This Indicator requires the UoC to conduct a site-specific risk assessment to proactively identify and mitigate risks associated with handling and containment of cultured animals. The Indicator emphasises the need for tailored evaluation rather than a generic approach as site-specific circumstances might require different responses. Management approval ensures that the assessment is formally reviewed, acknowledged and integrated into wider management structures.

Documentational evidence of a risk assessment, the identification of appropriate risk levels and any mitigation actions taken (including the implementation thereof). The evidence should also include proof of management approval and periodic review of the risk assessment to ensure that it remains relevant.

Presence of a documented risk assessment, which:

That the risk assessment identifies:

This Indicator requires the UoC to prevent the escape of cultured animals. It focuses on three key aspects:

Inspection of containment structures to check for structure integrity, including:

Escape prevention measures are installed according to construction specifications that incorporate environmental conditions and species-specific characteristics.

Documents demonstrating inspection and maintenance is occurring regularly and when needed (e.g. after a storm).

Escape prevention measures have been installed according to construction specifications and are appropriate to environmental conditions and species-specific characteristics.

Documents have been presented which demonstrate inspection and maintenance has occurred regularly and as required.

<https://www.gov.scot/publications/aquaculture-code-practice-containment-prevention-escape-fish-fish-farms-relation-marine-mammal-interactions/pages/1/>

The stocking and culture of transgenic animals is not permitted on ASC certified sites.

Transgenic animals are not common in aquaculture, but transgenic stocks of Atlantic salmon, rainbow trout, channel catfish and Nile tilapia are known to exist.

Evidence that non-transgenic animals are stocked should be presented to the auditor. This could consist of a declaration from the hatcheries that non-transgenic animals are used.

All stock is from non-transgenic origin.

Records of data submissions to ASC.

Data on wildlife mortalities has been submitted to ASC and is accessible.

Wildlife mortalities are disclosed and are easily and publicly available.

Hardcopies of mortalities are available to stakeholders, if requested.

Records are kept demonstrating when mortalities have been disclosed.

Sampling results are easily and publicly available. If applicable, confirm that the site has made hard copies of test results easily available to stakeholders.

Mortalities have been disclosed per site within 30 days of each incident.

Documentation (e.g. batch records) demonstrating the wild broodstock species is not listed as a Threatened Species.

The IUCN Red List can be used to check whether the wild broodstock species is listed as Threatened.

Evidence has been presented that wild broodstock is not a Threatened Species.

IUCN: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Batch records or other documentations are maintained to demonstrate stocked fish are hatchery-raised.

For Seriola/Cobia, where wild caught fingerlings are stocked, documentation demonstrating the species is not listed as a Threatened Species and records demonstrating the traceability of the fish.

The IUCN Red List can be used to check whether the species is listed as Threatened.

Traceability documentation should include the species, catch method and area in which the fish was caught.

Batch records or other documentation are presented to demonstrate stocked fish are hatchery-raised.

For Seriola/Cobia stocked from a wild fishery, adequate documentation is presented to demonstrate traceability back to the fishery and the certification of the originating fishery (to an ASC-recognised fisheries certification scheme).

IUCN: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

Acoustic deterrence includes any device or method used in which acoustic (‘sound’/’noise’) is used to deter wildlife. This includes, but is not limited to, the use of acoustic deterrent devices (ADDs) and acoustic harassment devices (AHDs).

Records of the use of any aquatic acoustic deterrence, which includes the frequency and duration and duration of the deterrence.

If aquatic acoustic deterrence is used, scientific reports/publications are obtained which demonstrate that the deterrence does not result in significant stress, injuries to, or mortality of, the species impacted/targeted by the deterrence.

Records are provided to demonstrate whether any aquatic acoustic deterrence has been used.

If aquatic acoustic deterrence has been used, scientific reports/publications have been presented by the UoC to demonstrate that the deterrence does not result in significant stress, injuries to, or mortality of, the species impacted/targeted by the deterrence.

Records showing that the UoC has investigated each mortality incident and how the investigation has led to the implementation of appropriate actions to prevent recurrence.

Documents demonstrating the actions have been implemented and prevented recurrence.

Investigations have taken place following each mortality event.

Actions have been implemented to prevent recurrence of wildlife mortalities.

Indicator 2.1.1 and Appendix 3.1 outline the site-specific Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) following the Standardised Risk Methodology.

Mitigation measures may need to be implemented to manage Human-Wildlife Conflict within the site and in the area surrounding the site.

The risk level and identified mitigation measures (if applicable) should be identified in the ERA.

The ERA assesses the risk of Human-Wildlife Conflict. Evidence should be presented to demonstrate whether the risk is low.

Mitigation measures implemented to manage Human-Wildlife Conflict to maintain the low risk level.

The ERA has assessed the risk of Human-Wildlife Conflict and determined the risk level is low.

Mitigation measures are implemented (if required and recommended by the ERA) to maintain the low risk level.