{
  "url": "https://openlegislation.uk/eu-regulation-2007-708/annex-II/part-1/division-3",
  "json_url": "https://openlegislation.uk/eu-regulation-2007-708/annex-II/part-1/division-3.json",
  "legislation": "eur/2007/708",
  "legislation_title": "Council Regulation (EC) No 708/2007 of 11 June 2007 concerning use of alien and locally absent species in aquaculture",
  "legislation_url": "https://openlegislation.uk/eu-regulation-2007-708",
  "path": "annex/II/part/1/division/3",
  "kind": "division",
  "number": "Step 3",
  "heading": "Risk potential associated to the alien and locally absent species",
  "text": "A single value is given based on the assessments done in Steps 1 and 2:\nThe assessor is referred for guidance to Appendix A and Appendix B of the ICES Code of Practice.\nThe final categorisation of risk potential takes the value of the highest of the two probabilities when there is no probability increment between the two estimates (i.e. if the Risk of establishment and spreading is high and the risk of ecological consequences is medium, the final rating takes the value of the highest of the two probabilities which is high. When there is a probability increment between the two estimates (i.e. a mixture of high and low) the final value is medium.\nComponent\nRisk potential(H, M, L)\nCertainty(VC, RC, RU, VU)\nComments in support of assessment\nEstablishment and spreading (step 1)\nEcological consequences (step 2)\nFinal rating of overall risk potential\nThe result of this assessment will be expressed in terms of the following risk levels:\nA high-risk movement:\n(a) has a high risk of damaging biodiversity from spreading and other ecological consequences;\n(b) operates under farming conditions which would increase the risk of such damage;\n(c) involves an aquaculture facility which sells live aquatic animals for further farming or restocking;\n(d) as a consequence, the movement is of major concern (major mitigation measures are required). It is advised that the proposal be rejected unless mitigation procedures can be developed to reduce the risk to low.\nA medium-risk movement:\n(a) has a medium risk of damaging biodiversity from spreading and other ecological consequences;\n(b) operates under farming conditions which would not necessarily increase the risk of such damage, taking account of the species and the containment conditions;\n(c) involves an aquaculture facility which sells its products mainly for human consumption;\n(d) as a consequence the movement is of moderate concern. It is advised that the proposal be rejected unless mitigation procedures can be developed to reduce the risk to low.\nA low-risk movement:\n(a) has a low risk of damaging biodiversity from spreading and other ecological consequences.\n(b) operates under farming conditions which would not increase the risk of such damage;\n(c) involves an aquaculture facility which sells its products for human consumption only;\n(d) as a consequence the movement is of negligible concern. It is advised that the proposal be approved. Mitigation is not needed.\nThe proposal can only be approved as presented (no mitigating measures required) if the overall estimated risk potential is low and if the overall certainty for which the overall risk has been estimated is very certain or reasonably certain.\nIf, as a result of a first analysis, a high or medium category is attributed to the overall risk, then containment or mitigation proposals are to be incorporated in the application, which will be subject to subsequent risk analysis until the final rating for the overall risk becomes low with a very certain or reasonably certain assessment. Descriptions of these additional steps, together with detailed specifications of the containment or mitigation measures, will become an integral part of the risk assessment.",
  "extent": "E+W+S+N.I.",
  "status": null,
  "version": "current",
  "annotations": [
    {
      "type": "footnote",
      "label": "f1",
      "text": "The assessor is referred for guidance to Appendix A and Appendix B of the ICES Code of Practice."
    },
    {
      "type": "footnote",
      "label": "f2",
      "text": "The final categorisation of risk potential takes the value of the highest of the two probabilities when there is no probability increment between the two estimates (i.e. if the Risk of establishment and spreading is high and the risk of ecological consequences is medium, the final rating takes the value of the highest of the two probabilities which is high. When there is a probability increment between the two estimates (i.e. a mixture of high and low) the final value is medium."
    }
  ],
  "outstanding_effects": [],
  "provenance": {
    "source": "legislation.gov.uk",
    "source_url": "https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2007/708/annex/II/part/1/division/3",
    "retrieved_at": "2026-11-01T14:52:53.113108+00:00"
  },
  "licence": "Open Government Licence v3.0",
  "licence_url": "https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/",
  "attribution": "Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: legislation.gov.uk, The National Archives."
}