Filter content

by selecting applicable filters below

System

Water Type

Feed Dependent

Species

Indicator 2.6.4

Requirement

Indicator scope: cages The UoC shall ensure that cages are sited under at least one of the following conditions: – In water that is at least twice the cage depth; or, – ≥10m above the bottom of the waterbody; or, – During periods at >75% peak biomass, the velocity of the current below the cages is >0.1 m/s, measured according to Appendix 8 (8.4).3333An exemption applies to sites situated in areas classified as having a “hard bottom”. Evidence is required to support the classification “hard bottom”.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • The UoC should initially determine the depth of the waterbody in comparison to the depth of the cage.

  • Measurements should take place at the lowest water level and from the bottom of the cage.

  • Depth should also be measured from the outer circumference of the culture containment space, i.e. excluding predator nets, mortality collection chambers etc.

  • In tidal systems, the depth should be measured at mean low water spring tide (MLWS).

  • If the depth of the water column (surface to seafloor) is less than 10m or less than double the cage depth, the UoC should measure the current velocity below the cage to determine whether the >0.1 m/s threshold is met.

Evidence of Implementation

  • Results of measurements which demonstrate that all cages in the UoC meet the depth/current velocity requirements in Indicator 2.6.4.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • The UoC has provided evidence demonstrating that all cage systems meet the siting requirements outlined in Indicator 2.6.4.

  • If mean current velocity is used to meet the requirement, the UoC has provided evidence that measurements were taken during periods with >75% peak biomass.

Useful Resources

Indicator 2.6.3

Requirement

Indicator scope: cage-fed systems with feed of a diameter ≥3mm. The UoC shall ensure that feed used contains <1% fines, following the method outlined in Appendix 8 (8.3).

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • Indicator 2.6.3 complements the other water quality indicators by addressing the direct release of uneaten feed in the form of fines into the environment.

  • Setting a maximum percentage of fines in the feed addresses the efficient and proper transport, storage and physical delivery of feed pellets to the site.

  • Poor performance in any of the above phases of feed handling will result in a higher percentage of fines (fine particles of feed) and potentially greater impacts on water quality, due to an increase in suspended organic particles and nutrients released into the environment.

  • Sampling of feed lots includes feed delivered as material in bulk, big bags and small bags to the site.

  • Testing by the feed manufacturer to the UoC is permissible where there is no significant risk of feed deterioration during subsequent handling, storage or application.

    • The UoC should demonstrate that deterioration in feed does not take place during the processes outlined above.

    • The UoC should report the schedule and location of testing of feed if it is not conducted on-site.

  • Rationale for not testing on site should also be reported.

Evidence of Implementation

  • The method used to determine the percentage of fines in feed, in accordance with Appendix 8 (8.3).

  • The determination and documentation of a schedule and location for the testing of feed.

  • If testing takes place prior to delivery to the site, the rationale should be documented for not testing on site.

  • Calibration of sieving machines (if used) in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • The rationale for the timing and location of feed sampling.

  • The UoC has appropriate testing technology on site and that, if applicable, it is calibrated as required.

  • The method used to determine the percentage of fines in feed, in accordance with Appendix 8 (8.3).

  • Review testing results and confirm that results demonstrate feed contains <1% of fines.

Indicator 2.6.1

Requirement

Indicator scope: fed systems The UoC shall adhere to species-specific limits on Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Phosphorus (TP) release, according to Appendix 2(2.1). 2.6.2 Indicator scope: fed systems Reporting The UoC shall annually report to ASC TN and TP release (Indicator 2.6.1), according to ASC data submission procedure.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • TN and TP in the feed are required for the calculations. TN and TP content in the feed should be obtained from the feed supplier.

  • The suitability of the TN and TP limits per tonne of production should be reviewed if the UoC is in a Type A waterbody and needs to implement corrective actions, in accordance with Indicator 2.6.13.

  • The annual limits may need to be reduced to prevent shifts in trophic status or correct increases in limiting nutrients.

  • Equipment used to measure TN and TP per tonne of production should be calibrated according to the technical specifications. The equipment used will be based on the formula used in Appendix 8 (8.2):

    • Equipment is required for Formula 2 to measure TN and TP concentration in the influent and effluent water and the volume of the effluent water.

    • Equipment is required for Formula 3 to measure TN and TP concentration in the influent and effluent water.

Evidence of Implementation

  • The formula (outlined in Appendix 8 (8.1)) used to determine the TN and TP load per tonne of production.

  • Results of the TN and TP load per tonne of production based on the relevant calculation.

  • Equipment to measure TN and TP load per tonne of production has been calibrated according to the manufacturer’s instructions, based on the formula used in Appendix 8 (8.2).

Auditors Should Confirm

  • TN and TP load per tonne of production has been determined.

  • Species-specific limits have been adhered to (where applicable) over the previous 24-month period.

    • TN and TP have been determined and reported where species-specific limits are not available.

  • The UoC has calibrated the equipment used to determine the TN and TP load per tonne of production, based on the formula used in Appendix 8 (8.2).

Indicator 2.5.6

Requirement

Indicator applicability: cage culture, suspended marine mollusc systems The UoC shall report to ASC the benthic status, according to ASC data submission procedures.

Indicators 2.5.4–2.5.5

Requirement

Indicator applicability: freshwater systems discharging into rivers The UoC shall demonstrate that the benthic status does not deteriorate downstream from the site’s effluent point, following the method outlined in Appendix 7 (7.5).

Indicator applicability: freshwater systems discharging into rivers The UoC shall ensure that: – the person conducting sediment sampling (see Indicator 2.5.3) has the necessary competencies, experience and training; and – the laboratory conducting the analysis of the samples is accredited and has approved the sampling methodology. In cases where regulatory requirements are defined, the UoC shall ensure that the person conducting the sampling and/or the laboratory conducting the analysis complies with these requirements.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • The benthic monitoring method for freshwater systems discharging into rivers:

  • Uses sediment sampling upstream and downstream from the site outflow point to:

    • Determine the presence, composition, abundance and diversity of invertebrate fauna; and

    • Categorise the benthic status upstream and downstream as a measure of assessing the aquatic ecosystem health.

[Sampling Timing]

  • Should consider the seasonality of the presence of the macroinvertebrate species, e.g. insects in their larval stage of the life cycle.

  • It is recommended that sampling is conducted during summer and winter.

  • In geographical regions like Scandinavia, spring and autumn are recommended as the best times for sampling.

[Location]

  • Practical considerations should be taken into account regarding the sampling locations midstream (e.g. strong currents, particularly in wide, deep rivers).

  • In cases where it is impossible to collect samples in locations midstream, sites should ensure sampling all available substrate types present along the bank and in areas with slower water flow.

[Gear]

  • Standard equipment such as a surber sampler, handnet and grab should be used.

[Sampling analysis]

  • ISO/IEC 17025 is an example of laboratory accreditation.

  • For more guidance, see the section

Evidence of Implementation

  • Records:

  • Sampling activity, including:

    • Scope of the sampling

    • Timing and frequency of the sampling and the person conducting sampling.

    • GPS sampling locations.

    • Classification system.

    • Analysis results.

      • Competence, experience and training of the person conducting sampling and analysis.

      • Accreditation of the laboratory conducting the analysis of the samples.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • Sampling was conducted as per the minimum requirements in Appendix 7 (7.5) by cross-checking records.

  • Sampling analysis results demonstrate benthic status downstream from the effluent discharge similar to, or better than, upstream.

  • Sampling frequency agrees with the frequency required by Appendix 7 (7.5).

Useful Resources

Indicators 2.5.1–2.5.3

Requirement

Indicator applicability: cage culture and suspended marine mollusc systems The UoC shall2828An exemption applies to sites situated in areas classified as having a ‘hard bottom’. Evidence is required to support the classification ‘hard bottom’. determine benthic status, following the method outlined in Appendix 7 (7.2.1, 7.3.1, 7.4.1, 7.7).

Indicator applicability: cage culture and suspended marine mollusc systems The UoC shall demonstrate an ‘Acceptable’ benthic status,2929An exemption applies to cage sites situated in lakes and reservoirs, where determination of benthic status is required (Indicator 2.5.1) but demonstration that the status is ‘Acceptable’ is not required for the first three years of the ASC Farm Standard being effective. following the method outlined in Appendix 7 (7.2.2, 7.3.2, 7.4.2).

Indicator applicability: cage culture and suspended marine mollusc systems The UoC shall ensure that the person conducting sediment sampling and analysis (see Indicator 2.5.1) is independent and has the necessary competencies, experience and training. In cases where regulatory requirements are defined, the UoC shall ensure that the person conducting the sampling and analysis complies with these requirements.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • The method for benthic monitoring for cage culture and suspended marine mollusc systems is composed of:

    • Sediment sampling zones and sampling locations across transects.

    • Benthic quality categories and thresholds for defining those categories and the benthic status.

[Sampling approach]

  • The method uses a three-level sampling approach:

    • The number of transects and sampling locations, as well as the complexity of analysis, may increase based on Level 1 or Level 2 monitoring results:

      • [Level 1] requires sampling along one transect in the direction of the predominant current. The samples are to be analysed for redox potential and total free sulphide.

      • Direction of the predominant current is the compass direction in which the water flows the majority of the time.

        • [Level 2] requires sampling along three additional transects. The samples are to be analysed for redox potential and total free sulphide.

        • [Level 3] requires sampling as per Level 2 (at a minimum, on the two transects in the direction of the predominant current). The samples are to be analysed for three (of the 14) biotic indicators selected from Table 2 of Appendix 7 (7.1).

      • Sites should select biotic indicators that are more appropriate based on their location or based on regulatory requirements.

      • In Scotland, sites should select AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index (AMBI) as one of the biotic indicators since it is a component of the Infaunal Quality Index (IQI) required by the regulation in that country.

        • Sites can choose to commence monitoring at any of the three levels.

          • Previous benthic impact results can provide an indication of the level at which monitoring should commence.

        • The same sediment samples collected for Level 1 or Level 2 sampling can be used for the analysis required by Level 3 sampling.

          • Sites are not required to collect new sediment samples.

        • Transects:

          • In cases where a transect overlaps with another site, the direction of the overlapping transect should be adjusted.

            • The same applies to any transect/sampling station overlapping with land.

            • Transect directions should also be adjusted to avoid sampling in areas where water depth changes rapidly along the transect.

            • In all cases, each transect should be as close to 90 degrees from each other as possible.

            • In cases where multiple cages are located in close proximity, transects should be located at the edge of the last cage site.

          • Given the low complexity associated with Level 1 and Level 2 sampling and analysis, it is advisable for sites to conduct monitoring not only at the required timings by the indicator but also prior to those timings

      • The results can indicate the need for Level 3 sampling at the timings required by the indicator, thereby assisting in monitoring planning.

[Ecological Quality Status (EQS) categories]

  • Ecological Quality Status (EQS) categories are used to determine the benthic status (see more details on the categories in the

Evidence of Implementation

  • Production overview information:

    • Biomass (projected and current).

    • Feed delivered (projected and current).

    • Harvest (biomass, time of harvesting).

    • Bottom water temperature data.

    • Visual imagery confirming hard bottom.

  • Records:

  • Sampling activity, including:

    • Timing and person conducting sampling.

    • GPS sampling locations.

    • Competence, experience and training of the person conducting sampling and analysis.

    • Sampling analysis results.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • Sampling was conducted according to the method and timing stated in Appendix 7 (7.2, 7.3, 7.4), by cross-checking production overview information and records.

  • Competence, experience and training of the person conducting sampling.

  • Adequate level of personnel competence should be verified by observations and interviews.

  • The sampling analysis results that demonstrate an acceptable EQS.

Useful Resources

The benthic monitoring method for cage culture and suspended marine mollusc systems uses five Ecological Quality Status (EQS) categories to define abiotic and biotic qualities based on the seabed macrofaunal communities. The EQS categories are outlined in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Descriptions of benthic macrofauna assemblages for each of the five Ecological Quality Status (EQS) categories of the benthic monitoring method for cage culture and suspended marine mollusc systems:

EQS Category Description

High No or very minor disturbance: Species abundance, richness and diversity is high and sensitive taxa dominate. Opportunistic taxa are absent or of negligible abundance. Geochemical quality elements indicate aerobic conditions with low free sulphide toxicity.

Good Slight disturbance: The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is slightly reduced. Most of the sensitive taxa are present but slightly reduced. Opportunistic taxa are present but negligible. Geochemical quality elements indicate aerobic sediment conditions with a slight increase in free sulphide levels.

Moderate Moderate disturbance: The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is moderately reduced. Sensitive taxa have negligible abundance or are absent. Tolerant and first-order opportunistic taxa co-dominate in abundance. Geochemical quality elements indicate a moderate increase in anaerobic conditions with free sulphide levels known to be lethal to sensitive and indifferent taxa.

Poor Major disturbance: Evidence of major alterations to the values of the biological quality elements. Diversity is greatly reduced with sensitive and indifferent taxa showing negligible abundance or are absent. Tolerant taxa are sub-dominant to first-order opportunistic taxa. Geochemical quality elements indicate a major increase in anaerobic conditions and sulphide concentrations lethal to most taxa.

Bad Severe disturbance: Evidence of severe alterations to the values of the biological quality elements and in which large portions of the relevant biological communities normally associated with undisturbed conditions are absent. First-order opportunistic taxa dominate but are greatly reduced in abundance. Geochemical quality elements indicate a severe increase in sulphide concentrations that are lethal to all taxa.

Indicator 2.4.21

Requirement

The UoC shall time fallowing periods to occur outside the out-migration period of native salmonids.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • This indicator requires the UoC to schedule fallowing periods outside the out-migration period of native salmonids.

  • The UoC should

    • Identify the local out-migration period of native salmonids in its operating region.

    • Schedule fallowing periods so that no fish are present in cages during this time.

    • Work with scientists, local fishery trusts, and regulatory bodies to align fallowing timing with migration patterns.

Evidence of Implementation

  • The out-migration period of native salmonids has been determined.

  • Documents demonstrating fallowing periods have been scheduled outside the out-migration period.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • Fallowing periods occur outside the out-migration period of native salmonids.

Indicator 2.4.20

Requirement

The UoC shall publicly disclose the scientific baseline study (see Indicator 2.4.19).

Indicator 2.4.19

Requirement

The UoC shall conduct, in collaboration with the local fishery trust(s), a scientific baseline study to determine the genetic composition of the contemporary native and farmed salmonid population(s) in the waterbody where it operates. The baseline study shall: a. use credible methodologies and analysis and undergo peer review; and b. include known historical farmed and native salmonid genetic profiles; and c. determine if changes in the genetic composition of the contemporary native salmonid population(s) have occurred; and d. if changes in the genetic composition of the contemporary native salmonid population(s) are detected, seek to determine if these have occurred through introgression of farmed salmon or through other mechanisms; and e. be updated every three years.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • This Indicator requires the UoC to conduct a collaborative scientific baseline study on the genetic composition of both native and farmed salmonid populations in the waterbody where it operates.

    • The goal is to assess potential genetic changes in wild populations, particularly from interbreeding (introgression) with farmed salmon, and ensure ongoing monitoring.

  • The study should establish a genetic baseline for comparison over time and should follow rigorous scientific methods and undergo peer review for credibility.

  • The study should use established genetic analysis techniques (e.g. DNA sequencing, microsatellite markers, SNP analysis).

  • The study should, if available, include known historical genetic profiles of both native and farmed salmonid populations in the waterbody.

  • The study should determine if genetic changes have occurred in native populations and identify if this is the result from introgression from farmed fish or other evolutionary pressures.

  • The study must be updated every three years.

Evidence of Implementation

  • The UoC maintains records of the conducted study or demonstrates that the study is under development.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • Verify that the study has been concluded and has been conducted according to the requirements or is under development.

Indicator 2.4.18

Requirement

The UoC shall collaborate with fishery trust(s) in conducting native salmonid monitoring programme(s) in the waterbody where it operates.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • This Indicator requires the UoC to collaborate with local fishery trusts in conducting native salmonid monitoring programmes within the waterbody where it operates.

    • The purpose is to track the status of native salmonid populations and assess potential impacts from aquaculture activities. ‘Collaborate’ would imply involvement e.g. beyond providing funding or passive support.

  • Collaboration may include:

    • Sharing data on site operations and potential interactions with native salmonids.

    • Assisting in monitoring efforts (e.g. providing access to sites, participating in surveys).

    • Supporting scientific research or environmental assessments.

  • The monitoring programme should address as minimum:

    • Tracking population health, abundance and migration patterns of wild salmonids.

    • Assessing genetic integrity (to detect any impact from escaped farmed fish).

Evidence of Implementation

  • The UoC maintains records (e.g. agreements, partnerships, etc.) of collaboration with fishery trust(s).

Auditors Should Confirm

  • Records have been presented to demonstrate collaboration with fishery trust(s).