Filter content

by selecting applicable filters below

System

Water Type

Feed Dependent

Species

Indicator 4.1.2.7

Requirement

The UoC shall ensure that the HMP considers crowding activities with the intent of preventing stress, injury and mortality. Crowding activities shall be carried out: a) under supervision; and b) gradually; and c) partially; and d) for a maximum of two hours. An exception applies where a registered veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional demonstrates that exceeding two hours of crowding does not negatively impact fish welfare, in which case the maximum time period shall be defined by the registered veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • Appropriate crowding intensity is achieved when there is a balance between fish welfare, minimising abnormal behaviour and having sufficient fish in the crowd area for an effective handling.

  • Abnormal behaviour may be defined as fish behaviour commonly found or seen when fish are stressed.

  • During crowding operations consider an appropriate fish density avoiding:

    • Vigorous escape behaviour.

    • Violent splashing.

    • Escape attempts (jumping).

    • Burrowing into the crowding net.

    • Air gasping.

    • Excessive gill movement.

    • Inability to fish maintain body position (white sides constantly on surface).

      • Skin colour changes.

      • Presence of fish scales in the water.

    • Narrow deep nets are recommended over wide shallow nets for fish crowding.

Evidence of Implementation

  • Considerations, plans and actions taken pre- and during crowding for achieving an appropriate crowding intensity.

  • Records:

    • That confirms the monitoring of the crowding, e.g. time and intensity.

    • Employees should demonstrate awareness of the established crowding operation.

    • Rationale for exceeding the crowding time as directed by the veterinarian or aquatic health professional.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • The crowding operation incorporates considerations for an appropriate crowding, and it is implemented.

  • Implementation can be verified by cross-checking the crowding operations with records, information from employee interviews and observations.

Useful Resources

Indicator 4.1.2.6

Requirement

The UoC shall ensure that the HMP includes a fitness assessment of the fish prior to handling activities,7272An exemption applies to handling activities related to health examinations (e.g. health assessment, parasite counting) and in the case of emergencies (e.g. containment of an escape). approved by a registered veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional. For the specific handling activities listed below, the fitness assessment shall be carried out: – within a two-week period prior to transport or treatment that requires handling of the fish, except when the same type of treatment is repeated, in which case the assessment shall be carried out at least once a month after the initial treatment; – within a two-week period prior to net change and passive grading.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • Fitness assessment may fall into two categories:

    • Single assessment: Performed within a two-week period prior to the handling.

    • Recurring assessment: Performed at least once a month in the case of serial, repeated treatments, e.g.:

    • Handling for administering multiple rounds of treatment to fish populations over a period of time, e.g.:

      • Bacterial infections, such as bacterial gill disease, furunculosis, or red spot diseases.

      • Fungal diseases, such as saprolegniasis.

      • Treatments for parasites control such as formalin treatments, hydrolysers or thermal delousing.

  • A successful fitness for handling record should demonstrate:

    • Fish free of diseases.

    • Minimal morphologic damage.

    • Normal behaviour.

    • Low mortality rate.

    • Usual feeding rates.

    • An example of a fitness for handling assessment record is provided in the Table 9 below.

Table 9: An example of a fitness for handling assessment record with information collated from assessments and routine data collected on the site.

Fitness assessment report

Handling activity to be carried out

Date handling expected to be carried out

Disease status comments

Mortality levels Low Consistent Increasing Other:

Feeding rate Normal Sluggish Very active Other:

Fish behaviour

Comments from last morphological checks

Fitness comments

Date: Approved by:

Position:

  • Handling in case of emergencies are exempt from requiring fish fitness assessments e.g.:

    • Containment of an escape.

    • Imminent risk of predation.

    • It is recommended to have a health representative verify the emergency operations together with written advice to support decision-making when handling is required in an emergency.

Evidence of Implementation

  • HMP includes consideration for fitness assessment prior to handling.

  • Fitness assessment report.

  • Records:

    • Veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional handling approval.

    • Documented reasons for exemptions with written advice.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • Fitness assessments status before handling.

  • Implementation can be confirmed by cross-checking the frequency of fitness assessment and handling records, information from employee interviews and observations.

  • The rationale for any deviation from the frequency of fitness assessment before handling is in accordance with those highlighted by the indicator and respective footnotes.

Useful Resources

[

]

Indicator 4.1.2.5

Requirement

The UoC shall ensure that the HMP, following consultation with a registered veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional, considers the use of anaesthesia during handling activities.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • The use of anaesthesia is not required in every handling operation, but it should be considered in operations that can inflict pain, e.g.:

    • Inter-peritoneal vaccinations.

    • Stripping.

    • Handling operations that require fish immobilisation.

Evidence of Implementation

  • HMP includes consideration for the use of anaesthesia during handling.

  • List of handling operations requiring the use of anaesthesia.

  • List of licenced anaesthetics available on site.

  • Records:

    • Anaesthetic prescriptions.

    • Anaesthetic usage.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • The HMP includes consideration of the use of anaesthetics during handling.

  • Implementation can be confirmed by cross-checking the HMP with records, information from employee interviews and observations.

Useful Resources

Indicator 4.1.2.4

Requirement

The UoC shall ensure that the HMP includes consideration of the environmental conditions associated with handling activities, with the intent of preventing handling under adverse conditions that could affect the health and welfare of the fish.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • Examples of considerations of external conditions:

    • Avoid mechanical treatments in the event of storms.

    • Avoid crowding fish for treatment without using a shade net on a sunny day.

  • Avoid transferring juveniles during period where there are less than favourable conditions:

    • Spring tides can result in stronger currents and rapid changes in water levels, juveniles may become disoriented or stressed potentially leading to injuries or escape.

      • Risk of entrapment and loss of equipment can be associated with spring tides.

Evidence of Implementation

  • HMP includes consideration for external conditions necessary to perform handling.

  • Records:

    • Weather forecast verification.

    • Employees should demonstrate knowledge of the considerations and the verification of external conditions before handling.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • HMP includes considerations for external conditions for handling and are implemented.

  • Implementation can be confirmed by cross-checking the HMP with records, information from employee interviews and observations.

Indicator 4.1.2.3

Requirement

The UoC shall ensure that the HMP includes contingency plans for handling activities, including at least the following: a) immediate response measures in the case of system failure; and b) humane culling response measures (see Indicator 4.1.3.2); and c) mass mortality event response measures.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • The contingency plans should consider:

    • Identification of potential failures.

  • Effective corrective measures, e.g.:

    • Backup power generators.

    • Oxygen support.

Evidence of Implementation

  • HMP includes processes’ contingency plans.

  • Records:

    • Backup system testing.

    • Additional oxygen source available.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • HMP includes considerations on fish health and welfare before handling events, including considerations for the existence of a backup system.

    • Backup system testing records.

  • Presence of backup system.

  • Employees are familiarised with the contingency plans by conducting employee interviews and observations.

  • Records:

    • Backup system testing.

Useful Resources

1. Barathan, B., Wang, Y., Su, Y., Hamilton, D., et al., (2022). Methods to control harmful algal blooms: a review. Environmental Chemistry Letters.

2. FAO eLearning Academy (2024) Emergency preparedness for aquatic disease outbreaks. Online course

Indicator 4.1.1.13

Requirement

The UoC shall report to ASC mortality data, according to ASC data submission procedures, following the method outlined in Appendix 12 (12.5.1).

Indicator 4.1.1.12

Requirement

The UoC shall calculate stocking densities, following the method outlined In Appendix 12 (12.5.4).

Indicator 4.1.1.11

Requirement

The UoC shall report to the relevant authorities if a WOAH-notifiable disease is confirmed at a site, and shall: a) apply the measures according to applicable legal requirements; and b) increase disease-monitoring in other batches of fish; and c) coordinate oversight by a registered veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional.

How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • Upon a WOAH-notifiable disease being confirmed, the UoC should consider within its response mechanism included in the HWMP (see Indicator 4.1.1.10) an emergency response procedure for culling the affected batches of fish (see also Criterion 4.1.3).

Evidence of Implementation

  • HWMP includes site-specific disease monitoring, responses and reporting requirements.

  • Specific considerations should be given to WOAH-notifiable diseases, including an emergency response procedure for culling the affected batches of fish.

  • National regulations. In some countries where WOAH-notifiable diseases are considered endemic, the UoC should follow the legal reporting requirements.

    • Records:

      • Reporting to authorities.

      • Measures applied.

      • Notification to other sites in the vicinity or the ABM.

      • Disease monitoring.

      • Veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional coordination.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • The HWMP includes considerations for WOAH-notifiable diseases (see interpretation for Indicator 4.1.1.10).

  • In case a WOAH-notifiable disease has been confirmed:

    • Reporting to authorities and implementation of regulatory measures.

    • Notification to other sites in the vicinity or the ABM.

    • Increased monitoring to other batches of fish.

    • Veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional coordination

Useful Resources

Indicator 4.1.1.10.7

Table 1. Requirements for Indicator 4.1.1.10.7

Indicator

Requirement

4.1.1.10.7

The UoC shall ensure the HWMP includes a mortality reduction plan which defines annual targets for both total and unexplained mortalities by considering the results of the trend analysis in Indicator 4.1.1.10.6 and shall implement appropriate actions to meet the annual targets.


How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • The mortality reduction programme should address the various factors contributing to fish mortality.

  • When building the programme, the UoC should consider:

    • Current mortality rates and causes, including unexplained mortality.

    • Set achievable goals and objectives.

    • Identify priority areas for intervention according to the goals and objectives.

    • Develop strategies addressing priority areas for intervention.

    • Monitor and evaluate progress regularly.

    • Provide employees with training.

    • Foster a culture of continuous improvement.

    • Collaborate with industry experts for knowledge sharing.

    • Seek health professionals’ involvement in developing the reduction plan.

  • When building the programme, the UoC should consider:

    • Special attention should be given to unexplained mortalities which may indicate underlying health issues or poor management practices

    • Identifying and addressing the root causes of unexplained mortalities is essential for improving overall management practices and reducing mortality rates.

    • In addition, consistent, clear downward trends in OWIs indicate declining health or welfare.

    • Examples of such trends include a consistent increase in overall morphological scoring, repeated observations of abnormal behaviour, deteriorating water quality with one or more parameters that are outside of the acceptable ranges, or increasing mortality.

    • If a declining trend is observed, then the UoC should assess the situation and investigate the causes behind the trends.

    • One or multiple issues may be causing the decline, including those of infectious or non-infectious origin.

    • In many cases, poor or inadequate husbandry practices can predispose animals to succumb to infectious diseases.

  • Also, when declining trends are observed, the UoC is expected to review at least the following husbandry practices if appropriate:

    • Stocking densities.

    • The feeding plan.

    • Water quality.

    • Handling practices.

    • Enclosure characteristics.

    • Environmental enrichment.

  • The rearing environment, for example:

    • Additional aeration.

    • Deployment of environmental enrichment (EE), (e.g. bubble curtains, change of tank colouration, adjustments in the light system), amongst others.

Evidence of Implementation

  • Mortality reduction programme.

  • Long-term animal health and welfare improvement measures as well as short-term mitigation measures to react to situations of declining health or welfare, included in the HWMP.

  • Mortality records that allow for trend analysis for the development of a mortality reduction programme.

  • Records of long-term animal health and welfare improvement measures and short-term mitigation measures to react to situations of declining health or welfare.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • The mortality reduction programme and the improvement and mitigation measures included in the HWMP incorporate the minimum required elements and that its outcome is implemented:

    • Implementation can be verified by cross-checking the programme and measures with relevant records, information from employee interviews and observations.

Useful Resources

Indicator 4.1.1.10.6

Table 1. Requirements for Indicator 4.1.1.10.6

Indicator

Requirement

4.1.1.10.6

The UoC shall ensure the HWMP includes trend analysis to determine changes in health and welfare over time. This analysis shall consider drivers of the trends and shall be based on the data analysed in indicator 4.1.1.10.5 and feedback from the processing plant where relevant.


How Do I Interpret This Requirement?

  • The analysis of OWIs data over time, as well as information gathered from the mortality classification and post-mortem analysis and the feedback from the processing plant:

    • Allows for the identification of trends that provide insights into factors influencing health, welfare and mortality events.

      • Regular reviews of trends, such as monthly and at least annually or at the end of the production cycle, are recommended.

    • Inform decision-making to improve overall production.

      • The veterinarian or aquatic animal health professional should assist the UoC with the trends analysis and drawing conclusions to build effective corrective measures for improving health or welfare over time.

    • Feedback from the processing plant can, for example, disclose the presence of recurring trends like skin wounds or deformities.

      • Sharing observations and feedback with the UoC enables prompt and thorough investigations.

Evidence of Implementation

  • The mechanism or trend analysis included in the HWMP.

  • Records that confirm trend analysis has been conducted include as a minimum:

    • Mortality classification.

    • Post-mortem analysis.

    • Feedback from the processing plant.

Auditors Should Confirm

  • The trend analysis mechanism included in the HWMP incorporates the minimum required elements and its outcome is implemented:

    • Implementation can be verified by cross-checking the mechanism with relevant records, information from employee interviews and observations.

Useful Resources