of Adult Salmon.Sakhalin Salmon Initiative: Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk.http://rudocs.exdat.com/docs/index-206646.html?page=2
  7. Makeev, S.S. 2011. New Approaches to Assessing Habitat Capacity of Sakhalin Rivers. Vladimir Ya. Levanidov's Biennial Memorial Meetings. 5: pp. 329-345.http://www.biosoil.ru/levanidov/articles/a0542.pdf
  8. North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission Statistical Yearbook. 1993-2009.http://www.npafc.org/new/pub_statistics.html
  9. Pacific Fisheries Research Center (TINRO Centre) and Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO). 2011. Biostatistical Information on Salmon Catches, Escapement and Enhancement Production in Russia in 2010. NPAFC Doc No. 1329.http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Documents/PDF%202011/1329(Russia).pdf
  10. Scientific Certification Systems (SCS), 2009. MSC Assessment Iturup Island (Russia) Pink and Chum Salmon Fisheries Public Certification Report. Certificate Code: SCS-MFCP-F-0011.http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/certified/pacific/iturup-island-pink-and-chum-salmon/assessment-downloads-1/10.09.2009-iturup-salmon-pcr.pdf
  1. Augerot, X. 2009. A Review of IUU Salmon Fishing and Potential Conservation Strategies in the Russian Far East. The Wild Salmon Center.http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/WSC_IUU_paper_v3.pdf
  2. Dronova N.A., Spiridonov V.A. 2008. IUU fishing of Pacific salmon in Kamchatka. Moscow, WWF Russia/TRAFFIC Europe. http://www.wwf.ru/resources/publ/book/eng/313
  3. East Kamchatka pink salmon FishSource scorecard.East_Kamchatka_pink_scorecard.jpg
  4. East Kamchatka pink scorecardEast_Kamchatka_pink_scorecard.jpg
  5. FishSource. 2014. FishSource salmon profiles.http://www.fishsource.com
  6. Klovach N.V., Temnykh O.S., Shevlyakov V.A., Bugaev A.V., Kaev A.M., and Volobuev V.,V. Biostatistical Information on Salmon Catches, Escapement and Enhancement Production in Russia in 2012. NPAFC Doc. #1487.http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Documents/PDF%202013/1487%28Russia%29.pdf
  7. Makeev, S.S. 2010. Regulating the Escapement of Adult Salmon.Sakhalin Salmon Initiative: Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk.http://rudocs.exdat.com/docs/index-206646.html?page=2
  8. NPAFC. North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission Statistical Yearbook. 1993-2009.http://www.npafc.org/new/pub_statistics.html
  9. Pacific Fisheries Research Center (TINRO Centre) and Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO). 2012. Biostatistical Information on Salmon Catches, Escapement and Enhancement Production in Russia in 2011. NPAFC Doc No. 1430.http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Documents/PDF%202012/1430%28Russia%29.pdf
  10. Ruggerone, G.T. et al. 2010. Magnitude and Trends in Abundance of Hatchery and Wild Pink Salmon, Chum Salmon and Sockeye Salmon in the North Pacific Ocean. Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science. 2:306-328.http://www.bioone.org/doi/pdf/10.1577/C09-054.1
  11. Shevlyakov, E.A., and Maslov, A.V. 2011. The rivers determining reproduction of pacific salmons in Kamchatka as indicators of spawning grounds filling. Izv. TINRO. 164:114-139.________-______.pdf
  12. TINRO Center. 2012. Salmon 2012.http://www.tinro-center.ru/
  13. TINRO Center. 2013. Salmon 2013.http://www.tinro-center.ru/
  14. Vakhrin, Sergey. 2011. Two Rivers, Two Fates - One Alarming, One Tragic.http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=32389&year=2011&today=07&month=10&PHPSESSID=sazonqio
  1. Akinicheva, E. 2011. Results of marking and mark sampling of chum and pink salmon produced at Gidrostroy hatcheries on Iturup Island.http://www.gidrostroymsc.com/Enhancement.html
  2. Akinicheva, E.G., et al. 2013. Estimate of the proportion of hatchery-origin fish in set net harvests on Iturup Island in 2012.http://www.gidrostroymsc.com/Enhancement.html
  3. Akinicheva, E. G., L. K. Federova, and V. P. Pogodin. 2012. Partial identification of tagged pink salmon returning to Iturup Island in the years 2010-2011.http://www.gidrostroymsc.com/Enhancement.html
  4. Beamesderfer, R., Chaffee, C., Matsak, E., Vincent, A., 2015. Iturup Pink & Chum Salmon Fisheries Re-Assessment. SCS Global Services, August 2015. 268pphttps://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/pacific/iturup-island-pink-and-chum-salmon/Reassessment-downloads-1/SS-F_RPT_IturupReAssess_PublicCertificationReport_082715.pdf
  5. Beamesderfer, R., Vincent, A., 2013. Iturup Island Pink & Chum Salmon Fishery. 2013 4th MSC Surveillance Visit Report. SCS Global Services, Inc., November 2013, 57pphttp://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/pacific/iturup-island-pink-and-chum-salmon/assessment-downloads-1/20131108_SR_SAL62.pdf
  6. Iturup pink scorecardIturup_pink_scorecard.jpg
  7. Russian Federal Government. 2006. "Federal Target Program: Socio-Economic Development Plan for the Kuril Islands (Sakhalin Oblast): 2007-2015." http://minsvyaz.ru/common/upload/prog_478_09.08.2006.pdf
  8. Scientific Certification Systems (SCS), 2011. Iturup Island Pink and Chum Salmon Fishery 2010 MSC Surveillance Visit Report. Certificate Code: SCS-MFCP-F-0011.http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/certified/pacific/iturup-island-pink-and-chum-salmon/assessment-downloads-1/27.01.2011_Iturup_2010_Surveillance.pdf
  9. Scientific Certification Systems (SCS), 2011. Iturup Island Pink and Chum Salmon Fishery 2011 MSC Surveillance Visit Report. Certificate Code: SCS-MFCP-F-0011. http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/certified/pacific/iturup-island-pink-and-chum-salmon/assessment-downloads-1/20120413_SR.pdf
  10. Scientific Certification Systems (SCS), 2013. Iturup Island Pink & Chum Salmon Fishery 2013 - 3rd MSC Surveillance Visit Report. January 2013. 44pphttp://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/pacific/iturup-island-pink-and-chum-salmon/assessment-downloads-1/20130416_SR_SAL62.pdf
  11. Zhivotovsky, Lev A. et. al. 17 June, 2011. Rapid expansion of an enhanced stock of chum salmon and its impacts on wild population components. Environmental Biology of Fishes. pp. 1-10.http://gidrostroymsc.com/uploads/Zhivotovsky_-_Rapid_Expansion-ENG.pdf
  1. Augerot, X. 2009. A Review of IUU Salmon Fishing and Potential Conservation Strategies in the Russian Far East. The Wild Salmon Center. http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/WSC_IUU_paper_v3.pdf
  2. Augerot, X., Foley, D.N., 2005. Atlas of Pacific Salmon. University of California Press, Berkeley.http://www.stateofthesalmon.org/atlas/
  3. Kanzeparova, A.N., Podorozhnuk, E.V. and Ponomarev, S.D. С.Д. 2011. Abundance of Chum and Pink Salmon in Khabarovskiy Krai. TINRO Center: Vladivostok, Primorskiy Krai.http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/article/676/41-48.pdf
  4. Makeev, S.S. 2010. Regulating the escapement of Adult Salmon. Sakhalin Salmon Initiative: Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk.http://rudocs.exdat.com/docs/index-206646.html?page=2
  5. Mironova, T.N. 2006. Hatchery Production of Salmon in Khabarovskiy Krai: 2002-2006." In "Modern Problems of Salmon Hatcheries of the Far East. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy.http://www.wwf.ru/publ/book/207
  6. Wild Salmon Center. 2010. New Protected Area Created on the Koppi River for the Protection of Tiger and Taimen Habitat.http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/Koppi%20PR%20RUS%2010-10-10.pdf
  7. Zolotukhin, S.F. 2009. Abundance Counts of Pink and Chum Salmon in Khabarovsk Krai in 2009. Khabarovsk TINRO. http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/351_083-90.pdf
  8. Zolotukhin, S.F. 2010a. Approaches to the Creation of a List of Rivers for the Creation of Fishery Protected Areas in Khabarovskiy Krai. In Pavlov, D.C. and Glubokovskiy, M.K. "Salmon Protected Areas in the Far East of Russia." VNIRO: Moscow. pp. 60-65. http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/Salmon%20RFE%20Pavlov.pdf
  9. Zolotukhin, S.F. 2010b. Abundance Counts of Pink and Chum Salmon in Khabarovsk Krai in 2010. Khabarovsk TINRO. http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/article/543/126-132.pdf
  1. Augerot, X., Foley, D.N. 2005. Atlas of Pacific Salmon. University of California Press, Berkeley.http://www.stateofthesalmon.org/atlas/
  2. Federal Fisheries Agency, Russia. September 2, 2011. "By September 1, the Magadan Commercial Fishery Harvested 11,500 Tons of Salmon." http://fish.gov.ru/presscentre/news
  3. FishNews. November 28, 2011. "Various Methods, One Result: Salmon Hatchery Specialists in Magadan Oblast Attempt to Combine Hatchery and Non-Hatchery Measures of Artificial Pink Salmon Propagation." http://www.fishnews.ru/news/10678
  4. NPAFC Working Group on Salmon Marking. Mark Reports. 2011.http://npafc.taglab.org/MarkSummary.asp
  5. Safronenkov, B.P., Khovanskaya, L.L., Ignatov, N.N., and Smilyanski, I.K. 2012. Hatchery Production of Localized Populations of Pacific Salmon: Future Possibilities for Magadan Oblast. Magadan TINRO: Magadan.http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/article/676/65-72.pdf
  1. fishery scorecardNE_Sakh_pink_scorecard.jpg
  2. Kaev, A. August 2, 2011. Wild and hatchery reproduction of pink and chum salmon and their catches in the Sakhalin-Kuril region, Russia. Environmental Biology of Fishes. pp. 1-12. http://www.springerlink.com/content/j458604436379l35/
  3. Kaev A.M. and Geraschenko, G.V. 2008. Reproduction indices of the north-eastern Sakhalin pink salmon. NPAFC Doc. 1124 (Rev. 1). 11 pp. Sakhalin Research Institute of Fisheries & Oceanography (SakhNIRO).1124_NE_Sakhalin_pinks.pdf
  4. Kaev, A.M., Antonov, A.A., Chupakhin, V.M. and Rudnev, V.A. 2007. Possible causes and effects of shifts in trends of abundance in pink salmon of southern Sakhalin and Iturup Islands. NPAFC Bulletin No. 4: 23-33.Kaev_et_al__2007__Possible_causes_and_effects_of_shifts_in_trends_of_abundance_in_pink_salmon_of_southern_Sakhalin_and_Iturup_Islands.pdf
  5. Kaev, A.M., Antonov, A.A., Yun, K.K., and Rudnev, V.A. 2004. Reproductive indices of the southern Sakhalin pink salmon. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish. Comm. Doc. 758, Rev. 1. 14 pp.http://www.npafc.org
  6. MRAG Americas. 2012. Public Comment Draft Report NE Sakhalin Island Pink Salmon Fishery Nogliki & Smirnykh Districts.http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/in-assessment/pacific/sakhalin_island_northheast_trap_net_pink_salmon/assessment-downloads-1/20120611_PCR.pdf
  7. MRAG Americas, Inc. 2012. Public Certification Report NE Sakhalin Island Pink Salmon Fishery Nogliki & Smirnykh Districts, 12 June 2012. 173 pp.http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/in-assessment/pacific/sakhalin_island_northheast_trap_net_pink_salmon/assessment-downloads-1/20120611_PCR.pdf
  8. MRAG (Beamesderfer, R.,Tabunkov, V.), 2014. Surveillance Report for NE Sakhalin Island Pink Salmon Fishery. MRAG Americas, Inc., January 2014. 52pp http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/pacific/sakhalin_island_northheast_trap_net_pink_salmon/assessment-downloads-1/20140130_SR_SAL234.pdf
  9. Portley, N. and H.J. Geiger. 2014. Limit reference points for Pacific salmon fisheries. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 34(2): 401-410.http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tandfonline.com%2Fdoi%2Fabs%2F10.1080%2F02755947.2014.882453%3FqueryID%3D%2524%257BresultBean.queryID%257D&ei=RVSWU-DbJZbooASitILQCQ&usg=AFQjCNHjz5YADhG7zYwh5hqTutJGXB70yQ&sig2=P7aV5F4BHU45s09ac43BGA&bvm=bv.68693194,d.cGU
  10. Sakhalin Environment Watch. September 2, 2011. "Fish Passage Blockage Left The Melkaya River Half Empty." Web Press Release. http://www.ecosakh.ru/?div=news&id=215
  11. Sakhalin Salmon Initiative. 2010. "Statistics on the Project 'Creation of a Watershed Council Network.'" http://sakhsalmoninitiative.org/doc/statistika.pdf
  12. Scientific Certification Systems (SCS). 2009. MSC Assessment Iturup Island (Russia) Pink and Chum Salmon Fisheries Public Certification Report. Certificate Code: SCS-MFCP-F-0011.http://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/certified/pacific/iturup-island-pink-and-chum-salmon/assessment-downloads-1/10.09.2009-iturup-salmon-pcr.pdf
  13. Springmeyer, D., Pinsky, M.L., Portley, N.M., Bonkowski, J., and Rand, P. December, 2007. "Ranking Sakhalin River Basins for Salmonid Conservation." Transactions of the Sakhalin Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography. Vol. 9, pp 264-293. http://www.sakhwatersheds.org/uploads/files/ssi_russ_prioritatization.pdf
  14. Trumble, R.J. and Lajus, D. 2008. "Pre-Assessment of the Sakhalin Island Salmon Fishery." MRAG Americas. St. Petersburg, FL. http://sakhsalmoninitiative.org/doc/sertifikaziy.pdf
  1. Augerot, X., Foley, D.N., 2005. Atlas of Pacific Salmon. University of California Press, Berkeley. http://www.stateofthesalmon.org/atlas/
  2. Markovtsev, V.G. The Role of Chum Salmon Hatchery Production on Stock Status of Salmon in Southern Rivers of Primorskiy Krai.http://www.wwf.ru/publ/book/207
  3. Semenchenko, A.Y. and Gorianov, A.A. 2010. Expert Analysis of the Fishery Significance of Salmon Basins in Primorskiy Krai. In Pavlov, D.C. and Glubokovskiy, M.K. "Salmon Protected Areas in the Far East of Russia." VNIRO: Moscow. pp. 60-65. http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/Salmon%20RFE%20Pavlov.pdf
  1. Fish Industry. 2012. Total 2011 fish harvest in the Russian Exclusive Economic Zone. Translated from Russian.http://www.fishindustry.net/foreign-markets/2453-itogi-vylova-ryby-v-iez-rossii-za-2011-god.html
  2. Irvine, J.R., M. Fukuwaka, T. Kaga, J.H. Park, K.B. Seong, S. Kang, V. Karpenko, N. Klovach, H. Bartlett, and E. Volk. 2009. Pacific Salmon Status and Abundance Trends. NPAFC Doc. 1199, Rev. 1. 153 pp.http://www.npafc.org/new/pub_statistics.html
  3. Irvine, J.R., M. Fukuwaka, T. Kaga, J.H. Park, K.B. Seong, S. Kang, V. Karpenko, N. Klovach, H. Bartlett, and E. Volk. 2009. Pacific Salmon Status and Abundance Trends. NPAFC Doc. 1199, Rev. 1. 153 pp.http://iea.uoregon.edu/indicators/Fish.Salmon.NorthPacific.Data2.pdf
  4. Kaev, A.M. and Geraschenko, G.V. 2008. Reproduction indices of the north-eastern Sakhalin pink salmon. NPAFC Doc. 1124 (Rev. 1). 11 pp. Sakhalin Research Institute of Fisheries & Oceanography (SakhNIRO).http://www.npafc.org
  5. Kaev, A.M., Antonov, A.A., Chupakhin, V.M. and Rudnev, V.A. . 2007. Possible causes and effects of shifts in trends of abundance in pink salmon of southern Sakhalin and Iturup Islands. NPAFC Bulletin No. 4: 23-33.http://www.npafc.org
  6. Klovach N.V., Temnykh O.S., Shevlyakov V.A., Bugaev A.V., Kaev A.M., and Volobuev V.,V. 2013. Biostatistical Information on Salmon Catches, Escapement and Enhancement Production in Russia in 2012. NPAFC Doc. #1487.http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Documents/PDF%202013/1487%28Russia%29.pdf
  7. Portley, N. and H.J. Geiger. 2014. Limit reference points for Pacific salmon fisheries. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 34(2): 401-410.http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02755947.2014.882453#.U4-exMeXogs
  8. Russia pink scorecardRussia_pink_scorecard.jpg
  9. Sakhalin Environment Watch. September 2, 2011. "Fish Passage Blockage Left The Melkaya River Half Empty." Web Press Release.http://www.ecosakh.ru/?div=77&id=1469
  10. Sakhalin Environment Watch. September 2, 2011. Fish Passage Blockage Left The Melkaya River Half Empty. Web Press Release. http://www.ecosakh.ru/?div=news&id=215
  11. Semenchenko, Anatoly. Expert Analysis of the Fishery Significance of Salmon Basins in Primorskiy Krai. 2010. In Pavlov, D.C. and Glubokovskiy, M.K. "Salmon Protected Areas in the Far East of Russia." VNIRO: Moscow. pp. 60-65. http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/Salmon%20RFE%20Pavlov.pdf
  12. Semenchenko, A.Y. and Gorianov, A.A. 2010. Expert Analysis of the Fishery Significance of Salmon Basins in Primorskiy Krai. In Pavlov, D.C. and Glubokovskiy, M.K. "Salmon Protected Areas in the Far East of Russia." VNIRO: Moscow. pp. 60-65.http://www.wildsalmoncenter.org/pdf/Salmon%20RFE%20Pavlov.pdf
  13. Trumble, R.J. and Lajus, D. 2008. Pre-Assessment of the Sakhalin Island Salmon Fishery. MRAG Americas. St. Petersburg, FL. http://sakhsalmoninitiative.org/doc/sertifikaziy.pdf
  14. Tsibikova, E.B. and Vorobev, N.A. December 1, 2011. Satellite Monitoring of the Coastal Pacific Salmon Fishery of Sakhalin Island. Presentation for the Conference "Land from Space: More Effective Decisions."http://www.ecosakh.ru/data/127_Sakhalin_nevoda_final_mal.pdf
  15. United Nations Development Program Global Environmental Facility (UNDP GEF). 2008. Regional’naia kontsetptsiia sokrashcheniia nezakonnoi dobychi lososevykh ryb v Kamchatskom krae; ekspertnyi variant, predstavliaemyi dlia shirokogo obsuzhdeniia/Regional proposal for the reduction of illegal salmon catch in Kamchatka Krai; expert version presented for broad discussion. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo VNIRO.http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/proon/koncbsb.pdf
  16. Zaporozhets, G.V. and Zaporozhets, O.M. Salmon Hatcheries of Far East in the North Pacific Ecosystems. KamchatNIRO, Petropavlovsk Kamchatskiy: 2011.http://www.knigakamchatka.ru/nauchnye-trudy-nauchno-populyarnye-izdaniya-kamchatki/raboty-uchenyx-issledovateley-kamchatki/salmon-hatcheries.html
  17. Zolotukhin, S.F. 2009. Abundance Counts of Pink and Chum Salmon in Khabarovsk Krai in 2009. Khabarovsk TINRO.http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/351_083-90.pdf
  18. Zolotukhin, S.F. 2009. Abundance Counts of Pink and Chum Salmon in Khabarovsk Krai in 2009. Khabarovsk TINRO.http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/351_083-90.pdf
  19. Zolotukhin, S.F. 2010. Abundance Counts of Pink and Chum Salmon in Khabarovsk Krai in 2010. Khabarovsk TINRO.http://www.tinro-center.ru
  20. Zolotukhin, S.F. 2010. Abundance Counts of Pink and Chum Salmon in Khabarovsk Krai in 2010. Khabarovsk TINRO.http://www.tinro-center.ru//attachments/article/543/126-132.pdf
  1. Akinicheva E., V. Volobuev, E. Fomin. 2012. Ma rked salmon production by the hatcheries of Russia in 2012. NPAFC Doc. 1400, Rev. 1. 6 pp. Sakhalin Research Institute of Fisheries & Oceanography; Magadan Scientific and Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography. http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Documents/PDF%202012/1400%28Rev1%29%28Russia%29.pdf
  2. Geiger, H. J. and X Zhang. 2002. A simple procedure to evaluate salmon escapement trends that emphasizes biological meaning over statistical significance. Alaska Fishery Research Bulletin 9(2): 128-134.http://www.adfg.alaska.gov
  3. Kaev, A. 2012. Wild and hatchery reproduction of pink and chum salmon and their catches in the Sakhalin-Kuril region, Russia. Evolutionary Biology of Fishes, 94 (1): 207-218.http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10641-011-9900-5
  4. Kaev, A.M. and Geraschenko, G.V. 2008. Reproduction indices of the north-eastern Sakhalin pink salmon. NPAFC Doc. 1124 (Rev. 1). 11 pp.Sakhalin Research Institute of Fisheries & Oceanography (SakhNIRO). 1124_NE_Sakhalin_pinks.pdf
  5. Kaev, A.M., Antonov, A.A., Chupakhin, V.M., and Rudnev, V.A. 2004. Reproductive indices of the southern Sakhalin pink salmon. N. Pac. Anadr. Fish. Comm. Doc. 758, Rev. 1. 14 pp.http://www.npafc.org
  6. Kaev, A.M., Antonov, A.A., Chupakhin, V.M. and Rudnev, V.A. . 2007. Possible causes and effects of shifts in trends of abundance in pink salmon of southern Sakhalin and Iturup Islands. NPAFC Bulletin No. 4: 23-33. Kaev_et_al__2007__Possible_causes_and_effects_of_shifts_in_trends_of_abundance_in_pink_salmon_of_southern_Sakhalin_and_Iturup_Islands.pdf
  7. Pacific Fisheries Research Center (TINRO Centre) and Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO). 1994-2013. Biostatistical Information on Salmon Catches, Escapement and Enhancement Production in Russia in 1993–2012. NPAFC Doc No. ____.http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Documents/PDF%202011/1329(Russia).pdf
  8. Sakhalin Environment Watch. September 2, 2011. "Fish Passage Blockage Left The Melkaya River Half Empty." Web Press Release. http://www.ecosakh.ru/?div=77&id=1469
  9. Sakhalin pink scorecardSakhalin_pink_scorecard.pdf
  10. Trumble, R.J. and Lajus, D. 2008. Pre-Assessment of the Sakhalin Island Salmon Fishery. MRAG Americas. St. Petersburg, FL.http://sakhsalmoninitiative.org/doc/sertifikaziy.pdf
  11. Tsibikova, E.B. and Vorobev, N.A. December 1, 2011. Satellite Monitoring of the Coastal Pacific Salmon Fishery of Sakhalin Island.Presentation for the Conference "Land from Space: More Effective Decisions."http://www.ecosakh.ru/data/127_Sakhalin_nevoda_final_mal.pdf
  1. Bugaev, V. F. 2002. On pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) abundance influence on Asian sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) abundance. North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission, Document 628, Vancouver. http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Documents/PDF%202002/628(Russia).pdf
  2. FishSource. 2014. FishSource salmon profiles. http://www.fishsource.com
  3. Shevlyakov, E.A. 2011. Regarding the Stock Status of Bolshaya River Pacific Salmon.http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=32399&year=2011&today=07&month=10.
  4. Shevlyakov, E.A., and Maslov, A.V. 2011. The rivers determining reproduction of pacific salmons in Kamchatka as indicators of spawning grounds filling. Izv. TINRO. 164:114-139.________-______.pdf
  5. TINRO (Pacific Ocean Science Center for Fisheries and Oceanography). 2012. Salmon 2012.http://www.tinro-center.ru/
  6. TINRO (Pacific Ocean Science Center for Fisheries and Oceanography). 2013. Salmon 2013. http://www.tinro-center.ru/
  7. Vakhrin, Sergey. 2011. Two Rivers, Two Fates - One Alarming, One Tragic.http://www.fishkamchatka.ru/?cont=long&id=32389&year=2011&today=07&month=10&PHPSESSID=sazonqio
  8. West Kamchatka pink scorecardWest_Kamchatka_pink_scorecard.jpg
  9. Zaporozhets, G.V. and Zaporozhets, O.M. Salmon Hatcheries of Far East in the North Pacific Ecosystems. KamchatNIRO, Petropavlovsk Kamchatskiy: 2011. http://www.knigakamchatka.ru/nauchnye-trudy-nauchno-populyarnye-izdaniya-kamchatki/raboty-uchenyx-issledovateley-kamchatki/salmon-hatcheries.html
References

    Comments

    This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

    Comments on:

    Pink salmon - Russia

    comments powered by Disqus