Peruvian Calico Scallop

Peruvian Calico Scallop Argopecten purpuratus Image Scandinavian Fishing Yearbook Peru, Sechura Bay Diver caught March 14, 2016 Matthew Cieri, Independent Research Analyst Disclaimer: Seafood Watch strives to have all Seafood Reports reviewed for accuracy and completeness by external scientists with expertise in ecology, fisheries science and aquaculture. Scientific review, however, does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch program or its recommendations on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report.

2 About Seafood Watch Monterey Bay Aquarium s Seafood Watch program evaluates the ecological sustainability of wild-caught and farmed seafood commonly found in the United States marketplace. Seafood Watch defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether wild-caught or farmed, which can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Seafood Watch makes its science-based recommendations available to the public in the form of regional pocket guides that can be downloaded from www.seafoodwatch.org. The program s goals are to raise awareness of important ocean conservation issues and empower seafood consumers and businesses to make choices for healthy oceans. Each sustainability recommendation on the regional pocket guides is supported by a Seafood Report. Each report synthesizes and analyzes the most current ecological, fisheries and ecosystem science on a species, then evaluates this information against the program s conservation ethic to arrive at a recommendation of Best Choices, Good Alternatives or Avoid. The detailed evaluation methodology is available upon request. In producing the Seafood Reports, Seafood Watch seeks out research published in academic, peer-reviewed journals whenever possible. Other sources of information include government technical publications, fishery management plans and supporting documents, and other scientific reviews of ecological sustainability. Seafood Watch Research Analysts also communicate regularly with ecologists, fisheries and aquaculture scientists, and members of industry and conservation organizations when evaluating fisheries and aquaculture practices. Capture fisheries and aquaculture practices are highly dynamic; as the scientific information on each species changes, Seafood Watch s sustainability recommendations and the underlying Seafood Reports will be updated to reflect these changes. Parties interested in capture fisheries, aquaculture practices and the sustainability of ocean ecosystems are welcome to use Seafood Reports in any way they find useful. For more information about Seafood Watch and Seafood Reports, please contact the Seafood Watch program at Monterey Bay Aquarium by calling 1-877-229-9990.

3 Guiding Principles Seafood Watch defines sustainable seafood as originating from sources, whether fished 1 or farmed, that can maintain or increase production in the long-term without jeopardizing the structure or function of affected ecosystems. Based on this principle, Seafood Watch had developed four sustainability criteria for evaluating wild-catch fisheries for consumers and businesses. These criteria are: How does fishing affect the species under assessment? How does the fishing affect other, target and non-target species? How effective is the fishery s management? How does the fishing affect habitats and the stability of the ecosystem? Each criterion includes: Factors to evaluate and score Guidelines for integrating these factors to produce a numerical score and rating Once a rating has been assigned to each criterion, we develop an overall recommendation. Criteria ratings and the overall recommendation are color coded to correspond to the categories on the Seafood Watch pocket guide and the Safina Center s online guide: Best Choice/Green: Are well managed and caught in ways that cause little harm to habitats or other wildlife. Good Alternative/Yellow: Buy, but be aware there are concerns with how they re caught. Avoid/Red: Take a pass on these for now. These items are overfished or caught in ways that harm other marine life or the environment. 1 Fish is used throughout this document to refer to finfish, shellfish and other invertebrates.

4 Summary This report evaluates the ecological sustainability of the Peruvian calico scallop (Argopecten purpuratus) fishery. In particular, we focus this report on scallops that are fished in Sechura Bay in the northern section of Peru. Historically, commercial fishing has primarily been concentrated in southern Peru, but in recent years fishing has been concentrated to the north in Sechura Bay as well as the bays of Mejillones and Rinconada in northern Chile. The Peruvian calico scallop fishery is deemed by Seafood Watch to be inherently resilient to fishing pressure due to their low age at first maturity (1 2 years); high growth coefficient (0.22 2.10); high fecundity; and lack of non-fishery-related habitat impacts. The Peruvian calico scallop was not a substantial fishery in Sechura Bay until the early 1990s. The status of the Peruvian calico scallop stocks is deemed by Seafood Watch a moderate conservation concern because several primary factors are unknown and scallop stocks are considered fully fished. Generally, the Peruvian calico scallop population size is highly dependent on El Niño Southern Oscillations (ENSO) events and the severity of El Niño. The relationship between population abundance and B MSY is unknown. There are uncertainties regarding age/size structure and long-term population trends, which are highly variable due to El Niño events and unregulated fishing pressure. Seafood Watch deems bycatch to be a minimal conservation concern for the Peruvian calico scallop fishery. Scallops are handpicked by divers, which is a highly selective fishing method resulting in no or minimal bycatch. Seafood Watch deems the Peruvian calico scallop fishery to have benign ecosystem impacts. Scallops are caught by divers, resulting in no benthic habitat damage. In addition, there are no indications of ecosystem impacts from the removal of scallops; it has been demonstrated that scallop populations and other associated benthic species are affected more from climatic and oceanographic conditions caused by ENSO events than by the scallop fishery. Management of the Peruvian calico scallop is deemed by Seafood Watch to be a high conservation concern. Of particular concern are the lack of a government response to shifts in scallop population size and the lack of protection from overharvest given that adult scallops are allowed to be harvested until they are depleted. In addition, there are concerns with the lack of formal stock assessments, biological reference points, the few regulations on scallop fisheries, and a general lack of enforcement of regulations. Because of the lack of management, reference points, stock assessment, regulations, and enforcement, the Peruvian calico scallop receives an overall recommendation of Avoid.

5 Table of Conservation Concerns and Overall Recommendations Stock / Fishery Calico scallop Peru Sechura Bay - Diver Impacts on the Stock Impacts on other Spp. Management Habitat and Ecosystem Overall Recommendation Yellow (2.64) Green (5.00) Red (1.00) Green (4.47) Avoid (2.773) Scoring Guide Scores range from zero to five where zero indicates very poor performance and five indicates the fishing operations have no significant impact. Final Score = geometric mean of the four Scores (Criterion 1, Criterion 2, Criterion 3, Criterion 4). Best Choice/Green = Final Score >3.2, and no Red Criteria, and no Critical scores Good Alternative/Yellow = Final score >2.2, and neither Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) nor Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) are Very High Concern 1, and no more than one Red Criterion, and no Critical scores, and does not meet the criteria for Best Choice (above) Avoid/Red = Final Score <=2.2, or either Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern, or two or more Red Criteria, or one or more Critical scores. 1 Because effective management is an essential component of sustainable fisheries, Seafood Watch issues an Avoid recommendation for any fishery scored as a Very High Concern for either factor under Management (Criterion 3).

6 Table of Contents About Seafood Watch... 2 Guiding Principles... 3 Summary... 4 Assessment... 11 Criterion 1: Stock for which you want a recommendation... 11 Criterion 2: Impacts on Other Species... 16 Criterion 3: Management effectiveness... 17 Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem... 22 Acknowledgements... 25 References... 26

7 Introduction Scope of the analysis and ensuing recommendation The Peruvian calico scallop is a commercially important member of the family Pectinidae found throughout Peru. In southern Peru, biomass and landings increase greatly during El Niño events (the warm-water phase of ENSO events) and then subsequently decline to low levels. During the El Niño events in southern Peru, spawning is more intense and prolonged throughout the year, whereas in northern Peru (including Sechura Bay) the opposite occurs (Avendano et al. 2007) (IMARPE 2008) (Wolff et al. 2007). Historically, fishing for the Peruvian calico scallop was primarily concentrated in a large bay in southern Peru, but that population is now depleted. In recent years, increased fishing effort has moved to Northern Peru where populations appear to be increasing as a result of restocking efforts in these bays. The bays of Mejillones and Rinconada in northern Chile are also important areas.sechura Bay is the most important harvest area of the Peruvian calico scallop, but other bays include bays of Mejillones del Sur, La Rinconada, and Independencia. Sechura is also one of the largest bays in western South America, extending 89 kilometers (km) north to south, and is located at the northern extension of the Peruvian upwelling system, where ENSO events cause some of the most extreme environmental variability in Peru (Taylor et al. 2008) (Figure 1, Figure 2). Figure 1. Map of Sechura Bay. Figure from Taylor et al. 2008.

8 Figure 2. Annual catch, sea surface temperature, and river discharge in Sechura Bay 1982 2003. The large El Niño event in 1997 1998 is reflected as high river discharge, subsequent flooding, and decreased scallop landings. Figure from Badjeck et al. 2009. Sechura Bay is a shallow bay with water depths not exceeding 30 meters (m) at 10 km from shore (Taylor et al. 2008). Sechura Bay is characterized as a transition zone between cold waters from the south (Humboldt Current) and warmer tropical equatorial waters from the north. During normal upwelling conditions, Sechura Bay has high primary productivity, high nutrients, and warm water conditions (when compared to higher latitudes) (Taylor et al. 2008). During El Niño events the transition zone shifts southward, waters temperatures rise, nutrient levels decrease, and flooding occurs, which may cause higher mortality rates on scallops due to sedimentation (Taylor et al. 2008). Scallop populations in Sechura Bay have shown a significant negative correlation between riverine discharge induced mortality (caused by sedimentation) and commercial catch levels (Taylor et al. 2008) (Badjeck et al. 2009). The scallop fisheries in Sechura Bay and elsewhere are carried out by divers who hand select scallops with no bycatch or habitat damage recorded. The fishery in Sechura Bay did not develop fully until the early 1990s, when demand for export scallops increased and diving techniques were introduced to the region (Taylor et al. 2008). From 1994 to 1997, there were approximately 500 boats commercially diving for scallops in Sechura Bay (Taylor et al. 2008). Fishers often migrate to the bays that are currently the most productive. In the past, commercial fishing has primarily been concentrated in Independence Bay in southern Peru (Wolff et al. 2007) (Mendo et al. 2008). In recent years, fishing has been concentrated in the north in Sechura Bay (Mendo et al. 2008). The Peruvian calico scallop population size is highly dependent on ENSO events and the severity of El

9 Niño (Taylor et al. 2008) (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Mendo et al. 2008). It has been suggested that management of this fishery needs to account for wide fluctuations in scallop biomass (which are affected by highly fluctuating oceanographic and atmospheric conditions) by managing scallop resources to avoid a boom-and-bust scenario (Taylor et al. 2008) (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Mendo et al. 2008). In Peru, adult scallops (> 65 mm) are allowed to be harvested until depletion, leaving stocks at low levels until the next boom in the cycle (Mendo et al. 2008). Overfishing has been shown to occur when populations expand, causing them to subsequently decline to low levels (Wolff et al. 2007) (Mendo et al. 2008). Research on the Peruvian institutional responses to fluctuations in stock biomass indicates that they are slow to respond to the high variability in scallop stock (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Figure 3). Figure 3. Institutional responses to disturbance on scallop populations over time in two regions (a) Pisco, which has been fished since the beginning of the scallop fishery in the 1950s; and (b) Sechura Bay, which has had an active scallop fishery since the 1990s. Shaded areas represent a disturbance, white areas represent response to the disturbance, and dashed lines represent fishermen migration to scallop fishing grounds. Figure from Badjeck et al. 2009. Currently there is a restocking program for scallops to try to enhance degraded populations (Mendo et al. 2008).

10 Overview of the species and management bodies The Peruvian calico scallop is a fast-growing, short-lived marine bivalve found in shallow waters (5 40 m) along the coast of Peru and Chile from Paita, Peru (5 S) to Valparaiso, Chile (33.0 S) (IMARPE 2008), a distance of approximately 3,700 km. Peruvian calico scallop abundance and landings are highly variable and correlated with El Niño Southern Oscillations cycles (ENSO). Production statistics The only scallop harvested commercially in Peru is the calico scallop, which is both collected from the wild (22,178 metric tons (MT) in 2013) and farmed (67,694 MT in 2013). In 2011 Peru exported over 10,000 MT of scallops valued at USD 136 million. Scallops were exported to Chile, Holland, Spain, Belgium, the United States, and France (FAO 2014). Importance to the U.S./North American market In 2014, the United States imported 3,000 MT of Peruvian scallops valued at USD 33 million. Peru ranks fourth behind China, Japan, and Canada for U.S. imports of scallops (NMFS 2015). It is unknown what proportion of the U.S. imports are wild caught vs. farm raised. Common and market names Peruvian Bay Scallop, Sea Scallop, Chilean Scallop, Fan Scallop Primary product forms Primarily frozen, but also fresh

11 Assessment This section assesses the sustainability of the fishery(s) relative to the Seafood Watch Criteria for Fisheries, available at http://www.seafoodwatch.org. Criterion 1: Stock for which you want a recommendation This criterion evaluates the impact of fishing mortality on the species, given its current abundance. The inherent vulnerability to fishing rating influences how abundance is scored, when abundance is unknown. The final Criterion 1 score is determined by taking the geometric mean of the abundance and fishing mortality scores. The Criterion 1 rating is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern Rating is Critical if Factor 1.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Critical. Criterion 1 Summary CALICO SCALLOP Region / Method Peru Sechura Bay Diver Inherent Stock Status Vulnerability 3.00: Low 3.00: Moderate Concern Fishing Mortality 2.33: Moderate Concern Subscore Yellow (2.644) The status of the Peruvian calico scallop stock is deemed by Seafood Watch to be a moderate conservation concern because several primary factors are unknown. The stock is considered fully fished, but it is unknown if overfishing is currently occurring. The relationship between population abundance and B MSY is unknown. There are also uncertainties regarding age/size structure, and population trends are highly variable due to unregulated fishing pressure and El Nino events. In addition, scallops are fished until they are locally depleted and there are no reference points established for the fishery.

12 Criterion 1 Assessment CALICO SCALLOP Factor 1.1 - Inherent Vulnerability Scoring Guidelines Low The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 0-35, OR species exhibits life history characteristics that make it resilient to fishing, (e.g., early maturing ( Medium The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 36-55, OR species exhibits life history characteristics that make it neither particularly vulnerable nor resilient to fishing, (e.g., moderate age at sexual maturity (5-15 years), moderate maximum age (10-25 years), moderate maximum size, and middle of food chain). High The FishBase vulnerability score for species is 56-100, OR species exhibits life history characteristics that make is particularly vulnerable to fishing, (e.g., long-lived (>25 years), late maturing (>15 years), low reproduction rate, large body size, and top-predator). Note: The FishBase vulnerability scores is an index of the inherent vulnerability of marine fishes to fishing based on life history parameters: maximum length, age at first maturity, longevity, growth rate, natural mortality rate, fecundity, spatial behaviors (e.g., schooling, aggregating for breeding, or consistently returning to the same sites for feeding or reproduction) and geographic range. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Low Although the intrinsic rate of increase for the Peruvian calico scallop and maximum age are not known, sexual maturity is reached in 12 18 months at 65 mm (Badjeck et al. 2009) and the species is thought to be short lived (Wolff et al. 2007). Growth varies with region and environmental conditions (e.g., ENSO cycles), ranging from 0.22 to 2.10 (Stotz & Gonzalez 1997) (Wolff & Mendo 2000) (Wolff 1987) (Yamashiro & Mendo 1988). During El Niño events, growth tends to be about three times faster than during normal years, as measured using the von Bertalanffy growth constant k (Tarazona et al. 2007) (Wolff & Mendo 2000). Peruvian calico scallops are hermaphrodites (IMARPE 2008). Reproduction occurs by broadcast spawning, whereby eggs and sperm are released into the water where fertilization occurs externally. Spawning occurs year round, but is highest between September and May (Avendano et al. 2008) (Wolff 1988).

13 Factor 1.2 - Stock Status Scoring Guidelines 5 (Very Low Concern) Strong evidence exists that the population is above target abundance level (e.g., biomass at maximum sustainable yield, BMSY) or near virgin biomass. 4 (Low Concern) Population may be below target abundance level, but it is considered not overfished 3 (Moderate Concern) Abundance level is unknown and the species has a low or medium inherent vulnerability to fishing. 2 (High Concern) Population is overfished, depleted, or a species of concern, OR abundance is unknown and the species has a high inherent vulnerability to fishing. 1 (Very High Concern) Population is listed as threatened or endangered. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Moderate Concern There are no established biological reference points for the Peruvian calico scallop. Landings and abundance data are closely correlated and fluctuate with El Niño Southern Oscillation cycles (Mendo et al. 2008) (Wolff et al. 2007). For Sechura Bay, biomass data are available from 1995 to 2007 (Figure 4). Scallop abundance tends to be higher during normal upwelling years and low following El Niño events (Mendo et al. 2008). Following the 1997 1998 El Niño event, biomass declined to low levels. From 2001 to 2003 biomass again increased, reaching 8,000 10,000 metric tons (MT). But biomass subsequently declined, likely as a result of high fishing pressure (Mendo et al. 2008). In Sechura Bay, biomass declined between 2002 and 2006, but has since increased to 52,000 tons in 2009 (IMARPE 2009). The biomass increase in recent years in Sechura Bay is likely a result of scallop restocking efforts (Mendo et al. 2008). In Samanco Bay and El Dorado Bank, densities per meter squared were high between 2005 and 2009, but have been almost zero between 2010 and 2012 (IMARPE 2014). Rationale: Figure 4. Biomass of Peruvian calico scallops in Sechura Bay (blue line), 1995 2007. Figure from Mendo et al. 2008.

14 Factor 1.3 - Fishing Mortality Scoring Guidelines 5 (Very Low Concern) Highly likely that fishing mortality is below a sustainable level (e.g., below fishing mortality at maximum sustainable yield, FMSY), OR fishery does not target species and its contribution to the mortality of species is negligible ( 5% of a sustainable level of fishing mortality). 3.67 (Low Concern) Probable (>50%) chance that fishing mortality is at or below a sustainable level, but some uncertainty exists, OR fishery does not target species and does not adversely affect species, but its contribution to mortality is not negligible, OR fishing mortality is unknown, but the population is healthy and the species has a low susceptibility to the fishery (low chance of being caught). 2.33 (Moderate Concern) Fishing mortality is fluctuating around sustainable levels, OR fishing mortality is unknown and species has a moderate-high susceptibility to the fishery and, if species is depleted, reasonable management is in place. 1 (High Concern) Overfishing is occurring, but management is in place to curtail overfishing, OR fishing mortality is unknown, species is depleted, and no management is in place. 0 (Critical) Overfishing is known to be occurring and no reasonable management is in place to curtail overfishing. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Moderate Concern The Peruvian calico scallop fishery was characterized as fully fished in the mid-1990s (IMARPE and ITP 1996). Since then, landings in Peru jumped significantly to over 90,000 tons but have since declined (Figure 5: (FAO 2015)). Recent high landings are most likely due to the restocking efforts and enhanced recruitment. This has been followed by lower abundance as a result of the 2009 2010 El Niño event (pers. comm., Yamashiro 2011) and fishing. In general, when scallop populations proliferate, the adults are fished until the point of depletion, so it is possible that current biomass has now declined substantially due to intense fishing pressure. Population assessments to determine the current biomass have not been conducted since 2009. The Peruvian calico scallop has not been listed as overfished, but it should be noted that overfishing occurs on scallop populations when their abundance peaks (Mendo et al. 2008) (Wolff et al. 2007).

15 Rationale: Figure 5. Landings of Peruvian calico scallops, 1950 2013. Data from FAO 2015.

16 Criterion 2: Impacts on Other Species All main retained and bycatch species in the fishery are evaluated in the same way as the species under assessment were evaluated in Criterion 1. Seafood Watch defines bycatch as all fisheries-related mortality or injury to species other than the retained catch. Examples include discards, endangered or threatened species catch, and ghost fishing. To determine the final Criterion 2 score, the score for the lowest scoring retained/bycatch species is multiplied by the discard rate score (ranges from 0-1), which evaluates the amount of non-retained catch (discards) and bait use relative to the retained catch. The Criterion 2 rating is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern Rating is Critical if Factor 2.3 (Fishing Mortality) is Critical. Criterion 2 Summary Calico scallop: Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Subscore:: 5.000 Discard Rate: 1.00 C2 Rate: 5.000 Species Inherent Vulnerability Stock Status CALICO SCALLOP Low 3.00: Moderate Concern Fishing Mortality 2.33: Moderate Concern Subscore Yellow 2.644 Seafood Watch deems bycatch, discards, and bait usage to be a minimal conservation concern for the Peruvian calico scallop fishery. Scallops are handpicked by divers, a highly selective fishing method resulting in no or minimal bycatch. Criterion 2 Assessment Factor 2.4 - Discard Rate United States Mid Atlantic, Trawl, Bottom <20% There are no bycatch concerns for the Peruvian calico scallop fishery (pers. comm., Yamashiro 2011). The fishery is highly selective, with divers handpicking scallops, resulting in no bycatch of non-target species.

17 Criterion 3: Management effectiveness Management is separated into management of retained species (harvest strategy) and management of non-retained species (bycatch strategy). The final score for this criterion is the geometric mean of the two scores. The Criterion 3 rating is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score <=2.2 or either the Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) or Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) is Very High Concern = Red or High Concern Rating is Critical if either or both of Harvest Strategy (Factor 3.1) and Bycatch Management Strategy (Factor 3.2) ratings are Critical. Criterion 3 Summary Region / Method Management of Retained Species Management of Non-Retained Species Overall Recommendation Peru Sechura Bay Diver 1.000 All Species Retained Red (1.000) Factor 3.1: Harvest Strategy Scoring Guidelines Seven subfactors are evaluated: Management Strategy, Recovery of Species of Concern, Scientific Research/Monitoring, Following of Scientific Advice, Enforcement of Regulations, Management Track Record, and Inclusion of Stakeholders. Each is rated as ineffective, moderately effective, or highly effective. 5 (Very Low Concern) Rated as highly effective for all seven subfactors considered. 4 (Low Concern) Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern rated highly effective and all other subfactors rated at least moderately effective. 3 (Moderate Concern) All subfactors rated at least moderately effective. 2 (High Concern) At minimum, meets standards for moderately effective for Management Strategy and Recovery of Species of Concern, but at least one other subfactor rated ineffective. 1 (Very High Concern) Management exists, but Management Strategy and/or Recovery of Species of Concern rated ineffective. 0 (Critical) No management exists when there is a clear need for management (i.e., fishery catches threatened, endangered, or high concern species), OR there is a high level of Illegal, unregulated, and unreported fishing occurring.

18 Factor 3.1 Summary Factor 3.1: Management of fishing impacts on retained species Region / Method Strategy Recovery Research Advice Enforce Track Inclusion Peru Sechura Bay Ineffective N/A Moderately Moderately Ineffective Ineffective Moderately Diver Effective Effective Effective Subfactor 3.1.1 Management Strategy and Implementation Considerations: What type of management measures are in place? Are there appropriate management goals, and is there evidence that management goals are being met? To achieve a highly effective rating, there must be appropriate management goals, and evidence that the measures in place have been successful at maintaining/rebuilding species. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Ineffective Regulations for scallop include a minimum size limit of 65 mm (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Wolff et al. 2007) and the issuing of temporary moratoriums in certain bays when scallop abundance is extremely low and on the verge of collapse (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Mendo et al. 2008). But fishing effort has not been monitored until recently, and there has been no formal stock assessment conducted for this species or the development of biological reference points. During high-production years, fishing effort increases to match high scallop abundance, and adult scallops (> 65 mm) are fished to depletion (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Mendo et al. 2008). The scallop fishery is an open-access fishery with no formal management plan and few regulations in place (Mendo et al. 2008) (Wolff et al. 2007). Subfactor 3.1.2 Recovery of Species of Concern Considerations: When needed, are recovery strategies/management measures in place to rebuild overfished/threatened/ endangered species or to limit fishery s impact on these species and what is their likelihood of success? To achieve a rating of Highly Effective, rebuilding strategies that have a high likelihood of success in an appropriate timeframe must be in place when needed, as well as measures to minimize mortality for any overfished/threatened/endangered species. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver N/A There are currently no overfished, depleted, endangered, or threatened species targeted or retained in the fishery.

19 Subfactor 3.1.3 Scientific Research and Monitoring Considerations: How much and what types of data are collected to evaluate the health of the population and the fishery s impact on the species? To achieve a Highly Effective rating, population assessments must be conducted regularly and they must be robust enough to reliably determine the population status. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Moderately Effective Peruvian calico scallop landings are recorded by the Ministry of Production. The Marine Institute of Peru conducts periodic investigations of scallop density and size structure in the major bays. Biomass in the major bays is also estimated approximately once a year (pers. comm., Yamashiro and Wolff 2011). But Sechura Bay biomass has not been estimated since 2009 (though other areas such as Samanco Bay have been). There has been no formal stock assessment conducted for this species or the development of biological reference points. Recently standardized catch biological sampling and catch per unit effort monitoring has commenced nationwide (IMARPE 2014). Though there is some monitoring of the Peruvian calico scallop populations, data are not regularly collected or adequate enough to interpret the status of the population, especially for a species that has high population variation depending on the severity of ENSO events (pers. comm., Yamashiro and Wolff 2011). In addition, when scallop populations increase, it results in an increase in fishing effort and subsequent scallop population reduction, so it is difficult to assess population health. Subfactor 3.1.4 Management Record of Following Scientific Advice Considerations: How often (always, sometimes, rarely) do managers of the fishery follow scientific recommendations/advice (e.g. do they set catch limits at recommended levels)? A Highly Effective rating is given if managers nearly always follow scientific advice. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Moderately Effective Because Peruvian calico scallops have little monitoring, a formal stock assessment is not conducted and there is little scientific advice given. Managers have set a minimum size (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Wolff et al. 2007), which corresponds to the size at first maturity (Badjeck et al. 2009). But there are no reference points, quotas, or harvest strategies for this stock. Subfactor 3.1.5 Enforcement of Management Regulations Considerations: Do fishermen comply with regulations, and how is this monitored? To achieve a Highly Effective rating, there must be regular enforcement of regulations and verification of compliance.

20 Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Ineffective There is no system of strict control and monitoring, so regulations are not always followed (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Mendo et al. 2008). For example, during the 1997 1998 El Niño event, many fishers were unregistered and scallops were harvested below the minimum size limit. In addition, there has been an increase in scallop aquaculture production and efforts to restock natural scallop beds in recent years. This promotion of scallop culture has increased fishing pressure on many of the bays for seed collection, and has created conflicts between aquaculture companies and fishers (Mendo et al. 2008). Subfactor 3.1.6 Management Track Record Considerations: Does management have a history of successfully maintaining populations at sustainable levels or a history of failing to maintain populations at sustainable levels? A Highly Effective rating is given if measures enacted by management have been shown to result in the long-term maintenance of species overtime. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Ineffective The fishery is an open-access fishery, so fishers from all over Peru may migrate to the bays where the scallops are currently the most abundant (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Wolff et al. 2007). During high scallop productivity years in the North when the scallop population proliferates (normal upwelling), the number of boats and divers in the fishery increases dramatically, resulting in extremely high fishing levels and a boom-and-bust cycle (Badjeck et al. 2009) (Wolff & Mendo 2000). There are no reference points, protected areas, or closed seasons, and scallop stocks are generally fished until the adults are depleted, with depressed stocks resulting at times (Mendo et al. 2008) (Wolff et al. 2007). Subfactor 3.1.7 Stakeholder Inclusion Considerations: Are stakeholders involved/included in the decision-making process? Stakeholders are individuals/groups/organizations that have an interest in the fishery or that may be affected by the management of the fishery (e.g., fishermen, conservation groups, etc.). A Highly Effective rating is given if the management process is transparent and includes stakeholder input. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Moderately Effective Public information on management decisions and their inclusiveness is not available. There is little regulation or management except for a 65-mm minimum size. Thus, there is little regulation or few management decisions to include stakeholders in.

21 Bycatch Strategy Factor 3.2: Management of fishing impacts on bycatch species Region / Method All Kept Critical Strategy Research Advice Enforce Peru Sechura Bay Diver Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

22 Criterion 4: Impacts on the habitat and ecosystem This Criterion assesses the impact of the fishery on seafloor habitats, and increases that base score if there are measures in place to mitigate any impacts. The fishery s overall impact on the ecosystem and food web and the use of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) principles is also evaluated. Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management aims to consider the interconnections among species and all natural and human stressors on the environment. The final score is the geometric mean of the impact of fishing gear on habitat score (plus the mitigation of gear impacts score) and the Ecosystem Based Fishery Management score. The Criterion 2 rating is determined as follows: Score >3.2=Green or Low Concern Score >2.2 and <=3.2=Yellow or Moderate Concern Score <=2.2=Red or High Concern Rating cannot be Critical for Criterion 4. Criterion 4 Summary Region / Method Peru Sechura Bay Diver Gear Type and Mitigation of Substrate Gear Impacts 4.00: Very Low 0.00: Not Concern Applicable EBFM Overall Recomm. 5.00: Very Low Green (4.472) Concern Seafood Watch deems the Peruvian calico scallop fishery to have benign ecosystem impacts. Scallops are caught by divers, resulting in no benthic habitat damage. In addition, there are no indications of ecosystem impacts from the removal of scallops. It has been demonstrated that scallop populations and other associated benthic species are affected more by climatic and oceanographic conditions caused by ENSO events than by the scallop fishery. Justification of Ranking Factor 4.1 Impact of Fishing Gear on the Habitat/Substrate Scoring Guidelines 5 (None) Fishing gear does not contact the bottom 4 (Very Low) Vertical line gear 3 (Low) Gears that contacts the bottom, but is not dragged along the bottom (e.g. gillnet, bottom longline, trap) and is not fished on sensitive habitats. Bottom seine on resilient mud/sand habitats. Midwater trawl that is known to contact bottom occasionally (

23 2 (Moderate) Bottom dragging gears (dredge, trawl) fished on resilient mud/sand habitats. Gillnet, trap, or bottom longline fished on sensitive boulder or coral reef habitat. Bottom seine except on mud/sand 1 (High) Hydraulic clam dredge. Dredge or trawl gear fished on moderately sensitive habitats (e.g., cobble or boulder) 0 (Very High) Dredge or trawl fished on biogenic habitat, (e.g., deep-sea corals, eelgrass and maerl) Note: When multiple habitat types are commonly encountered, and/or the habitat classification is uncertain, the score will be based on the most sensitive, plausible habitat type. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Very Low Concern Fishing is done by divers that handpick scallops, causing minimal habitat damage (IMARPE 2008) (Mendo et al. 2008) (Wolff et al. 2007). The diving fleet uses wooden boats equipped with a compressor, which provides air to the divers (Mendo et al. 2008). Fishing for the Peruvian calico scallop primarily occurs at shallow depths of 5 30 m in a mix of rocky, stony, and sand-mud substrates (IMARPE 2008) (Wolff et al. 2007). In addition, because scallops are handpicked, there is minimal habitat disturbance. Factor 4.2 Mitigation of Gear Impacts Scoring Guidelines +1 (Strong Mitigation) Examples include large proportion of habitat protected from fishing (>50%) with gear, fishing intensity low/limited, gear specifically modified to reduce damage to seafloor and modifications shown to be effective at reducing damage, or an effective combination of moderate mitigation measures. +0.5 (Moderate Mitigation) 20% of habitat protected from fishing with gear or other measures in place to limit fishing effort, fishing intensity, and spatial footprint of damage caused from fishing. +0.25 (Low Mitigation) A few measures are in place (e.g., vulnerable habitats protected but other habitats not protected); there are some limits on fishing effort/intensity, but not actively being reduced. 0 (No Mitigation) No effective measures are in place to limit gear impacts on habitats. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Not Applicable The diver fishery does not affect the seafloor habitat, making effective mitigation measures for fishing impacts on the habitat not applicable.

24 Factor 4.3 Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management Scoring Guidelines 5 (Very Low Concern) Substantial efforts have been made to protect species ecological roles and ensure fishing practices do not have negative ecological effects (e.g., large proportion of fishery area is protected with marine reserves, and abundance is maintained at sufficient levels to provide food to predators). 4 (Low Concern) Studies are underway to assess the ecological role of species and measures are in place to protect the ecological role of any species that plays an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem. Measures are in place to minimize potentially negative ecological effect if hatchery supplementation or fish aggregating devices (FADs) are used. 3 (Moderate Concern) Fishery does not catch species that play an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem, or if it does, studies are underway to determine how to protect the ecological role of these species, OR negative ecological effects from hatchery supplementation or FADs are possible and management is not place to mitigate these impacts. 2 (High Concern) Fishery catches species that play an exceptionally large role in the ecosystem and no efforts are being made to incorporate their ecological role into management. 1 (Very High Concern) Use of hatchery supplementation or fish aggregating devices (FADs) in the fishery is having serious negative ecological or genetic consequences, OR fishery has resulted in trophic cascades or other detrimental impacts to the food web. Peru Sechura Bay, Diver Very Low Concern There is no evidence that scallop removal has affected ecosystem or food web dynamics (Mendo et al. 2008). Population variability of Peruvian calico scallop and its predators is primarily driven by ENSO events (Wolff and Mendo 2000). The majority of the scallop s predators (crabs and sea stars) tend to proliferate during cool or normal years and decrease in population size during El Niño years (Stotz & Gonzalez 1997) (Wolff & Mendo 2000) (Wolff et al. 2007). A trophic model by Taylor et al. (2008) indicated that the Sechura Bay ecosystem is relatively inefficient from a community energetics point of view, likely due to the periodic perturbations of ENSO. In addition, a combination of high system productivity and low trophic level target species of invertebrates (i.e., scallops) and fish (i.e., anchoveta) in Sechura Bay results in high catches and an efficient fishery. The relatively small improvements in the fit of the simulation with the addition of trophic drivers on remaining functional groups dynamics suggests the overall importance of environmental drivers (Taylor et al. 2008).

25 Acknowledgements Seafood Watch would like to thank Dr. Matthias Wolff of the Leibniz Center for Tropical Marine Ecology for graciously reviewing this report for scientific accuracy and clarity. Scientific review does not constitute an endorsement of the Seafood Watch program, or its seafood recommendations, on the part of the reviewing scientists. Seafood Watch is solely responsible for the conclusions reached in this report.

26 References Avendano M, Cantillanez M, Pennec ML, Thouzeau G. 2008. Reproductive and larval cycle of the scallop Argopecten purpuratus during El Niño-La Nina events and normal weather conditions in Antofagasta, Int. Journal of Tropical Biology 56:121-132 Badjeck, M.-C., Mendo, J., Wolff, M., Lange, H. 2009. Climate variability and the Peruvian scallop fishery: the role of formal institutions in resilience building, Climatic Change 94(1-2): 211-232 FAO. 2015. Global Capture Production 1950-2013, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome Italy. FAO. 2014. Fishery Commodities Global Production and Trade (online query) 1976-2011 IMARPE. 2014. Evaluación del POI PTI al I Trimestre del 2014. Instituto del Mar de Peru (IMARPE). 235 pp. IMARPE. 2009. Evaluacion poblacional de concha de abanico (Argopecten purpuratus) en la Bahia de Sechura, 19 25 Mayo. Instituto del Mar de Peru (IMARPE), Sede Regional de Piura. 4 pp. IMARPE. 2008. Resources and Fisheries: Marine Invertebrates-Scallop. IMARPE and ITP. 1996. Compendio Biológico Tecnológico de las principales especies hidrobiológicas comerciales del Perú. Instituto del Mar del Perú/Instituto Tecnológico Pesquero, Lima-Perú, 143 pp. Mendo et al.. 2008. Mendo, J., Wolff, M., Carbajal, W., Gonzáles, I. and Badjeck, M., 2008. Manejo y explotación de los principales bancos naturales de concha de abanico (Argopecten purpuratus) en la costa Peruana. In: A. Lovatelli, A. Farías I. Uriarte (eds.) Estado actual del cultivo y manejo de moluscos bivalvos y su proyección futura: factores que afectan su sustentabilidad en América Latina. Rome: Taller Técnico Regional de la FAO. 20-24 de agosto de 2007. Puerto Montt, Chile. FAO Actas de Pesca y Acuicultura. No. 12. p. 101-114. NMFS. 2015. NMFS 2015. IMPORTS AND EXPORTS OF FISHERY PRODUCTS Stotz WB, Gonzalez SA. 1997. Abundance, growth, and production of the sea scallop (Agropecten purpuratus): bases for sustainable exploitation of natural scallop beds in north-central Chile. Fisheries Research 32:173-183. Tarazona J, Espinoza R, Solis M, Arntz W. 2007. Growth and somatic production of the fan scallop (Agropecten purpuratus) in Independcia Bay, Pisco (Peru) during El Niño and La Nina events. Revista de Biologia Marina y Oceanografia 42:275-285. Taylor, M.N., Wolff, M., Vadas, F., Yamashiro, C. 2008. Trophic and environmental drivers of the Sechura Bay Ecosystem (Peru) over an ENSO cycle. Helgol. Mar. Res. (2008) 62 (Suppl 1):S15 S32

27 Wolff, M. 1988. Spawning and recruitment in the Peruvian Scallop Agropecten purpuratus. Marine Ecology Progress Series 42:213-217. Wolff, M. 1987. Population dynamic of the Peruvian Scallop Argopecten purpuratus during the El Niño phenomenon of 1983. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 44:1684-1691 Wolff, M. and Mendo, J. 2000. Management of the Peru7ian bay scallop (Argopecten purpuratus) metapopulation with regard to environmental change, Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 10: 117 126 Wolff, M., Taylor, M., Mendo, J., Yamashiro, C. 2007. A catch forecast model for the Peruvian scallop (Argopecten purpuratus) based on estimators of spawning stock and settlement rate, Ecological modelling 209: 333 341 Yamashiro C, Mendo J. 1988. Crecimiento de la concha de abanico (Argopecten purpuratus) en la Bahía Independencia, Pisco, Peru. In: Salzwedel H, Landa A (eds) Recursos y Dinámica del Ecosistema de Afloramiento PeruanoBoletin, Instituto del Mar del Perú, Callao, Vol. Extraordinario: 163-168.