Filter content
by selecting applicable filters below
Indicator 4.2.1.8.4
by Contact on 8 October 2026
Table 1. Requirements for Indicator 4.2.1.8.4
|
Indicator |
Requirement |
|---|---|
|
4.2.1.8.4 |
Indicator applicability: every UoC using feed The UoC shall ensure the HWMP includes a mortality monitoring process which includes at least the following: a) monitoring and recording of mortalities when spotted; and b) removal of mortalities when spotted; and c) conduct a post-mortem analysis for each mortality event; and d) investigation of mortality events which remain unexplained or unattributed to crustacean health reasons; and e) collection of moribund crustaceans when spotted and cull them according to Criterion 4.2.3. Where any of the listed items above are not possible, the UoC shall record the reason. |
How Do I Interpret This Requirement?
-
The UoC should develop a procedure (e.g. SOP) to describe moribund collection and culling operations.
-
Employees should be trained on this procedure.
-
-
Moribund crustaceans should be collected using appropriate equipment to prevent further injuries and stress, e.g. hand net according to crustacean size.
-
Slaughtered moribund crustaceans should be considered for the calculations needed to demonstrate compliance with Indicator 4.2.1.4.
-
Whole pond/tank health issues should be addressed under a contingency plan for emergency culling.
-
Possible causes of several moribund crustaceans should be investigated.
-
-
A contingency plan for emergency culling should be in place.
-
Monitoring for mortality is understood as visual observation of whether there is mortality at the site, e.g. observations of the crustaceans in feeding trays, observations of mortalities at the tank/pond discharge.
-
Possible causes that would justify no monitoring or removal of moribunds and mortality when spotted are severe bad weather, or a major equipment failure not related to poor maintenance.
-
Scrutiny of mortality records and cause determination is essential for preventing further avoidable deaths and improving overall crustacean health and welfare in aquaculture.
-
If on-site diagnosis is inconclusive, off-site laboratory diagnosis is required.
-
When designing the mortality monitoring process, the UoC should consider carrying out a post-mortem analysis for each mortality event, not necessarily every crustacean.
-
A statistically relevant number of crustaceans from the mortality event shall be analysed.
-
A statistically relevant number of crustaceans refers to a sample size that is large enough to yield meaningful and reliable results when conducting statistical analysis.
-
In other words, the sample size should be sufficient to accurately represent the population being studied and to draw valid conclusions from the data.
-
The specific size needed for statistical relevance depends on various factors such as the variability within the population, the desired level of confidence and the statistical methods being used.
-
Typically, larger sample sizes provide more reliable estimates and stronger evidence for drawing conclusions.
-
The designated veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional should assist the site in determining the appropriate sample size required for statistical analysis and must conduct all diagnosis.
Evidence of Implementation
-
Records:
-
Mortality monitoring.
-
Mortality removal, including the results of post-mortem analysis and the rationale for determining the sample size required for statistical analysis.
-
Culling.
-
The mortality monitoring process, that incorporates the minimum elements required, included in the HWMP.
-
Employees should demonstrate awareness of the established mortality monitoring, removal process and culling method.
-
Auditors Should Confirm
-
The mortality monitoring process included in the HWMP incorporates the minimum required elements and is implemented.
-
Implementation can be verified by cross-checking the process with relevant records, information from employee interviews and observations.
-
-
Moribunds are collected when spotted and culled following responsible stunning and killing according to Criterion 4.2.3.
-
Implementation can be confirmed by cross-checking the frequency of collection and culling methods with records, information from employee interviews and observations.
-
Contingency plan for ‘treatment’ culling
-
Monitoring and removal of mortality in conformance with the frequency required.
-
Records, employee interviews and observations should demonstrate acceptable frequency.
Useful Resources
-
McKay, H., & McAuliffe, W. (2024) Pre-slaughter mortality of farmed shrimp. ReThink Priorities: Technical report. 24pp.
