Appendix VI - ShAD GSC Responses to 1st Public Comments-1
101
Shrimp Aquaculture Dialogue Responses to 1st Public Comment ShAD GSC RESPONSE General Comments WWF France Although sustainable consumption does not belong to the Shrimp Dialogue area of concern, WWF France urges the ShAD steering committee to add a paragraph on the need for sustainable consumption in the introduction of the Standards. WWF France would be happy to submit such a proposal, should the GSC request it. • We have added some language in the introduction, as suggested. New England Aquarium: Stating the goal of the standard to set metrics that approximately the top 20% of farms could practically meet is positive, since it sets the bar relative to the performance of the industry and the expectation of the standard developed. It should be clear though if this is the top 20% of farms or production, since a significant number of farms exist globally. • This for the top 20% of production, but is only a theoretical bar that the GSC uses to orient our work. Where it ultimately ends up is unknown and difficult to precisely estimate. M.N. Kutty Page 7: Geographic scope to which the standards apply “The shrimp standards do not seek to impede or restrict the general development of shrimp operations, but rather to address the production of shrimp that is traded internationally.” Comments: This appears to be a narrow view of the Dialogue – while it is appreciated that the standards are not intended to restrict general development of shrimp farming (SF) operations, the Dialogue being global in nature and in view international bodies such as WWF and FAO give stress rural development mainly in less dev eloped countries, the Global nature of the SHAD exercise should address sustainable shrimp aquaculture, centered now more in developing countries ‐ addressing “the production of shrimp that is traded internationally” connotes protecting more the interests of the importing countries – this approach needs to be revised and development of socially and environmentally sound aquaculture has to be encouraged globally, bringing the reformed benefits to all universally and not just ‘international trade’. • The ShAD recognizes this concern, but is not in a position to address it in a significant way. The first goal of the ShAD is to define acceptable social and environmental performance standards. How these standards are applied and used, while very important, is not in the direct scope of the GSC. CP Thailand I have tried to read through the Shad document, but honestly it is written in very difficult (for at least me a poor shrimp farmer) language, more reminiscent of some law document. So my first comment is that this needs to be put in much similar, direct language that the shrimp farming community can comprehend. Second comment is that it is definitely going to be very restrictive; just by the amount of environmental and social paper work that will be required‐ thus limiting its implementation to only the largest and most corporate of farming companies. Nothing wrong with this I guess, but as this document now stands very few farms in Asia would have interest; and only the large corporate farms of Africa and the Americas would apply. And thus the world impact of this set of standards would be minimized; but then after reading the
Transcript of Appendix VI - ShAD GSC Responses to 1st Public Comments-1
ShrimpAquacultureDialogueResponsesto1stPublicCommentShADGSCRESPONSEGeneralCommentsWWFFranceAlthoughsustainableconsumptiondoesnotbelongtotheShrimpDialogueareaofconcern,WWFFranceurgestheShADsteeringcommitteetoaddaparagraphontheneedforsustainableconsumptionintheintroductionoftheStandards.WWFFrancewouldbehappytosubmitsuchaproposal,shouldtheGSCrequestit.
• Wehaveaddedsomelanguageintheintroduction,assuggested.NewEnglandAquarium:Statingthegoalofthestandardtosetmetricsthatapproximatelythetop20%offarmscouldpracticallymeetispositive,sinceitsetsthebarrelativetotheperformanceoftheindustryandtheexpectationofthestandarddeveloped.Itshouldbeclearthoughifthisisthetop20%offarmsorproduction,sinceasignificantnumberoffarmsexistglobally.
• Thisforthetop20%ofproduction,butisonlyatheoreticalbarthattheGSCusestoorientourwork.Whereitultimatelyendsupisunknownanddifficulttopreciselyestimate.
M.N.KuttyPage7:Geographicscopetowhichthestandardsapply“Theshrimpstandardsdonotseektoimpedeorrestrictthegeneraldevelopmentofshrimpoperations,butrathertoaddresstheproductionofshrimpthatistradedinternationally.”Comments:ThisappearstobeanarrowviewoftheDialogue–whileitisappreciatedthatthestandardsarenotintendedtorestrictgeneraldevelopmentofshrimpfarming(SF)operations,theDialoguebeingglobalinnatureandinviewinternationalbodiessuchasWWFandFAOgivestressruraldevelopmentmainlyinlessdevelopedcountries,theGlobalnatureoftheSHADexerciseshouldaddresssustainableshrimpaquaculture,centerednowmoreindevelopingcountries‐addressing“theproductionofshrimpthatistradedinternationally”connotesprotectingmoretheinterestsoftheimportingcountries–thisapproachneedstoberevisedanddevelopmentofsociallyandenvironmentallysoundaquaculturehastobeencouragedglobally,bringingthereformedbenefitstoalluniversallyandnotjust‘internationaltrade’.
• TheShADrecognizesthisconcern,butisnotinapositiontoaddressitinasignificantway.ThefirstgoaloftheShADistodefineacceptablesocialandenvironmentalperformancestandards.Howthesestandardsareappliedandused,whileveryimportant,isnotinthedirectscopeoftheGSC.
CPThailandIhavetriedtoreadthroughtheShaddocument,buthonestlyitiswritteninverydifficult(foratleastmeapoorshrimpfarmer)language,morereminiscentofsomelawdocument.Somyfirstcommentisthatthisneedstobeputinmuchsimilar,directlanguagethattheshrimpfarmingcommunitycancomprehend.Secondcommentisthatitisdefinitelygoingtobeveryrestrictive;justbytheamountofenvironmentalandsocialpaperworkthatwillberequired‐thuslimitingitsimplementationtoonlythelargestandmostcorporateoffarmingcompanies.NothingwrongwiththisIguess,butasthisdocumentnowstandsveryfewfarmsinAsiawouldhaveinterest;andonlythelargecorporatefarmsofAfricaandtheAmericaswouldapply.Andthustheworldimpactofthissetofstandardswouldbeminimized;butthenafterreadingthe
backgroundyousetouttobeveryselective.Butinbeingselective;forevenalargefarmtoputtheeffortintobecomingcertifiedwiththesestandards,wouldrequireacleardefinitionofthefinancialbenefittothefarmintermsofpricingofproduct.Willtherebeapremiumaswithorganicproduct,andhowbigwillthatmarketbe.Iknowyouthinkitisprematuretorespondtothis;butwiththesestandards,youwillneedtorespondotherwiseIseenoincentiveforanyfarmadoptingthestandards.Iwasoverwhelmedbythecomplexityofthestandards,theamountofrequiredfarmdocumentationthatmustbemaintained,andtheingeneralsomenaïvetéonhowfarmsoperateincommunities.Iwasexpectingsomethingmorestraightforward.Iagreewithmostoftheintention;butthecomplexityoverwhelmsyourpurposeinmyopinion.AndinsomesectionsIwouldquestionifyouaremixingstandardsthatbelonginotherdocumentswithShrimpFarmStandards.MaybethisisbestcharacterizedasaShrimpIndustryStandard.
• Weunderstandyourcommentaboutthecomplexityofthestandardsdocument.However,theGSChasdeterminedthatallincludedpiecesareimportanttoensureunderstandingandthecredibilityofthedocument.Thisdocumentisnotwrittensolelyforindustry,NGOs,oronesinglegroup.Thisiswhyitissocomplex.Inthenewversion,wehavetriedtoexplainthismoreclearlyandhavemovedpiecestoappendiceswherepossibletominimizetheamountoftextinthebodyofthedocument.
WWF‐US
1. ThereisneedtospecifywhichspeciestheShADstandardswillapplyto‐IsMacrobrachiumincluded?WhataboutMetapenaeussp.?
• Wehaveaddedlanguagetoclarifythespeciescoveredbythesestandards.2. TheGSCshouldattempttofocusonthejustificationforthestandardsratherthanthe
justificationoftheimpacts.Therearemanyjournalorotherreferencestoimpacts.Theimpactshavebeendecidedbythedialogueandthereislittlemorejustificationnecessary.
• Werespectfullydisagree,aswebelieveitisimportanttounderstandthewhyinordertofosterinterestandagreaterunderstandingofthestandards.
3. ItmaybenecessaryfortheGSCtoexplainallofthematerialsurroundingthestandardsinthecurrentdraftofthestandards,butWWF‐UShighlyrecommendsanarrowerfocusandseparateguidanceinthenextdraft.Amoreconcisefinaldocumentwillallowreaderstofocusthemostimportanteffortofyourprocess–thetargets
• Guidanceisincludedinthedocument,asmanyGSCmembersfeelitisanimportantpiecetojudgethequalityofthestandards.Inotherwords,ithelpsthereaderunderstandtheintentbydemonstratingtothegreatestextentpossiblehowthestandardswillbeimplemented.
4. WWFUSwouldliketoseeaconciseexplanationforwhymetricsstandardsaremostappropriateforimprovement.Includinghowmetricsbasedstandardscouldcontinuetoraisethebarinthefuture.Wordingthatisvagueorprescriptivewillnotlikelybeabletoshowquantifiedimprovementovertime.
• Weagreeandhaveconsideredthisforthenextversionofthestandards.5. TheprinciplesappeartobequitedifferentfromtheonesintheInternationalPrinciples
forResponsibleShrimpFarming.ThereshouldbealignmentwiththeInternationalPrinciplesoraclearexplanationonwhythatis
• Werespectfullydisagree.TheInternationalPrincipleswereastartingpointandweredeemedinsufficienttocoveralloftheissues,whichiswhytheShADhaschangedtheseprinciples.Wehaveaddedlanguageintheintroductiontoaddressthis.
6. Inreferencetotheparagraph“Forexample,ifthefarmoperatesahatchery,thefarmandhatcherywillneedtocomplywiththestandardrelatedtotheamountofphosphorususedtoproduceametrictonofshrimp.”Thestandardsaredesignedforfarmsandaselectionofwhatstandardswouldbeapplicabletohatcheries,feedplants,processingplantsetcshouldbeclarifiedinthetext.
• Wehaveattemptedtoclarifythisinthenewversion.7. Itisimportanttostateclearlyhowthresholdsweresetforthedifferentstandards.Why
thosesurvivalrates,whythosevaluesofFFER?WWF‐USsuggestscreatingarepositoryofdataandusingthatdatatocalculatethresholdsaswasdoneinthePangasiusAquacultureDialogue(PAD).Withthistypeofstructure,stakeholderswouldnotbeabletoargueandpushstandardsupordown,theycanonlyprovidemoredata.Anotherapproachwouldbetousepeer‐reviewedpapersandtakeaveragesoftheaverages.
• Weagreeandwillattempttoprovidebetterexplanationsinthenextversionofthestandards.
WilliamRash1. Definitionoffarmscaleneedsconsistencyandrelevance
• Wehaveattemptedtoclarifythisfurtherinthenewdraft.2.Definitionofnewandexistingfarmsneedsconsistencyandrelevance
• Weagreeandaredevelopingtheseforthenextversionofthestandards.3.AuditingcriteriaHowshouldauditingbodiesgathertheirobjectiveevidenceasthiswilldifferforthetypeandsophisticationofthefarmorfarminggroup?Forinstanceforsmallfarmholders/familyfarmsthereshouldbelessrelianceondocumentedevidenceandmorerelianceonvisual/verbal/interviewevidence.Thisisofparticularrelevancewherethestandardspecificallyasksforthepresenceofrecordsordocumentation
• Weagreethatthisisasignificantchallengeandaretryingtofindcreativesolutionstosolvetheseproblems.
4.Scope‐FactoryProcessingShouldthescopeofthestandardincludetheenvironmentalandethicalaspectsofthefactoryprocess?a.Shouldthestandardalsoincludetheenvironmentalimpactofthefactoryprocess‐effluentdischargeoffactoriesprocessingshrimpiscommonlyhighrisk.b.Itwouldcompromisethevalueofthisstandard,ifithadcertifiedshrimpthatwasbeingprocessedinafactorythatwashavingaday‐to‐daynegativeimpactontheenvironment(thiscanalsobeextendedtotheethicalstatusoftheworkforce).
• Weagree.However,thisisinitiallyoutsidethescopeoftheShAD,butwewouldliketoensurethattheASCfindswaystoaddressthisimmediately.Werecognizeitasaveryimportantissue.
JavierDuenaThescopeandimplicationstowardsimplementationissimplytooambitiousandmostlikely,perceivedasexhaustiveandoverwhelmingbythemajorityofproducers,includingthosetargetedasthe20%potentiallyabletomeetthestandards.
ThechallengingprocessofgeneratingglobalperformancebasedstandardsforoneofthemostcomplexofWWF'saquaculturedialogues,presentlyneedstoincorporateanoutreachstrategythatwouldallowstakeholderstocatchupandbecomesomehow,effectivelyengagedsothattheprocessbuildsuponitselfasitgiveswayanddebateofwhatisrealisticallyattainable,andwhatisnot.Bystandardsaimingatapotential20%oftheshrimpindustry,itseemstheprocessandecosystemloses.Whatisneededistorecruitthelargestnumberofproducersintoaprocessthatbuildinguponitself,propelsarealisticoutlookonaddressingtheenvironmentalandsocialimpactstheproposeddraftstandardsaredesignedtoreduce.
• Wewouldbethefirsttoadmitthattheprocessishardlyperfect.However,participationintheShADwasopentoanyinterestedpartiesfromthebeginning.TheGSCiscomprisedofthosewhowerewillingtocommittovolunteeringtheirtimeandresourcestoactivelyengageinthisprocessandwearedoingthebestthatwecanwiththetimeandresourcesthatarecurrentlyavailabletous.Wealwayswelcomesuggestionsforimprovement.
RudyPorterThestandardsapplyonlytofarmswhereshrimpareraised.Thestandardsdonotapplytofishingoperations,shrimppreparationandprocessingortransport.IfcertificationisstampedonthepackagesofshrimpfromthesefarmsindicatingtheycomplywiththeILOCoreLaborStandards(CLS),buttheshrimpwereprocessedortransportedbyemployersthatdenyFreedomofAssociation,usechildlabororforcedlabor,ordiscriminateagainstworkers,thenthestamponthepackagegivesafalseguaranteethattheproductcamethroughasupplychainrespectingCLS,wheninfacttheoppositewouldbethecase.Inotherwords,establishingstandardsforonesmallpartofthesupplychainwhileignoringallotherpartsismisleadingtoconsumersoftheproduct.Inthisaspect,thestandardsproposedhereareinferiortotheexistingprocessestablishedbytheAquacultureCertificationCouncil,whichcoversprocessingplantsandfishing,aswellasfarms.Thesecriticismspertainonlytotheprintedstandards,whichstatenothingaboutthesystembywhichthesestandardswillbemonitored.TheintroductionsaystheSteeringCommitteehasalreadydecidedthatamonitoringbodywillbeformed,butitdoesnotdescribetheprocessthatbodywilluse.Regardlessofthequalityofthestandards,iftheyareused,forexample,byoutsideauditorswhoshowupforacoupledayseveryfewyearstorunthroughachecklist,thenthestandardsaremeaningless.
• Weagree.However,thisisinitiallyoutsidethescopeoftheShAD,butwewouldliketoensurethattheASCfindswaystoaddressthisimmediately.Werecognizeitasaveryimportantissue.
DallasWeaverOverallthedocumentlacksavisionofthefutureandcanbeviewedasanexpressionofentrenchedspecialinterestvoicingtheirselfinterest(ENGO'sandsomemajorfarmersandacademics).Therewasnoonerepresentingtheun‐inventedorthefuturebeyondunsupportedclaimsofthefuture.Thoseclaimingtobefocusingonthefutureweredoingsomerelytopreventfuturecompetitionwithalternativespecies,culturetechniques,geographicalareas,GMOcompetition,etc.Allofthishelpstheentrenchedinterestsonthepaneltothedetriment
ofthefuture.Verylittlehastodowithlongtermsustainabilityinthefaceofanother3billionpeopleintheworldwhowillneedtobefed.
• Werespectfullydisagreeandwelcomeyourfurtherinputasthestandardsdevelop.AldinHilbrands TheStandardonlyrequiresverylimitedrecord‐keepinganddocumentationonthefarm(i.e.timerecords,payrecords,workerrecords,trainingrecords,etc.).Auditingandcertificationisbasedontheprincipleofso‐called'objectiveevidence'.Withoutanyrecordsordocumentationtodemonstratecompliancewiththecriteria,itwillbeextremelydifficulttoauditandcertifyafarm,becausetheauditorwillhavetorelyoninterviewsand'hear‐say'.Thegeneralrequirementsarespecifiedinthisdocument,buttheyarenotdefinedinawaythatfacilitatesauditingandcertificationagainsttheStandard.Forsomecriteria,theimplementationguidanceisambivalentanddoesnotprovideaclearinterpretationofwhatisexpectedofthefarmerorauditor(basicneedsandlivingwages,discrimination,employeeandworkercontracts,etc.).TheStandardisverycomprehensive,butalsofulloftechnicaljargonandterminologyandextremelycomplicatedanddifficulttounderstand(especiallyfornon‐experts).ThedocumentmustbeaccompaniedbysimplifiedandtranslatedguidanceforthefarmsrequiredtoimplementtheStandard,andbycomprehensiveandpracticalguidancefortheauditorsrequiredtoauditandcertifyagainsttheStandard.Itissuggestedtotakeoutpartssuchase.g."rationale"and"guidanceforimplementation"andconsiderincludingtheseinabackgrounddocument.Andthereisnodescriptionofhowanauditorshouldassessafarm,groupoffarmsortheindicators("guidanceforassessment"sectionislacking).Page6,suggesttorefinethedefinitionof"accreditation"andreplace"entities"by"certificationbodies"becauseonecouldbeconfusedandthinkentititescouldbefarms.Page6,suggesttorefinethedefinitionof"certification"byadding"forshrimpfarms"tomakeclearthatcertificationisaboutconfirmingcompliancebyfarms.ThereisreferencemadetotheGSCbutthereisnowhereafulldescriptionolfthisabbreviation.Moreover,thecompositionoftheGSCisheavilybiasedtowardstheNGOsidetonotrepresentativeofthedifferentinterestgroupsinthisdiscussioninmyview.
• Werecognizethattheguidanceisincompleteandwanttoclarifythatthisisthestartingpointforitsdevelopment.Oncethestandardsarefinalized,amuchmoredetailedguidancedocumentwillbecreated.
• WeunderstandyourconcernaboutNGOsontheSteeringCommittee,butparticipationintheprocesshasbeenopentoanyoneandthecurrentGSCincludesindividualsfromseveraldifferentareasofwork.TheGSCalsohasavotingstructurethatpreventsanyoneinterestfromdominatingthediscussion.
KennethBoyceOneofthemostfrequentlyraisedmirroredaconcernofFairtrade:thatistheapplicabilityofthestandardstosmallholderproducers.Frequentlythepointwasraisedaroundbureaucraticnatureofsomeoftherequirementswhichisnotsuitabletotheinformalnatureofshrimpfarmingarrangementsinwhichsmallholderoperationsexist.Thestandardsarebeingcreatedinavacuumofinformationastowhatrequirementswillbeplacedonsmallproducersintermsofrganizationtobecertifiedcollectivelye.g.ifagroupof100smallfarmersjointogetherhowwilltheybecertifiedandaudited.Whatwilltherganizationalrequirementsbe?Willtheyneedsomesortofformalarrangement?
WhilethismaybeseenasnottheresponsibilityoftheShADindraftingthestandarditmakesitdifficulttounderstandhowbiganimpacttherequirementswillhaveonsmallfarmersintermsofcertification.Thisisparticularlyrelevantforthesocialandenvironmentalimpactassessmentswhichwillbetimeconsumingandpotentiallyexpensive.PossiblybythetimethefinalstandardispublishedthosesettinguptheASCwillhavealreadyestablishedsomeclearerpoliciesoncertification.Closecollaborationwiththemwouldberecommended.TheShAdhastheadvantageofbeingstillunderwaywhiletheASCisworkingonthesepoints.Thestandardscouldpotentiallyalsobemoreconsistentintheirapplicationofparticularmechanisms.E.g.thesourcingofsustainablefishmealhasatimeframeallocatedforthis.ThisoptionwasnotpresentedforuseofGMO.Thismakesthestandardconfusingasitisunclearastowhetherthestandardfavoursaprogressiveapproachtosolveproblemsorwhetheritinsistsonfullcomplianceforentry.
• WecompletelyagreeandmanyoftheGSCmemberssharethisconcern.WearetryingtodevelopthebestpossiblestandardsbutplantoworkwiththeASCtofindsolutionstohelpensurethatsmallholdershavetheopportunitytocomply.Ifthisdoesnotultimatelytakeplace,theworkwillobviouslynotachievethedesiredgoal.
IngerNaslundItisimportanttobalancebetweensmallscaleandlargescalefarmssothatcertificationcanbepossibleindependentofthesizeofthefarm.Likewiseitisofhighconcernthatthestandardswillbeclearandeasytounderstandforthosewhoaregoingtocomplywiththestandards.
• SeeaboveresponsetoFairtrade.FlavioCorsinThestandardsareheavilyprescriptive(i.e.focusedoncompliancetopractices)andseldomperformance‐based.Whenperformanceindicatorsarepresent,agreatdealofadditionalprescriptiverequirementsarealsoincluded,makingthestandardslargelyredundantand,webelieve,notinlinewithotherAquacultureDialoguestandards,whicharefarmorefocuseddocuments.WeencouragetheGSCtocriticallyrevisethestandardstoreducetheindicatorstoremovesuchcostlyredundancies.Moredetailedsuggestionsareprovidedbelow.
• WeagreeandaredoingourbesttoreducetheamountofBMPs,but,givencurrentknowledgegaps,thisisnotalwayspossible.
AlthoughthedocumentclaimsthattheInternationalPrinciplesforResponsibleShrimpFarmingwereused,thisisnotcorrect.Thecurrentversionoftheprinciplesisverydifferentfromthepresentone.Theprocessofdevelopingtheinternationalprinciplewasindeedmulti‐stakeholderandlasted7years.AttheConsortiumProgramwasmuchmorefocusedonprincipledevelopmentthattheShAD,thestandardsshouldberestructuredwithintheoriginalInternationalPrinciples.
• SeeaboveresponsetoWWFUS.InspiteofthepresenceofproducersontheGSCthestandardsdonotseemtobeapplicabletothegreatestmajority(ifnotall)farms.Principle2appearstobeparticularlyimpractical(somedetailsareprovidedbelow).WeacknowledgethatthecurrentversionmaynotbeendorsedbyalltheGSCmembers(asstatedonthecover),however,asthisistheversionthattheGSCindeeddecidedtopostforpubliccomments,wequestionthegovernanceoftheShAD,whichappearstobevoicingonlyconcernsofnon‐producerstakeholders.
Itseemsverylikelythatthesestandardswouldexcludemost,ifnotall,Asiansmall‐scaleproducers,whoareproducingthemajorityoftheshrimpproducedglobally.Lookingagainatprinciple2(asanexample),weactuallybelievethatonlyaverysmallpercentageofproducersgloballywillbeabletocomplyatall,asforexampleseveraloftherequirementssetonexistingfarmswouldbeimpossibletodocument.WebelieveinISEAL‐complianceprocessesandseeintheShADauniqueopportunitytotrulybenefittheindustry,howeverthestandardsintheirpresentformareextremelyfarfrombeingabletodeliveronthisexpectation
• SeeaboveresponsetoFairtrade.Thedocumentstates"TheDialogueseekstosetperformancestandardsatthefarm‐levelthatareambitious,yetpracticalforapproximatelythetop20percentoffarmswhetherthosefarmsarelargeorsmall".Westronglybelievethat,iftheShADstandardsaretobetrulyforthetopperformersregardlessofscale,atleastinnovative(bestperforming)small‐scaleproducersshouldbeabletocomply.Thisdoesnotappeartobethecase.WeareatpresentworkingwithWWFVietNamtoassesstheperformancelevelsofthemostinnovativesmall‐scaleshrimpcommunitiesofVietNam.Asthisisconductedthroughfieldsurveysin6shrimpfarmingcommunitiesover2topMekongshrimpproducingprovinces,wewillbeabletocompilethisinformationonlyinanothercoupleofweeks.WehopethattheGSCwillwelcomethoseresults.Linkedtotheaboveitem,itisnotclearhownumericalstandardsweresetandwhatistheevidencethatthetop20percentproducerswillbeabletocomply.Numericalstandardsshouldbesetusingascientificallyrigorousmethodology,whichofcourseshouldbeclearlystatedinthedocument.Itisnotclearwhy8/14GSCmembersareNGOswithnoproducermembershipandwhythe2AsianparticipantsarebothNGOs.ThisresultsonAsianproducersandproducingcountriesbeingcompletelyneglectedandtheresultisveryclearinthepresentversionofthestandards.TheShADprocessdoesnotseemtoallowfornewGSCmemberstobeincluded,butwiththetext"Aninsufficientlevelofparticipationwillleadtoreplacementwithanotherindividualfromthesamestakeholdergroupfromthesameregion"allowsforreplacement.DoesthismeanthatthepresentcompositionoftheGSCismeanttorepresentdifferentregionsinabalancedmanner?Thecurrentregion‐wisedistributionisasfollows:a.Europe:5b.USA:3c.LatinAmerica:2d.Africa:2e.Asia:2WedonotquiteunderstandwhatmechanismwasusedtoallocateGSCmembership.Wewelcomeanexplanation.WeunderstandtheconceptofRegionalSC,butagainwearepuzzledinseeingthat5/11membersoftheAsiaSCareactuallynotbasedinAsia.Inviewoftheabove,ICAFIS,asthe"sustainabilityarm"ofVINAFIS,anon‐profitorganisationwiththousandsofmembersincludingproducers,governmentofficialsandresearcherswouldliketobecomeamemberoftheGSC.IftheGSCdecidedtodeclineourofferwewouldwelcomeanISEAL‐compliantexplanationonwhyanorganisationformedaftertheShADprocesshadbegunandwillingtoactivelyandpositivelycontributeshouldberefusedsuchright.
• ICAFISisnowaShADSteeringCommitteemember.CarlosPerez?Thenumeralinquestion"systematic,quantitativeconservationplanning"isgoofyandunnecesarilyconfusingassuringthatASCwillbeanichestandardortherewillbefalsestatementsmadeinordertoachievecertificationsinmainstreamvolumes.Thenumeralis
envisionedtobeconsistentwithatleasttheecologicalconservationobjectivesofrelevantagenciestoretainecosystemspatternsandprocessesinrelevantjurisdictions.Theyhavefoundanecologicaljargonofhistoricallyreconstructingvegetationandfaunaendangeredorprotectedinanareaof10Kmoftheshrimpfarmandsubjectshavetoconformwithin3yearsifyouarealreadyinsideaprotectedarea.Thisleadstoasuperimpositionwithinterestsoftheneighborswhichinmanycasestheyincludebanana,rice,canesugarfarmsoflarge,mediumandsmallsizeinarea.Thissituationwouldnotpermittoconformtothisconceptgiventhelackofprofessionalsandstructuresinthethirdworld.Toenforceitallthestakeholdersinsideoraroundtheprotectedareatheiractivitiesaffecttheprotectedareainlarge,mediumorsmallmagnitudeasafunctionofthesizeandactivityitcarriesout.Itistheresponsibilityofthestatetherestorationoftheenvironmentbutinthegreatmajorityofplacesthereisnotevenmoneytopaysalariesfortheforestguardsorrangers.Inordertoavoidallthesecomplicationitssimplerinprotectingtherightsoftheenvironmenttoprohibitallactivityproductioninsidetheseprotectedareasandinthebufferzoneconductonlyactivitiesthatarecompatiblewiththeconservationofthearea.
• Werecognizethatwithsomeofthestandardstherearesignificantchallengesassociatedwiththeirimplementation.
• TheShADtakesastepwiseapproachtosolvingtheseissuesand,therefore,wouldliketofindastartingpointfromwhichtomoveforward.
StephanieMatheyFromourpointofview,thepromiseofasustainableaquaculturehastotakeintoaccount:‐Maintainingoptimalnutritionalprofiles,‐Productionconditionsrespectfulofhumanrights,inaccordancewithlocallawsoratleastwiththerulesoftheILO.Carrefourhasbeenworkingfor10yearswiththeFIDH(InternationalFoundationLeagueofHumanRights)onthesesubjects.Werecommendyoutocontactthemtogetinputfromexperts(GenevievePaul:[email protected])‐Useonlythenecessaryinputs.Forexample,cansuchacertificationsupporttheuseofpesticides?Shoulditnotbeclosertoorganicregulationsinsomecasesand,forexample,refertothelistofauthorizedpesticidesinorganicagriculture?‐Aconstantsearchforeffectivesolutions,innovativepractices,framedbystandards,suchasbioconversionortheuseofprobioticsforexample.‐Anon‐degradationofsensitiveecosystems.ThepositionofWWFFranceonthisissuehascaughtourattention.ItseemsinterestingthatthestandardstakeintoaccounttheirproposalsonRamsarsites,NationalParkseveniftheproposeddateofMay1999isbeforethepublicationdateofthestandards.Thecertificationmustalsobeeasilyunderstoodbytheconsumer,inlinewithitsexpectations.Thisisaguaranteeoflessimagerisk,andconsequentlycredibility/trustoftheconsumer.AtthisstagethereisthequestionofGMOs.CanwesupportaGMfoodaspartofsuchacertification?Wesupporttheideathatfeedinganimalshastobe“conventional”.InEurope,thismeansabsenceofGMOsinfeedforanimal.Italsoraisesthequestionofproteinsfromlandanimal.TheshrimpaquacultureDialoguesaimsalsotodevelopstandardsaccessibletoallfarmersthatadoptbetterenvironmentalandsocialpractices.Itisabalancebetweenscience‐based,credibility,social,environmentalandeconomicissues.Therefore,theGSCneedstoconsiderforeachstandarditseconomicweighttotheproducerinonehandandtotheconsumerontheotherhand(i.e.points7.1.1).
Last,wehopethatthesecommentswillhelptheGSCtakingpositionstodevelopcredible,realisticandpragmaticstandardforresponsibleshrimpfarming.
• Weappreciatethesecommentsandhavedoneourbesttoaddresstheseconcerns.However,thereisonlysomuchwecandowiththeavailableresourcesbutwehopethenewdrafthasaddressedsomeofyourconcerns.
NACAAlthoughscopeofthestandardsdocumentssays“theshrimpaquacultureoperation”,therearestandardsforfeedmillsandhatchery(6.1‐6.4,and7.1‐7.5)thatshrimpfarmershaveverylittlecontrolornegotiatingpower(particularlyforsmallscalefarmer).Proposetoseparatethosestandardsoutofthisdocument,andtobeincludedinothersetsofdocumentsforfeedmillsandhatcheries,orconsidermechanismsforensuringtheircooperation.Small‐scalefarmersrelymorethanlargecompaniesonconditionsdictatedandservicesprovidedbygovernmentsandcommercialpartners.Therefore,abilityofdemonstratingcompliancewilldependontheseexternalconditions.Smallscalefarmershavelimitedtechnicalandfinancialcapacitiestoconductvariousassessments(suchasEIA&BEIA).Suggestconsideringmechanismsforappropriatesupportingservicestructures,exceptionforcertainscaleofoperations,orrecognizealternativeswaysofdemonstratingcomplianceadaptinglocalconditions.Inordertofacilitatecomplianceofsmall‐scalefarmerstothestandards,"groupcertification"shouldbeconsideredasaoneoftheviablemechanisms.
• WecompletelyagreeandmanyoftheGSCmemberssharethisconcern.WearetryingtodevelopthebestpossiblestandardsbutplantoworkwiththeASCtofindsolutionstohelpensurethatsmallholdershavetheopportunitytocomply.Ifthisdoesnotultimatelytakeplace,theworkwillobviouslynotachievethedesiredgoal.
M.NKUTTYCapacityoffarmerstosubmitreturnsintheSHADstandardsformat:Settingstandardsshouldbeinconsiderationofthefarmers’capacityandcoststoprovidedatarequired.InseveralinstancesthesmallfarmerinAsiawouldfinditdifficulttogatherandpresentthedataneeded.Individualfarmlevelplanning,monitoringandmanagingcapacitiestosolvelargerecosystemissuesareoftengrosslyinadequate,especiallyamongthesmallfarmers;largerfarmsorfarmsinisolatedareasmighthavesomecapacities,wheredatacollectionisfeasible.ByrestrictingthestandardstolargerfarmsinthemajorSFcountriesinAsiaasinthecaseofIndiawouldleadtomissingthelion’sofshrimpproduction,forthemajorityoffarmsaresmall,<10hainsize.Itwouldbeunjusttoprecludethesefarmerswhoaregenuineshrimpproducers,followingsustainablefarmpractices.Onemightfindanidealfarmsetupindividuallybutcumulativelywithinthelandscape/ecosystemorevenatalargergeographiclevel,therecanbeproblems.Carryingcapacity(CC)studiesdeterminingthetotaleffluentloadsfromfarmsinthearea,alsotakingintoaccountcumulativeloadsfromothersectorsintothereceivingwaterbodies,arenecessary,burtheindividualfarmerisoftenillequippedinthiscontext.CCstudiesonlywillhelpindeterminingthetotaleffluentloadofexistingSFareas(WSAoccupiedbyshrimpfarms–anindexofSFponddensity)andpotentialareasforfurtherexpansion.InIndia,wehaveagoodexampleofhighlycrowdedshrimpfarmareasaroundKandaleruCreek–asmallestuarineriverflowingintoBayofBengal,inAndhraPradesh,India,wherethecreekwatersshowedhighlevel
ofpollution,andindeedcollapseoftheSFcomplexasithappenedduringthepartialSFcollapseinIndiaoveradecadeago,aselsewhere.Somelevelofremediationwasachievedbyreducingstockingdensity(SD)drasticallyto<10/m2,asimposedforruraltraditionalcoastalSFinIndiabyGoI/AquacultureAuthority(nowCoastalAquacultureAuthority(CAA),consequenttoIndia’sSupremeCourtintervention.ButthesolutionistorestrictSFoperationscollectively(possiblethroughSFAssociations,“AquaClubs”aschristenedinAP,India)byreducingthetotalfarmedareaandintensityofoperationstofallwithintheCCofthereceivingwaterbody,butsuchcomprehensiveCCstudiesareyettobedoneatmicroormacrolevelinmostcases.AfewsuchstudiesfordeterminingCCofcoastalwaterbodieshavenowbeguninIndiabytheCentralInstituteofBrackishwaterAquaculture(CIBAAnnualReports)(contact:[email protected]),butnoneofthesehavecometoanystageofimplementationthroughnationallegislation,thoughSFinIndiaisregulatedbyCAA.ThefarmedshrimpproductioninIndiaisdominatedbysmallfarmers–over90%ofthefarmersownfarms<10ha,dominatedby<2hasize.Thereforeignoringthesmallfarmproductionisnotanalternative,fortheyarenowinvolvedinsustainableshrimpproductionfollowingtheprescribednormsandindeedistheeconomicbaseofshrimpfarminginIndiaasinotherpartsonAsia.Carryingcapacityoftheecosystem:Inthiscontext,theExpertConsultationonDevelopmentofSustainableShrimpFarminginIndia,28–29August2002,Chennai,India,organizedbytheAquacultureAuthority(presentlyCAA)incooperationwithDoF,Tamilnadu”recommendedthat:
Macro‐levelplanningincludingbasestudiesasrequiredshouldbeundertakentounderstandtheinter‐sectoralinteractions,includingsocio‐economics,andtoincorporateaquacultureintoIntegratedCoastalZoneManagementPlans(ICZMPs).ActiveinvolvementoftheDepartmentsofFisheries,Centralfisheriesinstitutions/agenciesandotheraquaculture/fisheriesstakeholderswouldbeessentialinpreparationandfinalizationofICZMPs.
Micro‐levelplanningshouldbecarriedout,includingcarryingcapacitystudies,clusteringoffarmsandaquacultureestates.Researchoncarryingcapacityshouldbetakenupinpriorityat2–3sitesfordevelopmentofmodelsforwiderapplicationincoastalareas.Carryingcapacitystudiesshouldalsoconsidereffectsofnutrientloadandotherpollutingelementsfromdifferenteconomicactivitiesincoastalzonesandcontiguousupstreamareas.
Environmentalassessmentandmonitoringprogramsshouldbetakenupinimportantfarmingareastomonitorandadviseonthe(farm)clusterdesignandpractices,toensurethatthecarryingcapacityoftheecosystemisnotexceededandalsotoadviseonthechangingenvironmentalconditionsintheestuarine/coastalprofiles.
TheGuidelinesonGoodManagementPractices(GMPs)shouldbecomprehensivetoincludeenvironmentalprotectionneeds,labelingofchemicalproductsusedanddisposaltechniquesforaquaculturewastes.Shrimpfarmers/self‐helpgroups/associationsandNGOsasapplicableshouldbeactivelyinvolvedinthepreparationoftheGMPs.
IsuggestthatincaseofsmallfarmsinclustersorinthesamelocationsasprevalentinseveralplacesinIndiaespecially,theresponsibilityforCCstudiesandensuringtherequiredSHADstandardsshouldnotbelefttothefarmerindividually,butshouldbewithfarmers’associations(cf:“AquaClubs”inAndhraPradesh,thepremierSFStateinIndia,seespecificcomments,alsoabove),supportedbyGovernment/NGOagenciesconcerned.ThissuggestionwouldapplytoseveralotherSHADstandardsaswell,someofwhichhavebeenpointedout.
• Wecompletelyagreeandthankyouforyourextensivecomments.WearetryingtodevelopthebestpossiblestandardsbutplantoworkwiththeASCtofindsolutionstohelpensurethatsmallholdershavetheopportunitytocomply.Ifthisdoesnotultimatelytakeplace,theworkwillobviouslynotachievethedesiredgoal.
Principle1:ComplywithallapplicablenationallawsandlocalregulationsCriterion1.1:LegalRequirementsWWFFrancePrinciple1isparamountandcouldbeapprovedorreviewedbycertificationbodiesholdingtheexperienceofdealingwiththeseaspectswithintheframeworkofalreadyexistingcertificationprogrammes.Itshouldbecompletedbythesamedirectivesfortheimplementationofstandardsalreadyexistingfortheotherprinciples.
• WeagreeandtheShADisconsideringthemasotherresourcesforcertification.WWFMalaysiaPrinciple1isanoversimplifiedstatement(verymuchintheveinoftheRSPOPrinciple1)whichissettoprovideverylittleguidance(ifany).ThePrincipleappearstobederivedfromanunderlyingassumptionthateverymemberofregionhasrobustlawsonaquaculture.TherationaleoffersverylittleguidanceoftheimplementationofthisPrinciple.ThoughcommendablethatthegoaloftheShADistogo‘beyondthelaw’,abaselinewillbenecessary.Thebaselinesamongsttheregionwillvary.Inasituationwherethereisanabsence/inadequacyofthelaw,howwillthestandardsaddress/reconcilethis?ThereisneedtoalsoconsidercompliancetonationalpoliciesrelatedtotheenvironmentandbiodiversityandregionalframeworkssuchascodeofconductsandGuidelinesembracedbyASEANmembercountriesonaquaculture.E.g.ManualofASEANGoodShrimpFarmManagementPracticessignedin1998.Manyoftheseprobablyhavenotbeentransposedintolocallawssothereisaneedtoconsiderwhatinfluencethesehavewithintheindustryintheregion.
• Principle1doesnotassumethatacountryhasarobustlegalframeworkandonlyseekstoensurethatnocertifiedfarmsareillegal.Therestofthestandardscoverthecoreissuesofconcern.
WWF‐USThesearebasicallyalignedwithpreviousworkdonebyTilapiaAquacultureDialogue(TAD)andthePangasiusAquacultureDialogue(PAD)andcoverminimum“entrylevel”requirements.
• Thereisaneedtostatewhyonlythoseareasoflegalitywerecoveredandnotothers(e.g.farmwastedisposaletc.)
• Thereisaneedtoelaboratetherationalestatements• Weagreeandhavetakenstepstocorrectthisproblem.
FlavioCorsinItwouldtakealawyertoauditfor1.1.1andascertainthelegalityoffarms.Suggestclearlyspecifyingwhatdocumentsshouldbeauditedfor.Whythoseareasofcoverageandnotothers,e.g.shrimphealthregulationsetc.Needtoincludeintherationale.Guidanceonhowtoaudittheseshouldbeprovidedtohaveconsistencywithotherprinciples
• Weagreeandhaveconsideredthesecommentsinthenewversionofthestandards.1.1.1MarkNijhofParagraph1.1.1makesthefollowingthreeparagraphs(1.1.2.to1.1.4)redundant.Muchbetterwouldinmyviewbetodemandawrittenassessmentofalloperationalactivitiesandsubsequentlyhaveallrelevantlegislationavailableandtodemonstratecompliance.Currentcriteriadonotexclude,butmakeitpronetoomitaspectssuchasexhaustgasemissionofgeneratorsets,ground‐orsurfacewaterabstraction,laboursafetyissuesetcetera,astheyarenotexplicitlymentioned,althoughexplicitparagraphs(1.1.2–1.1.4)areprovided.However,ifusedincombinationwitha‘bestpractisestandard’,thischapterwillbecomesuperfluous!
• Wehaveconsideredyoursuggestioninthenewversionofthestandards.1.1.2NACAInThailandshrimpfarmerdonotpaythetaxdirectly,andthereforeitismorestraightforwardtostate“farmingrelatedtax”ratherthan“alltax”.Therequirementshouldbelimitedtotaxespaiddirectlybyindividualfarmersorcompaniesoperatingfarms.
• Wehaveconsideredyoursuggestionsinthenewversionofthestandard.1.1.3NACAInthecontextofsmall‐scaleshrimpfarming,itischallengingtoprovideevidenceforcompliance,wheremanyagreementsbetweenfarmownerandworkerarebasedonverbalagreement.Suggestauditingofthisstandardtobeconsideringpracticalandlocallyadoptedways(e.g.interviewsinsteadofcopyofcontractdocument).
• Wehaveconsideredyoursuggestionsinthenewversionofthestandard.Principle2:SitefarmsinenvironmentallysuitablelocationswhileconservingbiodiversityandimportantnaturalhabitatsWWFFranceConcerningprinciple2andmorespecificallythefirstcriterion,theGSCcurrentproposalappearsbothveryambitiousandverydifficulttoputintoplaceforanumberofsuggestedindicators.Farmlocationisamajorconcernindeedandmaybecomethemostdifficultpartofthestandards.WefeelherethatitisparamounttoremindtheGSCoftheimportanceofdevelopingapracticaltoolforWWFFrancetobeabletouseassoonaspossibleinordertoguideFrenchbuyersandconsumerstowardssustainableconsumption.Wewelcomeanyproposalbeyondthesepointsprovideditisarticulatedintoapracticaltool.
• Thankyouforthereminderandwehopethenewversionofthestandardsaddressesyourconcerns
NewEnglandAquariumGenerallystandardsshouldbedefinedtoclearlyshowhowfarmswillbeincompliance,expansionsandnewfarmsneednotbepointedoutastheseshouldbeconsideredwhenthefarmisre‐auditedorinitiallycertified.Shouldnewdirectivesberequiredaddingastatementsuchas“nonewimpactafterMarch2010”shouldbesufficient.
• Wehaveaddressedthisinthenewversionofthestandardsandwelcomefurthercomments.
Wedonotbelieveanexceptionforasilvofisheryshouldbeincludedinatop20%standard,sincetheseactivitieswillstillimpacttheenvironmenttheyoperatein(e.g.bacterialcommunitychanges)andmayactassinksforproductiveissuessuchasdisease.
• Weagreeandhaveremovedtheexemption.Consideraddinganexclusionzonefromotherfarmoutletsandthecertifiedfarminlet/pumpingstationunlessasuitableneighborhoodschemeisinplacetoavoidpollutionfromotherfarmsininletwaters.
• TheGSCconsideredthisbuttherewasnoagreementaboutincludingatthispoint.RobinLewisPondTypesAreTooFew.Iwouldrecommendthestandardsbeconstructedaroundfivetypesnottwo.Thesewouldbe:1.Abandoned/disusedpondsconstructedinwetlandswithnooperator(orphanponds).2.Abandoned/disusedpondsonexistingfarmswithanidentifiedoperator.3.Existingfarmswithnoabandoned/disusedponds.4.New/expandingfarmswithnoabandoned/disusedponds.5.Futureabandoned/disusedpondsderivedfromneworexistingfarmsthatdeactivateorabandonponds,canalorpumpingstationconstructedinwetlandsafteroperationbegins.SeediscussioninStevensonetal.(1999)abouttheuseoftheterms"abandoned"or"disused"aquacultureponds.Iwilljustusetheword"disused"inthediscussionasitproceeds.Ifweassumethattherewere30millionha,thatmeansshrimpaquaculturehasresultedinthelossordamageto1.5millionhaofformermangroves.Thisdoesnotincludeimpactstowetlandtypesotherthanmangrovessuchassalinas,andadjacentforestedandmarshdominatedfreshwaterwetlands.Howmuchofthisdamageremainsisunknown,buttheamountshouldbecharacterizedaccuratelyaspartoftheseefforts.ThefateofthesedisusedpondsshouldbeofgreatconcerntotheShAD.
• Guidanceforrestorationwilltargettheseponds.However,thisisstillbeingdevelopedandwewelcomefurthersuggestions.
• TheGSCdidconsiderfarmreclamationstandardsbutdeemeditinappropriatetoincludethematthistime.
WetlandCompensationisTreatedasRoutinelySuccessfulItisNotThenarrativerequirementatvariouspointsthatcallforrestorationof100%ofequivalentareaorconsiderationofapolicyofnonetlossofwetlandareaisverysimplistic,inmyprofessionalopinion,andignorestherealityof30yearsofunsuccessfuleffortstoroutinelyrestoreorcreatewetlandsintheUnitedStatesandoverseas(KuslerandKentula1990,Lewisetal.1995,NRC2001,ErftemeijerandLewis2000,Lewisetal.2003,Lewis2005,Lewis2009,Primavera1995,PrimaveraandEsteban2008,SampsonandRollon2008).
• Weacceptthispointbutwouldlikesuggestionsonhowtomakeitsuccessfultothebestextentpossible
Iwouldrecommendthatthedraftstandardsandtherequirementsforwetlandcompensationseriouslyconsiderthehistoryofsuchefforts,andtheinherentriskswithrequiringuntrainedindividualstoundertaketheseefforts.RestorationofdisusedpondsislikelytohaveagreaterchanceofsuccessthanthetypicalhandplantingofseedsorseedlingsofmangrovesonunvegetatedmudflatsorsimilarinappropriaterestorationsitesasrepeatedlydocumentedaroundtheworldbyLewis(1999),Stevensonetal.(1999),ErftemeijerandLewis(2000),Lewis
2005,Primavera(1995),PrimaveraandEsteban(2008),andSampsonandRollon(2008).GuidanceintheformofEcologicalMangroveRestorationguidelinesofLewisandMarshall(1998),Lewis(2005),Lewisetal.(2006)andLewis(2009)arereadilyavailableatwww.mangroverestoration.comandwww.mangroveactionproject.orgThequalificationsofapprovedcertifiersofcompliancewiththestandardswithrespecttowetlandcompensationshouldalsoreflectformaltrainingandcertificationinwetlandrestorationandcreation,oruseoftrainedwetlandprofessionalsaspartofthecertificationprogram.
• WeacceptthiscommentandwillcommunicateittotheASCwhenthetimecomestodoso.Thesequalificationshaveyettobedeveloped.
FlavioCorsinIngeneralthestandardsunderthisprincipledonotappeartodifferentiateappropriatelybetweenexistingandnewfarms.Gatheringsomeoftheinformationrequestedforexistingfarmswouldbemostoftenimpossiblebecauseofthelimitedhistoricalinformationavailable.Significantexceptionsshouldbemade,especiallykeepinginmindthecontextofcountriesandproducerswithlimitedresourcesSuggesthavingstandardsfornewfarmsandintroduceacontributiontoarestorationfundbyallfarms,includingexisting.ThisapproachwasconsideredacceptablewithinthePAD.
• Weunderstandthispoint,butthesestandardsaredesignedtocreateincentivestocreatechangeandgreatertransparencyaroundthesecriticalconservationissues.
NACAIngeneral,thequestionoftheappropriatescaleisanissueforsmallproducers.Thereisnoclearseparationbetweensmallfarmsandtheyusuallysharewaterresources.Farmersfeelthatrequirementsforprivatelandshouldbelessthanforstateland.
• WerecognizetheissueregardingsmallholdersandareworkingwiththeASCtodevelopmechanismstosupportthemunderthisscheme.
WWFGermanyGeneralremark:WWFhighlywelcomesstringentandeffectiveregulationswithregardstositingconsiderationfornewshrimpfarmsandcompensation/adaptationmeasuresforexistingshrimpfarmswithregardstoformer(illegal)habitatconversion.Asageneralfeedback,sitingstandardsfornewshrimpfarmsshouldbeverystringentandclear,morespecificallystandards2.1.12.1.12areregardedassufficientenoughtocoverthemostcriticalissueswithregardstohabitat/speciesprotectionfornewfarms.Forexistingfarmsthesamestandards(2.1.12.1.12)somehowneedmorein‐depthreviewintermsofpracticability/applicability.Restorationforexistingfarms(2.1.22.1.3:WWFregardsrestorationeffortsasakeypracticeforfarmsthataresituatedinsensitivehabitats.Restorationmustcompensateatleast1:1thelosthabitats.Restorationmustbedoneinsuchwaythatecosystemfunctionalityisallowed,bestincombinationwithestablishmentofbufferzonesaroundthefarmsortowardsaquaticwaterbodies(2.1.62.1.8.).Ifseveralfarmsareclusteredasunitofcertification,theymayjointheirsurfacesanddefinetheareasforrestorationalongthemostsuitableareas(e.g.alongtherivers/estuaries)Forexistingandnewfarms,standards2.1.2,2.1.62.1.8shouldincorporatespecific
standardsforextensive,zero‐inputsystems(e.g.suchasSilvofisherysystems).Forsuchsystemsitisrecommendedtoincludestandardsforbothbufferzones(2.1.62.1.7)aswellasanewstandardformangrovecoverageareaonanindividualfarm.InSilvofisherysystemsoptimumyieldsandecosystemfunctionarereachedbyacoverageof6070%mangrove(andponds/watersurfacearea3040%ofagivenfarm),thereforeitissuggestedtoincludethisasanadditionalnewstandardSilvofisherysystemsshouldbefurtheracceptedwithinShADwhentheyareincompliancewiththeregulationonbufferzoneswithaminimumwidthofcoastalbufferzoneof200m(+100mincomparisontocurrentdraft2.1.6)and100mforadjacentnaturalwaterbodies(e.g.riparianzonesalongfarms).
• Wehaveaddressedmanyoftheseconcernswithinthelatestversionofthestandardsandwelcomefurthercommentsastohowwelltheyhaveaddressedyourconcerns.
Criterion2.1:EcologicalandbioticsitingconsiderationsWWF‐USThecolumnonexistingfarmswouldmakemost,ifnoteveryfarm,noncompliantasmost,ifnotall,farmshavebeenbuiltonwhatwas,atsomepoint,wetland,mangroveetc.WWF‐USbelievesthatstandardsneedtobesetatalevelwhereexistingfarmswillhaveincentivestoimprovetheirenvironmentalperformanceWWF‐USfeelsthattherearenotenoughperformancebasedstandardsinthissection
• The2nddrafthasmorespecificsabouthowfarmscancomplywiththisstandard.JakePiscano,CENTERFOREMPOWERMENTANDRESOURCEDEVELOPMENTThereisnoneedfornewclearingforpondsorfishfarms.Largetractsofabandoned/idlepondsareavailableforrehabilitationandoperationalization.Thereshouldnolongerbeany“new”developmentthatwillrequireclearingstandsofmangrove.Therearelargetractsofidlepondsthatcanbeutilized,andexistingareasoptimized.Weagree2.1.1WWFFranceNonewfarmsorexpansionofexistingonesineithertheRamsarorNationalNatureParkssites.
• Seecomment2belowWWF‐USAgreed.Existingfarmsmayhavebeensitedinprotectedareas(PAs),butthathistoricalinformationmaynotbeavailable.WWF‐USrecommendsthattheShADconsidersaconcretedatesuchasRAMSARMay1999toserveasareferencedate.
• Weagreeandhavemodifiedthestandardsaccordingly.IngerNaslundStronglyobjectingthatthereshouldbeanyexceptionforneworexistingfarmsitinginNationalprotectedareas.
• PleaselookattheintentbehindtheProtectedAreasystemcategoriesVandVI(http://www.unep‐wcmc.org/protected_areas/categories/eng/index.html).Theyarenotdesignedtooutlawallhumanactivities,butrathertoensurethattheyareinaccordancewiththeobjectivesoftheProtectedArea.Wehopethecurrentstandardswillachievethisgoal.
NACAAcceptableifbuiltbeforedateofdeclarationofPAandcompatiblewithPAmanagementplan.InthecaseofSamroiyotnationalpark,specialmeasureshavebeenadoptedbycabinetdecreeforPA.Referencetomanagementplanmustbemade.
• Weagree.Thestandardsshouldreflectthisnow.BelizeShrimpGrowersThedocumentstatesthatfarmswillnotbelocatedinthecriticalhabitatofspeciesofnationalsignificance.Whatexactlyconstitutes"nationalsignificance"?Whichspeciesprecludefarmlocations?Isthereagrandfatherclauseforexistingfarms?
• Seenewstandardsdraft.
WWFMalaysiaRecommendationAllowanceforsitinginProtectedAreas(PAs)withIUCNPACategoryVorVIshouldonlybeallowedwithapprovalbythePAmanagementauthorityandstakeholders,andonlyifnotinconflictwiththemanagementobjectiveofthePAandinaccordancewithIUCNguidelines.JustificationEvenforIUCNPAcategoryVorVI,aquaculturefarmsshouldonlybepermittedunderspecificcircumstances.Indecidingonthesematters,thereisaneedtotakeintoconsiderationthepotentialimpactsoftheaquacultureactivitiesandhowthevaluesandintegrityofthePAwouldbeaffected.StakeholderconsultationshouldbeundertakenintheplanningprocessesandthenecessaryEIAandotherrelevantassessmentssuchasHCVAshouldbeconductedtodeterminewhetherornottheaquaculturefarmwouldcompromisetheintrinsicvalueofthePAandtheachievementofitsmanagementobjectives.Itisunclearif“NationalProtectedAreas”excludesub‐national(state,provincial,orlocal)protectedareas.RecommendationTheindicatorshouldbechangedtoincludeallProtectedAreas(National,state,provincialandlocalPAs).JustificationInsomecountries,PAsaregazettedunderthestate,provincialorlocallawsandnotnecessarilyundertheFederallaws.Therefore,theymightnotbereferredtoasNationalProtectedAreasbutintermsoftheirbiodiversityandecosystemservices,theywouldbejustasimportantasaNationalProtectedArea.Considerreplacingthereferenceprovided(IUCN,1994,GuidelinesforProtectedAreasManagementCategories.IUCN,Cambridge,UKandGland,Switzerland.261pp.)withthelatestreferencei.eDudley,N.(Editor)(2008).GuidelinesforApplyingProtectedAreaManagementCategories.Gland,Switzerland:IUCN.x+86pp.
• Thankyou.Pleasecheckthereformulation,aswehavetriedtoincorporatetheserecommendations.
2.1.2NewEnglandAquariumStandard2.1.2and2.1.3aregoodpoints;howeveraccesstohistoricaldataandchangesinenvironmentmightmakethisdifficulttoaudit,additionallytheselandscouldhavebeenconvertedlegally.AddingastartdateofRamsarorwhentheseareasbecameprotectedif
before1999maybemorerealisticandachievableobjectives.Whererestorationprojectstakeplace,naturalrestorationshouldbepreferred.Itshouldbenotedthatrestoration,especiallynatural,cantaketimetoachievethediversityandthezonationpatternoftheoriginalmangrove.Ensuringthatnaturalprocessescantakeplace(e.g.hydraulicaccessbypropagules)andmonitoringwouldbeuseful.Astandardof100%offarmfootprintabovethehigh‐tidelinewouldbeasuitableindicator(excludingpumpingstations)andcoveralltheseissues.
• WehaveaddedtheRamsardate,asyousuggested,andhaveconsideredsomeofyourotherrecommendationsaswell.
WWF‐USAlthoughWWFUSagrees,mostofitusedtobemangrovesatsomepoint.Howcanexistingfarmscomply?Sylvofisheryquestion.Sylvofisheryislikelytonotbeabletobecertifiedunderthewetlandandmangroveprotections.Suggestedaction:removereferenceofsylvofisheryasthedocumentalreadyhasstatedtargetsformangroveandwetlandconservation.
• Wehaveremovedthesilvofisheryexemptionandarecontinuallyworkingonguidancetoaddressthecomplianceofexistingfarms.
RobinLewisSilvofisheryEffortsareTreatedas"AGoodApproach"Using"SimpleTechnology"(page22intheDraftStandards)NeitherofTheseStatementsisTrue.Iwouldrecommendtheauthorsofthedraftstandardsreviewpages43‐46inLewisetal.(2003),Fitzgerald(1997),Brennanetal.(1999),andCloughetal.(2002)foradditionalviewsontheviabilityofsilvofisheries.
• Thankyouforthiscomment.Wehaveattemptedtoaddressthisconcernbyremovingtheexemptionforsilvofisheries.
WilliamRash(CriterionGuidance2.1.2‐2.1.3).Whatisthejustificationofpre1999,existingfarmsshouldbeanythingthingthatisinoperationpriortothestandardbeingavailable?Criterion2.1.2&2.1.3:Standardmustreflectsiverfisherytechniquesandsetouttoencouragesuchpractices.Standardshouldspecifysiverfisherytargetof50‐60%mangroveto50‐40%water.
• 1999isbasedontheRamsarConvention.Pleaseseethedocumentforfurtherdetails.JavierDuenaNotallowingfarmsbuiltpriorto2010andthatencroacheduponmangrovestomeetstandardswouldautomaticallyexcludewhatiscertainlyasignificantpercentageofoperationsthatwouldhaveconsideredmeetingthestandardunderarealisticmitigationandthereforecontributeconsiderablytocoastalecologicalrestoration.Whatmaybeviableistocontemplaterestoringmangroveswheremostneeded.
• Wehavemodifiedthestandardsaccordinglyandhopethat,indoingso,wehaveaddressedyourconcern.
FlavioCorsinInAsia,agreatdealofsmall‐scalefarmswereestablishedinmangroveareassometimeswiththeencouragementofgovernmentorganizations.Thosefarmsarecurrentlystilloperatingand
willnothaveachancetoconductrestorationactivitiesasthelandtheyownislimited.Itisnotclearwhythosefarmsshouldbemadeaccountablefordecisionstakenbyothersandwithoutknowingtheconsequences.Suggesttomakeexceptionforsmall‐scalefarmerswhooperatedwithinlegalitywhenconversionwasconducted
• Wehaveconsideredthis,buttherearesomesituationswherethedestructionsofmangrovesforshrimpfarmsisunacceptableregardlessofwhetheritwaslegalatthetime.ThisisakeyissuefortheShADtoaddresswiththestandards.
NACAExceptionforextensiveaquacultureprovidedestablishmentofthefarmwaslegalandareforestationprogramisputinplace.
• Seeaboveresponse.WWFMalaysiaWhilstoffsettingisacommonprincipleinconservationinordertoensurethatthereisnonetlossinbiodiversity,thisprinciplecannotbeappliedinallcases.Theimportanceofamangrove/wetlandsecosystemespeciallyforitsecosystemserviceshastobeconsideredwithinalocalcontextinmostcases.Forexample,themangrove/wetlandsareamaybeimportantintermsoflocalfisheriesorforfloodmitigationpurposes.Inthesecircumstances,offsettingviarestorationofequivalentwetlandsareaandcharacteristicsinanotherareawillservelittlepurpose,especiallytothelocalcommunity.TheShADshouldconsideratleasttwoaspectsbeforesuggestingoffsettingasablanketsolution
a) howmuchofmangrove/naturalwetlandsareawillbeclearedforcanalsetc.Thiscouldbeintheformofpercentageofthefarmsizeorincomparisontothetotalmangrove/naturalwetlandareainthatlocality)theimportanceofthemangroves/naturalwetlands,notonlyinthenationalcontextbutalsowithininthelocalcontext.
Forguidance,forexistingfarmsthatwerehistoricallyonmangrove/naturalwetlands,thefarmshouldberequiredtosetasideresourcestorestoreamangrove/naturalwetlandshabitatofanequalsize.
• Wehavetriedtoaddresssomeoftheseconcernsinthenewversionofthestandardsandwelcomefurthercommentsonthisissue.
2.1.3WWFFranceThemangroveindicatoristorefertoMay1999initsproposal.Itseemscrucialtousnottoconsiderthestandardspublishingdateasthestartofindustrychange.Referringtotenyearsbackwillallowthemoreproactiveproducerstobedulyrewarded.
a. 8%beforeMay1999with300%effectivereforestation.b. Waterworksandcanalsettingupshouldbeallowedinthemangroveareas
beyondMay1999with300%effectivereforestation.c. Farmswhichdonotcomplywiththesecriteriabutneverthelessmakeeffortsto
reachthatlevele.g.‘closing’pondsorbyanyothermeansshouldbeabletoobtaincertificationaswell.
• ThisisaRamsarreferenceandtheGSCbelievesittobethebestcutoffpoint.TheGSCisstillconsideringyourothersuggestions.
M.N.Kutty
Com:HighlyessentialinareassuchasVembanadLake(estuary)(aRamsarsite)/coastalbeltinKeralainIndia,whereaquafarmingoperations–thoughsomeorganicfarming‐isgoingon.WWF‐USAgreed.Sameasabove.RamsarinMay1999wouldbeausefulreferencedateThewetlandsareas“characteristics”willbehardtomimic,thusduplicatingcharacteristicsataspecificlocationforwetlandrestorationappearsabitfarfromreach.Suggestedaction:Strikethe“andcharacteristics”frombothexistingandnew/expandingfarms.
• ThestandardsforP2havebeenmodifiedsignificantlyaccordingtoallthePublicCommentinputreceived.Wewelcomefurthercomments.
NACARetroactiveassessmentwillnotalwaysbepossibleandlimitsofthenaturalwetlandisnotclearastheareahasbeenheavilyintervenedbyhumansandwaterwaysweremodified.InSamroiyotazoningofactivitieshasbeenestablished,whichdefinesaconservationarea(wetland).Referencetosuchzoningappearsastheonlypracticalwayofdefining“naturalwetland”.
• Wehaveaddressedthiscommentinthenewversionandwouldinvitefurthercommentsonitssuitability.
WWFMalaysiaItisstatedthatpondscanbebuiltinfloodplainsprovidedthehydrologyoftheareaismaintainedandapercentageofthenaturallandisnotdeveloped.Thisneedscarefulconsiderationduetothefollowingreasons:‐
a) Byallowingpondstooperateinfloodplains,willthereberisksofpondsbeingfloodedandoverflowingintonaturalriversystemsduringtherainyseasons?Ifyes,thiscouldposeaproblemespeciallyiftheaquaculturepondsaresituatedinlandandsalinewaterisusedintheponds.
Ifthepondsareraisedtoreducefloodingriskanddamagestothefarm,willthisleadtoincreasedfloodinginthesurroundinglowlyingareas?
• WehopethisconcernhasbeenaddressedbytherequirementoftheBEIAinthenewversionofthestandards.Pleasecommentonthesechangesinthenewversion.
2.1.4NewEnglandAquariumBEIAmaynotbesuitableforsmallfarmers;perhapsasizelimitonthefarmorannualproductionforthismightbeprudent.EIAsinmanycountriesarerequiredonlyonlargeroperations(e.g.50HainIndonesia)ifatall.Biodiversitymaychangeovertime,therefore,aBEIAmayneedtoberenewed(e.g.every5years).Proposedstandards2.1.9‐2.1.12onBEIAwouldlikelybeprohibitivetosmallerfarmsthusbiasingthestandardtowardsmuchlargeroperations.Standards2.1.4,2.1.5and2.1.15shouldbecombined–NositingincriticalhabitatdefinedbypresenceofIUCNredlist,locallistingprocessesordefinedHCVAareas.Noexceptionsforsilvofisheriesshouldbeincluded.
• Wehaveaddressedmanyofyourcommentsinthenewversionofthestandards.Weaccepttheconcernsaboutsmallholders,butitisuptotheASCtodevelopmechanismstoaddressthis.Thesilvofisheryexemptionhasbeenremoved.
WWF‐US
TheBEIArequirementmandatedbyanaccreditednationalbodywithinnationallegislationisnotalwaysoruniformlyavailableinmostshrimpproducingcountries.Furthermore,mandatingitscompletiondoesnotofferguaranteeofqualityorrelevanceforthepurposesconservationobjectives.Itisonerous,costly,andthehighvariabilityofitspotentialbenefitstoconservationisnotconsistent.Suggestedaction:Strike2.1.4.
• TheGSCrecognizesthesechallengesandhasdevelopedaguidancemoduletocreatetherequiredspecificity.Furtherworkwillbedoneonthispriortothefinalizationofthedocument.Furthercommentsarewelcome.
FlavioCorsinHowcanaBEIAbeconductedforfarmsestablisheddecadesbefore?Suggestremovingthisstandard.
• Seeappendix1toviewtheguidanceonthisissue.Furthercommentsarewelcome. NACACurrentpresenceofsuchspeciesonfarmdoesnotimplythatfarmwasbuiltontheirnaturalhabitat(ponds,water,treesdevelopedbyfarmsmayattractanimalsthatwouldnotbethereotherwise).Wouldonlyapplytoareassurroundingthefarm.Thentherequirementshouldbetocontributetotheprotectionoftheseareas.Contributionasagroupoffarmersratherthananindividualfarmmustbeaccepted.ThecategoryofIUCNRedlistshouldbeconsidered.Atleast“LeastConcerned”speciesshouldbeexempted.
• Wehavemodifiedthestandardtoclarifythisfurtherandwelcomeyourcommentsonthelatestversionofthestandards.
Dr.A.G.Ponniah'Farmsprotectareasofcriticalhabitatforsuchspecies'.Maynotbeapplicableforsmallfarms.FurtherBEIArequirementneedtobewaivedforsmallfarms.UnderIndianLawComprehensiveEIAincludingSIAismandatoryonlyforfarmsofabove40hainarea.
• TheGSCmustsetthestandardsitbelievesrepresenttheminimumacceptablebaranditisuptotheASCtodevelopmechanismstosupportsmallholders.TheGSCmustensurethatallofthecriticalconservationandsocialimpactsofshrimpfarmingareaddressedunderthisstandard.
WWFMalaysiaCommentWWF‐MalaysiasupportstheemphasisonthecriticalhabitatsforspeciesatrisknationallyorIUCNRedListspecies.ButitisunclearhowIndicator2.1.4willbeappliedforexistingfarms.Fornewfarms,theBEIAshouldassesstheimpactstothespeciesatalandscapelevel.JustificationFromWWF‐Malaysia’sexperience,forproposedprojectssituatedinanareawhichisacriticalhabitatforathreatenedterrestrialspecies,inmostcasestheEIAwillsimplystatethatthewildlife/specieswillmoveawaytoadjacentareas.Withoutconductingalandscapelevelassessment,itwouldbedifficulttoassessifsuchpresumedhabitatsadjacenttotheprojectareaaresuitableorareabletosupportaninfluxofindividualsfromanotherhabitatpatch.
• Werecognizethischallengeandaredoingourbesttoaddressitinthestandards,butitisunclearifthetoolsaresufficientlydevelopedtobeincluded.Wehavemodifiedthestandardsandwelcomefurthercommentsonhowtoaddressthisconcern.
2.1.5• TheGSCacceptstheconcernslistedbelow,butbelievesthatcontinuousimprovement
andthedevelopmentofmechanismstoensurecredibleassessmentsarenecessarynextstepsoncethestandardshavebeendeveloped.Therehavebeenrevisionstosimplifythesestandardsandwewelcomefurthercommentsonthe2ndpublicdraft.
WWF‐USNodefinedlistorcrediblestudyreferencingthepresenceof“speciesofrisk”isavailableinthemajorityofproducingcountries.Mandating2.1.5putsthecredibilityofthestandardsatriskduetothesubjectivejudgmentrequiredbyauditorsorauthorsofreportsgeneratingrequiredinformation.Suggestedaction:StrikeFlavioCorsinHowtogethistoricalinformationonwhatwasthehabitatofaspeciesatrisk?RedDataBookappearstohavebeenpublishedforthefirsttimeinthe90's(1992?),henceafteragreatdealoffarmshadbeenestablished.Suggestremovingthisstandard.2.1.5WearefamiliarwiththeRedDataBookofVietnam,whichincludes>1000pagesofpoorlyauditablematerial.Suggestremovingthisstandard.NACAThisindicatorshouldbegroupedwith2.1.4.2.1.6
• TheGSChasrevisedthestandardsforbuffers,etc.andcreatedanewproposaltoaddresssomeoftheconcernsthatwereoffered.Itisdifficulttorespondtoeachcommentduetothemanychangesinthestandards.Wewelcomeyourfurthercommentsonthenewversionofthestandard.
M.N.KuttyMinimumwidthisnow500masperCRZnorms(subjecttocurrentreview)appliednowinIndia,butexistingtraditionalSFpondsareallowedinthiszonebutthefarmingisnecessarilylowinput,allowingonlyaverylowstockingdensity(<10Pl/m2)andthesystemfollowedextensive‐seealsoGeneralComments.NewEnglandAquariumunnecessarilyprescriptive;whiletreedensitymaybeuseful,othersystems–suchasbreaksorwallscouldbeused.Wesuggesta100mexclusionzonefromthehightidelinetothefarmboundarywithsuitablewaveprotectionwherenoorlittlevegetation(<30trees/100m2)exist.Thiswouldexcludesilvofisheries.WWF‐USAgreedwithrevisiontoexcludetreedensitystandard.Suggestedaction:strikereferencetotreedensity.Furthermore,treedensityisrarelyunderthecontrolofthefarmer.Thereisnomentionofthecanalandpumpingstationbreaksinthebufferzones.Suggestedaction:Revisetomakeitclearthatpumpingstationandcanalbreaksareallowedinthebufferzoneforthepurposeofaccessingwater.WilliamRash
Standardneedstodrawthedistinctionbetweenbufferzonesthatarebetweenthefarmandthecoastlineandbufferzonesthatarebetweenthefarmandtheriver/estuaryline........astherequiredlengthofthesebufferzonescanoftendeemedtobedifferent.IngerNaslundMinimumwidthanddensityofbufferzonebetweenfarmboundaryandclosest(exposedcoast)maximumhightideline.‐Questioningthemeasuresoftheminimum100m.Herewouldsuggestatleast200‐300moneachsideofthefarmasabufferzonenottobeontheedgeofprotection.Thecoastalbuffersshouldbeatleast200‐400.Thesameshouldbefor2.1.7Minimumwithforriparianbuffersshouldbe100‐200m.FlavioCorsinThetreeconcentrationisoutsideofthecontrolofthefarmers.InadditionmostareasintheMekongdeltadonothaveabufferzoneatpresentaswhatistobeusedasbufferzoneisoccupiedbyfarms.Suggestremovingthisstandard.NACAReferenceshouldbelegislationbythetimefarmswereestablished+Samecommentsasfornewfarms.Smallfarmslocatedveryclosetoeachotherandoftendonothavebufferzone.Wetalkhereofmangroveforestasbuffer,whichisalwayslocatedbelowmaximumhightide.Therefore,theindicatormustconsiderdistancebetweenfarmandlowtideline(oratleastmangrovelimitonexposedcoast).Allowanceforpumpingstationsandcanalsneedstobeconsidered.Howtoconsidersituationsofcoastalerosion?Also,thecaseofsaltflatsorotherareasthatareimpropertotreegrowthcouldnotbeforested.Dr.A.G.PonniahCoastalbuffer‐Thebufferzoneprescribedisadequatebutincasethezoneisdevoidoftreesitcannotbetheresponsibilityofthefarmertoplantthem.NormallyinIndia,thenodevelopmentzoneinthecoastalareasisundertheownershipofGovernmentandfarmerhasnodirectsayinitsmaintenance.Incasethestandardsexpectthebufferzonetobeprovidedbythefarmerinhislandholding,intheabsenceofsuchintheGovernmentland,itwillbefeasibleforlargerfarmsonly.Thisstandardshouldnotbeapplicabletotraditionalanextensivefarmsexistingpriortothestandardintroduction.WWFMalaysiaRecommendationTheneedforanaturalvegetationinthebuffershouldbeemphasized.“Minimumwidthandcharacteristicsofriparianbufferswithnaturalvegetationbetweenfarmsandnaturalwaterways”.JustificationInsomecases,thefarmoperatorscouldclearthenaturalvegetationandattemptto“beautify”thebufferzonesthroughlandscapingworks.Thiscouldreducetheeffectivenessoftheareaasabufferzonebetweenthefarmsandthewaterways.Itisthereforenecessarythatthenaturalvegetationwithinthebufferzoneisleftintact.Incaseswherethenaturalvegetationisdegraded,theoperatorsmayneedtorestorethebufferzonesbyre‐plantingnaturalspecies.
RecommendationBufferareasbetweenfarmsandterrestrialsystemsshouldbedeterminedthroughadetailedassessment.JustificationAsinglebuffersizewillnotbeapplicableforallfarms.Insomeareastherewillbelargemammalsorreptilesthatmightneedalargerbufferareaandinsomeareasthesespeciesmightnotbepresentandasmallerbuffermightsufficeasawildlifecorridor.Therefore,thesizeofthebufferzonesshouldbedeterminedduringtheBEIA.2.1.7
• TheGSChasrevisedthestandardsforbuffers,etc.andcreatedanewproposaltoaddresssomeoftheconcernsthatwereoffered.Itisdifficulttorespondtoeachcommentgiventhechangesinthestandards.Wewelcomeyourfurthercommentsonthenewversionofthestandard.
NewEnglandAquariumdefine“farmboundary”andhowpumpingstationsareconsidered.Thisstandardisunclearandneedsfurtherclarification.CarlosRamirezcouldbeenoughone(1)corridorinfarm.Inourcasewehave1bigenough.FlavioCorsinWhatwerenaturalwaterways?IntheMekongdeltathedistinctionbetweennaturalandman‐madewaterwaysisnotthatclear.Howtoaudit?Also,thereisagreatlackofhistoricalinformation.Suggestremovingthisstandard.NACAReferenceshouldbelegislationbythetimefarmswereestablished.Allowanceforpumpingstationsandcanalsneedstobeconsidered.Riversaredynamicintropicalcountries;howtoaccountfornaturalmodificationsofwatercourses?+Samecommentsasfornewfarms.Sometime,resourcepoorfarmersarelocatingveryclosetonaturalwaterways,duetolimitedlandresources.Exceptionsshouldbemadeiffarmercandemonstratemeasurestominimiseimpacttonaturalwaterways.Guidancesaysitmustbeforested,butwhyshoulditbeifnaturalvegetationisdifferent?NaturalvegetationofSamroiyotwetlanddoesnotcounttrees.Referenceshouldbenativevegetationtype.Dr.A.G.PonniahForexistingfarmsriparianbuffershouldbeexemptedandforexpandingfarmsitcanbereiterated.Againthismaynotbefeasibleforsmallfarmersandacriteriatoexceptthemtobeincorporated.WWFMalaysia(page18)Difficultyinimplementinga400mwidebuffershouldnotbeconvenientlyusedasanexcusetogoforalessstringentriparianbufferrequirement.Basedonpracticalityreasons,initial
commitmenttowardscomplianceof200mzoneisacceptable.However,ShADshouldalsoincludearequirementtoconductanevaluationtodeterminewhether200mbufferzoneissufficientaspartofthefeasibilityorEIAstudiesfornewfarmsespeciallyincasesinvolvinglargescalefarmslocatedwithinthevicinityofenvironmentallysensitiveareas.2.1.8
WWF‐USBEIArequirementmandatedbyaccreditednationalbodywithinnationallegislationisnotalwaysnoruniformlyavailableinmostshrimpproducingcountriesandmandatingitscompletiondoesnotofferguaranteeofqualityorrelevancefortheintendedpurposesofconservationpurposes.Itisonerous,costly,andthehighvariabilityofitspotentialbenefitstoconservationisnotconsistent.Suggestedaction:Strike2.1.8to2.1.11.
• TheGSCrespectfullydisagreesandhasrevisedthestandardstoclarifytheguidanceandrequirementsoftheBEIA.EnsuringtheresourcestoachievethisstandardissomethingtheASCmustaddress.
FlavioCorsinWhatshouldafarmerwitha1haponddotocomplywiththisstandard?Fillthepondup?Eveninthecontextofafarmergroupsomefarmerswouldberequestedtoconverttheirpondintonaturalecosystems,whichwouldhavetremendoussocio‐economicalimplications.Suggestremovingthisstandard.
• Wehavemodifiedthestandardandwelcomefurthercomments.NACASuggestincludingsimpledrawing/diagramtounderstandthestandardclearly.Designoffarmscannotbemodified.Presenceofalternativecorridors,especiallyaroundsmallfarmsneedstobeaccepted.Sizeoffarmsneedstobeconsidered.Theproperscaleisnotfarm,butitneedstoincludeareasaroundthefarms.Therewouldbeaccountabilityissuesforagroupofsmallfarmsestablishedonprivateland.Whatisthepurposeiffarmssurroundedbybufferzones?Surelytheywouldactaswildlifecorridors.Farmsizeshouldbeconsidered:whatisthepointofacorridorinasmallfarm?
• Thisisagoodsuggestionthatwewerenotabletoaddressinthelatestversionofthestandardsbutwillattempttodosoforthefinalversion
Dr.A.G.PonniahBEIAshouldbemandatoryonlyforlargefarmsof40haandabove
• Wehaveincludedaguidancematrixthatincludesconsiderationsofthechallengesforsmallerfarms.Wewelcomefurthercommentsonthis.
2.1.9
• GSCResponsetocommentson2.1.9–2.1.11TheGSChassignificantlyrevisedandexpandedontherequirementsfortheBEIAinPrinciple2,includinghavingaddedaseven‐pageappendixtoexplainasmuchdetailaspossible.Wewelcomefurthercommentsandwillcontinuetodoworkonthisissue.WWFFranceTherequiringofanEnvironmentalImpactAssessmentdoesnotseemtobethepropermeanstoreachalevelofperformance.TheGSCshouldaimtoputforwardthereallevelofperformance
toachievefocussingonthemostimportantimpactswhich,inourview,aretheonesconcerningthemangrovesandthesensitivesitesidentifiedbyRamsarandNatureParks.M.N.KuttyNoEIAisrequiredforfarmssmallerthan10hainIndia,butallneedtoberegistered(licensed)andhavetocomplywiththenormsprescribedbytheCoastalAquacultureAuthority(CAA),astatutorybodysetbyGoI.However,somemechanismforensuringthemonitoringandreportingfromsmallerfarmsshouldbeinplace,sotheirproductsarenotleftout.SeeGeneralCommentsIngerNaslundOneofthemosteffectivewaystoensurethatanEIAprocessisfairandcredibleisthroughfullandpublicstakeholderengagement,withallaffectedandinterestedparties,andpublicdisclosureofEnvironmentalImpactsStatements.‐BelieveitisveryimportantandsupporttheEIA,BEIAtransparencyandwanttostressthattheimportanceisalsotocommunicatewithpeoplewhoarenotefficientlyreading.Thereshouldalwaysbeinformationavailableforallpeopleinvolvedinthebusiness.NACARefertolegalrequirementsbytimefarmswerebuilt.EIAshaveneverbeenmandatoryforshrimpfarmsinThailand.EIAsarenotretroactive.Analternativeneedstobeidentifiedforexistingfarms.Fundingisaproblemforsmallfarms.InthecaseofSamroiyot,anumberofstudiesandmanagementdecisionshavebeenmadeinrelationtotheinclusionofthewetlandinanationalparkandRamsarsite.Referencecouldbemadetoexistingstudiesandregulations.WWFGermanyBIEAforsmallscalefarms:ForsmallscalefarmsthereshouldbeprovisionsinplacetocombineBIEAforacluster/areaofsmallfarms.AsalimittoperformBIEAforindividualfarms,annualproductionvolumescouldbetakenastheindicator,sincethisisoftenreflectingthefinancialcapacityofagivenfarm.ThesameindicatorcouldbeusedtodeterminethesizeofaclusteroffarmssubjecttoBIEA.e.g.BIEAismandatoryforsinglefarmwithoutputof>250t/yearandclusteroffarmswithcombinedoutputof>250t/year.BelizeShrimpGrowersWhatconstitutesanationalaccreditationbodyforEIAs?WouldapprovalbyanationalcommitteethatappointsconsultantsfortheEIA(NEACinBelize)beconsideredequivalent?IftheEIAdoesnotstipulatethetypeofwildlifecorridortobemaintained,thenhowdoesthefarmidentifythosecorridors?DoesthisfeatureneedtoberetrofittedintotheEIAiftheEIAhasnotalreadyprovidedthisinformation?WWFMalaysia(2.19‐2.1.11)RecommendationEIAsshouldbemandatoryforfarmsthatcanhaveapotentialimpactonEnvironmentallySensitiveAreas/SensitiveorcriticalEcosystems/HCVAs.JustificationWhilstthesitingofthefarmmightnotbeinanenvironmentallysensitivearea/sensitiveorcriticalecosystemorHCVA,thefarmcouldhaveapotentialimpactonasensitiveecosystem
throughlandusechangesoreffluentdischarge.Insuchcases,thesizeofthefarmortheintensitiesshouldnotbethecriteriatodetermineifanEIAisneeded.AnEIAshouldbeconducted.Withoutsuchanassessment,theimpactstothesensitivearea,ifany,cannotbedetermined.RecommendationThecurrentseparateindicatorsforEIAandHCVAassessmentshouldberetained.JustificationInmostcountries,EIAsarealegalrequirementbutthequalityofthereport,thepublicparticipationprocessandotherproceduresdifferssignificantly.Forcertificationpurposes,thefarmsshoulddemonstrateastandardthatgoesbeyondthelegalrequirements.HCVassessmentareusuallynotpartoftheEIAprocess.Therefore,inWWF‐Malaysia’sopinion,HCVassessmentshouldbecapturedasaseparateheading/indicator.2.1.10
• GSCResponsetocommentson2.1.9–2.1.11TheGSChassignificantlyrevisedandexpandedontherequirementsfortheBEIAinPrinciple2,includinghavingaddedaseven‐pageappendixtoexplainasmuchdetailaspossible.Wewelcomefurthercommentsandwillcontinuetodoworkonthisissue.AldinHilbrandsItissuggestedunderindicator2.1.10thatBEIAsneedtobeconductedbyanaccreditedassessmentteam.Firstly,thissoundslikeanexpensivetaskthatneedstobeoutsourcedtoexpertsandthefarmercannotperformbyhimself.Second,therearenotdetailsgivenoftheaccreditationstandardsthattheseteamneedtocomplywithnoroftheaccreditationbodiesthatundertakethisaccreditation.FlavioCorsinwhatifthereisnonationallegislation?InSouth‐EastAsiathecapacitytoconductsuchBEIAisextremelylow.Howshouldthemillionsofsmall‐scalefarmerscomplywiththisstandardiftheyweretoseekcertification(andtheywereamongthetopperformersforeverythingelse)?Suggestremovingthisstandard.NACARefertolegalrequirementsbytimefarmswerebuilt.ItisunknownwhatcapacitiesexistinThailandandcouldbeaccessiblebysmallfarmers.BiologicalinformationaboutSamroiyotwasproducedbyacademicsandNGOsinrelationtothecreationofthenationalparkandtheRamsarregistrationofthesite.2.1.11
• GSCResponsetocommentson2.1.9–2.1.11TheGSChassignificantlyrevisedandexpandedontherequirementsfortheBEIAinPrinciple2,includinghavingaddedaseven‐pageappendixtoexplainasmuchdetailaspossible.Wewelcomefurthercommentsandwillcontinuetodoworkonthisissue.FlavioCorsinMostfarmersdonothaveawebsiteoraccesstointernet.Suggestremovingthisstandard.
NACAConsidertherequirementofanenvironmentalmanagementplan.Thisshouldhavetobedevelopedbyafarmergroupasindividualfarmerswouldhavethecapacitytoestablishsuchmanagementplans.CPIndonesiaBEIAstatementandassociatedmanagementplanpublishedandaccessibleatthecompanyandlocalgovernmentofficesinappropriatelanguage.AlldocumentspertainingtotheBEIA/EIAshouldbemadeavailabletomembersofthepublicforreviewandfeedback.JustificationPublicparticipationanddisclosureproceduresfortheEIAprocessvariesbetweencountries.Itisimportantthatthepublicisabletoinspect,reviewandprovidecommentsontheBEIA/EIA.Insomecases,NGOsmightnothaveacommunitybasedorbiodiversityprojectinthesaidareabutneverthelesswillbeabletoprovidecommentsontheBEIA/EIAbasedontheirexperience.2.1.12
• TheGSChasremovedthisstandardfromthe2ndpublicdraftoftheShADStandards.Pleaseseethepubliccommentsreceivedbelow.TheGSCwouldliketomakeitclearthatthisisacriticalissuethatitwantstoensureisaddressedoncetheHCVnetworkhasdevelopedtheappropriatecriteriaforaquaculture.
M.N.KuttyHowdoweimplementincentivestoundertakelandscapelevelandintegratedcoastalplanningprocessesanddealwiththeissuesof‘carryingcapacity’andcumulativeimpacts?AreEIAs,HCVassessmentsandQuantitativeConservationPlanningontheirownsufficienttodealwiththeseissues?Whatelsewouldberecommended?Aredatacollectionlayersfeasibleexpectationsforfarmersbothintermsofcostsand/orcapacity?”Planning,monitoringandmanagementespeciallyatthesmallfarmerlevelinfarmcomplexes–clusters,areoftenbeyondthecapacityandmeansoftheindividualsmallfarmer,exceptperhapsforlargerfarmsinisolatedareas.Onemightfindanidealfarmsetupindividuallyinisolatedcases,butcumulativelywithinthelandscape/ecosytemorevenatalargergeographiclevel,carryingcapacity(CC)studiesdeterminingthetotaleffluentloadsfromfarmsinthearea,alsotakingintoaccountcumulativeloadsfromothersectorsintothereceivingwaterbodies,arenecessary.ThisonlywillhelpindeterminingthetotaleffluentloadofexistingSFareas(WaterSurfaceArea,WSA,occupiedbyshrimpfarms–anindexofSFponddensity)andpotentialareasforfurtherexpansion.InIndiathereisagoodexampleofhighlycrowdedshrimpfarmareasaroundKandaleruCreek–asmallestuarineriverflowingintoBayofBengal,inAndhraPradesh,wherethecreekwatersshowedhighlevelofpollution,andindeedleadingtocollapseoftheSFcomplex,asithappenedduringthepartialSFcollapseinIndiaoveradecadeago,aselsewhere.Somelevelofremediationwasachievedbyreducingstockingdensity(SD)drasticallyto<10/m2,asimposedforruraltraditionalcoastalSFinIndiabyGoI/AquacultureAuthority(nowCoastalAquacultureAuthority‐CAA)ofIndia,consequenttoIndia’sSupremeCourtintervention.ButthesolutionisregulatingSFoperationscollectively(asdonenowthroughSFAssociations,“AquaClubs”aschristenedinAndhraPradesh,India)byregulatingthetotalfarmedareaand
harmonizingregulatedfarmingoperationstofallwithintheCCofthereceivingwaterbody.ComprehensiveCCstudiesarenotdonegenerallyatmicroormacrolevel,butsustainablepracticesadvocatedbyGoI/CAAandpromotedbytheMarineProductsExportDevelopmentAuthority(MPEDA)andtheconcernedStateGovernmentsaregenerallybeingfollowed.AfewoftheneededcomprehensivestudiesatmacrolevelfordeterminingCCofcoastalwaterbodiesandrecommendingthecriticallimitsofSFareas(WSA)havenowbeguninIndiabytheCentralInstituteofBrackishwaterAquaculture(CIBA)–seeAnnualReports(contact:[email protected]),butnoneofthesehavecometoanystageofimplementationthroughnationallegislation,thoughSFinIndiaisregulatedbyCAA.ThefarmedshrimpproductioninIndiaisdominatedbysmallfarmers–over90%ofthefarmersownfarms<10hainsize.Thereforeignoringthesmallfarmproductionisnotanalternative,fortheyarenowinvolvedinsustainableshrimpproductionfollowingtheprescribednormsandindeedreapingsocio‐economicbenefitsaccrued.Moreonthisin‘GeneralComments’.Isthescaleof10kmandtimescalefor2.1.10appropriate?”Com:ThisstandardwillbedifficulttofollowforthesmallshrimpfarmerinIndia/Asia.SeeGeneralCommentsWWF‐USInternationallyrecognizedandtransparentgovernanceidentifyingandrecognizingHighConservationValueAreas(HCVAs)areneitherreadilyacceptednordefined.Thus,itremainsdifficulttomandateno‐gozonesinHCVAs.Usingthisindicatorwithoutestablishedrecognitionofsuchareascouldimpactthecredibilityofthestandards.Suggestedaction:Revisetoread“AvoidanceofsitinginzonesidentifiedbyInternationalMoratoriumssuchastheAmazonBasin”.Akeyquestionremains:howtocollecthistoricalinformationforexistingfarms?Thiscouldbeconsideredinthefutureifamethodologybecomesapplicableforsiteorifaroundtableonthatissueisinitiated.IngerNaslundAllowanceforsitinginHighConservationValueAreas(HCVA).‐HighlyquestioninghowthiscanprovetosupportHCVA?ShouldnotallowsitingoffarmsinHCVA!!ThishastobesolvedinsomewayasIunderstandthattodayfarmsarealreadysitedinHCVA.‐2.1.122.1.13Stillbelieveitisrelevantwiththesystematic,quantitativeconservationplanningasdescribed.‐Thedefinition5NewFarm:Encompassesallformsofexpansion,newponds,newfarmsitesorrelatedfacilitiesdoneafterpublicationofthisdocument.‐Shouldbeaddedthatthisfarmhasarunningproductionatthistime.FlavioCorsinHowareHCVAdefined?Aretheremaps?Welookedatthewebresourcesbutwecouldnotfindany"auditable"information.NACA
InSamroiyotazoningofactivitieshasbeenestablished,whichdefinesaconservationarea(wetland).TheconsultationprocessusedtoachievesuchzoningcouldbeconsideredasanacceptablewayofdefiningaHCVA.Dr.A.G.PonniahTherationaleforthisseemstobetogeneratethedatarequiredforscientificplanning.InIndia,implementationofIntegratedcoastalzonemanagementprogrammesareinthepurviewofprovincialGovernmentsandhowthefarmercouldensurethatinthenextfiveyears?BelizeShrimpGrowersTheBSGAwouldliketoseeextensivedevelopmentofthehighvalueconservationareaconcept.Thelargerpartofthegoalsofanecocertificationshouldbetopreservelocalhighvalueecosystems.Directlinkagesbetweenthefarmsandthisprocessseemahighlyvaluableundertaking.BSGAisexploringparticipationinlocalcommitteeswithaconservationfocusthataddressmitigationandpreventionofanthropogenicimpactsWWFMalaysiaCommentItisunclearwhodeterminesHCVAareas.Thisneedstobeclearlystatedinthedocument.RecommendationApartfromHCVAs,areasthathavebeenidentifiedasEnvironmentallySensitiveAreas/criticalecosystems/habitatsinnational,stateorlocallanduseplansandpoliciesshouldalsobeincludedinthisindicator.JustificationInmanycountries,thereareplanningprocessestoidentifysensitiveecosystemsatthenational,stateandlocallevels.Theseareasshouldbemaintainedandshouldnotbeconvertedforaquacultureprojects.2.1.13
• TheGSChasremovedthisstandardfromthe2ndpublicdraftoftheShADStandards.Pleaseseethepubliccommentsreceivedbelow
NewEnglandAquariumTheScientificconservationplanningproposedstandard2.1.13couldbehighlyproblematicifthesestudieswereperformedbadly.Additionally,a10kmradiusisunlikelytobejustifiableforasmallproducer.Istheconceptofoverlappingreportslikelyif,asstated,thestandardcoversonlythetop20%offarms?WWF‐USMandatingspatialland/wateruseon20kmdiameteroffarmsiteindigitalformatisoverlyburdensomeandlargelyunavailableinmostregionswhereshrimpfarmingtakesplace.WerespecttheinterestandfocusoftheGSCtoimposesuchrequirementsbutarguethatitbestbelimitedtocoastalzoneplanning,research,andregulatoryactivityandshouldnotbemandatedasrequiredforcompliancewithstandards.Suggestedaction:Strike2.1.13.2:Questiononhydrology(pg26)–inthecurrentstandardsdocument,thereislittleroomforhydrologicmanipulation.Thereforefurtherstandardsonhydrologicalconditionsarenotneeded.
FlavioCorsinWeunderstandtheintent,butbelievethisisanunrealisticandunnecessaryrequirementfore.g.small‐scaleproducersofAsia,whowouldnotbeabletoprovidethisinformation.NACAScientificinformationaboutSamroiyotwetlandwasproducedbyacademicsandNGOsinrelationtothecreationofthenationalparkandtheRamsarregistrationofthesite.Butotherwise,itisunclearhowsmallfarmscouldcomplywiththatrequirement.WWFGermanyThescaleof10kmdoesseemquitehigh,thereishardlyanyshrimpfarmthissize.Maybeamoreappropriatelimitofthisisagainannualproductionvolume(sincethisreflectfinancialcapacityoffarms)incombinationwithsurfaceareaoffarm.Farmswithoutputs>2'000MT/yearand/orsurface>500hashouldbesubjectto2.1.1Criterion2.2:PreventionofsalinizationofadjacentfreshwaterandsoilresourcesCPThailandThisisnotastandardanddoesnotaddresstheissueofsalinization.Itismoreimportanttomeasureactualsalinizationimpactthanmandatesoilconditions.Whatifthesurroundingsoilisalreadysaline?Iwouldalsoarguethatasoilwith11%clayand69%sandwoulddolittletopreventseepageandsalinization.Basedonthis–aconcreteponddesignasusedinsomefarmswouldnotqualify.Howdoesonegoaboutsamplingforthesestandards.Somefarmshaveseveraltypesofsoils,Doesonepickapondtodetermineordoesoneneedtosampleallponds.Ifonepondfailsthetest;howdoesthataffectthestandardforthefarm.Howaboutconstructionmethodsthatareusedspecificallytopreventseepage(forexample,usinganimpermeablecore).Theguidanceforauditorsusingthe“simplemethod”wouldnotprovideanyassurancethatthestandardaswrittenwasmet.
• Weagreethatthisaspectshouldnotbeaddressedasanindicatorandhavenowmovedittotheguidancesection,asitisagoodpracticeforfarmerstoemploy.
WWFGermanyWithinCriterion2.2wedonotfindanindicator/standardmakingsurethatfarmingofmarineshrimpinfreshwaterhabitatsisexcludedfromcertificationbytheASC.Indicators2.2.4and2.2.5areaddressingthechangesofsalinityinthewater/soil(conductanceandchlorideconcentration)buttheimportantissueisontimingofsuchanalysis:Mostsalinewaterisbeingdischargedintothesurroundingwaterbodiesuponharvesting(pulsatingeffect),whichhasaclearandmajorimpactonwaterandsoils.Suchpracticemustbepreventedandnotallowed.
• Wedonotwanttobeprescriptiveandexcludeanyoneonprinciplebecausewewanttoallowfortechnicalsolutionstosolveforkeyproblems.However,itisdifficulttoaddressthisissuewithoutbeingprescriptive.
• Werecognizethisconcern(pulsatingeffect)andarecontinuingtoworkonthisissue.BelizeShrimpGrowersThefarmersfeelstronglythat1cmlossofwaterlevelcouldeasilyoccurduetosimpleevapotransporationinhotsubtropicalclimatesandthatthelossof<1cmperdaywasnotfeasibleasagoal.Isitpossibletostructurethe1500umohstandardinawaythatthefarmersareresponsibleforimpairmentsduetoinfiltrationwithoutresortingtoastandardthatrequires
noinfiltration?• Wehaveacknowledgedthischallengeandhavereformulatedtheindicatortospecify
thatwearetomakesureitaddresseswaterlossthroughseepageonly.Evaportransportationneedstobesubtracted.Werecognizethiswillbetechnologicallychallengingandareworkingonsolutionstothisproblem.Thisisrequiredonlyoffarmslocatedinfreshwaterareas.
2.2.1NewEnglandAquariumAdd“fully”between“not”and“covered”intheindicator.
• Wewillconsiderthisrecommendation.WWF‐USBymandatingtheperformanceIndicator/Standard2.2.4;then2.2.1through2.2.3becomeprescriptiveandredundant.Suggestedaction:Strike2.2.1;2.2.2;and2.2.3.
• Weagreeintheory,but,inreality,thepossibilityofmonitoringundergroundwaterwillnotalwaysbeguaranteed.Therefore,thesearevaluablepreventiveindicators.
IngerNaslundSoiltexturerequiredforpondsandcanalsnotcoveredwithaplasticlinerorotherwaterproofmaterial.Theclaycontentshouldbeonthemoreprecautionarysidetobe20‐30%fortoensurethatsalinewatersipthroughtofreshwater.
• SeebelowresponsetoWWFMalaysiaWWFMalaysiaForsoiltextureforpondsnotlinedbywaterproofmaterial,theclaycontentisstatedas>10%butinPage28itisstatedthathavingaclaycontentof20–30%isrecommendedforpondsitesoils.Iftherecommendedclaycontentis20‐30%,whyisn’ttheminimumrequirementforclaycontentforpondsandcanalsnotcoveredwithaplasticlinerorotherwaterproofmaterialsetat30%?
• While20‐30%isrecommended,theGSCbelievesthatthereisnodocumentedevidencethat10‐20%isaproblem.Therefore,webelievethatsettingthestandardsat20‐30%wouldbeanunfairtarget,especiallygiventheotherrequirementsinthestandard.
2.2.2CPThailandSeemsthiswasjustpickedoutoftheair–isthereanysupportingdatatoshowthatthisisameaningfulnumber?;Ihaveruncompletelylinedpondswithgreaterlossthanthisatcertaintimesofyear.Samehere–anymeasurementsIhaverun(OKalongtimeago)gavemuchhigherratesthanthisforevaporationinthedryseason.Againismeasurementsineachpondororforonedemonstrationpondorwhat,overwhatperiod?.Quiteapartfromhowthiswillbemeasuredorverified.Ifafarmtopsupwaterlosseveryweek,howdoesthatfitin?
• Asexplainedintherationaleonpage28,arecentliteraturereviewfoundthatnormalseepagefromaquaculturepondsdidnotexceed20cm/month,or0.67cm/day1.Asforevaporation,consideringthatmostfarmerswouldnothaveaccesstoreliabledata,itwasdeterminedtouseaveragevaluesforevaporationfromtheseagivenby
1Boyd2009
BaumgartnerandReichel(1975)2as0.39cm/daybetween0and20oNlatitudeand0.43cm/daybetween0and20oSlatitude–theareainwhichmostshrimpfarmsarelocated.Theaverageoceanevaporationforthezone20oN‐20oSlatitudeis0.41cm/day.However,weacknowledgethattheevaporationratecouldbehigherinsomeregionsandduringcertainperiodsoftheyear.Therefore,wemodifiedtheproposedstandardtoallowfarmerstoentertheirownevaporationdataintotheequation,providedtheycanjustifyareliablesourceofdata.
WilliamRashFormuladoesnottakeintoaccountwaterevaporation,precipitationorseepage.
• Waterlossisdefinedascumulatedlossthroughseepageandevaporation(seefootnoteinthestandardsdocument).Theexplanationofwhytheindicatorcombineslossesfromevaporationandseepageisgivenintherationaleforthestandard.Asforprecipitation,theguidancesaysthatmeasurementsneedtobedoneduringa24‐hourperiodwithoutrainfall,otherwiseanadjustmentforrainfallmustbemade.
MarkNijhofWhydoesthestandardnotfocussolelyonsalinizationinthevariouswaterbodiesduetofarming?The‘waterdrop’criteriaof1cmdaymayverywellbeexceededbyafreshwater(Macrobrachiumrosenbergii)shrimpfarms,withoutviolatinggoodfarmingprinciples!Infact,Penaeusmonodonisalsoculturedinpondswithverylowsaltlevels,makinghigherseepagerates(involume)acceptable.Ithinkthatthiscriterionismuchbettermetbydemandingroutine(ground)watersalinitytests.
• Thisargumentmakessense,however,groundwatermonitoringwouldbechallengingformanyfarmsthatdonothavewellsoftheappropriatedepthinoraroundthefarm.
FlavioCorsinThisisnotrealisticasseveralfarmswouldlosetheseamountsforevaporationonly.Shouldbeapplicabletothetopperformers(globally)andappliedonlyforpondsthathavepondwaterwithsalinitysignificantly(tobedefined)differentfromthesurroundingenvironmentHowtodefinefreshwater?Howtotakeintoaccountenvironmentsthatarebrackishduringpartoftheyearandfreshwaterduringothers?
• Weacknowledgethattheevaporationratecouldbehigherinsomeregionsandduringcertainperiodsoftheyear.Therefore,wemodifiedtheproposedstandardtoallowfarmerstoentertheirownevaporationdataintotheequation,providedtheycanjustifyareliablesourceofdata.Freshwaterisdefinedinthestandardsandthejustificationisdetailedintherationale.Environmentsthatarebrackishforpartoftheyearareconsideredtobebrackishunderthisstandardbecausethenaturalvegetationwouldbeadaptedtothoseconditions.Thiswillbespecifiedintheguidancesection.
NACAThestandardwastestedinthefieldfollowingthemethodologiesspecified.Theresultshowsmuchhigherlevelofwaterloss,andsuggestsrevisingthestandard.Therearemanyfactorscausingseepageanditisnoteasyforsmallscalefarmertoimprovethesysteminlimitedresources(e.g.withoutusingplasticliners).
2BaumgartnerandReichel(1975)
• Thankyouforthereport.Wewillattempttoaddressthisinthenextversion,althoughthegoaloftheShADistodefinethestandard.Therewillbeasecondphasewhichwillbefocusedontheimplementationofthestandard.
2.2.3M.N.Kutty“ThisinstrumentcostsaboutUSD1,000,andsmall‐scalefarmersmaynotbeabletoaffordit.Analternativeisachloridetestkit.SeveralcompaniessellthesekitsforlessthanUSD100.Note:Whenpurchasingkits,chloridekitsmustnotbeconfusedwithchlorinekits”.Thisissurelyapositiveconsiderationofsmallfarmer.
• WeunderstandthatthisisanissuebutitisabitoutofthescopeoftheShADcurrently.NewEnglandAquariumChange“fordilutingsalinityinpond”to“inshrimpproduction”
• “inshrimpponds”ismoreaccurate.IngerNaslundAllowancefortheuseoffreshgroundwaterfordilutingsalinityinpond.Thisshouldnotbeaccepted.Thisisveryimportantasundisturbedfreshwateriscrucialforthecommunities.‐Sedimentdisposalsitesshouldbesurroundedbyembankmentstoavoidrunoffand,iftheyareinareaswithhighlypermeablesoilorinfreshwaterzone,theyshouldbelinedwithclayorplastictoavoidinfiltration.Thisisveryimportantbutdisposalshouldnotbeallowedinfreshwaterareas!!FlavioCorsinremove"fordilutingsalinity"astheuseofgroundwatershouldbeavoidedregardless.
• Anumberoffarmsusesalineorbrackishgroundwaterwithoutnecessarilycausingnegativeimpacts.Wedeterminedthatwhatispotentiallydetrimentalisexcessivepumpingoffreshwaterbecauseoftheresultingcompetitionwithhumanneedsandrisksofsalinization.Therefore,weidentifiedtheonlyreasonforpumpinglargevolumesofwatertobefordilutingsalinityincoastalareaswherefarmersjudgethenaturalsalinityofsurfacewatertobetoohigh.Inothercases,risksassociatedwiththeuseofgroundwaterarecoveredbyindicator2.2.4.
NACAThefarmergroupusesaltgroundwater,andjustwantedtomakesurethisisOK,andsuggestmakingfootnotetoclarifythispoint.
• Wedonotthinkthisisnecessaryasitclearlysays“freshwater.”WWFGermanyClarificationfortheallowanceforuseoffreshwater:Isthisonlyforuseoffreshwaterforthepurposeofdilutingsalinity(=controlofsalinitylevels)oralsothegeneraluseoffreshgroundwaterformarineshrimpfarming?
• Forsimplification,wedecidedtoremove“forthepurposeofdilutingsalinity”intheindicator.Itmustbeunderstoodthattheuseoffreshgroundwaterisnotpermittedforcertifiedshrimpponds,whateverthepurposemightbe.
2.2.4
CPThailandThethresholdfortasteis600ppmCl,whatifthewellsintheareahadhigherclconcentrationthat300ppmbeforethefarmwasbuilt.Shouldthisstandardnotbebasedonmeasuringactualimpactbyprovidingmonitoringdataforspecificwatersources?
• WethinkthatisthegoalofTilapiaAquacultureDialogue,whichdefinedapermissibleincrease.Wewillconsiderthisinthenextversion.
FlavioCorsinWhatifwhatareconsidered"freshwater"wellshavetraditionallybrackishcharacteristics?
• Measurementswouldtelliftheyarefreshorbrackishwaters.NACASmallfarmersdonothavetheequipmenttoperformthistestandtheywouldneedtofindawayoffinancingitasagroup.Nowellintheareahadconductancelowerthanthestandard.Monitoringsurfacefreshwateriscomplexduetointeractionsbetweensaltwaterandfreshwaterandsignificantknowledgeoftheareaisrequiredtoestablishanappropriatemonitoringplan.
• Itistruethatsomeknowledgeoftheareaisrequired,buttheGSCbelievesthatitshouldnotbetooonerousforthefarmerstoidentifyfreshwaterbodiesintheirarea.
CPIndonesiaSalinity(0ppt)shouldbesufficientasitisimplementedsofar.
• Asalinityof0couldmaskvariationsofspecificconductancebetween0and1.900uS/cm,therefore,anymeasurementabovethehigherlimitisdefinedasfreshwater.Additionally,toascertainthatsalinityisactually0,aconductivitymeterorachloridekitwillberequiredbecauserefractometers(salinometers)donotprovideenoughresolution.Itisthereforeeasiertoreferdirectlytosuchsensitiveparameterstosetthestandards.
Dr.A.G.PonniahCoastalaquacultureisgenerallypracticedinsaltaffectedcoastallands.InmostcasesthesoilandwaterresourcesaroundtheestuarinecreeksaresalineandthelevelsofSpecificconductance(=40hasizefarmsasperCAAguidelines.EIAshouldincludepSIAshouldbemadeaspartofEIAandnotasasperateexercise
• Thisistrue,however,manyfarmsarealsolocatedinareasthatareattheinterfacebetweenbrackishandfreshwaterenvironments.
WWFGermanyFarmingofmarineshrimp(insalinewater)infreshwaterhabitatsshouldgenerallybebannedandnotallowedundertheShADstandard.(Exceptionmaybefullyclosedfarmingsystemwithpropertreatmentofsludge.Thisishoweververydifficultinafreshwaterhabitatanditwillalwayshaveseriousimpactsonsoilandwater).
• Thatcouldbeconsidered,but,asyouacknowledge,wemightidentifyexistingfarmsestablishedinfreshwaterenvironmentswithoutnegativeimpacts.Therefore,itisbettertobasethestandardsontheactualimpact,ratherthanadoptinganother“prescriptive”view.
WWFMalaysia
Thereleaseofsalinewatersintoafreshwaterecosystemneedstobeaddressedverycarefully,especiallyincaseswhere:‐
i) thefreshwaterisahabitatforspecieslistedintheIUCNRedList,ii) thefreshwaterisahabitatforspeciesdefinedbynationallistingprocessandiii) thelocalcommunitiesaredependentonthefreshwaterecosystem(e.gfor
livelihood,domesticuse).Insuchcases,theprecautionaryapproachshouldbetakenandnoallowanceshouldbemadeforthereleaseofsalinewatersintothefreshwaterecosystem.Incaseswherepoints(i),(ii)or(iii)aboveisnotrelevant,thereleaseofsalinewater/effluentintoafreshwaterecosystemneedstotakeintoconsiderationthedilutioncapabilityofthewaterwaysaswellastheseasonalvariations(wetanddryseason).
• Thatmakessensebutcarriesahighlevelofcomplexityforformulationinthestandards.Asforthepreviouscomment,analternativewouldbetobananysalinewaterdischargeintofreshwaterbodies.
2.2.5WWF‐USAgreedwithrevisiontoincludeminimumdistanceof25mlaterallyfromfarmperimeter.
• Providingajustificationforthisrecommendeddistanceisnecessary.CPIndonesiaSalinity(0ppt)shouldbesufficientasitisimplementedsofar.
• Pleaseseeabove.2.2.6NewEnglandAquariumStandards2.2.6and2.2.7aretooprescriptiveandaremovingawayfromfarmlevelcontrol.Sedimentshavealsobeenusedtoreinforcepondwalls.Replacewitha“noreleaseofsalinesedimentfromthefarmtoafreshwaterzone”
• SeebelowresponseCPThailandAgainaBAP,notastandard.
• Weagreeandhavemovedthistotheguidancesection.Alsothereareveryfewspecificconductancemetersusedonshrimpfarms;mostuserefractometers.
• Verytrue,butrefractometersdonotprovideenoughresolutionforaccuratelydeterminingverylowsalinitylevels,especiallythosearoundthelimitfordefiningfreshwater.
WWF‐USVeryprescriptiveandnotaperformancestandard.Theidentifiedimpactswouldbeminimizedbycomplianceto2.2.4and2.2.5above.Suggestedaction:Strike2.2.6.
• WeagreeandhavemovedthistotheguidancesectionFlavioCorsin2.2.6tooprescriptive.Suggestremovingthisstandard.
• Weagreeandhavemovedthistotheguidancesection
NACALittleaccumulationofsediments.Pondsarecleanedonceayearanddrysedimentspreadoverbanks.
• ThisisconsideredasaBMPintheguidancesection.CPIndonesiaNoneedtobedefinedasthereareseveralwaystomanagesediments.Itshouldbeenoughifthecompanycanshowappropriatewayinmanagingthesedimentwiththemaingoalnottocontaminatetheenvironment
• Weagreeandwillconsidermovingthistotheguidancesection.2.2.7FlavioCorsinIfconductanceistoohigh,peoplewillnotusesoilasfertilizer.Iftheydecidetodoso,itmeansthatitcanbeused.Suggestremovingthisstandard.
• Wecannotassumethatpeoplealwaysdowhatcommonsensedictatesandsomepeoplecouldusetheargumentof"fertilizingland"tojustifythedumpingwastesediment.Webelievethatusingactualmeasurementsisthebasisformakinggooddecisions.Also,wehavedetermined,thankstoyourcomment,thatweshouldnotonlyaddresstheuseofsedimentsasfertilizersbutanysituationofsedimentdisposal.
WWFGermanySothequestionisifitisnotpossibletosimplyexcludefarmingofshrimpinsurfacefreshwaterhabitats,anddefinethetermsurfacefreshwaterhabitatbymeansofconductanceandchlorinelevelsinwaterandsoilatthesurface.Wethereforedosuggestanadditionalparameterandstandard:2.2.8:Indicator:Farmingofmarineshrimpinsurfacefreshwaterhabitats(=waterandsoilparameterXXtobedefinedforthetermfreshwater)/Standard:None.Inourview,itisnotpossibletorearmarineshrimpinafreshwaterhabitatwithoutimpactingecosystemsthroughincreasinglevelsofsalinity,sowedonotseewhysuchpracticesshouldbeallowedundertheASC.Salinizationisalongtermprocesswithcumulativeeffectsoverthetime,andevenbymeasuringimpactsonwaterandsoilatcertaintimeintervals,itisnotpossibletopreventlongtermdamageandreducedsoilfertility/changingsalinitylevelsinsurfaceandgroundwaterbodies
• Thisiscomplex,asmanyshrimpfarmsarelocatedinareasattheinterfacebetweenfreshandbrackishwaterresources,withinconsistentconditionsthatvarydependingonseasonalandecologicalphenomena.Weneedthestandardstoaddressthepossibleimpactonfreshwaterresources.Therefore,negativeimpactsofinlandaquacultureshouldbecovered.Therearealsoargumentstomoveaquacultureasmuchaspossibletowardsinlandrecirculatingsystemsthatminimizetheimpactoncoastalenvironments.However,thisrequirescarefulconsideration.
Criterion2.3:Preventionofsoilerosion
• Criteria2.3hasbeendeletedfromthestandardsdocument.Principle3:DevelopandoperatefarmswithconsiderationforsurroundingcommunitiesWWF‐US
Expandtheimpactstatementtoidentifythespecificimpactsspecificallyraisedbycommunitiesand/ordocumented.Clarifyingtheseimpactswillhelptoframetheproposedsolutions(indicatorsandstandards).IfdeemedrelevantbyShADstakeholders,consideradoptingthebelowsixmajorlivelihoodthemesasawaytodefinethetypesofrelevantissuesandpotentialimpactsoncommunities
• Economicaspects–suchastheinfluenceofaquacultureonemployment,impactsonotherlivelihoods(complementarities,conflictwithorsubstitutionofotherlivelihoodstrategies),povertyissuesandincomechanges.
• Naturalresourceaccessanduseaspects–suchasaccesstonaturalresources,landandwatertenure,influencesonqualityandquantityofothernaturalresourcesusedbycommunities.
• Humanassets–suchasfoodsecurity,humanhealthandsafety,securityrisks,educationandtraining,indigenousknowledgeandpractices.
• Physicalinfrastructure–suchasaccesstoroads,electricity,telephones,changesininfrastructureandtransport,housing,wastedisposalsystems.
• Socialandculturalaspects–suchasculturalinstitutionsandresources,indigenousrightsandbeliefs,socialexclusion/inclusion(gender,ethnicity,agedisparities),socialnetworks
• Governance–awiderandgenericcategorythatprocessrelatedactivitiessuchasinfluenceofaquacultureonculturalnorms,taboos,regulationsandlaws,conflictmanagement,andprocessfortransparency,accountabilityandparticipation
• Theseissuesareaddressedintheguidancesection.Ingeneral,asindicatedbelow,wesuggestare‐groupingoftheexistingcriteria,essentiallycombining3.1.1and3.2.1intoanew3.1
• 3.1coverswhatisinvolvedinthepSIAassessmentandhowitshouldbeconducted.3.2.1covershow(quickly)conflictresolutionshouldhappen,while3.1.1isaboutfindingoutanddiscussingissues.3.1.2isaboutresolvingconflicts.
Principle3Flag(pg38):ThisflagandsubsequentquestionsarenotparticularlycleartoWWF‐US.Thequestionsasreadcurrentlyinferastandardthatwillclosefarms.Thisisnottheroleofastandardssettingbody.Ifthereisastandardthatsuggeststhefarmisnotcertifiable,thosestandardscanbeimplemented,buttodeterminetheefficacyofafarm’sexistencedoesnotseemtobetheroleoftheShAD,ratherShADshouldfocusonwhatisconsideredacceptableornot.
• Thisreferstoapreviouslyconsideredideatohaveacriteriononclosureandreclamation.Thecriteriondoesnotdiscusstheclosingoffarmsanddoesnotsuggestthatfarmsshouldbeclosed.Rather,itcoverswhatprovisionsfarmsneedtohaveinplaceincasetheywillorneedtoclose.
JakePiscano,CENTERFOREMPOWERMENTANDRESOURCEDEVELOPMENTThisshouldbetakeninholisticperspective,includingotheroperations,notnecessarilyaquaculture,thatalsoimpactoncommunitiesandmarineenvironments.
• Weassumeyourcommenttomeanthatmuchofthislieswithgovernmentsandnotwithaquaculturefarmers.Thisisperhapstrue,butthereisanindividualandsector‐specificresponsibilityinplayaswell.Theabsenceofanyortheexistenceofinsufficientlawsisnotanexcusefornegativeimpactsasaconsequence.
FlavioCorsin
Wearegenerallyinagreementwiththestandardsunderthisprinciple,withsomeminorexceptionsItisunclearhowasmall‐scalefarmerwillbeabletoconductap‐SIA,eveniftheymaynothaveanynegativeimpactonthesurroundingcommunities.Suggestprovidingmoreinformationonwhatexactlywouldbeexpectedandwhatmethodologyshouldbeusedbysmall‐scaleproducerswillingtocomplywiththesestandards
• Pleaseseethematrixinthenewversionofthestandards.WWFSwedenGeneralremarkforP3:Wefeelthattheissuesatstakehavebeenadequatelyaddressedsofar.AsageneralfeedbackwedothinkthattheunitofcertificationneedstobetakenintoaccountwhenaddressingsmallscalefarmsforP3.ForCriterion3.13.3standardsmusttakeintoaccounttherealitiesofsmallscalefarmersandallowforfarmergroup/clusterstoaddressandsolvetheseissues.
• Pleaseseethematrixandguidancesectiontoseehowthispertainstogroups/clusters.Criterion3.1:Allimpactsonsurroundingcommunities,ecosystemusers,andlandownersareaccountedforandare,orwillbe,negotiatedinanopenandaccountablemannerWWF‐USThewordingofthecriterionisnotconsistentwithothercriteria.SuggestedChange:Re‐wordcriteriontosomethingalongthelinesof“Openandaccountablenegotiationsrelatedtoimpactsonsurroundingcommunities,ecosystemusersandlandowners”orpreferablytheGSCwilladoptre‐organizedlanguageandsuggestionsoutlinedbelow.WWFUSsuggeststhebelowasapreferablecourseofactionbecauseofanticipatedissuesrelatedthepracticalityoftheinitiallyproposedSIA.Belowelementsin3.1havemanyofthecrucialelementsoftheSIAasdescribedinthefirstdraftbutsuggestsmoreconciseandtargetedindicatorsandmovemanyoftheSIAandotherelementsintotheguidancesection.WesuggestthisbecauseguidancefortheparticipatorySIAcouldbebiasedtowardslargescale,industrialfarms.Smallscaleaquacultureproducerscanhavesimilarmagnitudesofimpactwithsurroundingcommunities.Researchingtheimpactsofsmall‐scaleaquacultureonsurroundingcommunitieswouldappearcost–prohibitive;however,thereisnolesseningofsignificancebecausesmallscaleproducersarethedominanttypeinthecommunity.IfpSIAshavebeentested,thelessonslearnedonhowshrimpfarmingcanaffectlocalcommunitiesshouldbeapplied.ThetargetsandgoalsfortheShADarenottomonitorandevaluatepotentialimpacts,butrathertoaddresstheseproblemsthathaveproventobesignificant.Suggestedaction:ratherthanmandatingsociologicalstudiesontheimpactsofshrimpfarming,takethecurrentstateofinformationonwhattheimpactsareandsettargetsforhowtheGSCbelievescommunitiesandpeopleshouldbetreated.Arobustconflictresolutionprogramwilldeterminethespecificimpacts,butdoesnotrequireasmuchcapitalasapSIASuggestedNewCriterion3.1(seeallbelow):GovernancemechanismsforengagementwithlocalcommunitiesIndicator Standard3.1.1Presenceofcredible3engagementmechanismsagreedtobyfarmandcommunity
Yes
3Capableofbeingcreditedorbelieved,worthyofbelief,entitledtoconfidence,trustworthy
3.1.2Presenceofdocumentationoutliningcompanypolicyandproceduresthatsupporteffectivesocialauditingandresolutionofgrievancesorconflictswithcommunity.
Yes(notethe%usedincurrentdraftcouldbeincludedinguidance)
3.1.3Evidencethatsocialimpactauditingdocumentshaveidentifiedcrediblemechanismsfordialoguebetweenfarmsandcommunities
Yes
• TheintentionoftheShADforthiscriterionisunderstoodbyWWF,exceptwhenitstatesthattheShADhasagoaltomonitorandevaluatepotentialimpacts.TheShADdoesnothavethisgoal.Rather,thegoalistohavethefarmerdothat.ThecriteriaarebuiltinsuchawaythatanauditorclearlyseeswhattheShADdeterminesthe‘credibleengagement’,the‘presenceofdocumentation’andthe‘evidence’thatfarmersmustbeabletopresent(totheauditor).Therestisintendedtobehelpfultothefarmers(theguidanceisabouthowhe/sheneedstodothis)andauditors(asitdescribeswhatthefarmershouldhavedone).
WilliamRashCriterion3.1and2.1p‐SIA&EIA:Forsmallerfarmsorindividuallyowned/operatedpondsorfarmswithinagroupoffarms,thestandardneedstohaveanallowanceforassessmentreportstorepresentgroupsratherthanspecificfarms.Whatistheimplicationfornewandexistingfarms?Whatistheimplicationforcommissioningap‐SIAonacommunityfarmthatisalreadywellestablishedandpartofthecommunity?Howisthestandardtoaddressassociatednegativeimpactsofmigrantlabour?
• Pleaseseetheguidancesection.IngerNaslundAllimpactsonsurroundingcommunities,ecosystemusers,andlandownersareaccountedforandare,orwillbe,negotiatedinanopenandaccountablemanner‐Inparticular,appropriateconsultationmustbeundertakenwithinlocalcommunitiessothatpotentialconflictsareproperlyidentified,avoided,minimized,and/ormitigatedthroughopenandtransparentnegotiationsonthebasisofanassessmenttowardrisksandcurrentimpactsonthesurroundingcommunities.‐Thisisabsolutelymandatory!!
• Weagreeandtakethisassupportfortheproposed3.1BelizeGrowersCanthe"SocialImpactAssessment"becoveredbytheEIA?
• ParticipatoryelementsofBEIAandp‐SIAcanbeintegratedintooneprocess(oneeffort).Theguidancesectionsunderon2.1.andP3.1.showhowthiscanbedone.
WWFMalaysiaIngeneral,theprincipleandfollowingcriterionarefairlycomprehensiveinaddressingimpactsoftheaquaculturefarmonlocalcommunityasitalludestokeypoliciesandinternationalconvenantsandagreementsrelatedtorightsoflocalandindigenouscommunities.WWF‐MalaysiarecommendsthattheCriterionandIndicatorsinthedraftstandardsbetheminimumrequirementtobeadoptedandimplemented.
• Weagree.
http://www.webster‐dictionary.net/definition/credible
3.1.1NewEnglandAquariumAsocialimpactassessmentwouldbebeneficial;howeverincludingarealimitthattheassessmentshouldcoverbasedonthefarmsizemaybebeneficial.
• Stakeholdermappingwilldeterminethedistanceatwhichfarmstakeholdersshouldbeconsidered.
WWF‐USThesecommunityengagementmechanismsmayincludefunctioningmulti‐stakeholdercommittees,meetingreportssignedbyconcernedparties,agreeduponaquaculturefarmpolicydocuments.Evidencepresentedshouldensurethatpeopleandgroupsdirectlyaffectedbyaquaculturefarmoperationsareengaged.Monitoringshouldbeconducted,appropriatetothescaleofaquacultureoperations.Whilerespectingbusinessconfidentiality,aquacultureoperationsshouldshowevidenceoftransparencyandaccesstolocalcommunitiesofinformationonbusinessactivitiesthatdirectlyimpactthem,andpublicavailabilityofsummaryofresultsofanymonitoringofsocialindicators.
• Thisistrue.Guidelinesindicatethetransparencyrequirementsforthefarm.On‐farmoperationaldetailsthatposenorisktooff‐farmimpactscanremainconfidential.
AholdIsthisarealisticrequirement?Itseemstobearathercomplictedandtime‐consumingprocess,atleastforsmallerfarms(andnotjustthosewithlessthan5workers).
• Webelievethatthisisdo‐ableandalsonecessary.Pleaseseethematrixonhowthismaybedonebysmallfarms.
NACAThatisdifficultforsmallscalefarmerstoconduct,sosuggestauditorsinterviewlocalauthoritiesforreceivinginformation.
• Pleaseseethematrixandguidancesection.TheCertificationBodiesauditorsworkwithcanmakeauditsmucheasierbykeepingdatabaseswithinformationaboutthelocalauthorities.
CPIndonesiaFarmownersshallcommissionorundertakeaparticipatorySocialImpactAssessment(p‐SIA)anddisseminateresultsandoutcomeopenlyinlocallyappropriatelanguage.Localgovernmentshallhaveacopyofthisdocument.
• Weagreeandhaveincludedthisinthenewversionofthestandards.3.1.2WWF‐USConsiderexploringtheInstituteofSocialandEthicalAccountability(ISEA)AA1000Accountabilitystandard;thestandardaimstoassistanorganizationinthedefinitionofgoalsandtargets,themeasurementofprogressmadeagainstthesetargets,theauditingandreportingofperformanceandintheestablishmentoffeedbackmechanisms(AA1000AccountabilityPrinciplesStandard2008).TherearethreeAA1000AccountabilityPrinciples,oneofwhichisafoundationprinciple:(i)TheFoundationPrincipleofInclusivity;(ii)ThePrincipleofMateriality;
and(iii)ThePrincipleofResponsiveness.Inclusivityisthestartingpointfordeterminingmateriality.Thematerialityprocessdeterminesthemostrelevantandsignificantissuesforanorganizationanditsstakeholders.Responsivenessisthedecisions,actionsandperformancerelatedtothosematerialissues4.Thescopeofthecompanypolicydocumentation(3.1.2)shouldcoverthekeylivelihoodselementsinthelivelihoodframeworkieeconomicaspects,naturalresourceaccessanduse;humanassets;physicalinfrastructure;andsocialandculturalaspects.ThroughthisdocumentationcompaniesshouldshowmappingofrisksandriskmanagementrelatedtopotentialsocialimpactsConsiderkeepingthe“whatauditscancheckfor”from“applyingaP‐SIA”(fromthecurrentlypostedstandardsdraft)toinformtheguidancesectiononhowtofulfillcompanypoliciesandproceduresrequiredin3.1.2and3.1.3.(Number2ofthislistseemslessusefulandcouldbetakenout)
• Theupdatedguidancemayprovidemoreclarityonthisissue.Auditorsdonotdoap‐SIA,butratherchecktoseeifafarmerhasdoneonethatincludedtheappropriatescopingandinvolvedappropriate(localstakeholder)engagements.
3.1.3WWF‐USConsiderusingthedefinedpercentagesof“conflictsresolved”(fromcurrentlyposteddraftversion)forguidanceinthenewlysuggestedIndicator3.1.3,howeverWWF‐USalsorecommendsthatthelanguagebechangedtodefine‘resolve”moreclearly.Additionalsuggestedaction:includefootnotethattherewillbenobribesusedtoresolveissuesrelatedbythecommunity.Thereisaneedtorestrictcommunitiesfromdeterminingwhatislawandwhatisnecessarythatthefarmpays.CommunityleadersmustbeheldtotheintegritystandardssetforthbytheShAD.Insituationswherecompensationisrequiredtobepaidtocommunities,disclosureofamountsandpersonsreceivingtheseamountsarenecessary.Theemphasishereisonensuringthatsocialauditingprocedureshavebeenproperlyconducted(theyarebeingused—andnotjustacompanypolicy“onpaper”)andthatthespecificoutcomefromtheprocedureincludesthedevelopmentofcredibleengagementmechanisms.Theinvestmentsrequiredinsocialauditinganddevelopmentofcrediblecommunityengagementmechanismsshouldbeappropriatetothescaleandintensityoffarmoperations.TheGSCmightwanttoconsiderhowscalewillmatterandhowtoincludethisintheguidancedocument.Itmaybethatindividualsmall‐scalefarmerswouldnotbeexpectedtohaveadocumentedsystem,butbeabletoshowthattheyrespondconstructivelytoanyissueorcomplaintorthattheycouldworkthroughtheirassociations.Inallcasesconsultationanddialogueisimportant.Usefulguidanceisalsoavailablefromforestryinitiatives5andRoundtableonSustainablePalmOil6,amongstothers.
4InstituteofSocialandEthicalAccountability(ISEA)hasdevelopedasocialaccountingprocessstandard(AA1000)whichcanbeusedasareferencehttp://www.accountability21.net/uploadedFiles/publications/AA1000APS%202008.pdf.
5ForestStewardshipCouncil‐http://fileadmin/web‐data/public/document_center/publications/smallholders_briefing_notes/Social_Impacts_briefing_note_high_res.pdf6http://www.rspo.org/files/resource_centre/RSPO%20Criteria%20Final%20Guidance%20with%20NI%20Document.pdf
• Weagree,butthisissueliesbeyondthecontrolofafarmerandtheShADfeelsitcannotputdemandsonthefarmerforthingstheycannotcontrol.However,intheguidancesection,referenceismadetop‐SIAdocumentationbeingavailabletomorethanjustleaders.Communitymembersshouldbeabletocheckwiththeirleaders.
• Weagree.MuchofwhatisfoundintheShADstandardshasbeenderivedfromwhattheFSCandRSPOhavedonebeforeus.Thereferenceswillbeincludedinthedocumentashelpfulillustrations.
Criterion3.2:ComplaintsbyaffectedstakeholdersarebeingresolvedWWF‐USAddintheoriginal(fromposteddraft)criterion3.2andassociatedguidancetothe“grievanceprocedurepolicy”guidancetobeincludedinnew3.1.2.Thegrievanceprocedurewillensurethatallgrievancesarerecordedandfiled,aswellascorrectiveactionstakenanddocumented.Anappealprocessneedstobeavailableifstakeholdersfeelthattheyhavenotbeenheardwitharbitrationbyanexternalregulatingagency.
• Weagree;however,itisbeyondthescopeoftheShADtodefinethisasacriterion.Communitiesneedtoensureappealscanbemade.Farmsneedtoensurethatpolicy,processandoutcomesareverifiablebythecommunity.Organizinganappealissomethingcommunitiesneedtodo.Intermsofcertification,afarmcandoacrediblep‐SIAandalsohaveaclearconflictresolutionpolicyanddocumentationsystemandthreeyearslaterfacesanotheraudit.Thus,afarmer’sbehaviourneedstoremainresponsibletowardscommunityimpacts.
3.2.1NewEnglandAquariumCompliancegoalssuggestthatallconflictsandcomplaintswillbereasonableandaddressablebyacertaintimelimit.Thestandardshouldrequirethateachcomplaintisreviewedwithinaspecifictimeframeandthatwhereresolutionsarerequiredthesearemetorprogressingtowardbeingmet.
• TheShADhastriedtofindanappropriatemiddlegroundbetween‘easilyresolvableconflicts’and‘difficult,includingunreasonable’issues.Wethinkweerronthesafesideforfarmers.Inrealityweexpectonlyaminorfractionofdifficultorunreasonableconflicts.
AholdAgain,isthisrealistic?Soemthingtokeepinmindisthatwithourcompliance,afarmcannotbecertified.Wethinkitis.Itisalsoamatterofretailersandwhatfarmstheychoosetobuyfrom.
• Wethinkthisisrealistic.Itisalsoamatterconcerningfromwhichfarmsretailerschoosetobuy.
Dr.A.G.PonniahDisputesresolvableatthefarmerlevelcouldonlybeinsistedupon.Otherunresolvabledisputes/conflictsshouldbereferredtothelegalsysteminchargeofthecountryconcerned.Statusquoshouldbemaintainedtillafinalverdictisreachedontheissue.
• Allconflictsareincludedinthe50/75%countaswellasthosethatmayrequirelegalaction.Assaidabove,westillthinkweerronthesafesideforfarmers.Inreality,mostconflictswillbereasonableandwillbeeasilyresolved.Moreover,forthepurposeoftheinterpretationoftheword‘resolution’,ifbothpartiesinaconflictagreetoalegal
processandagreetoabidebythelegalverdict,theconflictis,intermsofthisstandard,consideredresolved.
Criterion3.3:ProvidingemploymentwithinlocalcommunitiesWWF‐USSuggestedAction:Delete3.3orclarifyWesuggestdeletingthisbecauseitisinconflictwiththeanti‐discriminationstandardinCriterion4.3.Hiringshouldalwaysbebasedonskillsandabilitytofulfilltherequirementsofemployment.Wherecandidatesforemploymentareofequalmerit,preferencecouldbegiventomembersoflocalcommunitymember.TheGSCcouldalsoconsideraddingarequirement(especiallyincaseswhereafarmhaslowpercentagesoflocalworkers)thattheyrunperiodic,no‐cost,voluntarytrainingprogramsforinterestedcommunitymemberstoincreasetheskillsandthereforeabilitytoobtainequalemploymentoflocalcommunitymembers.
• Weagreeandhavetriedtoclarifythisstandardinthelatestversionofthedocument.AholdMoreclarityisneededontheemploymentoflocalsvs.non‐discriminationofmigrants.
• Pleaseseetheaboveresponse.IngerNaslundThestandard‐Areasofconflictordisputearelistedonpaperandsharedamongfarm,localgovernment,andsurroundingcommunityrepresentatives.Atleast50percentoftheconflictsshallberesolvedwithinsixmonthsfromthedateofbeingfiled,andanadditional50%sixmonthslater(75%totalwithinoneyear).Thisoughttobereadybeforecertification!!‐Thefarmmust,therefore,haveaconflictresolutionpolicyinplacethatdescribeshowtomakecomplaintsaswellashowthefarmintendstoaddressthem.Absolutely,agree!!
• PleaseseePrinciple4forfurtherclarification.NACAThatisdifficultforsmallscalefarmerstoconduct,sosuggesttoallowmechanismstoreceivecomplainsatgrouplevels,insteadofindividualfarm.3.3.1NewEnglandAquariumAswrittenthisstandardisunlikelytomeettheissueswithmigrantlaborandcouldbeconsideredtobediscriminatory.Suggestthatalljobsbepostedlocallyandthatwhenapplicantsaresimilar,awrittenjustificationastowhythefinalindividualwaschosenoverothers.
• Ininstanceswhenprocessorscontractafarm,itisbeyondthescopeofthestandard.However,incaseswhereonefarmsub‐contractsothers,itiswithinthescopeofthestandard.Thus,notallcontract‐farmingcasesareincludedandthisstandardwillnotaddressallformsofit,theShADalsoplacesvalueonthesignallingtoothersintheindustrythatthisisanimportantissueforconsideration.
WWF‐USFlag:Migrantlabor.Whileitisappropriatetosourcelaborfromsurroundingcommunities,itshouldbenotedthatmigrantworkershaverightstoworkandearnincome.Inregionswherelaborabuseisrampant,workersmaychosetomigratetoareaswhereabusemaynotbeso
common.Thestandarddoesdojusticetotheissueofmigrantlaborandisadequatetoappropriatelyaddresstheinequitiesofhiringnon‐communitylabor.
• Asthisisnotaworker‐owner/operatorissue,webelievethismustremaininPrinciple3.M.N.KuttySurelythereshouldbemoreeffortstoselectandeventrainandabsorbcapablemanpowerfromthelocalcommunities.Mereadvertisementwillnotbeadequate–threemustbegenuineefforts‐feelingstobeofhelptolocalswhoareoftenfrompoorruralcommunities–byintent,wordsanddeedsfromtheSFinvestor/management.
• Quitepossibly.3.3.2shouldaddressthis.Wehaveconsideredthisinthenewversionofthestandards.
IngerNaslundThecriterionisformulatedtoensurethelocalworkforceisdulyconsideredforjobsonthefarm,andmigratoryworkersareonlyhiredwhenthelocalworkforcedoesnotmeetrequirements.‐Faircontractshouldbecompulsory,andifnotskilledworkersthereshouldbeeducationforthepurposeoftheirissuesofworkpaidbythefarm.
• Wehavemadesomemodificationsinthenewversionthatwebelievesatisfyyourconcern.
Dr.A.G.PonniahCouldbeinsistedupononlywithlarge(>=40ha)farmswithregularemploymentof>than5farmlaborers.Documentationprovidedbythevillageshouldbesufficientforthis.Iflocalsareeithernotskilledornotinterestedinaquacultureworkthefarmsshouldbeallowedtohirefrommigrantworkers.
• Itistruethatauditorsandcertificationbodiesdonotreplaceauthorities.Thecriterionisintendedtoencouragefarmerstotakepro‐activemeasuresonhowtohandleaclosureorabankruptcy.
Criterion3.4:Contractfarming7arrangements(ifpracticed)arefairandtransparentandarebeneficialtothecontractfarmerNewEnglandAquariumItisunclearifthecontractedfarmwouldbeabletomeetsomeofthesegoals(3.4.3inparticular)andguidelinessincetheprocessingplantislikelythedrivingforceinthisrelationship,andarelikelybeyondthescopeofafarm‐levelstandard.
• Thecriterionisinheretobeapplicableinthecaseswherefarmssubcontractotherfarms.Somepeoplehavenotedthatthiscaseisquiterare,butwefeltitisimportanttoincludethiscriterioninordertoensurethatthisissuewasaddressed.
Dr.A.G.Ponniah3.4.1to3.4.3Agreeableintotal.HoweverasobservedinIndiathesearenotlefttothefarmers
7Contractfarming:Contractfarmingcanbedefinedasanagreementbetweenfarmersandprocessingand/ormarketingfirmsfortheproductionandsupplyofagriculturalproductsunderforwardagreements,frequentlyatpredeterminedprices.Thearrangementalsoinvariablyinvolvesthepurchaserinprovidingadegreeofproductionsupportthrough,forexample,thesupplyofinputsandtheprovisionoftechnicaladvice.Thebasisofsucharrangementsisacommitmentonthepartofthefarmertoprovideaspecificcommodityinquantitiesandatqualitystandardsdeterminedbythepurchaserandacommitmentonthepartofthecompanytosupportthefarmer’sproductionandtopurchasethecommodity”(FAO)
andareattheconvenienceofthecontractor.Thesearetobeinsistedonfromcontractorwhowouldalsobeinvolvedinmarketingsincethefarmersmaynothaveanysayinthismatter.
• Weagreewithyourcommentthatthereisnoreasontoexcludeit.Ifanywaterbornediseasesoranyhumandiseasesattributableandprovedbeyonddoubtstotheshrimpfarm,thefarmcouldbeclosed.Anylifequalityparameterlikeaccesstodrinkingwater,beaches,landingcentreisaffectedthanreclamationarrangementshouldbeinsistedupon.Buttheprivatecertifyingagencywillnothaveanyjudicialpowerstoinsistonbothofthese.Thecertifyingagencyshouldreportthemattertothelocalgoverningagencyregardingthesewhichmaybebeyonditsscopeinviewofpossiblelegalbattlewiththefarmer.
• ThisisanASCand/orgovernmentissue.WWFSwedenThisisanimportantpartofsocialresponsibilityandwedowelcometheproposedindicatorsandstandardsforcontractfarmingmodels
• Thanksforthecomment.3.4.1NACAConcernabouttheprivacyofbusiness,andsuggestremovingfromstandardorplacingsafetymeasurestoprotectit.
• Thiscriterionisconcernedwithprotectingemployeesbyensuringcontracttransparencybetweentheindividualsthatarepartytothecontract.Thatbasicnormisoftenviolatedbythestrongerpartythroughlackoffulldisclosertotheweakerpartyaboutobligationsetc.Unwarranted/selectiveconfidentialityimposedbythestrongersideofthecontractisexactlywhatthiscriterionseekstoavoidfromtakingplace.
3.4.2NACAConcernabouttheprivacyofbusiness,andsuggestremovingfromstandardorplacingsafetymeasurestoprotectit.
• Pleaseseeaboveresponse.3.4.3IngerNaslundMeetingsareheldatleasttwice/year.Meetingswithfarm‐groupsorcooperativeshavebeenattendedbyatleast50%ofthemembership.Shouldbeevenbetterwithmeetingeveryquarterofayear!Tostresstheimportanceoffairandmutualunderstandingofbothcontractandworkload.Againthemutualagreements,standardswagesandextrapayforworkoutsidenormalworkinghours.‐Thereshouldabsolutelybeanindicatorandstandardssettingforprocedureshowtoclosureorreclaimagreements,againmutual.
• TheGSCconsiderstwiceperyeartobesufficient.Thesemeetingswillhappenjustbeforeharvestorharvestdeliveryso,onsomefarms,3timesperyearmaybenecessary.
CPIndonesiaMeetingsareheldbasedondemandoratleastonce/year.Meetingswithfarm‐groupsorcooperativeshavebeenattendedbyatleast50%ofthemembership.
• Pleaseseetheaboveresponse.Principle4:OperatefarmswithresponsiblelaborpracticesWWF‐USCriteria4.1through4.10andtheirrespectiveIndicators/StandardsareconsistentandforthemostpartalignedwiththeTADandPADandfollowthesuggestedframeworkofSocialAccountabilityInternationalrecommendationsthroughtheirconsultationworkwiththeAquacultureDialogues,ShADandits’GSC.–Agreed.Incertainplacesnotedbelow,thewordingcouldbechangedtobethesamevsTAD&PAD.WWFUSstronglysupportsalignmentoncrosscuttingissues.ImpactStatementSuggestedChange:add:“Manycountrieshavenationallawsthataddresslaborissuesrigorouslyandintensively,howeverthisisnotconsistentinaglobalcontext.Addressingthesekeyissuesinaquacultureiscritical,giventheimportanthumanrightsimplicationsandprovensocietalbenefitsoflaborstandardsrelatedtopoverty,sustainableeconomicgrowth,goodgovernanceandpoliticalstability.ThelaborstandardsinthisdocumentwillensurethatallaquacultureoperationscertifiedagainsttheDialoguestandardshavereducedoreliminatedthepotentialimpactsofkeylaborissuesassociatedwithproduction.ThelaborstandardsinthisdocumentarebasedonthecoreprinciplesoftheInternationalLaborOrganization(ILO):freedomofassociation,therighttocollectivebargaining,prohibitiononforcedlabor,prohibitiononchildlabor,andfreedomfromdiscrimination,aswellastheotherelementsthatareconsideredtobethefundamentalrightsatwork:fairwagesandworkinghours,decenthealthandsafetyconditionsandnon‐abusivedisciplinarypractices
• Weagreeandhavemaderevisionsinthelatestversionofthestandards.JakePiscano,CENTERFOREMPOWERMENTANDRESOURCEDEVELOPMENTThisshouldbeaprimaryconcern.Itisworthwhiletonote,though,thatfarmsoperateonaproductivityangle,usuallypayinglow,butgivinggenerousincentivesforproductivity.
• TheGSCwishestoensurethatfinancialandnon‐financialincentivesareproperlydocumentedandcompriseafairanddecentlevelofincome.Farmsmustbetransparentabouthowtheydothisandmustalsoensurethatworkerswholeave(forwhateverreason)stillgetappropriatepayfromthecycletheyworked.Criterion4.5.nowstatesthistoavoidanylackofclarity.
RudyPorterWequestionwhetherasystemofcodesofconductorstandards,enforcedbyoutsideauditorsmakingoccasionalvisitstoaworksitecanmakeanysignificantcontributiontoimprovinglaborconditionsormeetingminimallegallaborstandardsinanindustry.Workersmustbeabletoexercisetheirrighttoform,join,andparticipateinanindependentlaborunionwithco‐workers,withtherighttocollectivebargaining,inordertomakelong‐termandenforcedimprovementsinpay,benefits,andconditionsofwork.Thesetradeunionrightsmustbeenforcedbyaneffectiveandproperlyfundedsystemoflaborinspectionbyhostgovernments.IndependentstandardsandauditingonlymakeapositivecontributionwheretheyrequireenforcementofthisFreedomofAssociation.Thestandardsproposedheredonotmeetthisrequirementforreasonsstatedbelow.
• Auditsonlabourissueshavebeencontestedandwillbecontestedforsometimetocome,buttheindustryislearning,theCBsarelearning,andtheGSCfeelsthat
imperfectionsarenoreasontonotaddressthisbecausethealternative(i.e.notdefiningcriteria)isworse.
• Wesympathizewiththispoint,butmustalsoacknowledgethelegalrealitythatnotallcountriesyetallowforindependentunions.Therefore,weseektoseethatworkersidentifythe(larger)organizationtheywishtorepresentthem(intermsofverificationstheauditorcando).Suchawayofworkingislegalinallcountries,asfarastheShADisaware.
KennethBoyceSocialPrinciples:Asallsocialelementsofstandardsareopentogreaterinterpretationbyauditorsthanscientificmeasurablecriteria,Fromexperience,Iwouldrecommendverycarefulconsiderationofthewordingofthefinalstandardforprinciples3and4.IntermsororganizationandlaborrequirementsitwouldbeimportanttoalignanydecisionsonthiswithotherstandardsthatwillbehousedundertheASClabelasthesedifferentstandardswillbecommunicatedtothepublicviaacommonconsumerfacinglabel.Differencesinprovisionofsocialguaranteesforworkersonfarmscan'treallybejustifiedbecausetheyhappentobefarmsofdifferentspecies.Thosestandardsdevelopedlaterinthedialoguesshouldexceedthosedevelopedearlierintheprocess.Whileitistoolatetoaligntheseissuesperfectlyastheyhavebeencreatedbydifferentdialoguesprocesses,theShADshouldverifythattherearenocontradictorypoints.e.g.Point7.9.1intheTilapiastandardaroundtheprovisionofclean,safeandsanitarylivingaccommodationforonsiteemployeesisnotmentionedinthecurrentShADdraft.
• Thisistrue.TheASCwillprovideforthis(throughanacross‐ADsadvisorycommittee).Oneaspectthatwouldappeartobemissingisstrongerguaranteesforwomen.ThisstandardwillbeappliedonlyintheglobalSouthwheretherightsofwomenareoftenlessconsidered.Possiblyanassumptionisbeingmadethatthemajorityoffarmworkersaremale.Simplesuggestionstostrengthenthiswouldbesomeguaranteeofprovisionofabasicperiodofmaternityleaveaswellastheprovisionofseparatechangingfacilitiesforwomenonlargehiredlaboursetups.
• Weagreeandsomeadditionalindicatorshavebeenadded.Asmentionedabovethereisalsonomentionofadequatelivingaccommodationatareasonablecostforworkersonlargefarmsinremoteareaswhereitwouldbeunreasonabletoexpectworkerstoestablishthesethemselves.Likewisetheprovisionofpotablewaterandadequatesanitationfacilitieswouldbeimportantinthesesetups.
• Weagreeandsomeadditionalindicatorshavebeenadded.Inadditionforhiredlabourmodelsinsistingonahealthandsafetyorfirstaidofficercouldalsohelpwithminimisingoccupationalhazardsandensuringtrainingismaintained
• Weagreeandsomeadditionalindicatorshavebeenadded.WWFSwedenGeneralremarkforP4:Wefeelthattheissuesatstakehavebeenadequatelyaddressedsofar.AsageneralfeedbackwedothinkthattheunitofcertificationneedstobetakenintoaccountwhenaddressingsmallscalefarmsforP4.
• TheGSChastriedtodistinguishbetweenfamilylabor(forwhichtherigorofILOprovisionsmayholddifferently)andcontractedworkers.However,thefarmsizeitselfdoesnotseemrelevanthere.
Criterion4.1:ChildlaborIngerNaslundMandatorythatnochildlaborisusedandthereshouldnotbeanyoneyoungerthan15yearsofage.Noexceptionevenifthenationallawacceptthis.
• Weagreeandhaveaddedthistothestandards.BelizeGrowersWhatisthespecificgoalofthetwiceannualmeetingwiththeworkforceandwhatlevelofmanagementneedstohavethismeeting?Thefarmersfelttheymeetwiththeirworkersonadailybasisandtheutilityofthismeetingdidnotseemreadilyapparent.
• Themeetingsareintendedtoserveasanopportunityforissuestobediscussedbetweenthedecisionmakeronlaborcontractconditionsandtheworkersasagroup.Thesemeetingsshallbeminuted,traceableandtransparent,andthefarmersareaccountabletothisprocess.Workerswilloftentalktoaforemanwhohaslimiteddecision‐makingpowersoroftentotheirmanagerinprivate.Regardlessofwhethertheseencountersareeffectiveornot,aprocesstoinstitutionalizeprogressinlabormanagementthroughoutthecompanyisrequired.
4.1.1NewEnglandAquariumWillfamilymembersbeanexceptiontothisstandard?
• TheGSChastriedtodefineunderwhatcircumstances‘familylabor’mayprovideanexceptiontothisstandardandhasdeterminedthatfamilymembersundertheageof15arepermitted,withinreason(seerationaleandguidance).
WWF‐USInordertomakethisconsistentwithotherdialoguesconsiderdeleting“inviolationofILOConvention138and/or…….”Andaddingittothedefinitionsandguidancewheremostofthistypeofthingis.
• Thiswillremainasafootnote.Dr.A.G.PonniahIndiahasastrongregulationsagainstchildlabourandrecentlyRighttoEducationActhasbeenenactedhencethisisnotanissuewithIndia.
• Somecountriesdonothavesuchalaw.Thus,theGSCisfeelsitisnecessarytoarticulatethispointandputtheresponsibilityonfarmersinallcountries.
Criterion4.2:Forced,bondedcompulsorylaborIngerNaslund‐Mandatorythatnoforced,bondedorcompulsorylaborareusedoncertifiedfarms.
• Weagreeandhaverevisedthestandardsaccordingly.
Criterion4.3:Discrimination8intheworkenvironmentAholdThiscriterioncontradictscriterion3.3
• WehopetohaveremediedthisbyhavingrephrasedthecriteriainPrinciples3and4.IngerNaslundMandatorythatnodiscriminationofanykindwilloccuroncertifiedfarms.
• Weagree.Dr.A.G.Ponniah4.2.1Indianlegalsystemhasastronglegislationagainstthis.Buttheseregulationcannotbeenforcedforselforfamilylabour.Thisneedstobeincorporated.
• TheGSCacknowledgesthatcomplicationandhas,therefore,providedadefinitionfor‘familyworkers’.
4.3.1Dr.A.G.Ponniah4.3.to4.10Pointsareagreedto.Butcanbeenforcedonlyinlargerfarmswhere>5permanentlaborersareemployed.Thesecannotbeexpectedincaseofsmallfarmsandfarmswherefamilylaborisinvolved
• WerealizethattherewillbechallengesforsmallfarmersandexpecttheASCtodevelopmechanismstoaddresstheseissuesoncethestandardshavebeendefined.
4.3.3NewEnglandAquariumInclusionofthisstandardispositive,howeverthewordingisconfusing.Howwillexperience,tenureandotheractionsbeaddressedhere?Thisneedsfurtherclarification.
• Wehavetriedtoaddressthisconcernbutwouldwelcomefurtherfeedback.WWF‐USThisseemstoberedundantwith4.3.2andcouldbeaddedinguidancedocumentfor
• TheGSCfeelsitremainsworthwhiletokeepthisinasindicator.Criterion4.4:WorkenvironmenthealthandsafetyAholdFurtherdescriptionisrequiredofwhatconstitutes“adequatetraining”andwhatevidenceafarmshouldbeabletoprovide.
• Thisisaddressedintheguidancesection,asitmakesreferencetonational/provincialtrainingcentresthatissuecertificatestothosewhohavebeentrained.
AholdStrikeguidanceforpercentageofworkerstrainedinhealthandsafetypractices,procedures,andpolicies#4:Offerregularhealthandsafetytraiingforemployees(onceayearandforallnewemployees),includingtrainingonpotentialhazardsandriskminimization.
8Discrimination:anydistinction,exclusion,orpreferences,whichhastheeffectofnullifyingorimpairingequalityofopportunityortreatment.Notalldistinction,exclusion,orpreferenceconstitutesdiscrimination.Forinstance,ameritorperformancebasedpayincreaseorbonusisnotbyitselfdiscriminatory.Positivediscriminationinfavorofpeoplefromcertainunderrepresentedgroupsmaybelegalinsomecountries
• TheGSCconsideredthisbutdidnotagreewiththesuggestion.Pleaseproviderationaleastowhy.
IngerNaslundMandatorythatasafeandhealthyworkingenvironmentshouldbeessentialforprotectingworkersfromharm.Allfarmsshoulddoariskassessmentandifaccidentshappensthefarmensurehealthcareandrehabilitation.
• Weincludedrequirementsforinsuranceinthelatestversion.4.4.1NewEnglandAquariumAdd“relevanttotheirjobrequirements”after“policies”.Add“maintained”after“provided”
• Weagree.WWF‐USSuggestedAction:Deletesecond2sentencesofthisindicatorforconsistencywithotherdialoguesandincludethosesentencesinthefootnotesorguidance
• TheGSChasdecidednottotakethisaction,asthissentenceisinaccordancewithILOprovisionsonchildlaborthatinclude,specifically,thatnopersonbelow18shallbeexposedtodangerouswork.Theword‘job‐related’hasbeenaddedtoavoidconfusionwith‘legitimate’accidentsthatarenotrelatedtothework.
AholdRegardingfootnote51:Certificateofwhat?Farmsize?Training?Equipmentsafety?
• Wehaveadaptedthefootnotetoclarifythesepoints.4.4.2NewEnglandAquariumAdd“verified”beforeincidencesRemove“Nopersonsunder18involvedinaccidents”,sincethisisimpossibletoensure.Orapplyastrongerdefinitionof“accident”withregardtothisstandard.
• Wehavealteredthelanguage,butstillkeepthereferencetounder18,asthisisILOlaw.‘Accident’inthiscasemeanssomethingthatneedsprofessionalmedical(nurse/doctor)attention.Theguidancehasbeenclarifiedonthispoint.
WWF‐USSuggestedAction:Delete2ndsentence,difficulttodefineastandardasnoneunder18,incaseofalegitimateaccident.Tosolvethisproblemfocusshouldbeonprotectingyoungworkersespecially.Thisfocusshouldbemadeclearintheguidance
• Pleaseseeabove.CPIndonesiaOccurrenceofhealth‐andsafety‐relatedaccidentsandviolationsrecordedandcorrectiveactionstaken.
• Pleaseseeabove.4.4.3EricDeMuylder
Equalpayisonething,whatifwomenarenotacceptedforcertainjobs?Shouldn'ttherealsobearulethatalljobsshouldbeopenforbothsexes?Thiscanbeunder4.4.2or4.4.1butitseemsthatthesepointsaremerelyforexistingstaff,notnewhiring.
• Wehaveconsideredthisbutitmaybetoomuchtoaskatthispoint.Criterion4.5:BasicneedsandlivingwagesWWF‐USSuggestedChange:Callcriterion“FairandDecentWages”forconsistencyClarify:Livingwageisnotclearandcouldbehardtoaudit.LookatSAImethodologyandcheckifauditorcanadoptit
• Wehavetakenthissuggestionandchangedthelanguageinthedocument.• TheGSCcameupwithitsown‘formula’thatshouldbeclearandauditable,buthasnot
yetbeentested.TheShADwouldliketohaveastatisticianusetheformulaandtesttheoutcomes.
AholdRegarding“Guidanceforthecalculationofbasicneeds/livingwages”:Itisunclearfromthisguidancewhichformulatheauitorshouldapplyandwho,inthecontextoftheAquacultureDialogues,isresponsibleforsettingthelivingwage.Thesedefinitionsalreadyindicatethatitwillbeanabsolutechallengetofindfarmsthatpaytheirworkersenoughtocomplywiththisrequirement.
• Pleaseseeabove.IngerNaslundMandatorythatthereisafairandequitablewagesaccordingtonotonlyminimumstandardsbutalsoatransparentsystemofhowtosetwages.Importanttodefinewhatisanaveragefamilyandwhyonlysustaining50%ofanaveragefamily!!Employersshallensurethatwagespaidforastandardworkingweek(nomorethan48hours)alwaysonedayofina7dayweekschedule.
• Inaglobalcontext,itisquitecommonthattwoincomesarenecessarytosupportafamily.TheGSCbelievesitisreasonabletorequiretheaquaculturesectortobedecentandfair,butitdoesnotseemreasonabletoaskthoselookingtobecertifiedtogobeyondthoselevelsdeemedfairinaglobalcontext.
4.5.1NewEnglandAquariumFootnoteonlivingwagesdiffersfromtheguidancesection(50%ofaveragesizedfamily).Whichiscorrect?
• Pleaseseeabove.AholdADshouldstrivetowardsbasicneeds/livingwage,butitisunrealistictocurrentlyexpectittobepaidonthefarmlevel.Iffarmscanonlybecertifiediftheycomplywiththisrequirement,onlyveryfew(bigger)farmswillbecertified.Minimumwageplusgradualimprovementstowardslivingwagecouldbeasolutionforsmallerfarms.
• Thereisacost‐benefitanalysisbehindthedecisiontohireonanyfarm,largeorsmall.Thesizeofanoperationdoesnotjustify‘belowfairlevel’practices.
Criterion4.6:AccesstofreedomofassociationandtherighttocollectivebargainingRudyPorter1.)TherationalefortheCriterionsaysthat"...workersmustnotbeprohibitedfromaccessingsuchorganizationswhentheyexist."FreedomofAssociationmeanshavingtherighttoformunionswheretheydonotexist,freefromcoercion,intimidation,interference,orrestraint.AccordingtothelanguageoftheCriterion,theonlyactivitythatneedstobeprotectedifauniondoesnotalreadyexististherightto"collectivedialoguethrougharepresentativestructure...."TheworkerscoveredbythisstandardwouldcertainlynotbeguaranteedfullFreedomofAssociation,andtheemployersatfarmswhereunionsdonotcurrentlyexistwouldbeheldtoalmostnostandardatall‐guaranteeingtheirworkerscouldhave"collectivedialoguethrougharepresentativestructure,"butnotaunionindependentoftheemployerandgovernment,andrealcollectivebargaining.2.)Thisisunacceptable.3.)TheCriterionandaccompanyingrationalementiontherighttocollectivebargainingwhereunionsexist,butdonotstatethattherighttostrikeisalsorecognizedbytheILOasaprotectedcomponentoftherighttoFreedomofAssociationandcollectivebargaining.Respectforworkercollectiveactions,includingtherighttostrike,withoutretaliationmustbeclearlystatedinthestandards.Otherwiseanemployermay"respect"therightforworkerstojoinanexistingunionandbargaincollectivelybutthenpunishworkersforconductingastrike,andstillnotbeinviolationofthestandards.
• TheGSCagrees,buthastoaddressrestrictionsgovernmentsimposeoutsidethecontroloftheaquaculturesector.Ourapproachmayexcludeunionswheretheyareillegal,butwillthenallowforalargerorganization’sworkerstochoosetobeconnectedtotheauditanditsverificationonthismatter.Wefeelthisisthebestwecando,givencertainlegalrestrictions.
IngerNaslundMandatory!!Thereshouldbeafreedomoforganisingingroupsandjoiningtradeunionsforcollectivebargainofworkingrights.
• Weagree.4.6.1NACANotapplicabletosmallfarmerswhereworkersarerelativesorneighbors.
• TheGSCagrees,buthasprovidedadefinitionfor‘familyworkers’toensurethiscriterionisnotavoidedbysmallfarmersoutofconvenience.
CPIndonesiaThepercentageofemployeeswithaccesstotradeunions,andabilitytobargaincollectivelyorworkeraccesstorepresentative(s)chosenbyworkerswithoutmanagementinterference
• TheGSCassumesthiscommentisbasedonaslightmisunderstandingofthe100%qualification.Notallworkersmaychoosetojoinaunionororganization,butallworkersshallhavetherighttodosowithoutmanagementinterfering.Therationalehasbeenrephrasedtoavoidthisconfusion.
FlavioCorsinInsomecountriesworkersdonothavetherighttoformtradeunionsortradeunionsarenottrueadvocacyorganizationsforworkers(i.e.theadoptatopdownapproach).Suggestmakingexceptionsforproducersincountrieswherecompliancetothisstandardwouldnotbepossible
• TheGSCseekstomakeallowancesforthislegalrestrictionwhilestillensuringworkerscanaskforhelpiftheychoosetodoso.
Criterion4.7:Disciplinarypracticesintheworkingenvironmentcausingtemporaryorpermanentphysicaland/ormentalharmIngerNaslundAbsolutelynoabusivedisciplinaryactionsallowed.‐Acertifiedaquacultureoperationshallneveremploythreatening,humiliatingorpunishingdisciplinarypracticesthatnegativelyimpactaworker'sphysicalandmentalhealthordignity.
• Weagree.4.7.1WWF‐USSuggestedChange:Delete“physicallyormentally”.Thisisimpliedandimprovescrosscuttingeffectiveness
• Wehavemadethisafootnote.Criterion4.8:OvertimecompensationandworkinghoursAholdRegarding“Guidancefordeterminingincidences,violationsandabuseofworkinghoursandovertime:2.Itisonlyencouragedtokeepwork‐timerecords?Whataboutworkerrecords,payrollrecords,trainingrecords,etc.?Seegeneralcomments.
• Pleaseadvisewhatadditionalrecordsareneededtomonitorcomplianceon4.8IngerNaslundNoacceptanceofincidences,violations,abuseofworkinghours,andovertimelaws/expectations.
• Weagree.Criterion4.9:EmployeeandworkercontractsfairandtransparentAholdRegarding“Employeesandworkercontractsfairandtransparent”:Whataboutpersonaldetailsoftheworker?Awrittencontractisonlylegallybindingifthepartiesthatareenteringintotheagreementareidentified,incl.theworker
• Theguidancehasbeenadjusted.IngerNaslundWhereverbalcontractsarepracticed(e.g.remoterurallocations,casesofilliteracyandsmallfamilyfarms),extracareneedstobetakenthatthecontentsoftheagreementarefullyagreedtoandwell‐understood.–Thisshouldnotbepossibletosub‐usedbylargerfarmswitchalsoencompassescooperatives.
• Wehavetriedtomakethismoreclearinthedocument.
4.9.1AholdWhataboutotherformsofrecord‐keeping?Timerecords,payrollrecords,workerrecords?
• Wehavemadetheappropriateadjustments.Criterion4.10:FairandtransparentmechanismtoresolveconflictsIngerNaslundThisshouldbenotlessthaneveryquarterofayearforconflictsolvingoravoidance.
• TheGSCbelievesthattwiceperyearissufficient.4.10.1NACANotapplicabletosmallfarmerswhereworkersarerelativesorneighbors.
• Pleaseseethedefinitionsusedunderthisprinciple.CPIndonesiaManagementandthefullworkforcemeetbasedondemandoratleastonceperyearonthebasisofwrittenagendasandwrittenminutesofthemeetings.
• TheGSCbelievesthisfrequencyistoolow.Principle5:ManageshrimphealthandwelfareinaresponsiblemannerGeneralCommentsonPrinciple5NewEnglandAquariumIfthisisnota“chemical‐free”standard,thenwesuggestamaximumallowablepercentageofpondsthatafarmcantreat.
• Defininganallowablenumberoftreatedpondsisdifficulttojustify.Webelievethateitherallowingtreatmentornotismoreappropriate.LogicalrestrictionsaretoexcludetreatedproductfromASClabel,andstipulateconditionsforresponsibleuseofchemicals.
DallasWeaverThisissueiswaytoocomplexforthetypeofsimplemindedsciencebeingapplied.Thisisanattackonthefuture.Theminuteyougivesomebureaucratpoweroverthesedecisions,hewillsayno,hisonlypowerissayingNO.Wearesofarfromfullyandcorrectlyunderstandingthemicrobiologicalecologiesoftheseproductionsystems,anylimitationsonprobioticandrelatedattemptstocontrolthemicrobiologyofthesesystemsisprematureandcounterproductive.Itwouldbeespeciallyunfortunateifsomegovernmentbureaucratcreateslimitsusinghisoftenlimitedscientificunderstandingcombinedwithathehubristhatcomesfrombeingsurroundedbysupplicantswhocan'ttellhimheisfullofBS.
• Weagreethatdependingonlocalauthoritiesforapprovingnewproductscanbeaproblem.Ourintentistoavoidtheintroductionofundesirablebacteriatoponds,nottoputunnecessaryburdensonfarmers.
• Weneedtorelyonlocalauthoritiesbecauseweneedtobecoveredonthisissue,andcannotallowtheuseofbacteriathathavenotbeassessedbythirdpartiesforthesafetyoftheiruse.Therehavealreadybeenissueswithfoodbornepathogensinthepastwithproductsthatarefermenteddirectlyonthefarms.
• Wearetalkinghereaboutcertifyingresponsibleshrimpfarmersandcannotacceptunknownproducttobeusedinresponsiblefarming.Ofcourse,weencourageinnovationandthestandardswillbereviewedasknowledgeofthisissueincreases.
LarryDrazbaThemajorityofproducershaverespondedwitheitherviralexclusionsystemsornonviralexclusionsystems.Nonviralexclusionsystemsareanysystemthatacceptsthatalthoughmanysanitarymeasuresareemployedto;controlthepresencethepathogen,selectorfortifytheanimalstotolerateitspresence,managetheculturetominimizethepossibilityofanoutbreakormitigatetheeffectsshouldanoutbreakoccur,thepossibilityofanoutbreakisrealbecausethepathogensareubiquitousandcertainclimatologicdetonatorscancauseoutbreaks.Viralexclusionsystemscanguarantee100%successthroughtheuseofwatersterilization,specialcultureconditionsandcontrolledproductionprotocols.Theproposedstandardsareaimedatcoveringbothproductionstrategiesandasaresult,don’treallyquitecovereither.Theymostadequatelycovertheviralexclusionproductionparadigm.However,inordertoeffectivelycovertheviralexclusionstrategyitmustberecognizedasaviralexclusiontechnologyandprotectthatprecept.Ifaviralexclusionfarmislocatedinanestuaryorcoastalzoneandcomplieswithallthestandardsregardingwatersource,bufferzonesetctherequirementthatbiologicalcorridorscrossthepropertywouldresultinthepossibleinterferencewithviralcontroltechnologiesorpractices.Thestandardsshouldbedividedintostandardsforthetwodifferentproductionparadigms.Thecurrentstandardsareinnatelybiasedtowardshighlytechnifiedandcapitalizedviralexclusionsystems.Thediseasemanagementsectionofthedocumentassumesthatifafarmfiltersitswaterproperly,itcankeepoutdiseasecarriersorthepathogensthemselves.Thatisnotthecase.Diseaseoutbreaksarepossibleunlessthereissomedestructivetreatmentwithinthesystemtokillthevirus,possiblecarriersorboth.Mostproductionsystemsarenonviralexclusionsystemsbecausetheyaremuchtoolargetoemployaneffectivedeterrenttothepathogensandthereforedependonothertypesofproductiontoolssuchaslimitedseedingdates,seedingdensitiesandproductiontechniqueswithintheirpackageofdiseasepreventionprotocolstolimitoutbreaksandmitigatethenegativeeffectsshouldtheyoccur.MostoftheareasofconcentratedproductionhaveendemicpathogenpopulationsoftheOIEreportablevarieties;andmostoftheproducersinthoseareasarenonviralexclusionsystemsthathavemadesignificantstridestocomplywiththespiritandletteroftheseproposedstandards.Noneoftheseproducerswillbeabletoqualifyunderthisproposedsetofstandardsbecausetheminimumsurvivalstandardsarejusttoohighforproducersthatcannotcurrentlyclosethecycleforviralexclusion.ThesefarmsuseseedcertifiedfreeofOIEreportablepathogens,minimalexchangewatertechnologyandsubscribetoalltheenvironmental,social,legalandtechnicalrequirementsneededforcertificationbutbecausetheycannotimplementviralexclusiontechnologytheyarestillsubjecttodiseaseoutbreaksandthusdonotmeettheproposedstandards.IfitistheWWF’sintenttoexcludethisimportantsectionoftheindustrythenmissionaccomplished.Ifnot,thanthisneedstobeaddressedanditcouldbeaddressedbyseparatingthestandardsforthetwoproductionparadigms.
• TheGSChasnointentionofexcluding“sectionsoftheindustry,”but,rather,intendstoidentifybestpractices.Weagreethatsurvivalrateisquestionable,butwedonotagreethatmakingdifferentstandardsfordifferentsystemsisnecessarybecausethatwouldleadtocertificationshavingdifferentvaluesanddifferentmarkets,whichwouldbeimpossibletohandleunderthesameecolabel.
• Wehavehadsomesuggestionsthatsurvivalrateisnotagoodindicator.However,otherviewsarethatitiscriticalforaprinciplerelatedtohealthmanagementandanimalwelfare.
Criterion5.1:DiseasepreventionWilliamRash–UKRetailerStandardshouldalsoexcludetheallowanceofde‐headingorpeelingofshrimpatthefarm/pondsite.
• TheGSChasnotbeenconvincedthatthereisabasisforexcludingcompaniesthathavetheirprocessingplantonthefarmsite(e.g.riskofcrosscontamination).Wehaveattemptedtocoverthisin5.1
IngerNaslund–WWFSwedenBanonantibioticsforcertifiedfarms.SupportthemechanicalfiltrationsystemsaccordingtoShAD‐Toreducetheuseofantibioticsandpesticides,theShADispromotingtheuseofmechanicalfiltrationinordertoeliminatepathogencarriersandcompetitors.Mechanicalfiltrationcantakeplaceatdifferentlevelsinthefarm(pumpingstation,canalorpond),dependingonthefarmdesign,andwithdifferentmeans(e.g.,drumfiltersandinletfilters).Alsosupportingdissolvedoxygenforimprovingthepondbottomconditions.
• Mostfarmsdonotactuallyrequiretheuseofantibiotics,sotheGSCbelievesthatbanningtheuseofantibioticsisacceptable.However,ifthereisanaturalactivebacterialinfection,anditistreatable,itisbettertoallowantibioticusesothatthediseasedoesnotspreadtootherfarms,pondsorintotheenvironment.Inthiscase,thepondsthatusedantibioticswouldnoteligiblefortheASClabel.ThisisacontinuousandyetunresolveddebatefortheShADSteeringCommittee.
BelizeFarmersAssociationThestandardsin6.2callfor100%useofSPFPLs,butstandardsin5.1callforSPForSPRPLs.Whichstandardtakesprecedence?
• Wehaverevisedthestandardtotrytoaddressthisconfusionandwouldwelcomefurthercommentsonthisissue.
Farmswillnotbeabletocomplywithstandardsthatrequirepumpstooperateinnutrient‐richcoastalwaterswithameshsizeof250um.Mesheswillclogandpreventthepondsfromre‐filling.
• TheShADhasreceivedmanycommentsonthisissue.Weagreethat250ummightbetooprescriptiveandarenowencouragingfarmerstofiltertheirintakewaterasisappropriatetominimizetheriskofdiseasevectorsenteringtheirsystem.
WWFGermanySpecificmeasuresorexemptionsshouldbegrantedforextensive,zeroinputfarmingsystemswhichareinconstantexchangewithnaturalsurroundings(e.g.Silvofisherysystemsintheintertidalzone).SuchfarmsareusuallynothavinganykindofBMPinplacetopreventdisease,sincetheyareinconstantexchangewiththeenvironment,orarepartofthesurroundingenvironmentratherthanseparatedunit
• TheShADGSChasconsideredthisissueaswellandiswillingtothinkaboutexemptionsforzeroinputsystems,butitisimportanttonotethatthesefarmsarechallengingtocertifybecausetheydonotusuallyhavethedocumentstoverifycomplianceonotherimportantareasofthestandards.Furthermore,theShADstandardswillrequirecompliancewithallstandardstobecertified.
5.1.1NewEnglandAquariumItshouldbenotedthatfiltrationandsterilizationareverydifferentpond‐basedshrimpfarmingactivities.Viraldiseasesareunlikelytobecontrolledusingfiltration.Closingtheproductioncycle(i.e.nodailywaterexchange)isatechniqueusedwidelyinshrimpfarming,canminimizediseaseintroductionsandshouldbearequirementofthestandard.Farmsshouldoperatea“goodneighbor”systemandinformotheroperationsinagivenareaofdiseaseoutbreaksandthereleaseofproductionwaterintosharedwaterbodies.Fallowingbetweenproductioncyclesshouldalsoberequired.Shouldanoveldiseasebeidentified,certifiedfarmsinanareamustattemptacoordinatederadicationstrategy.
• TheGSCbelievesthatpreventingthespreadofdiseasethroughnowaterexchangeandwatertreatmentisnoteffectiveaspondsstillneedtobedrainedforharvest.
• Weappreciatethefallowingsuggestion,whichisveryeasytodoforsmallfarmsbutnotforbigsemi‐intensivefarms.Therefore,theGSCdoesnotviewthisasaviablesolution.
CPThailandInmyopinionpoorlywritten;whynotjustsayademonstratedpondbiosecurityprotocolandimplementation;andwhynothavestandardshowinghowmanydiseaseoutbreaksinthepastyear.Butthiswouldbedifficulttoquantifybecausehowdoyoudetermineadiseaseoutbreak;survivorship,andthenevenafarmthatdoesanemergencyharvestmaygetacceptablesurvivorshipwithadiseaseoutbreak.
• Weagreetoincludearequirementforabiosecurityplanandhavemadethatadjustmentinthenewversionofthestandard.However,theGSCbelievesthatitisimportanttodiscusshowfarmerscancontroltheirriskbyarticulatingoptionsintheguidance.
WWF‐USThisindicatorneedstoberephrasedinordertobeunderstoodproperly.PerhapsbesttoadoptashrimphealthplansimilartotheoneproposedinthePangasiusAquacultureDialogue(PAD)
• Weagreeandhaverevisedthestandardaccordingly,althoughitisnotinalignmentwiththePAD.
FlavioCorsinThisstandardisfartoogeneric.Suggestintroducingashrimphealthplanwhichcoversseveralspecificareasofinterest.AgoodstartingpointfordiscussionisprovidedintheGlobalGAPstandards.
• Agreeandhavemadethischange.Dr.A.G.Ponniah(India)Underthisthemajorconcernisthespreadofdiseasefromthefarmtothewild.Theentryofpathogensintothefarmistheconcernofthefarmertohaveasuccessfulcrop.Whatisneededtobeinsistedisthepreventionofreleaseofpathogensintothereceivingwaters.
• TheGSCunderstandsthisconcernbutbelievesthatfilteringinflowwaterisnecessaryasafirststeptopreventspreadofdiseasetothewild.Additionalstepstoprotectthewildfromdiseasetransmissionarebeingconsidered.
5.1.2
CPThailandReadslikeaBAP,andIthoughttheseweregoingtobedifferentthanthosestandardsusingBAPasabasis.
• WeunderstandthisconcernandinsomecasesBMPsarenecessaryasafirststepuntilsufficientinformationcanbegatheredtocreateaperformance‐basedstandard.However,itisnotalwayspossibletomakeeverythingperformance‐based.Wewelcomeanysuggestions.
MarkNijhofDiseasepreventionisnottobefoundinpreventionofpathogensenteringthefarm.Thesewillenteranyhow.However,diseasecontrolisbaseduponthenaturalimmunesystemofhealthyanimalsandthusongoodhousekeepingconditions.Iwouldthereforenotconsiderthingslikesieving,sterilisation,etc.Thesedonotoccurongrowingsites,neithershouldtheybenecessary.(forhatcheries,thisissometimesdifferentofcourse).
• TheGSCbelievesthatwatertreatmentispartofthese“goodhousekeepingconditions”thatreducerisks.Biosecurityisbasedonacombinationofpreventionmeasures.
FlavioCorsinHowtodefine"appropriatelysized"?thesecondoptionwouldnotbepracticalasthemeshsizewouldbecloggedafterfewdaysandwouldneedtobereplacedcountlesstimes.Suggestremovingthisstandard
• TheGSCdefines"appropriatelysized"as“asfineaspossible”andaccordingtothepathologicalrisksidentifiedin5.1,whichcouldbeincludedinabiosecurityplan.
NACAConsidertorevisethemeshsize(Typicallyshrimpfarmsuse600micron,andhatcheryfor250).Isitreallynecessarytogodown250micron?
• Wehavenotremovedtherequirementforaspecificmesh.Itisnowuptothefarmertodetermineandjustifythemeshsizeused,accordingtotherisksoftheirproductionsystem.
CPIndonesia<300µm
• Seeaboveresponse.5.1.3BelizeShrimpGrowersItisnotrealistictomeeta3ppmDOstandardfor5AMbenthicoxygenwithoutincurringotherenvironmentalcoststhroughtrade‐offsinfueluseorwaterexchange.Manyundisturbednaturallenticeutrophicecosystemsconsistentlyexhibitlessthan3ppmdissolvedoxygenatthebottomat5aminsubtropicalheat.Thisisnotastandardthatcanbeconsistentlymetwithoutheavyaerationorwaterexchange.Forcingthistrade‐offforanarbitrarybenthicoxygenforgasandadditionalwaterpollutionuponthemcouldactuallyincreasethenetfootprintofthefarmsonthesurroundingenvironment.Itisalreadyinthefarmer'seconomicintereststomaximizesurvivalandminimizediseasebymanagingDOintheponds.Themoreappropriateindicatorswouldfocusontargetslikeeffluentswherenodirecteconomicincentiveexists.
• Weagreeaboutthetrade‐off,but,asthisisahealthstandardandnotaneconomicalstandard,webelievethatthisiswhatisrequiredtoensureshrimphealth.Weagree
thatthereisachallengefornon‐aeratedponds,whereonlypreventionthroughpondmanagementcanbedone.Therefore,ifwedonotsetameasurablebar,wewillhavetoconsiderBMPs.
NewEnglandAquariumThevalueof3ppmistoolow–thisnumbershouldberaised.
• Thehigherthebar,themoredifficultitistoapplytonon‐aeratedponds.Thiswouldonlybepossiblewithmechanicalaeration.<2ppmiscriticaland>5ppmwouldbeideal.>3ppmatsunrisewouldendup>5ppmduringmostofthe24hperiodandsettargetwellabovecriticalvalues.Thereforeitisagoodcompromise.
CPThailandAveragedoverthefarmorforeachandeverypond.Nopondallowedtohaveanavgoxygen<3.Sowhatistheoutcomeifafarmshowsonepondwithavglessthan3forthreedays;lossofcertification.
• ThishasbeenthesourceofsignificantdebateamongtheGSCmembersandwehavetriedtoaddressitinthenewversionofthestandards.
WWF‐USDissolvedoxygenconcentrationishighlyvariable,isprescriptive,andnotperformancebased.MorethanthreeconsecutivecloudydaysresultinginDOaveragesof2.5ppmhasnotnecessarilyproveddetrimentaltopopulationsandmayperformwellingrowthandsurvivalparameters.Suggestedaction:dropstandardfrom3to2.5.
• Itdoesnotmakemuchdifferenceintermsofjustificationanddifficultiesofapplication.Thechallengeremainsonhowitisapplied.Itdoesnotsoundreasonabletowithdrawcertificationdueto1orafewinstancesoflowDO.
Dr.A.G.PonniahThestandardformaintenanceofoptimalDOandpH(upperlimitisalsoneeded)areonlygiven.Ifitistoavoidstresstothestockedorganismsthenawholelotofotherparametersaretobegiven.Inactualityitisthelookoutofthefarmertomaintaingoodconditionssoastoobtaingoodgrowthandsurvival.Forthesamereasonsthereisnoneedtospecifythesurvivalrateasastandardwhichisalsoverydifficulttoverify
• Weunderstandthechallenge,butthereisagreementthatsurvivalrateisagoodindicatortomeasureshrimphealthandthepotentialfordiseasetransfertothewild,whichiswhyitremainsinthestandards.
5.1.4CPThailandSamecommentasforoxygen;farm,pond,etc.WhatisthebasisforchoosingpH7asthecutoffpointintermsofdiseasepreventionorshrimphealth?Thereisafarclearerrelationshipbetweentemperatureanddiseaseoutbreaksbutthishasn’tbeenconsidered(notthatIamsuggestingthisbutthechoiceofpHappearspurelyarbitrary).
• Wecanonlyaddressparametersthatfarmerscancontroloratleastinfluence.Temperatureistotallyoutofcontrolofthefarmer,evenifweagreethatitisakeyparameterforshrimphealth.WehaveconsideredpHbecausepondswithacidicconditionsareknownforshowingproblems.However,weagreethatpHisnotakeyparameter,butwearedoingthebestwecanwiththeknowledgewehave.
WWF‐USTooprescriptiveandhighlyvariableasdirectfunctionofmicroalgalconcentrationsanddiurnalchanges.Thisisnotnecessarilyanegativeimpactnorperformancebased.Suggestedaction:Strike5.1.4.
• Despitethemicroalgaleffect,pH<7wouldbeasignofexcessiveacidity.However,weagreethatthisisasecondaryparameterintermsofshrimphealth.Itisworthnotingthatthisparameterwasfirstconsideredasameanstoexcludepondsbuiltonacidicsoilsandnotproperlyremediated.However,itistruethatfarmsthatareunabletocontrolapHabove7wouldbeoutofbusinessfairlysoon.TheGSCalsoconsideredthisforwelfarereasons,evenifitisofficiallyoutofthescopeofthestandards.
5.1.5NewEnglandAquariumRaiseSRto60%for#1and70%for#2
• TheGSCdoesnotthinkthisisrealisticconsideringthespreadofdiseaseagentsandthelevelofachievablebiosecurityinthesetypesoffarms.Thesurvivalrateiscalculatedbasedonactualdata,asitmusttobeanobjectivemeasure.
CPThailandNowthisIhaveaproblemwith;whyisitokforextensivepondstohavelowersurvivalsthanintensivefarms.IntellectuallyIseenojustificationinthreestandardsforthreefarmingstyles.If50%isokforextensivethenitshouldbeokforintensive.Andonanothernote;practicallyyouwillnevergetanaccuratefarmsurvival;becauseitistooeasytofakerecordsonactualplstockingdataandthenumberofshrimpharvestedissimplyestimatedfromharvestweightdata.Thelessaccuratetheharvestweight(orthemoreitdeviatesfromanormaldistribution),thelessreliablethefinalcount.
• Settingthebarat50%wouldbemeaninglessforsmallponds,wherethereisanopportunityforhigherbiosecuritymeasures,ascomparedtolargeponds.However,wesupportthepointmadehereandalsoagreethatitisdifficulttogetaccurate,verifiablenumbersonsurvivalratebecauseoftheuncertaintyofPLcounts,especiallyinAsia.
WWF‐USStandardslooklowtous:60,70and90withPL12starting(vannamei)Maybebreakingupinspecies:vannameivsmonodon(keepcurrentvaluesformonodon)
• TheGSCbelievesthatthiswouldresultinextremelyselectivestandards.WilliamRashWhatistherationalebehindthefigures?Forunfedandnon‐aeratedponds,shouldbemorelikeSR>35%andRSD<15%.
• ThenumbersusedinthestandardsweresetbasedonactualdatafromindustryGSCmembers.Wehavetriedtoimprovetherationaleinthestandardsdocument.
EricDeMuylderThiscriteriaseemstobeverydifficultfor3).Insemi‐intensiveofintensiveponds65%SRisanormal%.Idon'tunderstandwhythiscriteriachangesaccordingtointensity.Tomyknowledge,itiseasiertohavehighSRinlowerdensityponds.Iwouldsuggest60%forallsystems(no
discrimination:))NowitisalwayspossiblethatlowerqualityPl'sfromthehatcheryalreadyhaveanintitialhighermortalitylike20%.MaybetheSRshouldbecorrectedfortheSRduringthefirst24hours?Thiscanbeobservedwithasmallnetinthepond.Thiswouldenforcethefarmertodothisexercise,whichwouldenablehimtodoabetterfeedandwatermanagementafterwards,becausehehasabetterideaofpopulation.TheotherfactoristhatitisimpossibletocontroltheactualstockednumberofPl's.itiscommonpracticethatmorePl'sarestockedtoallowforsomemortality,butofficiallythereisalowernumberonthepaper.Thiscanaloobecausedbytechnicalstaffworkingonthefarmtoobtainbonusesonsurvivalandproductiontargets.
• Werespectfullydisagree.Experienceclearlyshowsthatthemoreintensivethesystem,thebettersurvivalrate.Itisstronglycorrelatedtothesizeofthepondandtheabilitytoimplementbiosecuritymeasures.The24hsurvivalcheckisaddinganotherlayerofcomplexitywithnoobviousbenefit.Intensivesystemsareusuallyadaptedtolowaveragemeanweightshrimp,withashorterlifecycleandlessproblemswithpondage,and,statistically,minimizedrisksforadiseaseoutbreak/mortalitytooccur.
MarkNijhofSurvivalisnotreallyauditable.Itcanonlybeauditedifproperdataarerecordedallowingdeterminationofsurvival,similartoe.g.FCR.Ihavenosolutiontoovercomethisdrawback.InGlobalgap,wesimplyrefrainedfromthisorsimilar(important!)criteriaasthesearenotauditable.ItwilldiminishthecredibilityofthestandardI’mafraid.
• Weagree,butasolutioncouldbetoincludeinthestandardsanobligationtocountPLsonthefarmbeforestocking.We,however,disagreethatitwillaffectthecredibilityofthestandards.Theseareparametersthatthefarmersaremanagingeveryday.WeareattemptingtodevelopamethodforfarmerstousestandardizePLcountsinordertomakethesurvivalnumbersmeaningful.Wewouldappreciateanyfurthercommentsonthisissue.
FlavioCorsinHowweretheseSRdetermined?Formonodonfarmerstheseseemtobefartooambitious.Wewillprovidemoreinfoafterhavingconductedthesmall‐scalefarmsurvey
• Weagree,butpleasekeepinmindthatthestandardsarealsomeanttobeselective.NACAConsidertorevisetheSRlower,suchas70%.SetseparatestandardsforP.monodonandp.vannamei?
• Seeaboveresponses.Weareconsideringstandardsfortheseparatespecies.WWFGermanyForextensive,zeroinputsystemstheSRandRSDarehard/impossibletomeasuresincerecruitment/stockingofshrimpisalsobynaturalinfluxintothefarmingsystems(PL'sarepassivelytakenintothefarmbytidalmovement),soSRisdifficulttocalculate.Provisionneedtobeinplaceforsuchsystems.
• WeunderstandtheconcernbutarenotsurethereismuchwecandoaboutitontheGSC,giventhatthesetypesofsystemsarenotlikelytoqualifyforcertificationduetoanumberofissues.Furthermore,theyarenotmajorpartsoftheexportproductionofshrimpandthestockingofwildPLsisnotallowedunderthesestandardsforverygoodreasons.
Farmingofmarineshrimpinfreshwater/lowsalinity:Itiswellknownthatfarmingofmarineshrimpinfreshwaterand/orlowsalinitylevelsincreasesrisksofdiseaseinordertopreventoutbreakofdiseaseduetofarmingofshrimpinlowsalinity/purefreshwaterareas(orcoursesuchstandardmustbecoordinatedwithP3(salinization)inordertopreventfarmerstransferringbrinesolutiontoinlandareasforreachingthedesiredsalinitylevels)
• Atverylowsalinity,whatmattersisthebalancebetweenkeyions,nottheoverallsalinitylevel.Therefore,anindicatorpurelyonsalinitydoesnotseemtobejustifiableanditissimilartothediscussiononpH.Farmersthatcannotfixtheseproblemsaresimplyveryunlikelytostayinbusiness.Whatseemstojustifytheargumentistheoppositiontotheuseofbrinesolutionsininlandponds,whichcouldbeconsideredunderP2.TheGSCdecidedtoincludethisforthewelfareoftheshrimp.
5.1.6NewEnglandAquariumIsredundantanddifferentfrom6.2.2.Wesuggesttheseareclarifiedandplacedinstandard6.
• Wehaveattemptedtoclarifythisinthenewversion,butwouldwelcomefurthercommentsifnecessary.
CPThailandThisisnonsensicalunlessalistofpathogensisprovided.IcouldconfidentlystatethatanyP.vannameiisSPFforMBV–isthatOK–freedomfromasinglepathogenaslongasitislisted?Also,ananimalmaybeSPRforasinglepathogen(monodonandIHHNanyone?)butnotSPF.Andwhatdoes“LocalPathogenResistant”(P.50)mean?
• Weagreethatitneedstorefertospecificdiseasesbutthedifficultyisthatthisdependsonthelocalcontext.TheOIEprovidesalistofpathogensandalsoprovidestheirpotentialhosts.Somecountrieshaveanationallist.Wehaveattemptedtoimprovethisinthenewversionofthedocument.
WWF‐USBreakupinspeciesvannamei(currentone)vsmonodon(replacedbySPF,SPRorseedtestedasnegativeforspecificpathogens(whichisdifferentfromSPF))
• Wehaveincorporatedelementsofthisinthenewversion.WehavemandatedthescreeningofspecificpathogenswhenSPForSPRisnotavailable.Thisissimilartowhatalreadyhappensandwerecognizethatitdoesnotfullyprotectthefarmareasbecauseofpoordiagnosticstests,replicationofthesamples,etc.Therefore,SPFanimalsarepreferredwhenavailableandmandatoryafteracertainperiodoftime,asthiswillstronglyimprovediseasemanagement,especiallyinAsia.
WilliamRashCriterion5.1.6&6.2.4:Standardneedstohaveanallowanceforwildcaughtfemalespawners.ThisiscommonpracticeinIndiaandforsmallfarmerholders
• 5.1.6onlyaddressesthesourceofPLs.Thisconcernisaddressedin6.2.3.NACADuplicatewith6.2.2.
• Pleaseseeaboveresponses.Criterion5.2:PredatorcontrolNewEnglandAquarium
WerecommendusingthestandardsproposedintheInternationalStandardsforResponsibleTilapiaAquaculture–Standard4.4
• ThisstandardisverysimilartothatoftheShADbutdoesnotincludeamonitoringprogramorthebanningofleadshot,whichwebelievetobeimportantissuestoaddress.
CPThailandAlotofgoodfaithinthis;ifafarmdoesnotwantyoutoknowthattheyuselethalleadonbirds;itwouldtakeanextraordinaryefforttodetermineotherwise.Whatarethe“environmentalimpacts”ofleadshotthat“havebeenfound”.Couldthisnotbebettersetupas“Functioningsystemofnon‐lethalpredatorcontrolinplace”.Howdoesafarm“…demonstratetheyhaveexhaustednon‐lethaloptionsbeforelethalcontrolisemployed.”
• Weunderstandthattheauditabilityisaconcern,asitisforseveralofthestandardsunderShAD.However,thetaskoftheShADistodefinestandardstoaddresstheissuestothebestofourability,theauditingchallengeswillbeworkedoutintheguidancedocument,butwerecognizethatitwillnotbeaperfectsystem.
5.2.1FlavioCorsinProvideexceptionforaquaticanimalsthatareinadvertentlykilledduringpondpreparation(e.g.rotenonekillsallfish,whatifsomeoftheseareprotected,etc...)
• Wehaveaddedanexceptiontothisinthestandards.5.2.3
• TheShADGSChasremoved5.2.3fromthestandard.Criterion5.3:DiseasemanagementandtreatmentWilliamRashDischargeofmetabisulphiteonfarmsisapotentialenvironmentalhazardandthestandardmustcapturethisrisk.
• Pleasereferto5.3.5,asthisissueiscoveredthere.Dr.A.G.Ponniah(page53)Useofantibiotics‐2ndparagraphAtpresentthereisnosuchaquaticanimalhealthspecialistavailableinIndiansystem,thispracticecannotbefollowedimmediately.Sincetheestablishmentofaquaticanimalhealthclinic,itsregistration,rulesandregulationsetc.aretobedecidedatgovernmentlevelforframingpoliciesinthisregard,thiswilltaketimeandthispracticemayberecommendedafteraperiodofsixyearincountrieswheresuchpersonnelarenotavailable..
• Pleaserefertothefootnotesforthisstandard,asthisissueiscoveredthere.5.3.1NewEnglandAquariumAswrittencreatestherequirementofpondleveltraceabilityandseparationthroughoutthechainofcustody,asthisisonlyafarmlevelcertificationcanthisbeassured?Thisstandard,inadditionto7.2‐7.4,impliesthattheShADisproposingtobecomeanorganicstandard.Thisisdifferentfromotherstandards,suchasthetilapiastandard.Clarityisrequiredonthisissue.
Additionallyterrestrialanimalbyproductsarenotallowedinfeedinsomecountries,thisshouldbeconsideredintermsofaglobalcertification.
• Pondleveltraceabilityvs.farmleveltraceabilityisakeyissuethattheShADhasbeenattemptingtoaddressforallthestandardsandisanongoingdiscussionattheGSClevel.UseofterrestrialbyproductsareaddressedinPrinciple7.
CPThailandForareasthathaveendemicNHP,farmsmustuseapprovedantibioticsinanapprovedmannerinordertooperateprofitably.Ablanketblacklistofallantibioticsunderallcircumstancesdoesnotseemright.Whatifaspecifictreatmentisprescribedbyaqualifiedanimalhealthprofessional?
• WeunderstandthisargumentbutdonotthinkitwouldbeacceptabletobesoldundertheASClabel,giventhatwearetryingtorewardthetopperformers.
WWF‐USAgreeandtheGSCshoulddefine“labeledproduct”.WWFUSrecommendsthefollowingpublication,whichsupportstheGSC’sdecision:SmithP.,T.E.Horsberg,A.LeBreton,F.Corsin(2008)Towardsprudentandresponsibleuseofantimicrobialsinaquaculture.In:L.Guardabassi,L.B.Jensen,H.Kruse(eds.)“Guidetoantimicrobialuseinanimals”,BlackwellScientificPublications
• Wehaveincludedthisreferenceinstandardsdocument.5.3.3WWFGermanyInstructionsshouldnotonlybepresentonthefarm,butthefarmingpersonnelmustprovethatproperinstructionsarebeingfollowedandimplementedinthedailypractice
• Wehavechangedthestandardtobetteraddressthisissue.5.3.4M.N.KuttyBesidesnaturallyoccurringpesticidesafewasvindicatedcouldbeallowedunderstrictcontrol
• TheShADisworkingwiththeconceptofawhite(acceptable),black(banned),andgrey(uncertain)foruseinthestandardstoallowfornewproductstodemonstrateiftheyareacceptableorunacceptable.
NewEnglandAquariumexcluderotenone
• WeneedsomerationaleastowhytheGSCshouldconsiderexcludingrotenone.Pleaseprovideoneforourconsideration.
CPThailandOption2istheonlyoptionifyouaretohaveanyfarmsinAsiaunderyourstandards.Theuseofpesticidesthatcompletelybreakdownintheenvironmentafteraveryshortperiodistheonlywayfarmscanmanagediseasecarriers(othercrustaceans).Inreality,thealternativesproposedareadefinitesecondbestoptionthatwillreducebutnoteliminatetherisksassociatedwithcrustaceancarriers.Theuseoftargeted,shortduration,biodegradablepesticidesshouldbepermittedeitherthrougha“whitelist”ora“blacklist”system.(note–cypermethrinisnaturallyoccurringinchrysanthemums–wouldthatbeOK?)
• Weareconsideringtheconceptofawhiteandblacklistforthefinalversionofthedocument.
WWF‐USWWFUSsupportsthe“nopesticideoption”andrequeststhattheGSCaddresseshowrotenoneisusedandreleased.NoteforGSC:poormanagementofintakewatercanleadtouseofpesticides:considerinrationaleorguidance
• Itisokaytoputarotenonerestrictioninguidance.However,webelievethatthisiswhywaterfiltrationisimportanttomanagegoodintakewater
IngerNaslundNoallowancefortreatingwaterwithpesticides,72withtheexceptionofTea‐seed‐cakeandRotenoneintheabsenceofshrimp.‐Fornotes72and73thereisaquestionifmorerecentinformationisavailable.Ifsothatshouldbeaddedaswell.‐Supporting‐Option1):NaturallyOccurringPesticidesOnly"Useofpesticideshashadseriousenvironmentalconsequences.Pesticidescontaminatesoilandwater.Therearemanyexamplesofentirecommunitiessufferingfromchronicpesticidepoisoning.Evenwhenusedproperly,somepesticidechemicalsremainintheenvironmentforyears,evaporatingintotheatmosphereand,ineffect,pollutingtheentireplanet"(FAO).Thisoptionwouldallowonlytheuseofrotenoneandteaseedcakeintheabsenceoftheanimal.
• Wetakeyourpointandhavetriedtoclarifythisinthenewversion,butthisissuewillbefurtheraddressedintheguidancedocument.
CPIndonesiaAllowancefortreatingwaterwithorgano‐phospatepesticides
• Thisisunderconsiderationbutwasnotresolvedbeforethe2ndpubliccommentperiod.Wewouldappreciateitifyoucanprovidefurtherrationaleastowhyyousupportthis.
5.3.5WWF‐USHowisthistobeverifiablyaudited?Themandatethatusedchemicalsare“brokendown”isdifficulttoascertainduetovariabilityinhalf‐lifesandretentiontimes.Themandateexcludingdangerousorbannedchemicalsreflectedin5.3.2willeffectivelyreducenegativeimpactsonenvironmentandnotallowsubjectivejudgementstobemadebyanauditorregardingwhetherthechemicalwaseffectively“brokendown”beforereleasedintotheenvironment.Additionally,thecultureofshrimpwillcauseoxygenandpHfluctuationsviaprimaryproductivityandbacterialdecompositionandtheseprocessesarenotnecessarilybadfortheenvironment.Lastly,concerningprobioticsandintroductionsofsuchorganismsandthebacterialprocessesthattheyinitiate‐thiscouldbeconsideredfromthe“neutralization”aspect.Suggestedaction:Strike5.3.5.
• TheGSCagreeswiththeauditingchallenges,butdoesnotagreethatthisstandardshouldbeeliminated.Weareworkingonprovidingmoreguidanceandwouldlikefurthercommentsonthisissue.
5.3.6
• TheGSChasremovedthisstandardforthe2ndpublicdraft.WWF‐USTooprescriptiveanddifficulttoascertainbyanauditor.Tomandatea“non‐detectable”residuelevelinwaterrequirestheuseofindependentlaboratoriesthatarecostlyandnotoftenpresentinproductionregions.Requiredguidancetosample,monitor,andchemicallypreservepondwatersamplesforviableanalysiswouldbehighlysuspectandpotentiallyreducethestandards’credibility.Suggestedaction:Strike5.3.6.MarkNijhofisassuchnotauditable!activechlorinecanrapidlybedeterminedbyatest(butitisunlikelytobeusedinpondsofcourse),butforpesticides,moreelaborateequipmentisrequired.CPIndonesia</=themaximumlimitWWFGermanyThenon‐detectableregulationisnotworkable,duetotoday'savailabletechnologyofanalysis,everysubstanceisdetectable,eveninveryremoteanduntouchedareas
• Weagreethatweshouldremove.Notrelevantforchlorineinmyopinion.Toodifficultandcostlytoascertainforpesticides.Wecouldincluderequirementtofollowwithdrawaltimeunder5.3.4.
5.3.7
• TheGSCacceptsthesecommentsandisstillworkingonasolutiontotheidentifiedproblems.Wewelcomefurthercommentsandideasonthisissue.
CPThailandIhaveadifficultywiththiswhereprobioticsarefermentedonfarm.Howdoesthefarmer(orauditor)knowthatthebacteriaintheoriginalprobioticcultureisstilldominantafterfermentationand,moreimportant,thatharmfulbacteriaarenotpresent?Also,manygovernmentssimplyrubber‐stampproductsthatarewidelyaccepted/usedsothisstandardwillbemeaninglessfromanenvironmentalorpublichealthstandpoint.(WhathappenswhentheCompetentAuthorityforaquaculture/fisheriesapprovesaproductbuttheFDAorVetauthoritydoesnot?)Inthesupportingfootnotes,itshouldbenotedthatMorarty&Decamparehardlydisinterested3rdparties.Also,Gatesoupe’sreviewdefinedprobioticsas“…livemicrobialfeedsupplements…”andspecificallystates“…Moriarty(1998)proposedtoextendthedefinitionofprobioticstomicrobial‘‘wateradditives’’.However,thisextensionwouldmaketoovaguedefinitionofTannock(1997).Isuggestanalternativedefinitionofprobioticsas:microbialcellsthatareadministeredinsuchawayastoenterthegastrointestinaltractandtobekeptalive,withtheaimofimprovinghealth.”Hisfinalconclusionwasthat“…considerableeffortsofresearchwillbenecessarytodeveloptheapplicationstoaquaculture.”WWF‐USTheknowledgerequiredtodeterminetheeffectsofintroducingnovelbacterialstrainsintotheenvironmentisnotwellunderstood.Thereshouldbecautioninhowprobioticsarepromoted.Suggestedaction:Nointroductionsofnovelbacteriawhetherdeemedaproboticornot.FlavioCorsin
Suggestremovingthisstandardasthedocumentdoesnotneedtospecifywhatisallowed,butonlywhatisnotallowedorcontrolled.
• Theapprovalby“competentauthorities”isapotentialsourceofendlessdifficultiesofallsortsfortheapplicationofthestandards.Wecouldasafirststeplimittheuseofantibioticsofknowncomposition(excludinguncontrolled,farm‐madeferments)andnotcontainingknownhumanpathogens(somecommercialproductsactuallydo
Principle6:Managebroodstockorigin,stockselectionandeffectsofstockmanagementGeneralM.N.KuttyTheproposedstandardsareneeded.Thereisthecommonproblemofthesmallfarmer(<10haholder),aswehavemostinthesubcontinent/India,whowouldnotbeabletoprovidealltheneededdocumentsthoughhe/sheiscomplyingtotherequirements–asageneralissueapplicabletothemajorityofshrimpfarmers,thereshouldconsiderablehelptothemthroughthegovernmental/associations/NGOsetcformeetingthestandardsandforpreparationoftheneededdocumentation.SeealsoGeneralComments.
• Weagreeandrecognizethisasamajorchallenge.WeareworkingwithandencouragingtheASCtodevelopmechanismsnecessarytosupportthecertificationofsmallfarmers.ThereareNGOslikeWWForIDHwhoseemtoalreadybeinvolvedinidentifyingthegapspreventingproducersfromcomplyingwiththestandards.Theseorganizationscanorganizetrainingssessionsandalsofinanciallyhelpfarmstoupgradebeforethecertificationphase.
JakePiscano,CENTERFOREMPOWERMENTANDRESOURCEDEVELOPMENTMonodonhasstillbeenunabletoreachthedomesticitylevelofvannamei,makingittotallydependentonwild‐caughtspawners.Butthiscanberemediedbyreleasingspentspawnersbackintotheenvironment.Broodstocktechnologyformonodonhasalsoreachedadegreeofsophisticationallowingspawnerproductionfromfarmedstock,buthatcherypeople,byandlarge,stillpreferspawnerstakenfromthewild.AchievingSPForspecificpathogenfreestatusforprawn(monodon)isadesirableobjective.Atthispoint,useofwildspawnersandtheirreleasebacktothewildafterspawningwillcontinuetobethecheapestandmostenvironmentallysafewayofobtainingfry.
• Returningthespawnerstothewilddoesnotworkbecausetheyareeyestockablatedand,iftheyarenotfedwithahighenergydiet,theywilldie.Therearealsodiseaseconsiderationswiththereturnofspawnerstothewild,astheanimalsarestressedandthepossibilityofdiseasestheymaycarrybeingtriggeredishigh.Insuchinstances,therestofthewildcrustaceanfaunathatissensitivetothesediseasesisalsoatrisk.WehaveaddedsomeinterimrequirementsforSPFandSPRbutseethisasmandatoryoverthelongterm.
IngerNaslund–WWFSwedenItisquestionablewiththeintroductionandmixingofthespeciesfromcontinenttocontinentforcertification.Heremoreinformationshouldbeconsideredonhowthedifferentspecieseffectnaturalenvironmentifescapesoccur.
• WehaveproducedawhitepaperonthistopicthatisnowincludedasasidedocumentontheShADwebsite.Thepaperincludesinformationabouttherisksandbenefitsofusingnativevs.non‐nativespecies.
Criterion6.1:Presenceofnaturalorestablishedshrimpspecies6.1.1WilliamRash–UKRetailerAllowancefornon‐indigenousspeciesshouldbebasedoncontinentalregionratherthanlocalorcountrylocality.Whatisthedefinitionof'widelyusedincommercialproduction'?
• Wehavedeletedthe“widelyused”language.WWFFranceMuchasinagriculture,thecurrenttrendinaquacultureistousealimitednumberofspeciesinordertofulfilmarketdemand,entailingadecreaseinbiodiversitywithinproductionsystems.ThisleadsWWFFrancetoencouragethefarmingofagreaternumberofspecies,bothlocalanddiversified.ShADstandardsshould,inourview,notallowproducersfarmingauniquenonlocalspeciesaccesstocertification.(6.2.1Indicator).
• TheGSCrecognizesthisconcern,butneedstoconsiderhowtoworkwithsystemsthathavebeeninexistenceformanyyearsinordertocreatepositivechangeintheexistingindustry.WhiteshrimpareheavilyfarmedinSoutheastAsiaandwethinkwehavedevelopedprecautionsintheShADstandardstoprotectagainstanyexistingnegativeeffects.
NewEnglandAquarium“Thereisnoevidenceofestablishmentorimpactonadjacentecosystems”isaconfusingstatementandwouldrequireabaselinestudyofadjacentecosystems.Evidenceofestablishmentisalsochallenging,andabsenceofevidencedoesnotconstituteabsenceofimpact.Wesuggestthatthislineberemovedorclarified.
• Thefootnotesfurtherclarifythisstatement.TheGSCconsidersprecautionarypositionstothebestofitsabilityandwefeelthatthislanguageisappropriate.
CPThailandThereappearstobeacontradictioninthestandardsincethefootnotedescribeshowP.monodonhasbecomeestablishedinseveraleastAfricancountriesandrepresentsasignificantproportionofthefishery.Italsostatesthat“…Therefore,theShADstandardsareunlikelytoallowforcertificationofP.monodoninareasoutsideitsnativerange.”However,thestandardstates“…unlessthosespeciesarealreadywidelyusedincommercialproductionlocallybythedateofthepublicationoftheShADstandards.”Doesthisexemptionincludecommercialfisheries?
• Commercialfisheriesproductionisnotcoveredunderthisstandard.Non‐nativeshrimpspeciesthatare“widelyused”mustalsobeabletodemonstratenoevidenceofestablishmentorimpactonadjacentecosystems.ItisakeypriorityoftheShADtopreventnewintroductionsofexoticspecies.
WWF‐USChangestandardsto“Yes”.
• Wehavemodifiedthelanguageaccordingly.EricDeMuylder
IsthistobereadANDANDAND?Becausethiswouldhaveasaconsequencethatintensiveindoorfarmingintemperatecountrieswouldneverbeaccepted,eventhoughtheimpactontheenvironmentiszeroforeffluentsorescapees.Iwouldchangethisintosomethinglikethis:Allowancefornon‐indigenousshrimpspeciesisonlyacceptedif:1.ThereisagovernmentalapprovalforcultureofthisspeciesandthespecieshavebeenapprovedforaquacultureusebyaprocessbasedonICEScodeofpracticeontheintroductionsandtransfersofmarineorganismsorcomparableprotocol.AND2.Thereisnointeractionwithlocalshrimpspecies:zeropossibilityforescapeesorcultureofthisspeciesisalreadywidelyusedincommercialproductionlocallybythedateofthepublicationoftheShADstandardsandthereisnoevidenceofestablishmentorimpactonadjacentecosystems;
• Wehavemodifiedthedocumentaccordinglyandbelievethatthistypeofsystemwouldnowbeallowed.
FlavioCorsinThisstandardisclearlynotalignedwithsimilarstandardsintheTADandthePAD.Thereshouldbenoallowanceforcertificationofafarmculturinganon‐indigenousspeciesunlessthespeciesisestablishedinthewildorthereisscientific(peer‐reviewed)evidencethatitcannotbeestablished.Also,"thereisnoevidenceofimpact"isdifferentthansaying"thereisevidencethatnoimpact".SuggestrevisingthisstandardconsiderablyandalignitwiththeTADandthePADaswebelievethatkeepingthisstandardinitspresentformwouldseriouslyaffectthecredibilityoftheShAD.
• Wehaveconsideredthisintherevisionofthestandardandwelcomefurtherinput.DrA.G.PonniahWhenintroductionofexoticswasdonewithproperprotocolandguidelinesbytheGovernment,thereshouldnotbeanyreservationsitacceptingthat.Theconditionthat'alreadywidelyused'(30%oftotalculture)shouldnotbeinsisteduponespeciallyincountrieslikeIndiawheretheintroductionofL.vannameiwasonlymaderecentlyafterwidedeliberationsatalllevelfollowingariskassessmentanddevelopingguidelinestoaddresstherisksatboththehatcheryandfarmlevel.Onlythecriteria,"thespecieshavebeenapprovedforaquacultureusebyaprocessbasedonICEScodeofpracticeontheintroductionsandtransfersofmarineorganismsorcomparableprotocol"‐needstobeadopted.
• TheShADexistsbecausethemandateofgovernmentstoprotectthepublicinteresthasnotbeenfulfilledbymanyshrimpproducingcountriesintheworld.Therefore,theShADdeemsitmandatorytogowellbeyondwhatisrequiredonlybyregulation,especiallyonissuesofcriticalconservationconcern(e.g.theintroductionofexoticspecies).
6.1.2
• TheGSCdecidedtoremovethisstandard.Criterion6.2:OriginofpostlarvaeBelizeShrimpGrowersExceptionsareneededforclosedloopbroodstockforimprovementsingeneticstockwhichallowfornewlinesofbroodstocktobebroughtinfromoutsidethecountry.Itwouldbe
appropriatetoapplytraceabilitystandardstosuchtransfersandrequiregovernmentalapproval.
• Thisisnotsomethingthatcanbeaddressedatthepresenttimebutcouldbeconsideredforfutureversions,assumingthatappropriatemechanismstomanagetheriskscanbeidentified.
6.2.1FlavioCorsinCompliancetonationallegislationisacceptable,buthowtocomplywiththemanyregionalandinternationaldocumentsonthematter?Suggestlimitingthistolegalrequirementsforimportation
• PleaserefertoPrinciple1,asthisissueisaddressedthere.Wehavemadesomefurthermodificationstoattempttoaddressthisconcern.
6.2.2NewEnglandAquariumAdd“orareSPR,wherethisiscommerciallyandlocallyavailableforcountryspecificdiseases”.
• Wehavechangedthistoan“AND”butsuggestthatitcannotbean“OR,”aspathogenfreeholdsgreaterimportance.Theconditionisthattheycannotbeimportedincountrieswherethepathogenisnotpresent,ifthereisevidencethattheyareSPRandnotSPFbutstillcarrythepathogenofconcern.IfthereisevidenceoftransmissionfromfromanSPRanimalthenitshouldnotbeallowed.ShouldbeSPFforallofthepathogensexcepttheonethattheyareresistantfor.
CPThailandItwouldbemybeliefthatmostofthesocalledSPRstocksoftheAmericasarenotSPFundertheOIEguidelines;allhaveIHHNVthatIhavetested.Doesthismakethemaproblem;no.TheyarejustashealthyasanOIESPFshrimp.Alsoitwouldbeimpossibletohaveanymonodonthatisfromawildbroodstockpassthiscriteria.(Actually,thisstandardonlycoversSPFstatusanddoesn’tmentionSPR).ThisshouldallowPLproducedbyafacilitycertifiedasSPForabletodemonstratetheirSPFstatustosupplywithoutbatchbybatchcertification.ThismaybedonethroughaspecificSPFfacilityregisterusedbytheauditors.
• Pleaserefertotheaboveresponse.• Aslongasdomesticatedmonodonisnotavailable,farmerscanusewildbroodstock,
whileensuringthatitistestedforthelistofdiseasesunderPrincple5.However,farmersmustusedomesticatedbroodstockwhenitisavailableinthecountry.
• Initially,werequirethatfarmsshowtheirPLsareSPForhavebeentestedagainstthelistedspecificpathogens(RefertoPrinciple5andtheICESguidelinestable.Origin:DonaldV.Lightner),withthedocumentsprovidedbythehatcheries.Later,asthepreamblestates,wehopethecertificationwillbeextendedtohatcheriesand,therefore,submittedtoanindependentaudit.
WWF‐USshouldconsiderallowanceforseedtestingnegativeaswell
• Wehaveaddressedthisconcerninthenewversionofthestandards.Dr.A.G.PonniahSPFseedisavailableforL.vannameionlyandhencespecificexemptionshouldbeindicatedfor
otherspeciesofshrimps.• Weunderstandthecomment,butwearetryingtoincentivizechangeandcreate
demandforSPFseedtobeavailableforspeciesotherthanvannamei.Insomecountries,SPFmonodonisalreadyavailable,alongwithindicus,japonicusandstylirostris.
6.2.3EricDeMuyldermonodonandvannameishouldbewrittenwithoutcapitalletters.indicus,stylirostrisandjaponicuscanbe100%fromfarmraisedbroodstock(thisisalreadythecaseanyway)
• Wehaveaddedthesespeciestothe2nddraftandincludedyoursuggestedchange.IngerNaslund–WWFSweden%oftotalpost‐larvaefromclosedloophatchery(i.e.farm‐raisedbroodstock)andthestandardsP.Vannamei100%,P.Monodonmustbeimprovedovertime(100%within6yearsafterthepublicationofthestandards).‐CanthelaterbeshortertimeafterthestandardsaresetasthisshouldnotcomeasasurpriseafterseveralyearsofdiscussionswithintheShAD.Alsotheartificialbreedingofbroodstockshouldbedonewithotherlessharmfulmethodsthaneyeblinding.Ashadowstandardofcertifiedbroodstockshouldbeobtainedintherewiseddraftstandard.
• TheShADrespectfullydisagreesasitisseekingtofindabalancebetweendifferentinterests,wherepossible,andhascometotheconclusionthat6yearsisappropriate.
• Animalwelfareinthehatcheryisnotcoveredunderthesestandardscurrently.CPIndonesiaCannotbedefinedasitisstilldependontheresearchresult
• Weagree,butthesestandardsaredesignedtocreateincentivesforchangewithintheglobalindustryandtohelpandrewardthoseproducerswhoarepushingtheindustryforward.Wealsoneedtobeambitioustobeabletodifferentiatefromexistingstandardsandreallyimproveshrimpfarming.
Dr.A.G.PonniahPLfrom"closeloopedhatchery"cannotbeconsideredasSPFwithoutcertificationofthefacility.Itwillalsoleadtoinbreedingifproperbreedingprogrammeisnotfollowed.OnlyPLfromcertifiedSPFsourcestobeallowed.
• Wehaveallowedforsomeexemptionsinthe2ndpublicdraftonwhichwewouldappreciatefurtherfeedback.Therewasaneedtoallowthestandardstobeuseablebyasmanyfarmersaspossible.
6.2.4ShADResponse
• Werecognizetheabsenceofcertifiedbroodstockfisheries.Wewouldliketoseeifthereisenoughinformationtosaythatthebroodstockhastocomefromalegalfisheryandpossiblyaskforadocumentfromthegovernmentastowhereitiscomingfrom.Thedocumentshouldexistinallbroodstockimportingcountries,asthefulltraceabilityisanabsoluterequirementforICES.
• Itisimportanttonotethatwhiletherehavebeensomemodificationsinthe2ndpublicdraft,thereisstillsignificantdebateontheGSCregardingthisstandard.Wewelcomefurtherfeedback.
CPThailandHowmanyshrimpfisheries(monodon)arecertifiedbythirdparties;fisheriesoffIndia,offBangladesh,OffMalaysia,Iftherearenocertifiedfisheriesthenyouhavejusteliminatedallthemonodonfarms.Thiscarriesasignificantriskofcausingtradedistortionsandwouldinfactincreasepressuretointroducevannameiintomonodonproductionareas.Whatdoesa“fisheriesmanagementplan”require?Ifthisisimplementedaswritten,itwillruleoutalmostallmonodonproductioninAsia.WWF‐USAlthoughWWFUSbelievesthatafisheriesmanagementplanisbeneficial,webelievethatthenumberofbroodstocksourcedisinsignificantandthisrequestwilllimittheabilityofhatcheriestofollowbiosecurityprotocolandnotsourcebroodstockfromthewild.Suggestedaction:Strike6.2.4.WilliamRash–UKRetailerCriterion5.1.6&6.2.4:Standardneedstohaveanallowanceforwildcaughtfemalespawners.ThisiscommonpracticeinIndiaandforsmallfarmerholdersCertificationcriteriashouldalsoincludethatthecertificationecolabellingschemecomplieswiththeFAOGuidelinesfortheEcolabellingofFishandFisheryProductsfromMarineCaptureFisheries(2005),seeftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/a0116t/a0116t00.pdf.ThemainargumentbeingthatISEALdoesaddresstheprocessnotthecontentofthestandard.FlavioCorsinThisstandardwouldmakevirtuallyalltheAsianmonodonproducersnon‐certifiable,withtheexceptionoftheextremelyfewstockingdomesticatedmonodon.SuggestremovingthisstandardCPIndonesianotimplementableDr.A.G.PonniahCertifiedfisheriesarenon‐existentinmostofthecountriesandmostofthehatcheriessourcetheirbroodstocklocallywhichcannotbeavoidedatthepresentstage.Appropriatetimelimitmaybegiven.IngerNaslund–WWFSwedenWild‐caughtbroodstockmustbesourcedfromfisherieswithanestablishedfisherymanagementplanorcertifiedfisheries.‐Thisshouldbemandatoryforallwildcaughtbroodstockorfishfeedfishery.6.2.5WWF‐USseemstocontradict6.1.2
Dr.A.G.PonniahThoughstockingwildseedisbannedinthecountry,ithastobeallowedincaseoftraditionalsystemswhichfollowtrapandculturemethod.WWFGermanyAllowanceforexceptionforzero‐inputsystems(e.g.Silvofisheries).NaturalinfluxofPL'sintothefarmingpondsshouldbeallowed/acceptedbytheShAD
• TheShADhasallowedfornaturalinfluxsystemsbutdoesnotthinkthatthesetypesofsystemswillqualifyforcertificationwithothercriteriainthesestandards.Therewillneedtobestrongregulationsspecifiedintheguidancetoensuretheallowanceforthesetypesofsystemsisappropriatelyimplemented.
Criterion6.3:EscapesfromculturefacilitiesBelizeShrimpGrowersProhibitionsonremovalofliveshrimpfromthefarmdonotallowfornormaloperationssuchastransferfromhatcheriestomovePLs,transfersofbroodstockbetweenbiosecurefarms,orsushimarkets.NewEnglandAquariumAdd“Nomassescapeevent(e.g.collapseofapondwall)forthreeyears.Failureswillresultinlossofcertification”
• Wehaveaddedlanguageinthelatestversionofthestandardstoaddressthisconcern.IngerNaslund–WWFSwedenItisofhighconcernifallowingtheintroductionofL.vannameiorL.monodonindifferentenvironmentthannatural.6.3.1NewEnglandAquariumDefine“timely”(e.g.ataminimumof)CPThailandSomeofthesecertainlysoundlikeBAP’s.DeleteA‐Hasthesearetooprescriptive.WWF‐USWWFUSagreeswithA.C(change“timely”by“daily”).E,andH.StrikeDasitisredundantwithEandF.ConsiderforC:adding“repair”andthenstrike6.2.3FlavioCorsinClarifywhatwordssuchas"adequate","timely"etc.actuallymeanCPIndonesiaTHISISALSOMUCHTOODETAIL,ASALLOFTHESEMATTERWILLAUTOMATICALLYBEDONEDr.A.G.PonniahDocumentingallthelisteditemsisnotpossibleespeciallyintraditionalandextensivefarms.Therequirementsshouldbesimplified.ShADResponsefor6.3.1
• Wehavechanged“timely”to“daily”• WeacceptthattheseareBMPsandareworkingtowardsabetterescapesstandard,but
needtohavetheseinplaceatthistime.• Werecognizethatdocumentingescapeswillbechallengingbutsuggestthatwillwork
itselfoutwithtime.Withnoavailabledocumentsnothirdpartyindependentcertificationispossible.ItwillbeuptotheNGOstoimprovethetrainingoffarmers,documentavailabilityandmanagementonfarms.
6.3.2FlavioCorsinHowareescapeestoberecorded?Doesthisreferonlytotheobservedescapees(e.g.shrimpcaughtinthetraps)?Ifso,suggeststatingthisclearly.Ifnot,suggestremovingthisstandardasimpracticaltorecordallescapeesCPIndonesianoneed,itwillnotworkable.ShADResponse
• Wewouldsuggestthatitreferstoallobservedescapees,aswerecognizethechallengeofaccountingforeachindividual.However,wewanttoensurethatanythingthatcanberecordedisrecorded.
Criterion6.4:TransgenicshrimpIngerNaslundThestandardisabsolutelycrucial.CPThailandFromthefootnotedefinition:“GeneticEnhancement:theprocessofgeneticimprovementviaselectivebreedingthatcanresultinbettergrowthperformanceanddomesticationbutdoesnotinvolvetheinsertionofanyforeigngenesintothegenomeoftheanimal.”Thiswouldeffectivelyprohibitselectivebreeding–evenfortraitsthatwouldreduceenvironmentalimpacts.ShADResponse
• Thisstandardexiststopreventtheinsertionofforeigngenesintothegenomeanddoesnotpreventselectivebreedingfromoccurring.
Principle7:UseresourcesinanenvironmentallyefficientandresponsiblemannerM.N.KuttyThissectiononresourcesuseisloadedonlyforfeedexceptforCriterion7.8.Surelythereareotherresourcessuchasfertilizersandmanuresuseoftenwithoutcontaminatingthepondandfarmenvironment(aspermittedinorganicfarming)–whyaretheseleftout?Resourcesalsoincludewaterandotherinputs.IfthesehavebeedealtwithearlierthisshouldbesoindicatedortheHeadingrevised.Concerningstandardsforfeedquality,itmightbeworthconsideringtherecommendationofTacon&Forster(2003)thatthestandardscouldbebasedoneffluentloadsofnutrientsratherthanthecontentofthefeeds.
• Werecognizethisasanimportantissue,butitisbeyondthescopeoftheShADtoaddressthisconcern.Weexpecttheseissuestobeaddressedinthefuture,asthestandardsarecontinuouslyimproved.
NewEnglandAquariumWerecommendthefollowingrequirements:Allfishmealandfishoilmustbeindependentlyverifiedfortraceabilityandshowspeciessourced,countryoforigin,geartypeusedandbycatchspeciesassociatedwiththefisheryAND:Allfishmealandfishoilusedinfeedsmustbeshowntomeetthefollowingrequirements:Marineproducts,includingbyproductsandtrimmings,toexclude:∙Allkrillandkrillproducts(untilappropriatemanagementsystemsandsufficientscientificknowledgesupportstheirresponsibleharvest)∙Unregulatedfisheriesbycatch∙Allfisheriesforwhichthefollowingtermsareappliedbygovernmentorganizations,fisherymanagersororganizationssuchasFAOandICES:oOverexploitedoHarvestedunsustainablyoratriskofbeingharvestedunsustainablyoFisheryclosed(exceptaspartofareaclosuresaspartofadaptivemanagement)oRecommendationofnofishingoStockstatuscriticaloBycatchofIUCNendangeredorcriticallyendangeredspeciesoIUUfishingprobableoDamagescriticalhabitats(e.g.dynamite,poisonfishing)∙Allfisherieswithoutformalmanagementplans,exceptwherefisheryhealthiseffectivelymaintainedthroughrestrictionsandoutputcontrols(e.g.notakeof‘berried’femalesandprecautionarysizelimits)∙AllfisherieslistedasendangeredorcriticallyendangeredbytheIUCN∙Anyproductsofthesamegenustothespeciesforwhichthefeedisintended.PreferentialSourcingofAquaticResources:∙Preferentiallysourcefarmedfishbyproductsandtrimmingsandfisheriesfromsourcescertifiedto(GLOBALGAP,GAA,MSC,EU/USOrganic)standards–InclusionofAquaticResources:∙Feedinclusionratesoffishmealandfishoilmustnotbeexcessive(i.e.setamaximuminclusionpercentage)forthespeciesforwhichfeedisdesigned.Levelsshouldberegionappropriate,suchthatwhenanimalbyproductsarenotlegalthenanincreasedmaximuminclusionrateofmarineresourcesisallowed.
• TheIFFOstandardhasgoodtraceabilityandcouldbeusedtoaddresssomeofthesecomponents,ashasbeendoneforotherdialogues.WehaveaddedmetricsforFishsourceaswell.
SustainableFisheriesPartnershipSFPproposesthatoneimportantsourceofinformationonthestatusoffisheries(includingbiomass,mortality,thelevelofprecautioninmanagementandotherfactors)istheFishSourcedatabase(www.fishsource.org).SFPrecommendsthattheShADadoptanindicatorforfeedfisherystockstatusthatrequiresallfivecriteriaintheFishSourceassessmenttoscore6orgreaterandthatonecriteriabepermittedtobeunscoredbutNOTthecriteriaforbiomass(criteria4).ThisisequivalenttoacceptingfisheriesthatscoreeitherA,B,C,DorEintheSFPassessmentandallowsfor66.9%offishcaughtintheprincipalglobalreductionfisheriestobeacceptedasconsistentwithcertification.
SFPagreesthatwithinfiveyearsallcertifiedshrimpshouldbefedonrationsderivedfromfisheriesthatarecertifiedbyanISEAL‐compliantschemesuchastheMarineStewardshipCouncil.Consequently,theuseofFishSourceasanindicatorbeforefiveyearshaselapsedispurelyatemporaryarrangement.FisheriesthatarenotcurrentlyassessedonFishSourcecanjointhedatabasesimplybygettingintouchwithSFPstaffandidentifyingthefisheriesdatanecessarytocompletetheassessment.FurtherinformationonthisprocessisavailablefromSFP.OtherissuesassociatedwithassessmentSFPproposesthataperiodoftwoyearsshouldelapsebeforeafisheryusedforfeedisrequiredtohavecompletedassessment.SFPholdsthisviewbecause:SuchassessmentsaretechnicallyfeasiblewithintwoyearsThereisalreadyarequirementforMSC(orequivalent)certificationwithinfiveyears–anassessmentaftertwoyearscouldessentiallybean‘MSCpre‐assessment’leavingthreeyearsinwhichtoresolveproblemsthatareobstaclestofullMSCcertificationTheperiodoftimewhencompletelyunassessedfisheriesareusedforfeed(whichoftenmeans‘trashfish’)shouldbeminimizedAn‘assessment’canbedefinedinanumberofwaysbutafullFishSourceprofileshouldcertainlybeconsideredtobean‘assessment’forthepurposesofcertification.Thedraftasks‘whatisacredibleassessor’?IntheviewofSFPacredibleassessorcanbedefinedinanumberofwaysbutthekeyrequirementforcredibilityistotaltransparencywithregardstofisheriesdataandmethodologyandanexplanationofwhyanygivenbenchmarkhasbeenadopted.Thedraftproposesthatassessmentsbepeerreviewed.SFPwouldcertainlywelcomepeerreviewofanyofitsassessments(andthewebsiteforFishSourcealreadyhasafeedbackmechanismincludedinthesystem).Wedonotcurrentlyhaveaviewonhowtodefineacrediblepeerreviewer.
• WehaveaddedFishsourceasaninterimindicator.JakePiscano,CENTERFOREMPOWERMENTANDRESOURCEDEVELOPMENTManyfeedmillersnowusealternativeproteinsources:meatandbonemeal(notallowedincertaincountries)poultryby‐productmeal,andfish‐byproduct,etc.Therelativehighcostoftheseproteinsourcesstillpushesmillersandfarmerstoseekotherproteinsourcesincludingplantprotein.Thedangerhereisthetendencytoexhaust“newlyfound”feedalternativesandevenwetfeed.Theuseoftablescrapsrenderedforfeedstandardshasalsobeendonebutvolumeshavebeennegligible.Smallorlargescaleshrimpfarmingwillhaveanenvironmentalfootprint,nodoubt,butobservingbasicenvironmentalrulesandfocusingoncarryingcapacityofspecificareaswillallowproductiveoperationswithaminimumofnegativeimpacts.Eachareaorpondhasitsowncapacityandcharacteristicsmuchlikeaperson’sfingerprint.Itisknowingthisparticularcharacteristicthatallowsfarmerstooptimizeproductivity.
• TheShADisconsideringtheuseofalternativeproteinsourcesunderthesestandardsandischallengedbyrestrictionsontheproductsincertainkeymarkets.
MarkNijhof
Chapter7cannotbeauditedatfarmlevel.Thisneedsaspecificfeedmanufacturingstandard,andcertifiedfarmsshouldhenceonlyobtainfeedfromcertifiedfeedproducers.Itsimplycannotbeputintothestandardthatisauditedontheshrimpfarmonly!Thiselementislargelybelievedtobesolvedby‘adocumentfromthefeedsupplier(oncompanyletterhead)’(page62,top).Suchcriteriawilldetractheavilyfromthecredibilityofthisstandard.Inaddition,thefeedmanufacturerisnormallynotthecompanyexploitingthenaturalsource.Weallfullyunderstandthenecessityofaddressingtheelementof‘feed’inthestandardinviewoftheuseofresources.However,IbelievethatthesolutionistobefoundinobtainingfeedfromafeedsupplierthatadheressomesortofCodeofConductorstandard.Theelement7.2.1.bisanotherexampleofthisproblem,recognizedbyShAD.ItisnotanoveltythatIadviceclosecollaborationwithGlobalgap,inwhichIseemuchofthevaluablethoughtsmentionedonp.63(mid)besolved.AquaculturereliesheavilyonagricultureandthiscrucialrelationshiphasbecomemanifesttoShAD.Unfortunately,GlobalgapFruit&vegetablestandardsdonotyetimplementtheelementofecologicalsustainabilityindesiredlevels,butthatislikelytobeamatteroftime.
• WeagreethatthisishardtoauditbutwewanttostartsomewhereandtheShADstakeholdershaveidentifiedthefeedissueascritical.Therefore,wemustaddressthisissuewiththesestandardsandwelcomefurthersuggestionsonhowtostartonthiswork.Wecanverifyfeedpurchaseswithinvoicesandnothavetorelysolelyonthefarmer’sword,butwewelcomeothersuggestionsastohowthiscanbedone.
IngerNaslundOfhighimportancetohavefulltransparencyinformationtotheconsumerofcontentsoffeedandhoweffluentsaretreated.
• Thisissueisbeyondthescopeofthestandards.ThisisanissuetoraisewiththeASCitself.
WWFGermanyGeneralNotewithregardstofeeds:Feedasoneofthemayorimpactfactorinaquaculturemustbehandledandaddressedasacrosscuttingissueforalldialoguesinexactlythesameway.ThereisnorationalewhyanASCcertifiedPangasius/Tilapiashouldhavedifferentindicatorsorstandardsforthesustainabilityoftherawmaterialsbeingused(marineandterrestrial).ItisofoutmostimportanceforthemarketacceptanceandthesuccessoftheASCinEuropethatthisissueisdealtwithbyWWFwithhighestprioritybeforethelaunchoftheASC.Retailers,importersandconsumerswillnotunderstanddifferentregulationwithregardstofeedrawmaterialsourcesfordifferentspecies,alsoitcannotbeexplainedbecausethereisnorationalefordoingso!Anotherimportantremarkwithregardstofeedrawmaterialsandfeedmanufacturing:ItistheresponsibilityandthejobofthefeedindustrytosupplyfarmerswithASCcompliantfeedstuffs,notanindividualfarmers'jobtocheckonthecorrectnessofthefeedingredients.ThefeedindustrymustbecomepartoftheASCfromthebeginning,formanufacturingofASC‐compliantfeedstuffs.IfthefeedindustryisnotsubjecttoauditingforASC‐compliance,thefarmerscannotrelyonthecorrectnessofthestatedproductspecificationsandthereisahugepotentialforfraudandnon‐compliance/incorrectlabellingonthesideofthefeedindustry.
• Weagreewithyourcomments.However,theseareidealsituationsthatmaynotplayoutinreality.AswecannotpredictwhattheASCwillrequire,webelieveitisnecessary
todevelopthisstandardtoensurethatthemajorissuesofconcernareadequatelyaddressed.
• Regardingdialoguealignmentonthefeedissue,weagainagreewithyourcomments.However,forcingalignmentisoutsidetherealmoftheShAD’smandateandthatissomethingthathastoultimatelybehandledbytheASC.Thereareeffortstomakethishappen,butitisunclearhowmuchtheywillbeabletoaddressit.
CPPIndonesiaAllofthesequestionshouldbeaddressedtofeedcompany,andfarmshouldonlyberequestedtobuyfromthecertifiedfeedcompany.
• Inanidealsituationweagreewithyourcomment.Unfortunately,however,therehasyettobeafeeddialogue.Therefore,theconditionsforthissituationdonotcurrentlyexist.Ifandwhentheydoweagreethatissomethingthatfarmersshouldhavetoaddress.
Criterion7.1‐OriginofaquaticingredientsCPThailandDoesthisreallybelonginfarmstandards;seemslikeotheragendasarecreepingintothis.Theyare.Thesearedefactofeedstandardsobtainedthroughanon‐ISEALprocesswithouttheactiveinvolvementofkeystakeholders(feedcompanies,ingredientsuppliers).Afarmerhaslittleornocontroloverthisunlessthefarmispartofaverticallyintegratedoperation.Thiscouldagainbeseenaspotentiallycausingatradedistortion.Theseissuesarebestaddressedthroughaseparatefeeddialogue.
• Weunderstandandagree,butfeedhasbeenidentifiedbyvariousstakeholdersasamajorissueofconcernandmust,therefore,beaddressedbythestandard.WerecognizethechallengeforfarmersandwillbeadvisingtheASConhowtoproceedwiththistothebestofourability.Otherstandardshavefoundsimilarchallengesandareworkingbyputtingclusterfarmstogetherinanefforttohelpaddressthem.
WWF‐US7.1Flag(pg60):Asthedevelopmentofstandardsforconsumerstomakeinformedsourcesabouthowshrimpareproduced,customersoffeedmanufacturershavetherighttorequestcertainproductspecifications.Webelievethatthecurrentproposedimplementationplanisforwardthinkingandjustifiable.WilliamRashHowpracticalisitforthefarmer(particularlysmallerscalefarmers)toexertinfluenceoverthefeedindustry?Shouldseparatestandardsbeapplicableforfeed?
• Pleaseseetheaboveresponses.EricDeMuylderIwouldalsoadd:preferenceforlocalingredientsinsteadofimports,butproducedinasocialandenvironmentalacceptableway.Secondly:preferenceforlocally(orregionally)producedshrimpfeedsinsteadofimportsfromfaraway.
• ItisbeyondthescopeoftheShADtomandatesuchastandard.Targetedlocalfisheriesaredatadeficientandoftenpoorlymanaged.TheShADdoesrecognizethisconcernandhopestoaddressitinfutureversionsofthestandards.
IngerNaslundOriginoffeedshouldbecertifiedorresponsibleproduced/fishedincertifiedshrimpfarms.
• Weagree,however,thisisnotpossibleatthepresenttime.Wearetryingtoaddressthisviatheinterimstandards(7.2.1a–c)andhopethatthiswillbethecaseinfutureversionsofthestandards.
NACA(Generalpoints)Thereisneedforgovernmentandregionalorganizationtosupportandworkontheseissues.SuggestWWFtoconsidersupportingsuchinitiatives.
• Weagreeinprinciple,butthisisoutsidethescopeofthedialogue.Wewouldseeitasaverypositivedevelopmentiftheseorganizationscangettogethertohelpimplementthestandards.
7.1.1NewEnglandAquariumChangestandard7.7.1to“Requirementforproducerstosourcecrediblycertified(e.g.ISEALcompliantorcomparableprogram)feedmanufacturedusingenvironmentallyandsociallysustainableingredientsandpractices.Allfeedingredientswill,atleast,meettherequirementsstatedintheinterimstandards‐100%withinthreeyearsoftheavailabilityofsufficientvolumesofregionallyavailable,species‐specificfeed(startdatetobestatedpublicallybyASC).
• Wehavedecidednottofollowaningredientavailabilityapproachandsettimelinesforcompliance.Wethinkthatwaitingforvolumestobeavailabledoesprovideincentivetomaketheappropriatechanges.
ArjenRoemShrimpshouldnotbefed(farmed)shrimpofthesamespecies,fishshouldnotbefed(farmed)fishofthesamespecies,animalsshouldnotbefed(farmed)animalsofthesamespecies.Theseaquaticanimalseateachothertypicallyinnature,butintraspeciesfeedinginaquaculture/agricultureshouldbeavoidedforrisksofdiseasetransmissionandgeneralethics.WWF‐US7.1.1:Standardstobechangedasfollowing:CommerciallyavailabletobechangedbySADproposal:lessthan5yearsfollowingthedateofthepublicationoftheShADstandards
• TheGSCagreesandhaschangedthestandardsaccordingly.WilliamRashIfMSCiscurrentlytheonlymemberofISEALwhocancertifyfisheries,andcurrentlyonlyonefisheryisgoingthroughassessment,whatisthedefinitionof'commercialavailability'?
• Pleaseseetheaboveresponse.AldinHilbrandsCertificationcriteriashouldalsoincludethatthecertificationecolabellingschemecomplieswiththeFAOGuidelinesfortheEcolabellingofFishandFisheryProductsfromMarineCaptureFisheries(2005),seeftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/a0116t/a0116t00.pdf.ThemainargumentbeingthatISEALdoesaddresstheprocessnotthecontentofthestandard.
• Weagreewiththissuggestionandhaveaddedittothestandards.IngerNaslund
shouldthestandardsbesetto‐100%withinfiveyearsofcommercialavailabilityand50%withinthreeyears.
• Wehaverevisedoursourcingandinterimapproaches,butthinkthata3yearinterimphasewouldbehardtoauditandmaynotworkverywell.Asthesetargetedfisheriescomeonline,thereisanincentiveforthemtomoveinincrementalimprovements.
CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTUREThestandardcanreadas'100%within5yearsofcommercialavailabilitywithinthecountry'WWFGermanyWedowelcomeastringentandclearregulationonthetypeoffishmeal/fish‐oilsbeingused.Thestandardhowevershouldbemuchstricter,inordertosupportfisheriesintheirprocesstowardsbettermanagementandmoresustainablestocksandhaveASC‐certifiedproductsonthemarketwhichareincompliancewiththestandard
• WeagreewithyourcommentsandhavetriedtostructuretheShADstandardstoaddressyourconcern.Wewouldwelcomefurtherspecificsuggestionsastohowtodothis.ItisthehopeoftheShADthatthesestandardscreatethetypeofchangeyouhavementioned.
Thetermcommercialavailabilityneedssomeclarification:DoesthismeanthatiffishmealfromMSC‐certifiedsourcesarenotavailable,thingswillnotchangeandtheinterimsolution7.1.1a7.1.1.dwillapplyduringinfinitetimeline?InourviewtheASCneedstosupportfisheriesintheirprocessofimprovementby(a)communicatingacleardeadlineforcertifiedsourcesoffishmealandfish‐oiland(b)askingforimplementationofthiswithinarealistic,butchallengingtimeframe.AccordinglywedoproposefollowingIndicators:7.1.1.Overalltimeframetousecertifiedsources:5yearsfromthepublicationoftheShrimpstandard(forallproductsundertheASC).(=thisistheoveralldeadlineforallfeeds/producers/products)
• Wehaveremovedthecommercialavailabilitytermfromthestandardsandhaveidentifiedanewapproach.
Itisafactthattodaythereareconsiderablevolumeoffish‐by‐productsavailablefromMSC‐certifiedfisheries.Duetomissingmarketdemandsuchfishmeal'sarehowevernotsuppliedtofeedmanufacturersasspecificlabelledfishmealsforuseinsustainableaquafeeds.IftheASCisclearlyaskingfordoingso,therewouldbeademandforthisandtheindustrywouldcertainlyreacttoit.ASCcertifiedproductsmustbeincompliancewitharegulationonthisimportantaspectassoonaspossible,otherwisethereisnojustificationfortheASConthemarket.Thesourceofthemarinerawmaterialsisoneofthecentralpointsofsustainableaquacultureandconsumersdoexpectasolutionforthisproblemasap(notafter5yearsofcommercialavailability)
• Weagreeandhavechangedthestandardaccordingly.• Wearetryingtoavoidcreatinganichestandard.
7.1.1.InterimSolution:Thisinterimsolutionshouldapplyonlyaslongassustainablecertifiedfishmealsourcesarenotcommerciallyavailable(seeabove)orwithinthestatedoveralltimelineofyearsafterpublicationofthestandard
• Ifnecessary,thetimeperiodfortheinterimstandardscanbechanged,butitisimportanttocreateincentivesforchangewithinthestandards.Ifwedonot,concernsmayariseabout“greenwashing”andofferingcertificationwithoutsufficientenvironmentalandsocialperformance.
7.1.2
NewEnglandAquariumIsStandard7.1.2partofthefuturestandard?Howwoulda“sustainablesource”bedefined.Thismaytaketimetoimplement.Werecommendaddingthistothefuturerequirementandchangeto“By‐productfeedingredientsusedaresafe,unsuitableforhumanconsumption,notfromthesamegenusastheculturespecies.”Thecertifiedfeedsupplier(viathefarm)mustprovideacompletefeedingredientlistwithsourceinformationshowingallfeedingredientswhichmustbeindependentlyverifiedfortraceability(ISO65orabove)CPThailand7.1.2:Thephrase“unsuitableforhumanconsumption”istoobroadtobemeaningfulinthiscontext.Manyfishusedforfishmealandoilaretechnically“suitableforhumanconsumption”buthavelittleornodemandastheyaretoooily/bonyetc.WWF‐USThisIndicatoriswrittenwithlanguagethatistoovague.“Unsuitable”forhumanconsumption?“Sustainable”source?Thisisverydifficulttoauditsincemostinformationfromfeedmfgwillbegeneratedbystatement/disclosureletterssignedbyfeedmfg’s.Continuousimprovementisverydifficulttoshowusingthistypeoflanguage.Suggestedaction:Strike7.1.2.AldinHilbrandsIndicator7.1.2Thereisnodefinitiongivenofa"sustainablesource"fortheauditortoverify.SHADResponse
• Weagreewiththeconcernsnotedhereandhavemodifiedthestandardtoreadnoallowanceoffeedingredientsfrompenaeidshrimp.
7.1.3WWF‐USAllcommercialfeed,listtheiringredientsbyorderof%inclusionratesintheirformulations.Theyalsolisttheresultsofthefeedproximateanalysisonexternaltagslocatedonfeedbags.Dietformulationsareproprietaryformulasandarenotavailableforreviewbyfarmersorauditors.Suggestedaction:Removeformulaandreplacewithlistandprovidemorerationale
• Weagreeandhavechangedittoread“listofingredients.”WWFGermanyThefarm/feedsupplierneedstoprovideinformationonallingredientsfrommarinesources,notonlybelow5%(infactsomeshrimpmealscontainproductssuchassquidliveroils,squidmeals,fishmeals,fish‐oilsofteninrelativequantitiesofbelow5%,butthiscomponentsarethenadding‐uptooverallcontentsofmarineingredientsof2030%.
• Weagreeandhavechangedittoincludeallingredients>1%.7.1.1aWWFFranceInterimplanfor7.1doesnotstrikeusasapragmaticsolutionandwewouldliketosuggestthattheGSCstudythecombinationofIFFOstandardsandSFPscoringsystemasintermediatesolution
• Wehaveaddressedinthenewversionofthestandards.
WWF‐USThoughwearesensitivetowhatthisIndicatorisattemptingtoprevent,itdoesn’thaveacrediblewayforanauditortoascertainorjudgeitsvalidity.Thewayitiscurrentlywrittenleavestoomuchauthoritytotheauditorwhomaynotbeadequatelyskilledtomakethatjudgmentandthisrepresentsagreaterenvironmentalrisk.Suggestedaction:Strike7.1.1a.
• WeagreeandhaveaddedtheIFFOandFishsourceindicatorsandstandards.WehavemodifiedthestandardssothatifneitherofthosetwooptionsisavailableafarmermustcomplywiththeexistingShADinterimstandards.
WWFGermany7.1.1.a:Asinterimsolution,wedowelcometheproposedscheme7.1.1bWWF‐US7.1.1b:Suggestedaction:strike7.1.1bandincorporatethefollowingIndicators/Standards;“Priortoachievementof7.1.1,thepercentageoffisheriesproductsinfeedthathavebeensourcedfromfisheriescertifiedascompliantwiththeInternationalFishmealandFishoilOrganization(IFFO)globalstandardforResponsibleSourcing(RS)”.Standard:100%.And“Priortoachievementof7.1.1,theFishSourcescore,orequivalentscoreusingthesamemethodology,characterizingthefisheryfromwhichthefishmealorfishoil
• Pleaseseetheaboveresponse.7.1.1c–Thisindicatorandstandardhasbeendeletedinthe2ndpubliccommentdraftM.N.KuttyStockassessmentonalargerscaleisusuallyavailablethroughnationalinstitutionssuchastheCentralMarineFisheriesResearchInstitute(CMFRI)inIndiainformarinestocks.Incasethesearenotreadilyavailableasincaseofminorstocksifadequatelyimportantthenationalmonitoringinstitutionscouldberequestedtoassistinassessingthespecificstock/s.Incasesuchinstitutionsneedsupportappropriatemechanismsatinternationalshouldcomein.PerhapsFAO(WWForanyotherbody),whichusuallyreliesandscreensnationalinputdataitcollectsforregionalandglobalassessment,couldassistintheprocess.
• Thisisbeyondthescopeofthestandards.Incorporatingishsourceresultsinsomethingmoreobjective.
WWF‐US7.1.1c:ThoughwearesensitivetowhatthisIndicatorisattemptingtoprevent;itdoesn’thaveacrediblewayforanauditortoascertainorjudgeitsvalidity.Thewayitiscurrentlywrittenleavestoomuchauthoritytotheauditorwhomaynotbeadequatelyskilledtomakethatjudgment.“Peerreviewedbyindividualsoutsideoftheorganization”canintroducevariableresultsandcreateacredibilityliabilityintheimplementationprocess.Suggestedaction:Strike7.1.1c.
• Thishasbeenaddressedinthenewversionofthestandards.
7.1.1d‐Thisindicatorandstandardhasbeendeletedinthe2ndpubliccommentdraft
M.N.KuttyThisisanextensionofthesameissue.Inreportingareabasedproductionstatisticsspeciesabundanceandbiologychangesarereportedbycoordinatingnationalinstitutions.Dependingonthemagnitude/importanceofthestocksthesamemechanismsuggestedabovefor7.1.1ccouldbefollowedCPThailandWhatare“speciesinteractionissues”?WWF‐USThisIndicator/Standardisverysubjective,notperformancebased,anddifficulttoverifyinanaudit.Suggestedaction:Strike7.1.1d.EricDeMuylderDoesthismeanthatshrimpshouldnotbefedtoshrimp?ThenIwouldsuggestthatadifferenceismadebetweenpenaeidshrimpmeal(suborderdendrobranchiata)orproductsandmealsoriginatingfromothercrustaceans,includingshrimpfromthesuborderpleocyematawhicharealsocalledshrimporprawns(crangon,pandalus,macrobrachium)butareasclosetopenaeidshrimplikelobsterorcrabs.Theuseofhumanfoodfilletingwastefromenvironmentally‐preferablefisheriesoraquaculturefacilities.Allshrimpfeeds(alsoformonodon)canbeproducedtechnicallyandnutritionallywith100%fishmealcomingfromfilletingwaste.ThiswillNOTresultinhigherFCRorslowergrowth.Theonlyexceptioncouldbemadeforstarterfeeds(forexampleupto5g),becausedigestibilityoftheseproductscouldbelowerduetodoublecooking(tunameal).Themainproblemcouldbeavailabilityinsomecountries.Forexampleitwouldnotmakesensethatashrimpfeedmanufacturerhastoimportby‐productfishmealifthereisalocal(sustainable)supplyofotherfishmeal.Itmightbeinterestingthatfishmealshouldbesourcedfromlocalproductionpreferentially.WWFGermanyAsinterimsolution,wedowelcometheproposedschemeCriterion7.2–OriginandcontentofterrestrialfeedingredientsWWFFranceThebeliefthatitispossibletosimplyreplaceallorpartoffishmealbysoyflourdoesstrikeusasabitpremature.Itrisksdisplacingtheproblemofsearesourceoverexploitationtolandresourceoverexploitation.Numerousleadshaveyettobeexploredsuchasbioconversionandalgaeuse.
• Weagreeandaredoingourbesttoaddresstheresponsiblesourcingforalternativeingredientsinthestandards.WehaveincludedFFERandterrestrialingredientsourcingstandardsinanefforttohelpaddressthisconcern.
IngerNaslundISEALisagoodbasetostartfromasacceptedmostlyforcertifiedproducts.WWFGermanyInthisareawedonotseetheneedforindependentcertifiedsourcesforallplantrawmaterials,exceptforsomepotentiallyhazardouscropssuchassoyorpalmoil.Wedoproposetoputan
indicatorforsuchcropsonly• ISEALCompliancecoversbothsoyandpalmoil.Wewillputthosestandardsinthe
documentbeforecompletion.7.2.1WWF‐USThisshouldbeaddressedinthepreambleandthenthefollowingproposedindicatorbeconsideredbytheGSC:“Presenceandevidenceofaresponsiblesourcingpolicyforthefeedmanufacturersforfeedingredientswhichcomplywithinternationallyrecognizedmoratoriumsandlocallaws.Specifically,thepolicywillincludethatvegetableingredients,orproductsderivedfromvegetableingredients,mustnotcomefromAmazonBiomeasgeographicallydefinedbytheBrazilianSoyaMoratorium.Standard:Yes.”
• Wehavemodifiedthecurrentstandardsandrationaletoaddressthisconcern.
FlavioCorsinHowis"commercialavailability"defined?Suggestalsoaddingameasureofamountofingredientstobeavailable.
• Wehavemodifiedthestandardaccordingly.CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTUREThestandardcanreadas'Within5yearsofcommercialavailabilitywithinthecountry'
• Wehavemodifiedthestandardaccordingly.WWFGermanyWithin2yearsofcommercialavailabilityonly(5yearsistoolong).Inthisarea,wedonotproposeanoveralldeadline,sinceforsuchcrops,anISEALcompliantschemeisnotyetavailable(incomparisontotheMSCwhichisonthemarketsince10years).
• Wehavemodifiedthestandardsaccordingly.Pleasecommentonthenewversionofthestandards.
7.2.2WWF‐USAllcommercialfeedmanufacturerslisttheiringredientsbyorderof%inclusionratesintheirformulations.Theyalsolisttheresultsofthefeedproximateanalysisonexternaltagslocatedonfeedbags.Dietformulationsareproprietaryformulasandarenotavailableforreviewbyfarmersorauditors.Suggestedaction:Strike7.2.2.WWFGermanyAllplantingredientsmustbeknown(notonlyforcomponentsmorethan5%).
• TheShADhasclarifiedthelanguageandchangedtherequirementtoingredientsgreaterthan1%
7.2.1aNewEnglandAquariumThisshouldbeacurrentrequirementandshouldbekept
• Weagreeandhavemodifiedthestandardsaccordingly,asithasbeenmovedtothenewlycreated7.1.
CPThailandSurelytheplacetoaddresstheAmazonbiomeisinBrazildirectly,notthroughfarmstandardsforshrimp.Ifitisintendedtoreallymakeadifference,whynotspecificallytargetpoultryandswinefeedsthatuseBraziliansoybeanmeal.
• TheGSCrecognizesthechallengeposedbythisissue,butfeedingredientsareidentifiedasacriticalissueandmustbeaddressedtothegreatestextentpossiblebythestandards.
7.2.1bShADResponse
• WiththeexistenceoftheRTRSandResponsiblePalmOilstandards,theGSChasdecidedthatcontrollingforpesticidesisnolongernecessaryandhasremoveditfromthestandards.Webelievethatcompliancewiththeaforementionedstandardsshouldaddressthisissue.Iftherearereportsthatthisisnotthecase,futureversionsoftheShADstandardsdocumentmayrevisitthisissue.
WWF‐USThisIndicatorextendssignificantlypasttherealmofinfluenceofindividualfarmers.TheabilityforanauditortoascertaincompliancewiththisIndicator/Standardishighlysuspect.Suggestedaction:Strike7.2.1b.EricDeMuyldernopresenceofinsecticidesinrawmaterials.Thisdoesnotmeanthatthefarmercannotuse,butthereshouldbenoremainsintheendproduct.Thisissimilartowhenyouproducevegetablesforhumanconsumption.AldinHilbrandsThecurrentstandardshouldnotlookinto"PesticideUseinAgriculture"sincethisisaverycomplexareawhichisalreadyaddressedthroughfoodsafetystandards.ThereforeitissuggestedtorefertoGFSIrecognisedthird‐partyfoodsafetycertificationschemes(http://mygfsi.com/about‐gfsi/gfsi‐recognised‐schemes.html)thataddressthisissueatfarmlevel.CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTURETracingthechemicalandpesticideuseinagricultureingredientswillnotbepossibleatthepresentstageandonlyitcanbeinsistedthatthefeedshouldnotcontainanyresidueofheavymetalsandpesticides.Criterion7.3:UseofGMOingredientinfeed
• Sincethefirstpubliccommentperiod,theGSChasdecidedtoneitherbannorallowGMfeedingredientsinordertoaccommodatethemainmarketsforASCshrimpinAmericaandEurope.ThereremainssignificantdebateintheShADabouthowtoconsiderGMfeedingredientsinawaythatisacceptableforallofthestakeholders.PleaseseetheoptionscurrentlybeingdiscussedbytheGSCinthe2ndpublicdraft.TheGSCwelcomesfurtherfeedbackonallofthemoralternativeproposals.
NewEnglandAquariumAswrittencreatestherequirementofpondleveltraceabilityandseparationthroughoutthechainofcustody,asthisisonlyafarmlevelcertificationcanthisbeassured?Thisstandard,inadditionto7.2‐7.4,impliesthattheShADisproposingtobecomeanorganicstandard.Thisisdifferentfromotherstandards,suchasthetilapiastandard.Clarityisrequiredonthisissue.Additionallyterrestrialanimalbyproductsarenotallowedinfeedinsomecountries,thisshouldbeconsideredintermsofaglobalcertification.ArjenRoemFurthermore,theambitionistoreducethedependencyon(wild)marineresourcesintime.Thatmeansweneedtofeedshrimpothersustainableproteinfeedstuffsanditiscounterproductiveandunsustainabletoputunnecessaryrestrictionsonthosealternatives,asproposedin7.3and7.4TheuseofGMOrawmaterialsshouldnotbeblockedperse.Iamnotgoingtowritealothereonscientificprosandcons.WhentheseGMOrawmaterialsareapprovedandallowedinfoods,theycancertainlybeapprovedforanimalfeed.Transparencyisneededandclearlabellingistherightapproach:whenyouuseGMOrawmaterialsyouhavetoputthisonthefeedlabel.WilliamRashWhatisthepracticabilityandavailabilityoffeedmillsbeingabletosourcemaize,soyaandotherimplicatedingredientswith100%assurancethattheingredientsareGMOfree?Accredited'identitypersevered'(IP)proceduresofthesupplychainneedtobeinplace;andonsuchinternationallytradedingredientsthepracticalityofachievingthisisextremelydifficultifnotimpossible.DallasWeaverAnyrestrictionsonGMOinfeedindicatesaflawed,selfinterestedprocess,whoseintentiscommercialadvantage,notsustainablefoodproduction.Asyouknowomega3fattyacidsforaquacultureareinlimitedsupply(yourfishmealissue)andthatincludesshrimpdiets.Monsantoisreleasingthissummerahighomega‐3strainofhighoilproductionsoybeanandthisisjustthebeginning.ThiswasaccomplishedusingGMOtechnologytoshiftfromomega‐6toomega‐3pathways.Therewillbeanother3billionpeopleonthisplanetinthenext40yearsandtheywillbericherandwanttoeatmeat.Wewillneedtheimprovementinfoodconversionthatwecangetbygoingfrompigsandchickentoaquaticorganisms.Shrimpcanbecomethenewchicken,ifyoudon'tkilltheindustrywithsenselessandirrelevantthingslikerestrictionsonGMO.KennethBoyceFairtradehasaclearnon‐GMOpolicysoourfeedbackfavoursthe0%option.Asanindustryalreadyundercriticismforenvironmentalandsocialproblemscausedbyitsoperation,shrimpfarmersshouldbeencouragedtoimprovenotonlytheirfarmingmethodsbutalsotheeffectoftheirsourcingpolicies.ThisisanareawhereprogresscriteriamaybeusefultoallowproducerstransitionfromdependenceonGMObasedfeedtonon‐GMOfeedsasisthecaseelsewhereinthestandardforsourcingofISEALcertifiedfishmeal.Thiswouldbeespeciallyrelevantforsmallproducerswhowouldhavedifficultychangingtheirsourcingplansandinfluencinglocalfeedmillstoprovidethemwithnon‐GMOfeed.WWFSweden
NOGMOacceptedIfeedofanykind!!7.3.1
WWFFranceInaddition,thedevelopmentofGMOs(GeneticallyModifiedOrganisms),theimpactsonhumanhealthandtheenvironmentofwhichareverypoorlydocumented,alreadyraisesacertainnumberofproblems:- infavouringasmallquantityofspecies,theycontributetothedeclineofdomestic
biodiversity;- theiruseentailsanincreaseintheuseofpesticides(80%ofcommercialisedGMOshave
beencreatedtoberesistanttoherbicide–plantsareknowntodevelopresistancetochemicalproducts;
- theydeprivefarmerstheworldoverofthepossibilitytofreelydisposeoftheseedsneededfortheircropsinremainingmanufacturerproperty.
ItisforthatreasonthatWWFFrancecallsforabanontheuseofGMOplants.Inthespecificcaseofsustainablycertifiedproducts,theuseofproductsstemmingformGMOcropsmustneedsbebanished.CPThailandAgainIdonotseethisasanythingtodowithfarmingstandards;itisbeingdrivenbyotheragendas.Thisisanideologicalstancethatisatoddswiththeavailablescientificevidence,especiallywhenstatedasablanketban.However,again,thishasnoplaceinafarmstandard.WWF‐USWWF‐USrecognizesthattheissueoftheincorporationofGMOornotinfeedformulationsishighlycontroversial.Wealsorecognizethespiritedandcredibleongoingdebateonbothsidesofthisissue.WWF‐USdoesnotendorsetheuseofGMObutalsodoesnotbelievethattheAquacultureDialoguesshouldbetechnologicallybiased.TheDialoguesshouldremaintechnologicallyneutral.Therearemultipleissuesinvolvedinthisdebate.WWF‐USrecognizesthatalmost80%ofglobalsoybeanmealproductionisfromGMOsources.Thereisanadditional5‐10%ofglobalnon‐GMOsoybeanthatisstoredand/ortransportedinconditionsthatallowforcross‐contaminationwithGMOproductandwouldeffectivelyprecludecompliancewithanon‐GMOstandard.Additionally,withtropicalaquaculturecommodityspeciesfeedmfgmanufacturing;thereislittleavailabilityofnon‐GMOingredientsavailable.Fromanethicalperspective,WWF‐USbelievesthatinthemedium‐term,foodproductionneedstoproducemorewithless.Iftheglobalpopulationistoincreaseby50%in30‐years,wewillneedtoproducemorefoodwithlesstoensurethedevelopingworldhasaccesstosufficientnutrition.WWF‐USrecognizesthatcertainnorthernEuropeanaquaculturespeciesmayhaveaccesstonon‐GMOvegetableproteinfeedstuffsintheircommercialdietformulations,butthemajorityofglobaltropicalfarmedproductwillbeexcludedcompliance.TomandatetherequirementorstipulatethelabelingofGMOuseinproductpackagingmaterialwillimplyexcessivelyonerouscostandtraceabilityrequirementstocompliance.However,theuseofGMOinfeedingredientsanditssubsequentuseinproductionshouldberecordedintheauditorguidanceandchecklistreportswhichwillbeultimatelyavailabletothestandardlabeluser,“retailer”whichcanthenascertainordemandfromitssupplychainto‐useGMOorotherwise.Thedecisiontodisclosethisinformationtoconsumersisadecisionofthe“retailer”.Theinformationwillbeavailableinauditorreportsbutnotmessagedpublicly.Thisproposalis
consistentwiththeTADandPADstandardsandwillpromotetheconceptofcross‐cuttingalignmentofsimilarissueswithmultiplespecies.Suggestedaction:(e)GMOallowed,withtheidentificationofGMOuseintheauditreportandthisreportisavailabletotheretailertomakecommercialdecision.EricDeMuylderForproteinmeals:GMOfree(whichmeanslessthan0,9%).Foroils/lecithin:doesn'tmatter,thereisnoDNAinthisproductanditwouldbeverydifficult(impossible)tomakefeedswithoutGMOLecithinTherearehoweverenoughalternativesforGMOsoybeanmealtoproducegoodqualityfeeds,suchasrapeseed/canola,sunflower,peanut,cottonseedetc.AldinHilbrandsOptionbispreferredbecauseofthedifferenttrade‐offsandconsumerpreferences,itisuptothemarketorlegalprovisionstodeterminewhatispreferred.ButtheinformationarounditsusemustbedisplayedsothattheconsumercanusethisinformationinthebuyingdecisionmadewhenshoppingforASCshrimp.FlavioCorsinSuggestadoptingoption(a)asthiswouldbefeasibleandwouldbeinlinewithadoptingaprecautionaryapproach.Dr.A.G.PonniahGMOinfeedmaybepermittedwithproperlabelindicatingthelevelofinclusion.WWFGermanyIftheASCwantstohavecredibilityandsuccessontheEUmarket,thereissimplynowayforGMOinfeedstuffsItisthestrongpositionofmanyretailersandimporterspartneringwithWWFinEuropethatNon‐GMOpolicyisexpectedforASCproducts.IfASCisallowinguseofGMO,manymarketpartnerswillnotgoforthiscertificationschemeandthereforeriskingthedesiredmarketimpactoftheASCinEurope(thisisspecificallyforimportantmarketslikeGermany,UK,Switzerland,UK,theNetherlands,FranceandScandinavia).WethereforevoteverystronglyfortheoptionofnonGMOfeedstuffsundertheASC(=option(a)withinthelegislationlimitsonGMOdetectionandresiduesbytheEUlaw)BelizeShrimpGrowersNon‐GMOfeedsarenotavailabletotheBelizeanmarket(oranyCentralAmericanmarket)withoutaminimumofa20%increaseinmarketpriceoftheproduct.Thismark‐upwouldmaketheShADeconomicallyimpossibletofollow.CarlosPerez?IhaveaclearpositiononGMOfeedingredients.TheavailabilityofTRUE!!!NONGMOingredientsisverylimitedandwhenREALtremendouslyexpensivetherebyguaranteeinganichestandardforWWF.IpointoutthatincasesoforganicacuaculturetheprofitincentivetotradeinNONGMOwhichisGMOinvariousinstancesisgreatthereforedelinquencyisrampant.DNAprofilingisavailableaspolicingtoolbutnotpracticalforvolumeaquaculturesupplychainonlymaybeforniche.WeasproducersthinkthatGMOtechnologyonlyaccelerateswhatalreadyhappensinnature(DNAmodificationsandmutations(whichinsomecasesitsfavorable)‐Whenincreasingcapacityoftheorganismtosurviveornegativewhenorganismdies
duetodisturbanceofcontrolofvitalprocess.ThemanipulationofDNAposesreducedornorisktoorganismswhichconsumeit;dailyweconsumeDNA(food)whichmighthaveamutation,changeinDNAwithnoconsequenceforourhealth.IfweeatfishweeatitsDNAanditdoesnotaffectusevenifitistransformedornot.TherearetwotypesofGMOthoseinwhichaforeignDNAmaterialhasbeeninserted(ex:fishgenesputintopotatoDNA)orthesameDNA(potatogenesfromcoldareas‐Alaska‐hasbeeninsertedintopotatoDNAfromEcuador).OneofthemainfearsfromGMOinthefieldisthepossibilitythattheconstructusedtoinsertDNAtoanorganismmaybeusedbythehostorotherorganismstouse/transferDNAsucharesistance/susceptibilitytopesticides,antibiotics,etc.NeverthelesstheriskislowconsideringthatspecificconditionsarerequiredinordertoinsertDNAtoacellandlaterpropagate.ConcernsofGMOinacuaculture‐TheuseofGMOingredientsinshrimpfeeddoesnotposeahumanhealthconcern.ShrimpfeedacuacultureingredientswhicharesubjectofGMtechnology(soy,wheat,cornetc)priortohumanconsumptionhavetopassthroughseveralphases.Firstfeedpreparation.Laterthefeedwillbesubjectedtodigestionwhentheshrimpconsumesitandwilltransformitintomuscle/tissue.Theconsumptionoftheseshrimpshouldnotposeanyrisktohumans.IftheconcernoftheuseofGMOingredientsinshrimpfeedsisanenvironmentalconcern,itisnotrealistictothinkthatbanningorlimitingtheuseofGMOinagriculturalingredientsisasolutionsincethereisnotenoughnonGMOagriculturalproductsavailabletocovertheneedsforshrimpfeedsoranyaquaculturefeed.GMOshrimpuptomyknowledgedonotexistsincethereisnotenoughknowledgeofshrimpgeneticsorDNAtoproducethem.Followupmessageonnumeral2.1.13willsendtomorrowalongwithothernumeralswhereihaveconcerns.Yourinitialdraftisthemostcompleteaquaculturedraftihaveeverseen.Criterion7.4:UseoflandanimalbyproductinfeedWWFFranceConcerningtheuseoflandanimalsflour(7.4.1),itdoesnotseemappropriateforustogiveprioritytothesetechnologiesinthefaceofsustainableconsumptionpatternsorthequestfornewproteinsourcespresentingneitherethicalnorfoodsecurityproblems.ArjenRoemlikewisefortheuseofLandanimalprotein(LAP).Itshouldnotbeblockedperse.Itisinlinewith7.1.2topromotetheuseoffishandmeatindustrybyproductsnotsuitableforhumanconsumptioninanimalfeedprovidedthosebyproductsarefoodandfeedsafe.UsingLAPcontributestosustainability.Fortransparency,ofcoursedeclareonthelabelwhathasbeenusedinthefeedintermsofLAPsoranykindofrawmaterialforthatmatter.Whatissafe?Modernmeatprocessingplantswithdedicatedlinesperanimalspeciesordedicatedplantsperanimalspecieswithpropercollectionandheattreatmentwhereneeded.Ingeneral,bloodmeals,feathermeals,poultrymeals,pigmealscanbesafe.ForruminantmealsspecialattentionisneededforTSE‐screening.'MarketingshrimpwithlabelslikefedGMO‐freeorLAP‐freedietsareshorttermopportunitiesandnotsustainableadverts.'DallasWeaverThisissueshouldbeirrelevanttoyourobjectivesofsustainability.Thiswholesubjectshouldbedeleted.Bykeepingitinthediscussion,youagainindicatethattheagendaisnotsustainability.Feathersarebestusedasaproteinsourcenotasfertilizer,ifwewanttofeedthehumanpopulation.
AldinHilbrandsThepreferredoptionise)becauseinourviewthisismarketandregulations(legalcompliance)drivenshoulditshouldonlybelabelledwhenitisacustomerrequirementoralegalrequirement.Andthisinformationiswaytoodifficultforaconsumertodigestanywaysolabellingwillnothelpbutonlyconfusethem.IngerNaslundNOlandanimalby‐productsinfeedcanbeusedunlesswearetalkingaboutinsectsasfeedproduction.WWFGermanyInordertousenaturalresourcesmoreefficiently,wedoproposetoallowanimalbasedby‐productsunderfollowingconditions:(a)safemanufacturingprocess(b)noresiduesofchemicals/therapeutics(c)nofood‐safetyriskandotherhazardsinvolved(d)productsmustbefromknownandapprovedoriginandfullytraceableBelizeWhymustfeedingredientsbeunsuitableforhumanconsumption?Mostingredientsaresuitableforhumanconsumptioninsomeformandthiswouldprecludethingslikesoy,fishandothers.Veryfewingredientsinshrimpfeedarenotappropriateforhumanconsumptioninsomeform.Astandardthatdoesnotallowforuseofthoseingredientscannotbefollowedaswritten.Itisnotapparentwhylandanimalby‐productsshouldnotbeusedinshrimpfeed.7.4.1ShADResponse
• ThereremainsdebateontheGSCastowhetherornotstandardsthatmandatelabelingfortheinclusionofLandAnimalByproductsshouldbeincluded.Thekeyquestioniswhetherornotitisimportantfortheuseoflandanimalbyproductstobeexpresseddowntotheconsumerlevel.SomeGSCmembersthinkitisimportanttobetransparentforpeoplebuyingecocertifiedproduct.Furthermore,shrimpdonoteatthesetypesofnutrientsinnature,whichisalsoaconcernforsomeGSCmembers.ThereisafurtherconcernaboutwhatindustriestheShADshouldbepromotingwiththestandards,assomeGSCmembersbelievethatlandanimalbyproductsshouldbepromotedwhileothersfeelthattheyshouldnotbepromotedoveralternativessuchasinsects,algae,etc.Finally,theissueofwhetherornottheproductionofthesefeedingredientscreatesenoughenvironmentaland/orsocialimpactsforconsiderationundertheShADhasyettoberesolved.TheGSCwelcomesopinionsorsuggestionsonalloftheseissues.CPThailandSeeabovenoteonISEALcomplianceandactiveinvolvementofdirectstakeholdersfromthefeedandfeedingredientssectors.WWF‐USShrimpareopportunisticanddetritivoresintheirnaturalhabitatsoWWF‐USdoesnotseetherelevanceofthisIndicator/Standard.Theuseofterrestrialanimalbyproductwillreducethe
dependencyonmarineproductingredientfeedstuffs.Webelievethatthisstandardisinconflictwiththemorerelevantenvironmentalissueofreducingdependencyonwildfisheries.Suggestedaction:Strike7.4.1orincorporatethisproposedoption(c)Landanimalbyproductsallowed,butnolabeling.WilliamRashTheUKretailtradewillnotaccepttheuseoflandanimalbyproductsinfishfeed.EricDeMuylderLandanimalproducts.Allthoughtheseproductscomefromconventionallyproducedlivestock,theirre‐useincreasesthesustainabilityofbothindustries.Ithinktehsameruleshouldapplyasforpesticideuse:notracesofantibiotics(orhormones)shouldbepresentintheby‐products.Idon'tthinkthereshouldbeadifferenceforblood,feathers,bonesetc.Butonethingwhichisimportantisthat100%ofby‐productmealshouldcomefromanimalsslaughteredforhumanconsumption.Thismeansthatfallenstockfromfarmsorothercadaversshouldnotbeincludedinthemeal.Iftherenderingfactorydoesn'tseparate,thentheirproductsshouldnotbeused.Thehealthriskisofcoursetobig.Thereasiningbehindthiswouldbe:ifthemeatisfitforhumanconsumption,thentheby‐productshouldbefitforshrimpfeeds.ImustcommentthatIamconsultantforSonac,whichisarenderingcompany,whichincreasesmyknowledgeonthematter,butdecreasesmyobjectivity.Other(oftenforgotten)rawmaterialssuchaswormmealorinsectmealshouldnotbeconsideredasanimalproteins.Theseproductsshouldbepromoted,aswellassinglecellproteins(yeast,bacteria,algaeandfunghi),whichareoftenproducedinaverysustainablematter.CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTURELandanimalbyproductscanbepermittedinfeedwithproperlabel.(AtpresentIndianregulationsprohibittheuseoflandanimalbyproductinfeedandthiswouldbefeasibleonlywhenthisisrelaxed.)Criterion7.5:UseofwildfishforfishmealandoilShADResponse
• WerecognizethatthisisadifficultissueandtheShADisdoingitsbesttofindabalanced,precautionarystartingpoint.
• Weexpectthistobeimprovedwithtimeandtomovetogreaterefficiency.• WethinkthatFFERisusefulbecauseitisaperformancemetricthatcanbeusedtotrack
progressovertime.Inaddition,efficientuseofresourcesisrisinginimportanceasasustainabilityissueandthisisacorereasonwhytheShADincludesFFER.
• WehavechangedthecalculationstoincludetheuseofbyproductsIngerNaslundUseofwildcaughtfishfeedformproofedsustainablemanagedfisheriesonly.Isthefishfeedequivalenceratiosetforfullfeedornot?Thisisnotdefined.FlavioCorsinWearepuzzledonhowthesestandardswereset.Theyappearfartoopermissive.Forexample,lookingattheVietnamshrimpindustryasawhole(i.e.notatindividualfarms)theFCRwouldbe
around1.5andtheFFERforfishmealandfishoilwouldbebothataround1.1.Thiswouldmeanthatifthesefiguresweretobeusedasstandards,about50%ofthefarmerswouldbeincompliance.SinceVietnamisthetopmonodonproduceranditadoptsavarietyoffarmingsystemscommonalsotoothertopmonodonproducingcountries,wesuggesttolowerthestandardsbasedonactualdatacollectedglobally(assuggestedinthegeneralcomments)andtobeattheverylistFFER<1.1andeFCR<1.5WWFGermany Wedowelcometohaveanefficiency‐parameterintheShADstandardforuseandconversionoffishmealandfishoilintoharvestableshrimpHoweverwedoquestioniftheFFERshouldnotincludeallfishmealandfish‐oils,independentonitsorigin(reductionfisheriesorprocessingby‐products).IfFFERisonlytakingforagefisheryproductsintotheequation,thenthereisnoefficiencythresholdinplaceforfishmeal/fishoilconversionfromprocessingby‐products.Suchby‐productsarestillvaluableproteinswhichcanbeusedbyvariousmeans.Sinceaquacultureisonlyoneoptionundervarious,soundandefficientuseofthisresourceshouldbepromotedbytheShADIftheFFERisnotincludingprocessingby‐products(ascurrentlyproposedinthedraft),wedoseethepotentialforp.vannameitohaveanFFERbelow1.Thisisfeasibleforadvancedproducers.ForBlackTigershrimp,theproposedFFERof1.5willputalimittothesizeofharvestableshrimp,whichiso.k.TheproposedeFCRistoohighinourview:ThisindicatorisbasedonfarmingofBlackTigerinsemi‐intensiveproductionforaharvestsizeof3035g.Forvannamei,thisistoohigh.WedoproposetohavetwospeciesspecificeFCRstandards.Forvannamei,wedoproposeaneFCRof1.7.7.5.1NewEnglandAquariumAtthispointtheFFERofL.vannameitomeet1:1iseasierthanP.monodontomeet1.5:1WWF‐USagreedwithnewstandardsformonodon:1.2.EricDeMuylderOthermarinemealslikesquidmealshouldbeaddedtothewildcaughtfish.IfonlywildcaughtmarineanimalsarecountedthentheFFERcouldbelessthan0,5forvannameiandlessthan1forallotherspecies(Iwoulddefinelikethisinsteadofonlymonodon,thisavoidsdifficultiestocertifyotherspecies).monodoncanbefarmedwithafeedcontaining15%fishmealfromwildcatch(orevenless).SowithanFCRof2,thiswillresultinanFFERofabout0.9.AldinHilbrandsThisindicatorshouldbedeletedbecauseaslongasthefishmealandoilcomefromawell‐managedresource,themarketwilldeterminewhereitgoesandthisisallthatmatters,CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTUREReductionoffishmealinfeedisaddressinorganicstandards.Thiswouldresultincaponproductionandhenceneednotbeincluded.
7.5.2CPThailandAgainhowisthisaveraged;overthefarm;byharvestetc.IpersonallyfindaeFCRwhichbythewayforshrimpisthesameasFCRtoridiculouslyhigh.NofarmisgoingtomakeprofittodaywithanFCRof2.5andwithgoodfeedsandfeedmanagementshouldbemuchlowerthanthis.Absolutely100%correct.FCRisessentialasthisis(inafarmstandard)issomethingthatisunderthedirectcontrolofthefarmer.AnFCR(noneedforeFCRinthecaseofshrimp)representingthetop20%producerswouldhavetobebasedonAsianproducer’sperformance.UsingtheFrenchOfficialOrganicShrimpABRegulationCC‐REPAB‐Fpublished13.2.2007underEUOrganicRegulationn°834‐2007)isneithertypicalforthenon‐organicproductionofshrimp,noranexampleofindustry“bestpractice”.
• WehaveremovedthereferencetothosedocumentsandhavereducedtheFCRstandardto2.1atamaximum,althoughthereisstillsignificantdebateonhowtosetthetargetforthisandforFFER.
WWF‐USSuggestedaction:Strike7.5.2.Althoughwebelieveitisredundant,iftheGSCchoosestokeepthisindicator,wewouldproposetobreakupassuch:vannamei:1.7andmonodon:2.1
• Currently,theGSCbelievesthatthereisstillvalueinhavingthisstandard,althoughthereissignificantdiscussionastohowtohandleit.
DallasWeaverShouldanFCRstandardbeincludedintheShADstandardsdocument?Ifso,whatshouldtherationalebeforsettingtheappropriatelimit?TheoverallFCRisafunctionoftheingredients.Intheory,IcouldmakeazeroproteindietjustprovidingfatandcarbstotheshrimpdirectlyandaddingNPKfertilizertothepondandgrowingbiomassassuspendedsolids(heterotrophicorODAStypeculturesystem)toproducetheproteinintheformofbacterialcells(biofloc).TheoverallFCRcouldbefairlyhighasyouhavetoprovidethechemicalenergytodrivethemicrobiologicalfoodchain.Mostoftheshrimpproductionareasoftheworldareinthetropics.Intheseareas,growinghighproteincropsrequiresdefendingthosecropsagainstinsectswhichhavebeenplayingchemicalwarfaregamesformillionsofyearsandaregoodatit.AddingNPKfertilizertothesoilisrapidlylosttohighrainfallandaddstoenvironmentalpollution.However,thesesameareascanproducecellulosewithverylittleNPK,becausetheinsectscan'tdirectlyeatcellulose.ThiscellulosecanbecombinedNPKfertilizerandcouldproduceashrimpfeedinthepondoroutsidethepond(infermeters),buttheoverallFCRwouldbepoorrelativetoahighprotein,highenergydiet.However,thecost,environmentalimpact,andsustainabilitywouldbefarsuperiorandstillbetterthancowsfedcelluloseandNPK(yesthatalsoworks).TheFFERdiscussionisalsoirrelevant.Fishmealisjustanotherproteinsourceforthelinearprogrammingmodelsusedtoconstructshrimpdiets.ThesimplemindednessoftheFFERconceptisapparentwhenonethinksaboutwildshrimpandfish,whatistheirFFERinthe7to10rangeifyoucountallthelivefoodthattheyconsume.Wildanimalshavetocatchtheirdinnerandthattakesenergy.Thisisjustanotherorthogonalissuebroughtupbytheactiviststotryandpreventaquacultureandraisefunds.Itisnotrelevantscience.Youcanmake100%
nonfishmealdiets,buttheyaremoreexpensive.Itisallaboutcostandcompetition,notscience.Ifyoueliminatedallfishmealfromallaquaticdietswithaworldwidelaw,theproductionoffishmealandharvestofwildfishwouldn'tchange,thefishmealwouldsimplygobackintochickendiets.Giventhisreality,FFERisjustscientificnonsenseandshouldbejustifiedinthisdocument.
• Thanksforyourcomments.However,theGSCdoesnotshareyourposition,therefore,boththeFCRandFFERstandardscurrentlyremaininthedocumentbecauseefficiencyisidentifiedasacriticalissue.
EricDeMuylderFCR<2Ithinkthisisessentialinsustainablefarming.AlowFCRwillnotonlycontributetobetterutilisationofresourcesbutalsodecreaseeffluentload,reduceenergyforpumpingandaerationetc.ThisisthewaythesalmonfarmingwasabletoreduceitsFCRtobelow1,onlybecausetheindustrywasforcedtodoit.Ofcoursethiswillforcefarmerstoinvestinhigherqualityfeedsandfeedatlowerfeedingrates.Overfeedinghasbeenthemainprobleminshrimpfarmingsincemanyyears(andstillis).Onlybyforcingfarmerstoimproveontheirperformancethementalitywillchange.FarmersnotabletoachieveanFCRbelow2willbeforcedtoreducestockingandbiomassdensity,usingmorethenaturalproductionofthepond,whichalsoincreasesthesustainabilityoftheindustry.Ialso(similarlytothesalmonindustry)believethatalowertargetshouldbesetforthefuture,forexample<1.8within5years,1.6within10yearsorsooner,sincethisisachievableandhasalreadybeenprovennow.
• WehavedroppedtheFCRstandardto2.1orlowerandwelcomefurtherinputonthisissue.
AldinHilbrandsFCRshouldbedeletedtoobecausefarmerswilldotheirbesttooptimiseuseoffeedanywaybecauseitdirectlyaffectsprofitability.Andagain,appropriatemanagementoftheresourcesthatdelivertherawmaterialsismoreimportant
• TheGSCisstilldecidingonthisissuebutcurrentlybelievesthatFCRmustbepartofthestandards.
MarkNijhofIampleasedtoseethebalanceddiscussionofimplementingaFCRatall.Pleaseremindthatthisisnotreally‘auditable’;theauditorhastorelyentirelyontheintegrityofthefarmerhere.Only‘goodfeedingpractises’arereallyauditable;notFCR’s.FCR’sarealsohighlyaffectedbythesourceofnon‐proteinenergyinthefeed.Ifthisislipids(39KJ/g)orcarbohydrates(17kJ/g)makesatremendousdifferenceinFCR,althoughbio‐energetically,thesameefficiencymaybeachievedwhilehavingverydifferentFCR’s.However,inordertocontinuethe‘massbalanceapproach’ofdeterminingphosphorusandnitrogenoutput,FCR’sremainnecessary.IwouldthereforenotsetamaximumforFCRandleavetheuseoffertilizerfree,becausefertilizerisenvironmentallyspokenequivalenttofeed.MysuggestionistoallowanyFCRand/oruseoffertilizer,butsticktotheN,Pandorganicmaterreleasepertonneofshrimpproduced.Seefurtherunder7.6.4
• WehavemodifiedtheFCRto<1.7forvannemeiand<1.5–2.1formonodonbecausethisseemstostrikeagoodbalancebetweentheopinionsexpressedbythepublicandtheGSC.However,theGSCisstilldebatingexactlyhowtoobjectivelysetthetargetandwelcomesfeedbackonthisissue.
Criterion7.6:EffluentcontaminantloadWilliamRashCriterion7.6:Standardshouldincludesludgedisposal
• Weidentifiedsludgedisposalasanimportantenvironmentalriskandhaveaddresseditunderindicators2.2.6,2.2.7and7.6.3.Wehavedecidedtoclarifythispointfurtherthroughanewindicator(7.6.4)basedontheformerindicator2.2.6,whichwasremovedfromCriteria2.2.
IngerNaslundTheeffluentonnitrogenandphosphorusshouldbeminimizedasmuchaspossibleandreductionshouldbeinefficient"cleaning"systems.Ofcoursethishastobeinrelationtotheleastpossibleaffectionofthesurroundingenvironment.
• Thereisanobligationinthestandardstotreateffluentsfromintensiveponds(indicator7.6.3)tocontroltheconcentrationofsettleablesolids.Studieshaveshownastrongcorrelationbetweentheremovalofsettleablesolidsandthereductioninotherpollutants,includingnitrogenandphosphorus.
CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTUREItwillbeeasiertomonitorifthestandardsaddressthenutrientloadinwastewaterratherthanthisroundaboutwaywhichincludesanumberofassumedvalues.Hencethedevelopmentofqualitystandardsfordischargewatercaninsteadbeintroduced.
• Nutrientloadmeasurementswouldbeideal,butareextremelychallengingforshrimpfarmerstoperform,especiallysmallholdersbecause:‐ Itrequiresanextensivewatersamplingprotocoltotakeintoaccountthedifferent
periodsofwaterrelease(routinewaterrenewal,harvest)andrelatedwatercomposition(verydifferentdependingonactivityandtimeofharvest).
‐ Thecostofwateranalyseswouldbedifficulttoassumeformanysmallholders,whichcouldresultfromunfairlyexcludingthemfromcertification.Theaccesstoalaboratorycouldalsobeachallengeinsomeareas.
‐ Anaccurateestimationofvolumesofwaterreleasedisusuallydifficultbecauseofperiodicwaterexchange,partialrecyclingofwaterandthemethodofreleasingwaterfromfarmsbysimplyopeningagate.
‐ Asaresult,wepreferredtousestandardsbasedoncalculationsfromdatathatiseasilyaccessibletoallfarmers(feedandfertilizercomposition)ratherthanexpensivemeasurementsthatweknowdonotnecessarilyaccuratelyreflectthenutrientload.
PageNo.69Lastpera‐1stline:TSSTotalsuspendedsolidswronglymentionedastotalsettleablesolids.
• Youarecorrectandthismistakewascorrectedinthelatestversionofthestandards.BelizeItiscounter‐intuitivetousesettleablesoildsasastandardfromaeratedpondsratherthanTSS(orpreferablyashfreedryweight).Focusingonthetreatableportionoftheeffluentavoidsthe
realissueofeffluent,withistheirimpactsthatescapetreatment.Byfocusingontreatableratherthantotalsolidsandontheeffluentfrompondsratherthantheaggregateeffluentdownstreamfromtreatment,thestandardcompletelyfailstoaddresstheactualimpactsoffarmoperationortheactualinfluenceofsettlingpondsandothermitigations.Thisstandardshouldberestructuredtoaddressashfreedryweightofaggregateeffluentsfromsettlingpondsdownstreamofeffluenttreatment.
• Itistheintentionofthisindicatortofocusonthetreatablefractionofthesolidsbecausethislimitof3.3mL/Lwouldimplyanobligationtohaveatreatmentinplaceforcomplianceinthecaseofintensive,aeratedponds.Therefore,inpractice,itwouldapplytowaters"downstreamofeffluenttreatment".However,inordertoclarifythispoint,wehaveintroducedanewindicatorthatspecificallyrequiresthetreatmentofeffluentsfromaeratedponds.SSarethemostenvironmentallyharmfulfractionoftheTSS,soitseemslogicaltofocusonthatparameter.Additionally,TSSisdifficulttomeasureforshrimpfarmers.Expensiveequipmentisrequiredandanalysiscanonlybedoneinlaboratories,whicharenotavailableinallproducingcountries.However,SSmeasuresareinexpensiveandcanbeeasilyperformedonanyfarm.Thisallowsformoreintensive,meaningfulandverifiablemonitoringofeffluentwater.
WWFMalaysiaThedilutionfactorofthewaterwayswheretheeffluentisdischargedintoshouldbetakenintoconsideration.Thisisespeciallyimportantinareaswheretherearedistinctrainyanddryseasons.Inthedryseasons,thedilutionfactoroftheriverwillbelessandmightnotbeabletodilutethesameamountofpollutionloadasduringtherainyseasons.
• Weagreethatthedilutionfactorisakeyparametertoconsiderfordeterminingtheassimilationcapacityofthereceivingwaterbody.Unfortunately,afterconsultingtheliteratureandscientistswithexperienceinassimilation(orcarrying)capacityofcoastalwatersandestuaries,wecametotheconclusionthatthereisnosimpleandaccuratewayofevaluatingsuchaparameter.Therefore,weidentifiedtheconcentrationofdissolvedoxygenasthebestalternativebecauseitwillindicateiftheassimilationcapacityofawaterbodyhasorhasnotbeenpassed.Itisalsomoreeasilymeasuredbyfarmers.
7.6.1CPThailandIhaverunthroughsomecalculationswiththeverybestperformanceinAsianfarms;andnonecanpassthisstandard.Wheredidthisnumbercomefrom?MaybeIcalculatedwrong;butmyfarmshaveFCRof1.3,1%waterexchange,nofertilization,andafeedproteinlevelof32%.WhenIcalculateforaproductionof800tonsofshrimponmyfarmtheresultis24kgsN/tonofproduction.PlayingwiththenumberseitherIwillrequireaverageFCRbelow1.1orlowermyproteinleveltolessthan25%,whichispresentlyprohibitedbyThaiFisheries.Andlookingatthisveryhypotheticalcalculation;whatifthefarmislined;thereiszerouptakebysediments;andIknowfromactualmeasurementsofdenitrificationonthefarmthatIraninBelizethatgaseouslossescanbegreaterthanafactorof0.2.Andtomatchthiswith7.5.2willafarmthathasanfcrof2.4everachievethisnitrogenstandard
• Thecalculationforthecaseexposedisasfollows(Formula3):EffluentN=((800*1.3*.0512)+0)‐(800*0.0286)‐((53.248*0.25)+(53.248*0.2))0.95)/(800/1000)=(53.248‐22.88‐22.76)/0.8=9.5kgN/tonofshrimp.
• Theassumptionsarebasedonstudiesmadeusingearthenponds,therefore,itistruethatthesameassumptionsaboutbottomsoiluptakemaynotapplytolinedponds.
• Consequently,weproposeageneralizationofthebaseformula:• EffluentN=(FeedN+FertilizerN)–ShrimpN‐WasteNremovedorrecycled
WilliamRashWhatistherationalebehindthefigures?
• Thisisdetailedintherationaleandguidancesections.ThestandardwasdeterminedbasedonanefficientintensivecultureofP.vannameiwithFCR15:1for35%‐proteinfeed,nofertilizerand0%waterexchange.Thecalculationfor1000kgofshrimpproduced(Formula3):EffluentN=(((1000*1.5*.056)+0)‐28.6‐((84*0.25)+(84*.2))1)/1000=(84‐28.6‐21‐16.8)/1000=17.6kgN/tonofshrimp.
DallasWeaverInterestingthatyouclaim10%volatilizationoftheammonia.ThatcouldonlybetrueinhighpH,highammoniasystems.Youneedlesssimplemindedsciencetounderstandtheseproblems.
• Thisisanapproximationbasedonstudiesdoneonoutdoor,earthenaquacultureponds.Studiesdoneinshrimppondsdonotdifferentiatethedifferentformsofatmosphericlosses.Studiesdoneatstockingdensitiesof7to72shrimp/m2(hencecoveringmostoftherangeofshrimpculturepracticedworldwide)indicateatmosphericlossesbetween23and32%oftotalnitrogeninputs.Therefore,byassuming10%denitrificationand10%ammoniavolatilization,weadoptedaratherconservativepositionthatmaximizesthepotentialdischargethrougheffluentwater,henceprovidinganincentivetoreducewaterexchange.
• Consideringthat:o theformulaappeareddifficulttoapply,o someassumptionscouldresultinasignificantlevelofinaccuracyforsome
farms,henceresultinginunfaircomparisons,• Weproposeasimplifiedindicatorbasedonparametersthatcanallbemeasured,or
calculatedbasedonestimationsthatwouldnotintroduceunfairbiases.
Amountofnitrogenorphosphorousreleasedfromtheculturesystempertonofshrimpproduced(kg/tonofshrimp)=QuantityofN/Pinputsfromfeedsandfertilizers–QuantityofN/Premovedthroughshrimpharvest–QuantityofN/Premovedthroughsludgeorbiomassextraction–QuantityofN/Precycledthroughwaterrecirculation.
FeedN/P(kg)=(kgFeed1applied)x(%N/PFeed1content)+(kgFeed2applied)x(%N/PFeed2content)+etc.
FertilizerN/P(kg)=(kgFertilizer1applied)x(%N/PFertilizer1content)+(kgFertilizer2applied)x(%N/PFertilizer2content)+etc.
ShrimpN/P(kg)=(kgShrimpharvested)x(%N/PShrimpcontent) SludgeorbiomassN/P=kgdrymaterialx(%N/Pcontent) WaterNrecycled=TotalN/Pconcentrationxvolumeofwaterreused.7.6.2None7.6.3
None7.6.4M.N.Kutty35%airsaturationwhenundefinedcanchangefromabout3.5ppmto2ppmdependingontemperaturefrom20to35C!(ItisworthnotingthattheDOsaturationgoesdownwithincreaseintemperaturethemetabolicratesincreaseleadingtofasterdepletionofavailableDO)Toreachthiscumulativevalueinthereceivingwaterstheeffluentsfromasinglefarmorseveral–assumingmorearelocatedintheperiphery‐someindividualfarmeffluentDOcouldbequitelow,muchlowerthanthecriticalvalue/sdependingonthespecies.Thedefinitionsofspecificeffluentvaluesforindividualspeciesrestricttheotherspeciesuse.Thisisalsoawrongapproachifcumulativeeffectsofotherwaterusersarenottakenintoconsideration–apparentlythestandardswillworkforisolatedlargeenterprisescapableofeffectingthestandards,butnotforsmallfarmersinthemajorshrimpproducingcountriesinAsia.AsinthecaseofotherstandardsinthissectionitmightbebettertobaseonDOlevelinthespecificfarmeffluents,thoughtheoverallbenefitofacumulativeDOvalue,perhapsalsoBOD,inthereceivingwaterisaclearadvantage.NewEnglandAquarium35%saturationistoolow.MarkNijhofIsthebetterfarmingpractices,theeffluentisdischargedinstreamingwaterbodies.Inthatcase,anychangeinDOvaluesatthepositionofthefarmisnotattributedtothefarmobviously.ThisisalsoclearlyrecognizedbytheShAD.AnadditionalaspectisthatthedropinDOiscausedbymicrobialactivityusingtheBODassubstrate,therebyhavingaconsiderabletimelag!IwouldthereforenotencouragetheuseofthisDOparameterandsuggestanothermethod.Similartotheretentionefficiencyofphosphorusandnitrogen,theretentionoforganicsubstance(expressedforinstanceasitsoxygenequivalent,CODvalues)canbedeterminedandusedsimilarly.SeeattachedacopyofthefirstpagesofanarticleofmeinJournalofAppliedIchthyology(1994).Youcoulduse1,25,2,90and1,07gramoxygenpergramofprotein,fatandcarbohydratesrespectivelytoassesstheuseof‘organicmatter’inanaquacultureenterpriseinviewofenvironmentalaspects.However,youwillstillrequireFCR’stodoso.
• WeagreethatDOconcentrationofreceivingwaterbodiesdoesnotnecessarilyresultfromtheimpactofthefarmonly.YoursuggestionthatorganicloadsexpressedasCODcouldbeusedinsteadisatotallydifferentapproachthat,inthecontextofshrimpfarming,isnotdirectlyrelatedtotheactualimpactofafarm.Themethodyousuggestisbasedontheassumptionthattheoxygendemandisadirectfunctionoftheamountandthecompositionoffeeds(andotherorganicmatters)applied.But,inreality,partofthisoxygendemandiscoveredbyoxygensuppliedtoorproducedinthepond,andinintensivefarmingotherpartsareremovedwithsedimentafterharvestandthrougheffluentwatertreatment.Therefore,theactualimpactofanyfarmonthereceivingwaterbodythroughoxygendemandisnotdirectlyrelatedtotheamountoffeedapplied.Becausethereisnoeasywayofmeasuringtheimpactofasinglefarmonareceivingwaterbody,wehavetakenthisapproachofconsideringthecurrentoxygenconditionofthereceivingwaterbody.Evenifitresultsfromanumberofother
parametersandhumanactivities,theShADhasconsideredthatcertifiedfarmsshouldnotbelocatedonwatersystemsthathavebeenpassedassimilativecapacity.
• BODisusedtoassesspotentialforeffluentstocauseharmtotheenvironment.The
effluentvolumeandBOD5concentrationcanbeusedtocalculatetheBODloadthataparticulareffluentsourcewillimposeonawaterbody.However,nobasisexistsforrelatingBOD5insamplesfromawaterbodytotheassimilativecapacityofthatwaterbody.WeconcludedthatDOistheonlypracticalparameter,asitiseasyaninexpensivetomeasureandalsoiseasytointerpret.
• Weacknowledgethat35%saturationcouldresultinverylowconcentrationsathigh
temperatureandhighsalinity.Themostcharacteristicfeatureofeutrophicationiswide,daily,excursionsindissolvedoxygenconcentrationresultingfromthelargeabundanceofalgaeandothermicroorganisms.Therefore,weproposetousethesameindicatorasTADandPAD:Percentagechangeindiurnaldissolvedoxygen(DO)ofreceivingwatersrelativetoDOatsaturationforthewater'sspecificsalinityandtemperature<=65%.
• ExceptionswillbemadeforfarmsthatdischargewaterwithTNandTPlowerthantheTN
andTPofthereceivingwaterbodyrespectivelyorhavenotdischargedanywatersincethelastaudit(orforthelast12monthsinthecaseofthefirstaudit),thankstotheuseofrecirculationtechniques.
Criterion7.7:EnergyefficiencyWilliamRashCarbonfootprint/energydistinctionshouldbeinplacethatidentifiesdifferentoperatingmodels‐Tidalwaterexchange,waterpumpingexchange,aerationetc.CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTUREVerymuchessentialforintensivefarmingsystemsWWFGermanyWedowelcomethefutureincorporationofenergyefficiencystandardsintotheShADbasedondataavailablefromauditedfarms.Wedoproposetoincorporatealsothefeedascomponentforenergyefficiency/carbonemissions,sincethefeedisamajorcontributortooverallcarbonfootprintoffarmedshrimp7.7.1None7.7.2WWF‐USAgreedandcheckunitMJorkJ.Criterion7.8:HandlinganddisposalofhazardousmaterialsandwastesWWF‐USWWFUSwouldliketoseesomealignmentwithotherdialoguestandardsandwesuggestionrephrasingthe6indicatorsthatareprescriptivewiththefollowing2:
• Presenceandevidenceofafunctionalpolicyforproperandresponsibletreatmentandstorageofnonbiologicalwastefromproduction(disposalandrecycling);standards:yes
• Evidencethatallnonbiologicalwastefromgrowoutsiteisstoredanddisposedofproperlyand/orrecycled;standards:yes
• Thesesuggestionsdonotcoverstorageandhandlingofhazardousmaterials(priortotheiruse)andbiologicalwastes.Itispossibletousethesetypesofindicatorsbuttheguidancewouldneedtobedetailedenoughastoclearlydefineresponsiblemanagement.
MarkNijhoflubricantsaretoalargeextentbeingusedandneedrefilling(e.ggreasingbearings).Recovering(asusedengineoilinacar)issurelynotalwayspossible!‐Idon’tthinkthatlandfilltodisposewastesisagoodoptionanywhere.Besides,theverdictofwhatis‘non‐hazardousandnon‐recyclable’saysmoreaboutthedecisionmakerthenaboutthegarbagemostly.IwouldsuggestthatALLwastesaredisposedinatransparentwaybyarecognizedcompany.‐Wastehandlingcompaniesmightbecertified(e.g.ISO14000),butnot‘accredited’asismentionedhere.
• Werevisedthestandardssothattherequirementistorecyclewhereverpossible.• Wastemanagementcompaniesarenotavailableinmanyshrimpfarmingareas.
IngerNaslundAllwasteandespeciallyhazardousmaterialshouldbedisposedinanappropriatewaywithassuranceofnonleakageintothenaturalenvironment.Allwastehandlingshouldberecordedandforthehazardouswasteasecuredmanagementsystemshouldbeshownbeforecertification.Companieshandlinghazardousmaterialshouldbeaccreditedforthis.
• Weagreewiththeseconsiderationsandhavedoneourbesttoincorporatethemintheguidancesection.
FlavioCorsinProvidethedefinitionof"bund"StandardsinthiscriterionarelargelyimpracticalinmanyAsiancountries,whereaccreditedwastemanagementcompaniesarelargelyunavailableorprohibitivelyexpensive.Suggestremovingthesestandardsandreplacethemwitharequestforevidencethatspecificsolidwastes(tobedefined)havebeendischargedinthenaturalenvironment(tobedefined)
• Abundisdefinedasawaterproofwallandfloorbuiltaroundtanksofoilorotherhazardousliquidstocontainthemintheeventofaspill.
• Weacknowledgethatwastemanagementcompaniesmightnotbeavailableinallareas,sowehavereviewedthestandardstoincludemoreflexibilityfortheauditortoconsideralternativeactionsavailableoneachsite.
CENTRALINSTITUTEOFBRACKISHWATERAQUACULTUREAccreditedwastemanagementcompanymaynotbeavailableinallthecountriesandhenceothersafemodesofdisposalmayhavetobeconsidered.Pleasemakethecommentsboxarealargerandmoreuserfriendly.
• Weagreeandrevisedthestandardsaccordingly.WWFGermany
Besideshavingquantifiableindicatorsandstandardsforpropermanagementandhandlingofhazardousmaterialsandwaste,ifmaybereasonabletoincludesomeBMP'swiththisregards,sincethesuggestedindicatorsarenotyetcoveringallpotentialhazardousareasofconcernAdditionalindicatorsshouldinclude:Propersitingandmanagementofburningsitesonthefarm,disposalofashesfromburningsite(mostoftensuchashesisbeingwashedintosoilsandwaterwhichisbothanenvironmentalandfood‐safetyhazard),properdisposalofoldanddamagedmachineryandequipment,oldenginesandbatteries,plasticandnon‐biodegradablematerialsthataredisposedinthesurroundingareasoffarms,propercoverageandpreventionofleaking/erosion/washingofoilandgreaseintothesoilandwaterbymachineryonthefarm(e.g.diesel‐poweredaerators,pumps,wells,trucks,building‐machinesetc.(e.g.coveringofalldieselpoweredenginestoprotectfromrain),leakageofoilfrommachineryintothesoilandwater
• TheShADisseekingtosetperformancestandardstothegreatestextentpossibleandhavedevelopedthestandardswiththisinmind.
7.8.1WWF‐USpresenceandevidenceofafunctionalpolicyforaproperandresponsibletreatmentandstorageofnonbiologicalwastefromproduction(disposalandrecycling)Standards:yes7.8.2WWF‐USEvidencethatallnonbiologicalwastefromgrowoutsiteisstoredanddisposedproperlyandorrecycled.Standards:yes7.8.3M.N.KuttyThisisnottrueformanyfarmsinSFcountriesinAsiawherethefarmaresmallandoftenclustered.Butsmallerstockingdensitiesadvocatedandregulatedthroughfarmers’societiesnowreducetheeffluentloadinreceivingwaters–thisshouldbegivenconsideration(seealsorelatedcomments).Itwouldappearthatconsiderationforsmallfarmershavenotbeengivenadequately.
• Wehavesimplifiedthestandardrequirementsandhopethatthishasaddressedtheseconcerns.WeunderstandtheconcernsaboutsmallholdersandareworkingonsolutionswiththeASC.
7.8.4None7.8.5None7.8.6None
