Search

The System for Assessment of Ecological Condition, coordinated by the Norwegian Environment Agency, is intended to form the foundation for evidence-based assessments of the ecological condition of Norwegian terrestrial and marine ecosystems not covered by the EU Water Framework Directive. The reference condition is defined as “intact ecosystems”, i.e., a condition that is largely unimpacted by modern industrial anthropogenic activities. An ecosystem in good ecological condition is defined as a system that does not deviate substantially from this reference condition in structure, functions or productivity. This means that, in practice, what is assessed here is the extent to which an ecosystem is impacted by anthropogenic drivers. This report describes the first operational assessment of the ecological condition of Norwegian Arctic and Sub-Arctic marine shelf ecosystems in the Barents Sea. The assessment method employed is the Panel-based Assessment of Ecosystem Condition (PAEC1), and the current assessment has considered to what extent the Barents Sea shelf ecosystems deviate from the reference condition2 by evaluating change trajectories. Panel-based Assessment of Ecosystem Condition of Norwegian Barents Sea Shelf Ecosystems

On 30th March 2022, all Russian participation in ICES was suspended. Although the announcement of the suspension stressed the role of ICES as a “multilateral science organization”, this suspension applied not only to research activities but also to the ICES work providing fisheries advice for the sustainable management of fish stocks and ecosystems. As a result of the suspension, it is not possible to run ICES stock assessments or provide ICES advice for the Barents Sea stocks of NEA cod, NEA haddock, Sebastes mentella or Greenland Halibut, as management and data collection for these stocks are shared between Norway and Russia. There are therefore no AFWG stock assessments for these stocks this year. This is especially unfortunate as NEA cod is currently declining, and updated assessments are required to ensure an appropriate management response. It is to be hoped that the political decision to exclude Russia from the ICES advice process which underlies our sustainable fisheries management does not lead to mismanagement of the shared stocks and the consequent ecological harm.

Source at https://hi.no/hi.

Annual catch quotas and other regulations of the Barents Sea fisheries are set through negotiations between Norway and Russia. Assessment of the state of the stocks and quota advice are based on survey results and international landings statistics. The results from the demersal fish winter surveys in the Barents Sea are an important source of information for the annual stock assessment. Fish investigations in the Barents Sea Winter 2022

On 30 th March 2022 all Russian participation in ICES was temporally suspended. Although the announcement of the suspension stressed the role of ICES as a “multilateral science organization”, this suspension applied not only to research activities, but also to the ICES work providing fisheries advice for the sustainable management of fish stocks and ecosystems. As a result of the suspension, the ICES AFWG provided advice only for saithe, coastal cod north, coastal cod south, and golden redfish ( Sebastes norvegicus ). Northeast Arctic (NEA) cod, haddock and beaked redfish ( Sebastes mentella ) assessments have been conducted outside of ICES in a newly constituted Joint Russian-Norwegian Working Group on Arctic Fisheries (JRN-AFWG). Although this work has been conducted independently of ICES, the methodologies agreed at ICES benchmarks and agreed HCRs (Harvest Control Rules) have been followed in providing this advice.

This report presents the main results from the surveys in January-March 2021. The surveys were performed with the Norwegian research vessels “Helmer Hanssen”, “Kronprins Haakon” and “Johan Hjort”, and the Russian research vessel “Vilnyus”. Annual survey reports since 1981 are listed in Appendix 4, and names of scientific participants in 2021 are given in Appendix 3.

A new dataset on the diet of Atlantic cod in the Barents Sea from the 1930s to the present day has been compiled to produce one of the largest fish diet datasets available globally. Atlantic cod is one of the most ecologically and commercially important fish species in the North Atlantic. The stock in the Barents Sea is by far the largest, as a result of both successful management and favourable environmental conditions since the early 2000s. As a top predator, cod plays a key role in the Barents Sea ecosystem. The species has a broad diet consisting mainly of crustaceans and teleost fish, and both the amount and type of prey vary in space and time. The data – from Russia, Norway and the United Kingdom – represent quantitative stomach content records from more than 400 000 fish and qualitative data from 2.5 million fish. Many of the data are from joint collaborative surveys between Norway and Russia. The sampling was conducted throughout each year, allowing for seasonal, annual and decadal comparisons to be made. Visual analysis shows cod diets have changed considerably from the start of the dataset in the 1930s to the present day. There was a large proportion of herring in the diets in the 1930s, whereas in more recent decades capelin, invertebrates and other fish dominate. There are also significant interannual asynchronous fluctuations in prey, particularly capelin and euphausiids. Combining these datasets can help us understand how the environment and ecosystems are responding to climatic changes, and what influences the diet and prey switching of cod. Trends in temperature and variability indices can be tested against the occurrence of different prey items, and the effects of fishing pressure on cod and prey stocks on diet composition could be investigated. The dataset will also enable us to improve parametrization of food web models and to forecast how Barents Sea fisheries may respond in the future to management and to climate change. The Russian data are available through joint projects with the Polar Branch of the Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO). The UK and Norwegian data (Townhill et al., 2020) are being released with this paper at https://doi.org/10.21335/NMDC-2139169383.

WKRPChange was tasked with examining how ICES handles the estimation of target and limit reference points in the face of changing environmental conditions. In particular, the meeting participants were asked to review the robustness of the current ICES procedures and to suggest specific improvements that could be made, especially relating to changes in stock productivity arising from environmental conditions, species interactions, and density-dependent effects. Part of the work involved reviewing the basis of the ICES reference points and contrasting the ICES procedures with those in the USA and Canada, and part on providing specific guidance for future reference point estimation within ICES. One common approach to changing environmental conditions is to truncate data series. WKRPChange agreed that this may be necessary in some cases, but several studies were presented showing that the estimation of reference points becomes unreliable (both noisy and potentially biased) as the time series is reduced, and therefore recommended that modelling the specific process involved is generally a better approach than truncation. The meeting noted several examples within the current ICES management system for which reference points are allowed to vary (e.g. F in the case of NEA cod, Blim in the case of Iberian Sardine) according the prevailing conditions. WKRPChange noted that this was only required if conditions were expected to change significantly over the lifespan of the reference points, and that where it was implemented the status determination (the “traffic lights”) should be made accordingly.The key recommendation of WKRPChange is consistent with the conclusions of WKGMSE2, namely that a scoping exercise should be undertaken for each stock to identify any key drivers. Where there is good evidence for ecosystem-driven changes in stock productivity that process should be accounted for in setting reference points. The meeting highlighted that reference points have a finite lifespan, generally related to the benchmark cycle, and the estimation of the reference point should predominantly take into account processes likely to be important over that lifespan. WKRChange noted that many ICES stocks are managed by Harvest Controls which are evaluated through a MSE process. In this case there is considerable scope for including such environmentally driven processes in the Operating Model. However, many stocks are managed through the standard ICES HCR with reference points derived through the EqSim program. There is therefore a specific recommendation that the possibility to include density-dependentgrowth be incorporated into EqSim, to allow more realism to be included in the estimation of reference points where the evidence indicates that this is important within the reference point life span. The meeting also highlighted the recent work at WKRISH 6, which gave scope to “fine tune” the Ftarget to account for small changes in environmental drivers without requiring full reestimation of the reference points.

A Benchmark Workshop for Demersal species (WKDEM), chaired by External Chair Richard D.M. Nash, UK and ICES Chair Daniel Howell, Norway and attended by two invited external experts Amy Schueller, US and Robert Boenish, US met at ICES, HQ, Copenhagen 9–13 December 2019 for a data evaluation meeting and at ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark, for a Benchmark meeting 10–14 February 2020. In addition, two WebEx meetings were convened (23rd October 2019 and 23rd February 2020) to discuss data issues and logistics related to the work plan prior to the data evaluation meeting and the Benchmark.Four demersal stocks were Benchmarked in WKDEM, Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus) in subareas 1 and 2 (Northeast Arctic) (Had.27.1–2), Cod (Gadus morhua) in Division 6.a (West of Scotland) (Cod.27.6a), Whiting (Merlangius merlangus) in Division 6.a (West of Scotland) (Whg.27.6a) and Whiting in Division 3.a (Skagerrak and Kattegat) (Whg.27.3a).The 2020 benchmark for Northeast Arctic Haddock was proposed due to the poor retrospective pattern (annually changing perception of the stock) for the assessment in 2018. The final SAM model was based on the updated dataset and a new SAM setting allowing for plus groups in surveys. The final model had a lower AIC and more parameters compared to the configuration used in the previous assessment with the same data as the final model. Some changes were made to the prediction models, mainly to reflect the current perception of the stock dynamics. The reference points were not changed.The 2020 benchmark for 6.a cod was proposed initially due to uncertainties in the catch data and the selectivity patterns in the catch and survey data. In addition, a separate analysis of the stock estimated a different trend in fishing mortality and higher biomass, which lead to an inter-benchmark in February 2019. A number of alternative assessment methods were considered with a decision to switch from the TSA model to SAM. An improved approach to estimating area-misreported landings was implemented, and maturity and natural mortality values were modified. The survey data included in the final assessment are consistent (in terms of year and age range) with those used previously. The reference points were updated having been derived following the ICES guidelines and using EqSim. There was some concern that an alternative model, FAFmodel, along with an extension to allow natural mortality to be estimated by the model (“TVM” model) provided a different perception of the stock dynamics. The latter model was not presented for evaluation prior to the Benchmark and as such needs to be evaluated as to its efficacy for assessment of this stock in the future.The 2020 benchmark for 6.a whiting was proposed because the assessment was influenced partly by incorrect reporting of landings data (species and quantity) from the past which directly affected the perception of the stock. There were newly available catch data and reworked survey indices (including the combined Irish and Scottish Q4 survey), plus reworked maturity and natural mortality estimates were available. It became clear that running TSA with the new data and changed survey configuration resulted in poorly converged optimisation runs. An age-aggregated stochastic Surplus Production in Continuous Time (SPiCT) model was tried but the modelled stock level was highly uncertain, although the trends were considered more robust. The result was to reclassify 6.a whiting to category 3 using the SPiCT model to give trends, according to the ICES guidelines for data-limited stocks.The 2020 benchmark for 3.a whiting was proposed because it was considered a category 5 stock with no advice and more information is available (time-series of catches (landings and discards), a new fisheries independent biomass index that combines all relevant scientific surveys in the area) that were not being used but could be utilised to infer stock status and provide better catch advice. The outcome was to reclassify the stock to category 3 and provide advice using the “2-over-3” trend based approach with the new biomass index. An attempt to provide an analytical assessment for the stock using the surplus production model (SPiCT) was unsuccessful.

This report presents the main results from the surveys in January-March 2020. The surveys were performed with the Norwegian research vessels “Helmer Hanssen” and “Johan Hjort” and the Russian research vessel “Vilnyus”. Annual survey reports since 1981 are listed in Appendix 1, and names of scientific participants are given in Appendix 3.

I rapporten dekkes tre hovedtemaer: (1) Dominerende trekk i status og utvikling i økosystemet i Barentshavet siden 2016 med vekt på å beskrive hvordan sentrale prosesser påvirker tilstanden; (2) en mer detaljert beskrivelse av status og utvikling for de ulike komponentene i økosystemet; og (3) en beskrivelse av fiskeriforvaltningen i Barentshavet.

Global fisheries catches can be increased in a sustainable way after rebuilding of fish populations, if ecosystem functioning is considered. A central biological reference point for fisheries management, Fmsy, the fishing pressure that gives the maximum sustainable yield, has been re-evaluated taking into account ecosystem functioning. This has been done for the main commercial fish stocks of the Northeast Atlantic. The new Fmsy values can replace the current values right away in fisheries management. Report of the working group meeting in 2017.

Global fisheries catches can be increased in a sustainable way after rebuilding of fish populations, if ecosystem functioning is considered. A central biological reference point for fisheries management, Fmsy, the fishing pressure that gives the maximum sustainable yield, has been re-evaluated taking into account ecosystem functioning. This has been done for the main commercial fish stocks of the Northeast Atlantic. The new Fmsy values can replace the current values right away in fisheries management. Report of the 3rd working group meeting in Rhode Island 2018.