Search

In this article we review the past 50 years of climatic conditions off West Greenland, where there has been large variability in the atmospheric and oceanographic conditions as well as in fish stocks. A positive relationship is found between the hydrographic conditions expressed by the water temperature and the fish recruitment of cod and redfish, whereas the recruitment of shrimp and halibut seems to react positively to lower temperatures. Observed shifts in the hydrographic conditions during the second half of the 1990s indicate that a change in the fish stock environment may be expected in the coming years. Relationships between the past variations in fisheries resources, hydrographic conditions, and the large-scale climatic conditions expressed by the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) strongly support the incorporation of environmental variability in prediction models for fish stock recruitment and thereby in the assessment of fisheries resources. Article from Marine Science Symposia Vol. 219 - "Hydrobiological variability in the ICES Area, 1990-1999", symposium held in Edinburgh, 8-10 August 2001. To access the remaining articles please click on the keyword "MSS Vol. 219".

Sandeel in the North Sea is a priced commercial species and an ecological key species acting as prey for numerous predators from birds, through fish, to sea mammals. Sandeel is in particular important to the Danish fishery and fishmeal industry. However, large fluctuations in stock size and a complicated system of sub areas, where several have been deemed data poor by ICES, have been a challenge for the dependent industry. The main aim of the present project was to provide a scientific basis for making a re-evaluation of the models and management regime used by ICES to provide advice for sandeel in the North Sea. This required (i) reviewing the literature to identify holes in our basic knowledge, (ii) investigating transport of sandeel larvae between fishing grounds and differences in population dynamics and productivity to guide decisions regarding management areas, (iii) developing a new survey index from the existing sandeel dredge survey, and (iv) make an effort to improve existing stock assessment models where possible. Approximately half way through the project period, the ICES benchmark for sandeel took place. Here, all new results from the project was presented and used to facilitate a number of changes and improvements of the models and management regime.After the benchmark the project carried on to further underpin some of the decision made during the benchmark meeting. These included conducting otolith analyses and population genetics, revealing novel insight, and the factual area divisions decided at the benchmark meeting was specifically evaluated using larval drift simulations. Studies of environmental drivers of sandeel recruitment and productivity were also finalized during the second half of the project. The results revealed that the productivity of forage fish in the North Sea in general (sandeel included) has declined over time, explaining why the high fishing mortalities experienced during the 1990s cannot be maintained today. Correlative links were found between environmental variability and sandeel recruitment, suggesting that recruitment forecasting is potentially possible. This work has therefore been presented before the members of the ICES WKS2D working group. This group is now planning to test an operational forecasting model in the coming years. Lastly, the process of evaluating a range of management strategies was initiated to support the ongoing process of developing a long-term management plan. The MSE work is still ongoing and the continuousness of this work has been ensured by a new project initiated 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 working group meeting in 2017.

The main objective of this work was to summarise current knowledge on fishmeal and fish oil as well as identify the research needs and create a roadmap for future industry-driven research. The main conclusion was that the quality of raw material, fishmeal and - oil are not yet well defined. The real focus by the industry has mainly been limited to nutrients, such as proteins and fats and other components that makeup fishmeal. There has been less focus on the health benefits of dietary contents of fishmeal and –oil and the relationship between processing methods and the nutritional and technical properties of fishmeal. In addition, to proactively strengthen the market position and competitiveness, it is crucial for the industry to achieve a common understanding of the needs of their customers in line with a clear profile of the benefits of their products. A communication strategy as well as a research strategy is needed.Finally, the identity of the industry needs to be clear and transparent to promote a story about the industry to provide a clear and positive image of the industry to be communicated to the society. This means, that a communication strategy as well as a research strategy must be established, as there is a lack of communication along the value chain from the industry to the consumers. There is still a lack of understanding by the consumers of why fishmeal is produced, the reasons must be communicated in such a way that it reaches the average consumer.The industry members are interested in moving forward to sustain the future growth of the industry. Fishmeal and fish oil production has been prosperous for a very long time, but to

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.

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 2nd working group meeting in Vancouver, November 2017.

The main objective of this work was to summarise current knowledge on fishmeal and fish oil as well as identify the research needs and create a roadmap for future industry-driven research. The main conclusion was that the quality of raw material, fishmeal and - oil are not yet well defined. The real focus by the industry has mainly been limited to nutrients, such as proteins and fats and other components that makeup fishmeal. There has been less focus on the health benefits of dietary contents of fishmeal and –oil and the relationship between processing methods and the nutritional and technical properties of fishmeal. In addition, to proactively strengthen the market position and competitiveness, it is crucial for the industry to achieve a common understanding of the needs of their customers in line with a clear profile of the benefits of their products. A communication strategy as well as a research strategy is needed. Finally, the identity of the industry needs to be clear and transparent to promote a story about the industry to provide a clear and positive image of the industry to be communicated to the society. This means, that a communication strategy as well as a research strategy must be established, as there is a lack of communication along the value chain from the industry to the consumers. There is still a lack of understanding by the consumers of why fishmeal is produced, the reasons must be communicated in such a way that it reaches the average consumer. The industry members are interested in moving forward to sustain the future growth of the industry. Fishmeal and fish oil production has been prosperous for a very long time, but to remain so, cooperation among all stakeholders is crucial for continued progress., Funding: AG-fund, EUfishmeal

A 2 year project funded by: The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund & the Danish Ministry of Environment and Food (1.372 mio DKK), the Norwegian Fisheries Research Fund via IMR Norway (0.5 mio DKK) and from the Nordic Council of Ministers (0.5 mio DKK). The total budget for the project is therefore 3.057 mio DKK

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.

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 2nd working group meeting in Vancouver, November 2017.

The ICES Workshop for management strategy evaluation for Norway Pout (WKNPOUT) took place 26–28 February 2018 at ICES Headquarter chaired by Andrés Uriarte, Spain, with the assistance of ICES Secretariat. 12 participants, both scientific experts and stakeholders, from Denmark and Norway, attended the meeting. The group addressed the special request from the European Union and Norway to advise on the long-term management strategies of Norway Pout in ICES Subarea 4 (North Sea) and ICES Division 3.a (Skagerrak-Kattegat). The proposed management strategy is based on the ICES escapement strategy with the aim of achieving a high probability of having the minimum SSB required to produce MSY (Blim) surviving to the following year. ICES was requested to evaluate: 1. Whether a management strategy is precautionary if the TAC is constrained with a lower bound in the range of 20 000 tonnes to 40 000 tonnes and an upper bound in the range of 150 000 tonnes to 250 000 tonnes, or another range suggested by ICES. 2. Whether such a strategy would be precautionary if the TAC constraints referred to in paragraph 1 are overridden by a constraint on the maximum value of fishing mortality (Fcap), and whether the application of the Fcap would allow a precautionary strategy with a higher minimum TAC than if the Fcap was not applied. 3. Whether a provision to override the minimum value of the TAC when the stock is forecast to be below some threshold value would allow a precautionary strategy with a higher minimum TAC than if the escape-clause was not included, and whether such a provision would provide any additional benefit to the inclusion of an Fcap as referred to in paragraph 2. The alternative management procedures were tested in the framework of a management strategy evaluation (MSE) set up according to the assessment model SESAM adopted for Norway pout in the 2016 benchmark. One thousand simulations (replicates) were projected over 20 years for each of the different harvest control rules. Each replicate begins in the 2018 TAC year which starts in quarter 4 of calendar year 2017. Each replicate randomly draws a true state of the system (starting population, age and quarterly fishing patterns and series of past recruitments) from the joint distribution estimated by the last stock assessment. This is taken as the approach best reflecting the uncertainties in the SESAM assessment. An alternative reducing the uncertainty in the initial stock numbers, recruitment and exploitation pattern at the median estimate from the last assessment was also tested. The simulations were conditioned by a maximum realized level of fishing mortality the fishery can exert (assumed at 0.89; Fhistorical), which means that the full TAC will not be taken if the required F exceeds this value. First the group tested whether the current ICES procedure for providing TAC advice for Norway Pout, based on an escapement strategy (the default method), was precautionary. Results showed that it is not precautionary (as tested with unconstrained levels of fishing mortality), because the probability of SSB falling below Blim is higher than 5%. This is probably linked to cases of very high TAC and F when very high recruitments occur, in association with observation errors in the assessment. This called for modifying the default escapement strategy either by setting an upper F (Fcap) or including conditions on TACmin/ TACmax as explored here. Concerning Request 1: The group tested HCR escapement strategies (as the default method) bounded by a combination of TACmin (at either 20, 30 or 40 kt) and TACmax (at 150 and 200 kt). Results show that these HCR were precautionary for TACmin at 20 kt for the two TACmax levels and for a TACmin at 30 kt when bounded by a TACmax of 150 kt. They gave median and mean TACs (around 100–130 kt depending upon the rule) and realized catches around 110–115 kt, with TACs set at TACmin or at TACmax around 20–24% and 36–46% of the cases respectively. In these cases, Fhistorical was reached in 9–16% of the years, which makes the results sensitive to the assumption that the fishery will not exceed catches requiring F above Fhistorical. Other combinations based on higher values of TACmin or TACmax led to unprecautionary outcomes. Concerning Request 2: The same combinations of TACmin and TACmax as for request 1 were explored with Fcap at either 0.3 or 0.4. Results showed that the inclusion of a Fcap increases the range of TACmin and TACmax combinations that are precautionary, reaching for Fcap up to a TACmin at 30 kt and a TACmax of 200 kt. On average, TACs become considerably lower when Fcap is applied (ranging between 72 and 97 kt depending upon the combinations) and realized catches did not exceed 92 kt. In general, TAC increases with increasing Fcap. The gain in average TAC by increasing TACmin or TACmax is minimal, but the TAC constraints affect the probability of falling below Blim. For these bounded rules, the probability of setting TAC at TACmin is very similar to the probability for HCRs without an Fcap, but the probability of reaching TACmax is considerably lower due to the application of the Fcap. The absolute changes in TAC between years are smaller with Fcap constraints as well, (in the order of 40 000 t) partly because of the lower TAC in general. Applying Fcap makes the HCR more robust to violations of the assumption of an Fhistorical, as the probability of reaching Fhistorical becomes significantly lower than for the HCR without an Fcap. The sensitivity of the performance of tested HCR to the alternative fittings of the stock recruitment relationship is minor, as shown for examples of rules with Fcap. Concerning request 3, due to time limitation and little interest from stakeholders to override the TACmin, the group did not fully cover this request, but an exercise was made to find out if the TACmin of 40 000 t might become precautionary under an alternative configuration of the escapement policy. An escapement strategy with a TACmin at 40 000 tonnes aiming at an escapement Biomass at 65 000 t instead of the current Blim (39 450 t) would become precautionary with combinations of Fcap in the range 0.3 to 0.4 and TACmax in the range 150 to 200 kt. TACmin would be set in around 48% of the years, which gives a median TAC slightly above TACmin. Mean TAC for the three HCR is in the same order of size as for Request 2. The Special request also asked ICES to evaluate whether the results of the MSE would be significantly changed if the TAC year were defined as 1 November to 31 October rather than a calendar year. The latter TAC year is applied to the EU Member States fishing in EU waters, while Norway uses the calendar year (January–December). Furthermore, ICES advice is produced based on a forecast from 1 October to 30 September, and ICES uses such forecast to advice management for the period 1 November- 31 October. The MSE adopted to answer the request follows the same practice. The WK has not compared the results of the MSE for the TAC year defined as 1 November to 31 October with those for a calendar year, as the latter would require a time shift in the assessment and forecast. The report includes some considerations on the current practice for advice and the TAC year.

The Workshop on the management strategy evaluation of the reference point, Fcap, for Sprat in Division 3.a and Subarea 4 (WKSpratMSE) was held in ICES headquarters in Copenhagen 11-12 December 2018, and continued to work by correspondence through February 2019. The aim of the workshop was to estimate an appropriate Fcap for sprat in Division 3.a and Subarea 4 (Skagerrak, Kattegat, and North Sea) and sprat in divisions 7.d and 7.e (English Channel). This was done in response to the outcomes of the Benchmark Workshop on Sprat (WKSPRAT 2018). Two external reviewers participated and reviewed the analytical work and conclusions of the workshop. See full participant list in Annex 1. Sprat in the English Channel (Divisions 7de) is a category 3 stock and is assessed based on the acoustic survey carried out in area 7.e. Previously, the “2-over-3” rule had been used to provide catch advice, but evaluations during the last WKSPRAT benchmark suggested that such rule is not appropriate for short, highly productive species. The workshop therefore compared through simulations the performances of a “1-over-2” rule (with and without an uncertainty cap) and of different fixed harvest rates. The simulations suggested that a 1-over-2 rule for short-lived highly productive species might cause the stock to fall below safe levels and eventually to collapse because the rule is not reactive enough to limit the catches when there is a recruitment failure. When removing the uncertainty cap, performances improve, but the risk still remains above safe limits. The use of a fixed harvest rate seems to prevent risk and maximize catch, depending on the proportion used. Simulations suggest that a 20% harvest rate is considered appropriate to maintain the stock at safe biomass levels and to produce relatively high yield. One external reviewer suggested that these rules continue to be explored at the relevant upcoming Workshop for Data-limited Short-lived Stocks (WKDLSSLS). Sprat in Skagerrak, Kattegat, and the North Sea (Division 3a, Subarea 4) is a category 1 stock and follows the ICES MSY approach where the advised yearly catches correspond to the estimated stock biomass in excess of the MSY Bescapement, but constrained so that the fishing mortality is no higher than a limit F (Fcap). A “full” closed loop management strategy evaluation (MSE) was carried out to test for a range of F’s and find an appropriate Fcap value that showed a less than 5% probability of SSB < Bescapement. The value of Fcap was conditioned on using Bpa as MSY Bescapement. A “short-cut” MSE featuring an assessment emulator was implemented to compare the two approaches. The stock and fleet dynamics were conditioned on the most recent assessment from WKSPRAT2018. Performance statistics between the “full” and “short-cut” MSEs were similar, suggesting that short-cut MSEs should continue to be explored, as they have the advantage of being unaffected by assessment numeric convergence. According to these analyses, Fcap of 0.69 is precautionary.

The benchmark workshop on sprat (WKSPRAT) was held in ICES headquarters in Copenhagen from 5–9 November 2018. The benchmark process started in June 2017 with a 3 day data compilation meeting, also held at ICES. Three stocks were benchmarked: North Sea sprat, 3.a sprat and the Channel sprat. During the benchmark process, several arguments were put forward on the connection between the North Sea stock and the 3.a stock in Kattegat-Skagerrak. It was therefore agreed to merge the two stocks and assess them as one stock assessment unit. Sprat in area 4 and 3a During the 2018 benchmark, enough evidence were presented to merge the sprat stocks in the Skagerrak-Kattegak and in the North Sea. The catch data and the indices of abundance from 3.a were included in the data from area 4. Three surveys are carried out in the area (IBTS in Q1 and Q3 and HERAS survey) and were all used as tuning indices in the model. The IBTS indices were standardized using a delta-GAM approach: the inclusion of 3.a data increased the internal consistency between all age classes for all indices. The SMS model, previously used to assess the North Sea component, was used to assess the new combined stock. The model year is resolved into 4 seasons, where season 1 corresponds to quarter 3 of the calender year. The term ‘season’ is hence used here to identify the model year, while the term ‘quarter’ refers to the calendar year. The final model formulation includes a power function for the age 0 catchability of IBTS Q1, a constant maturity ogive and the inclusion of the very few catches reported for season 4 (Q2) into season 1 (Q3) of the following year. The new stock assessment shows a considerable improvement in the retrospective pattern, as well a better fitting to some ages of the IBTS surveys and catches (as indicated by survey and catch CVs). The stock reference points were revised following ICES standard guidelines. Blim was estimated as the breakpoint of the segmented stock recruitment relationship and Bpa was derived from Blim. Short-term forecast settings were updated. The Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) settings for the estimation of the Fcap were presented and discussed. Several scenarios were proposed to be tested and results will be evaluated during an ad-hoc MSE workshop that will take place on 11–12 December 2018. Sprat in area 7d,e Not enough evidences were available to change the boundaries of the English Channel stock. The stock is a category 3, and the data available are still scarce. An acoustic survey (PELTIC) is carried out in the English part of area 7.e since 2013. In 2017, the survey has been extended to include also the French part of 7.e and in 2018 the Eastern Channel was surveyed as well. Also, an IBTS index in Q1 is available for the Eastern Channel from 2007 onwards. The time series from the PELTIC survey has been used since 2017 to provide advice. At the benchmark, the updated time series was presented: the method used to produce the acoustic index was revised compared to previous years and it was changed to StoX (StoX, 2015). Concerns were raised because of the uncertainty in the stock distribution, and the fact that the acoustic survey covers only the Western part of the English Channel. No analytical assessment seems to work so far: both a seasonal and non-seasonal SPiCt were attempted during the benchmark workshop, but the short time series in the acoustic index and the lack of any contrast in the data still does not allow the model to converge. The group agreed to provide a seasonal advice based on an empirical method, i.e. to use both indices for trends, but only the acoustic survey for provision of advice. Two advice rules were proposed: the 1 over 2 rule, and a fixed F rule. Both options will be tested in an MSE framework and presented during the ad-hoc MSE workshop that will take place on 11–12 December 2018.

This paper reviews the concepts of marine ecosystem services and their economic valuation in a European fisheries management perspective. We find that the concept is at best cumbersome for advising on how best to regulate fisheries even in an ecosystem context.We propose that operational fisheries management must consider three different types of analysis, the yield of and the effect of fishing on the commercial species, the effects of fishing on habitats and non-commercial species and finally an overall analysis of the combined impact of all human activities on the marine ecosystem. We find that the concept of marine ecosystem services is not helpful for the two first mentioned types of analysis and that a cost-benefit analysis that is implied by the marine ecosystem services concept is inadequate for the third. We argue that the discussion needs to be divided into two: (1) finding the boundaries within which we accept impact on the marine ecosystem and (2) within these boundaries find the optimal fishing pressure, in mathematical terms replacing the unconstrained optimisation implied by the ecosystem services concept with an optimisation with constraints. The constraints are defined as to avoiding social unacceptable solutions. This paper reviews the concepts of marine ecosystem services and their economic valuation in a European fisheries management perspective. We find that the concept is at best cumbersome for advising on how best to regulate fisheries even in an ecosystem context.We propose that operational fisheries management must consider three different types of analysis, the yield of and the effect of fishing on the commercial species, the effects of fishing on habitats and non-commercial species and finally an overall analysis of the combined impact of all human activities on the marine ecosystem. We find that the concept of marine ecosystem services is not helpful for the two first mentioned types of analysis and that a cost-benefit analysis that is implied by the marine ecosystem services concept is inadequate for the third. We argue that the discussion needs to be divided into two: (1) finding the boundaries within which we accept impact on the marine ecosystem and (2) within these boundaries find the optimal fishing pressure, in mathematical terms replacing the unconstrained optimisation implied by the ecosystem services concept with an optimisation with constraints. The constraints are defined as to avoiding social unacceptable solutions.