When Pisces-RFR evaluates a fishery, the wider environmental impacts range from the effect on other fish, and other species, that would have eaten the caught fish, the physical effect on the environment, such as seabed habitats, as well as wider issues such as fuel use.

These are varied and not necessarily ‘average-able’: each fishery has to be broadly assessed and reasons for the score explained.

1. 1. Worst practice … major effects threatening the existence in the area of one or more species. Fishing methods the worst option in terms of wider global footprint;
   

2. 2. Poor … possibly significant marine environmental effects. Wider footprint neither worst or best of class. No corrective measures agreed;
   

3. 3. Transitional … possibly significant environmental effects. Wider footprint neither worst or best of class. Credible corrective measures have been applied, but at an early stage of implementation;
   

4. 4. Good … marine environmental effects widely regarded as acceptable, and regularly checked. Wider footprint good.  Open to further improvements.
   

5. 5. Best practice, the goal …. the fishery co-exists with other species and habitats in good condition, and is a model low impact fishery in terms of its wider global footprint.