This Indicator requires the UoC to ensure that fish counting procedures achieve a minimum accuracy of 98%, meaning that the error margin must not exceed 2% and applies to both manual and automated counting methods.

The total number of fish at key stages of production (e.g. stocking and harvesting) needs to be counted.

The actual count should be within 2% of the true number (e.g. if 100,000 fish are stocked, the count must be between 98,000 and 102,000).

Acceptable counting methods include e.g.:

The UoC shall demonstrate that fish are counted at key stages of production (e.g. stocking and harvesting) using a method that achieves 98% accuracy.

If automated systems are used, ensure they are regularly calibrated.

Documentation of counting procedures, accuracy checks and error rates.

Results of fish counts at key stages of production have been presented.

That calibration of the counting method is conducted.

Documents are maintained to record counting procedures, accuracy checks and error rates.

[Note]: Indicator 2.4.9 only applies for species/regions that are classified as ‘Category Major/Massive (MR/MV)’ in the EICAT Species Factsheet.

This Indicator requires that the UoC implements suitable actions to minimise the potential harm to biodiversity by a species, depending on its context as determined in Appendix 6 (following the decision-tree in this Appendix).

For situations in which either the species, the production region or the culture system results in a low likelihood of contributing to biodiversity harm, the UoC is not required to implement actions.

For situations in which either the species, the production region or the culture system contributes to biodiversity harm, the UoC is required to implement actions that reduce this risk. This could mean, e.g.:

Documents demonstrating to what extent the decision tree in Appendix 6 is applicable, and evidence of a reduction in the harm category (where relevant).

In cases where a reduction in the harm category is not possible, the UoC should demonstrate which additional measures have been taken, including the intended outcome of these measures.

The outcome of the decision-tree results in Appendix 6.

In cases where a reduction in the harm category is not possible, confirmation that additional measures have been taken, including the intended outcome of these measures.

[Note]: Indicator 2.4.12 only applies for species/regions that are classified as ‘Category Major/Massive (MR/MV)’ in the EICAT Species Factsheet.

This indicator requires a zero limit on mass escape. It also requires certification cancellation if the limit is exceeded.

An event counts as a ‘mass escape’ if the thresholds are exceeded, regardless of cause (e.g. storm damage, net failure, human error). The thresholds are:

The UoC has a register of known escapes in which exceedance of the set limit is monitored.

Records of mass escape events are maintained.

Escape limits remain below the set threshold and that calculations are made correctly.

[Note]: Indicator 2.4.11 only applies for species/regions that are classified as ‘Category Major/Massive (MR/MV)’ in the EICAT Species Factsheet.

This Indicator requires a strict limit on the number of known escapes allowed per production cycle or per year, whichever threshold is stricter. ‘Known escapes’ refers to escape incidents that are either observed directly or detected through monitoring. It does not include unverified or speculative losses.

Escape limits:

The UoC has a register of known escapes in which exceedance of the set limit is monitored.

Records of known escapes are maintained.

Escape limits are to remain below the set threshold and that calculations are made correctly.

[Note]: Indicator 2.4.9 only applies for species/regions that are classified as ‘Category Moderate (MO)’ in the EICAT Species Factsheet.

This Indicator requires that the UoC implements suitable actions to minimise the potential harm to biodiversity by a species, depending on its context as determined in Appendix 6 (following the decision-tree in this Appendix).

For situations in which either the species, the production region or the culture system results in a low likelihood of contributing to biodiversity harm, the UoC is not required to implement actions.

For situations in which either the species, the production region or the culture system contributes to biodiversity harm, the UoC is required to implement actions that reduce this risk. This could mean, e.g.:

Documents demonstrating to what extent the decision tree in Appendix 6 is applicable, and evidence of a reduction in the harm category (where relevant).

In cases where a reduction in the harm category is not possible, the UoC should demonstrate which additional measures have been taken, including the intended outcome of these measures.

Confirmation of the decision-tree results in Appendix 6.

In cases where a reduction in the harm category is not possible, confirmation that additional measures have been taken, including the intended outcome of these measures.

[Note]: Indicator 2.4.9 only applies for species/regions that are classified as ‘Category Moderate (MO)’ in the EICAT Species Factsheet.

This Indicator requires a strict limit on mass escape events over a six-year period to ensure that large-scale fish escapes are rare and properly managed. It also requires certification cancellation if the limit is exceeded.

An event counts as a ‘mass escape’ if the thresholds are exceeded, regardless of cause (e.g. storm damage, net failure, human error). The thresholds are:

The UoC has a register of known escapes in which exceedance of the set limit is monitored.

Records of mass escape events are maintained.

Escape limits remain below the set threshold and that calculations are made correctly.

[Note]: Indicator 2.4.8 only applies for species/regions that are classified as ‘Category Moderate (MO)’ in the EICAT Species Factsheet.

This Indicator requires a strict limit on the number of known escapes allowed per production cycle or per year, whichever threshold is stricter.

‘Known escapes’ refers to escape incidents that are either observed directly or detected through monitoring. It does not include unverified or speculative losses.

Escape limits:

The UoC has a register of known escapes in which exceedance of the set limit is monitored.

Records of known escapes are maintained.

Escape limits remain below the set threshold and that calculations are made correctly.

This Indicator requires the UoC to report the relevant data to ASC, as per data submission procedure.

Evidence that data has been submitted and received by ASC.

Verify that UoC holds evidence that data has been submitted to ASC.

This indicator requires the UoC to log (i.e. register) all handling and containment incidents, including near misses, in order to inform the risk assessment (see Indicator 2.4.3) and the training (2.4.4) on situations that could result, or have resulted, in registered escapes.

A documented register of all handling and containment incidents and near misses.

Presence of the register.

Interviews with employees to confirm that employees are aware of the register and that it is being used.

Training and handling procedures includes:

Training documents and records of staff attendance.

Presence of relevant procedures/protocols.

Training documents and records of staff attendance.

Presence of relevant procedures/protocols.

Interviews with staff.