Search

Aquaculture in Norway is governed under national legislation with social, economic, and environmental objectives. Marine aquaculture relies on high quality environmental conditions. Facilities in the Norwegian Sea ecoregion are located in coastal areas, which are generally characterized as low nutrient environments. Aquaculture production is dominated by salmonids, which account for around 50% of national and 25% of global salmon production. Production of other finfish species, seaweed, and molluscs is low. Salmon lice is the major issue for farmed salmon production, and it is also the major threat to wild salmon from aquaculture in the ecoregion. Reducing the occurrence of sea lice serves profitability, animal welfare, and the environment and is the main driver of aquaculture regulations in the region today. Genetic introgression between farmed and wild salmon is another major threat. Aquaculture is an important industry for coastal communities in the ecoregion. In the past, industry growth has been governed by profitability concerns; currently, however, environmental concerns are governing aquaculture developments. Competing interests from other human activity sectors and recreational uses in coastal areas is changing the outlook for the industry. Sustainable aquaculture growth requires innovative production technologies to reduce the environmental impact, development of sustainable feed ingredients for fish farming, and expansion and diversification to lower trophic organisms and fish species other than salmonids. Future aquaculture development should also consider the impacts of climate change and interactions with other human activities in the sea.

The 2012 advice for this stock wasbiennial and valid for 2013–2014. New data available do notchange the perception of this stock. Therefore the advice for this fishery in 2015 is the same as for 2013: ICES advises that there should be no directed fisheries for blue ling, and a reduction in bycatches should be considered until the scientific information is sufficient to prove the fishery sustainable. Measures should be implemented to minimize the bycatch. Closed areas to protect spawning aggregations should be maintained and expanded where appropriate.

ICES advises on the basis of the management plan agreed by Norway, the EU, the Faroe Islands, and Iceland that catches in 2015 should be no more than 839 886 tonnes. All catches are assumed to be landed.

The NASCO Framework of Indicators for North East Atlantic stocks for 2013 was run in January 2014, and did not indicate the need for a revised analysis of catch options. Thus, no new management advice is provided for 2014. The most recent multi-year advice for the North East Atlantic Commission was provided by ICES (2013a). In that assessment, there were no catch options for the Faroes fishery that would allow all stock complexes to achieve their conservation limits (CLs) with a greater than 95% probability in any of the seasons 2013/14 to 2015/16. In the absence of specific management objectives, ICES advised that there were no mixed-stock fishery options on the NEAC complexes at Faroes in 2013 to 2016. The results from the exploratory assessment conducted by ICES in 2013 based on smaller management units (countries) were in line with this advice.While stocks remain in a depleted state and in the absence of a fishery at Faroes, particular care should be taken to ensure that fisheries in homewaters are managed to protect stocks that are below their CLs.

The 2009 data (landings and survey) do not change the perception of the stock and give no reason to change the advice from that given last year: “ICES advises that a management plan be developed and implemented which takes into account the uncertainties in science and the properties of the fisheries. ICES suggests that catches are set no higher than 10 000 t as a starting point for the adaptive part of the management plan.”

ICES advises that Blim, Bpa, and FMSY remain unchanged (A in the request). Given the current status of the stock the current management plan (A in the request) has a probability >0.06 of SSB< Blim in 2017. In the short term, ICES advises against increasing target F (0.125) in the management plan (B and C in the request) as stock size is currently relatively low and decreasing. Given the current status of the stock, all of the evaluated HCRsin the request have a probability >0.05 of SSB< Blim in 2017. The stock assessment has shown bias over the last 15 years such that the stock has been overestimated on average by 26%. This overestimation means that the stock has been fished at higher Fs than intended under the plan. With the current management plan, the short-term probability of SSB< Blim increases from 0.061, if no bias is assumed, to 0.77 if the historical bias is incorporated. Under the assumptions for normal recruitment used in the HCRs, the simulations show that the population is expected to increase. Currently ICES is unable to determine the source of the recent bias or predict whether it will continue or not.

This paper deals with observed changes in the Norwegian Sea Deep Water (NSDW) after the cessation of bottom water formation in the Greenland Sea. Current measurements indicate that the deep water flow from the Greenland Sea to the Norwegian Sea has reversed. The Deep Water in the Norwegian Sea is warming in the entire layer below 1000m depth and down to the bottom. The thickness of the adiabatic layer is decreasing. The salinity of the homohaline layer is constant but the thickness is decreasing. The overflow water in the Faroe-Shetland Chunnel is freshening.

The advice given in 2012 for this stock is biennial and valid for 2013 and 2014 (see ICES, 2012a): “ICES advises on the basis of the precautionary approach that no fishing for porbeagle should be permitted. Landings of porbeagle should not be allowed. A rebuilding plan should be developed for this stock.” The advice is summarized in the table below.

The workshop on the evaluation of northern Norwegian coastal cod harvest control rules (WKNCCHCR 2022) was held to evaluate proposed HCRs and to examine the basis of the Blim for the coastal cod north stock. The stock has moved from category 3 to category 1 with a SAM assessment as a result of the benchmark WKBARFAR in 2021, and there was therefore a desire to produce HCR(s) for the stock based on the new assessment. In addition, concerns had been raised over the estimation of Blim at WKBARFAR. The meeting thus covered both an examination of the model and data relevant to Blim, as well as evaluations of various HCRs. While investigating Blim it was discovered that the estimate of Blim was highly sensitive to small changes in model or data, or even to the choice to consider recruitment-at-age 2 vs. age 3. These changes moved the Blim estimate in a range between lowest and highest observed stock size and various points in between. Over the observed range of SSB recruitment had never completely collapsed but it was difficult to distinguish to what extent, if any, recruitment had been impaired. This was taken to imply that the signal in the recruitment was weak both due to noise in the data but also due to the nature of the stock as a complex of interacting substocks (various fjord substocks plus a separation-by-distance stock along the coast), meaning that there is no one single Blim value associated with impaired recruitment for all of the substocks. As a result, it was concluded that no reliable Blim estimate could be produced for this stock. As part of the work on Blim, the meeting identified that the acoustic survey has poor cohort consistency, particularly in the most recent portion (the index is split between 2002 and 2003 due to a change in methodology). The decision was therefore taken to change to using the acoustic index as a biomass index instead of an age-structured index. This change has only a minor impact on the SSB estimates. The request required an examination of HCRs with a combination of Btrigger and both FMSY- and Fp0.5 (Fpa)-based fishing advice. However, given the absence of a reliable Blim level which the stock should be maintained above, it was considered that none of these HCRs could be considered precautionary, and therefore could not be used as the basis for ICES advice. To arrive at an HCR which could be evaluated as precautionary and form a basis for potential ICES advice, the meeting proposed an HCR based on F0.1. In addition to the theoretical basis for F0.1 as a fishing level that should drive the stock to safe and productive levels, the F0.1 estimate was rather stable to the range of data and model options tested at WKNCCHCR and at similar previous fishing pressures the stock had increased. Further, in all cases, F0.1 was estimated as being below all potential values of Fp0.5 (either with or without a Btrigger point and taking account of the uncertainty around Blim). The HCR with Ftarget = F0.1 was therefore evaluated as precautionary within the observed range of SSB in the part of the time-series considered in the stock–recruit simulations (2003–2020). This lower bound on the HCR was named SSB_lowerbound. The meeting also examined the Fbar range used for reporting F and concluded that the Fbar range should be expanded from the current F4–7 to F4–8.

ICES advises that when the long-term management strategy agreed by the European Union, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Norway, and the Russian Federation is applied, catches in 2023 should be no more than 511 171 tonnes.

ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied, landings should be no more than 818 tonnes in each of the years 2023 and 2024. ICES cannot quantify the corresponding catches.

ICES advises that when the MSY approach is applied, catches in 2023 should be no more than 1 359 629 tonnes.

ICES advises on the basis of the MSY approach that catches in 2012 should be no more than 211 000 t.

ICES advises that there should be no directed fisheries for blue ling, and a reduction in bycatches should be considered until the scientific information is sufficient to prove the fishery sustainable. Measures should be implemented to minimize the bycatch. Closed areas to protect spawning aggregations should be maintained and expanded where appropriate.

ICES advises on the basis of precautionary considerations that catches should be no more than 40 000 t.

ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied, landings should be no more than 179 tonnes in each of the years 2023 and 2024. ICES cannot quantify the corresponding catches.

On the basis of the MSY approach, ICES advises that fishing should only take place on salmon from rivers where stocks have been shown to be at full reproductive capacity. Furthermore, because of the different status of individual stocks within stock complexes, mixed-stock fisheries present particular threats. The management of a fishery should ideally be based upon the individual status of all stocks exploited in the fishery.

Based on ICES approach to data-limited stocks, ICES advises that catches should be reduced by 4%. Because the data for catches of smooth-hounds are not fully documented and considered highly unreliable (due to the historical use of generic landings categories), ICES is not in a position to quantify the result.

Advice f or 2011 On the basis of the MSY approach, ICES advises that fishing should only take place on maturing 1SW salmon and non-maturing 1SW salmon from rivers where stocks have been shown to be at full reproductive capacity. Furthermore, due to the different status of individual stocks within the stock complex, mixed-stock fisheries present particular threats to stock status. The management of a fishery should ideally be based on the status of all stocks exploited in the fishery. Given the current abundance levels from the NEAC run reconstruction model and associated Bayesian abundance forecasts, the following advice on management is provided for the two age groups in the Northern and Southern NEAC stock complexes (Figures 10.2.1, 10.2.2; Table 10.2.1). Northern European 1SW stocks: For 2011 to 2014, this stock is forecasted to be at risk of suffering reduced reproductive capacity prior to the commencement of distant-water fisheries. This stock complex therefore offers no mixed-stock fishing opportunities. Northern European MSW stocks: For 2011 and 2012, this stock is forecasted to be at full reproductive capacity prior to the commencement of distant-water fisheries. For 2013 and 2014, the stock is at risk of suffering reduced reproductive capacity prior to the commencement of distant-water fisheries. There are mixed-stock fishing opportunities on this stock complex only in 2011 and 2012. Southern European 1SW stocks: For 2011 to 2014, the stock is forecasted to be at risk of suffering reduced reproductive capacity prior to the commencement of distant-water fisheries. This stock complex therefore offers no mixed-stock fishing opportunities.. Southern European MSW stocks: For 2010 to 2014, the stock is forecasted to be at risk of suffering reduced reproductive capacity prior to the commencement of distant-water fisheries. This stock complex therefore offers no mixed-stock fishing opportunities..

The core objectives of the Working Group on International Pelagic Surveys (WGIPS) are to combine and review the results of annual pelagic ecosystem surveys to provide indices for the stocks of herring, sprat, mackerel, boarfish, and blue whiting in the Northeast Atlantic, Norwegian Sea, North Sea, and Western Baltic; and to coordinate timing, coverage and methodologies for the upcoming 2022 surveys. To support this work, the group is drafting an update to the Series of ICES Survey Protocols 9 - Manual for International Pelagic Surveys (SISP9-IPS). This past year, WGIPS held a number of focal sessions including: (1) a session for presenting auxiliary monitoring of ecosystem components beyond the standard fishery survey results for the target species. This session has been held annually since 2019, with presentations this year on tests with an in-trawl stereo camera system during part of the 2021 International Ecosystem Summer Survey in the Nordic Seas (IESSNS), (2) a session on the future and development of databases used to store data from surveys in WGIPS (ICES Acoustic Database and the “PGNAPES” database), developments and use of the acoustic survey analysis software “StoX” and progress on adopting the ICES Transparent Assessment Framework (TAF) for archiving and documenting acoustic index calculations, and (3) a session on biological sampling strategies in WGIPS surveys. The group is documenting the sampling strategies used in all WGIPS surveys (on request from ICES Working group on Acoustic Trawl Data Portal Governance (WGAcousticGov) and is planning a workshop on sampling strategies in the ICES Coordinated Acoustic Survey in the Skagerrak and Kattegat, the North Sea, West of Scotland and the Malin Shelf area (HERAS). The group also reviewed progress on mesopelagic sampling with an update from the European Union Horizon 2020-programme on Ecologically and Economically Sustainable Mesopelagic Fisheries (MEESO), presentations on new net developments for the International Blue Whiting Spawning Survey (IBWSS) and experiences with using a Methot Isaac Kidd (MIK) net to target scattering layers at 150m. Lastly, WGIPS reviewed progress in using genetic stock separation methods for splitting survey results to component herring stocks and discussed ways forward to continue to develop these methods whilst maintaining the integrity of the survey indices. WGIPS encourages continued close collaboration of the survey group, assessment groups and institutes carrying out the genetic analysis work.

The 2012 advice for this stock wasbiennial and valid for 2013–2014. New data available do not change the perception of this stock. Therefore the advice for this fishery in 2015 is the same as the advice for 2013: Based on the ICES approach for data-limited stocks, ICES advises that catches should be no more than 9040 t.

ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied, landings should be no more than 3272 tonnes in each of the years 2016 and 2017. Discarding is known to occur, but is variable and quantities of dead discards have not been estimated.

ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied, landings should be no more than 1682 tonnes in each of the years 2017 and 2018*. Discards are substantial but only available for part of the fishery. ICES cannot quantify the corresponding catches.

The 2012 advice for this stock is biennial and valid for 2013 and 2014. New data availabledo not change the perception of the stock.Therefore, the advice for this fishery in 2015 is the same as the advice for 2013: Based on the ICES approach for data-limited stocks, ICES advises that fisheries should not be allowed to expand from 120 t until there is evidence thatthis is sustainable.

Blue whiting is distributed over a vast area in the Northeast Atlantic from the Barents Sea to the Mediterranean. Within this area spawning has been observed in the Mediterranean, in the Bay of Biscay, west of the British Isles and south of Ireland. North of the Shetland-Faroe-Iiceland Ridge, apart from single observations, no spawning has been observed. The area west of the British Isles is a major spawning area whereto fish from the Norwegian Sea migrate to spawn. It is however difficult to concieve that all blue whiting, which are found in the Norwegian Sea and in the Barents Sea during summer and autumn belong to the same spawning stock. In that context morphometric measurements and meristic counts on blue whiting were performed during some surveys with "G.O. Sars" to the Norwegian Sea and to the spawning area west of the British Isles.

The advice given in 2012 for 2013 and 2014 is reiterated for 2015: “Based on ICES approach to data-limited stocks, ICES advises that catches should be reduced by 20%. Because the data for catches of tope are not fully documented and considered unreliable (due to the historical use of generic landings categories), ICES is not in a position to quantify the result. Measures to identify pupping areas should be taken.” The advice is summarized in the table below. NB: The advice for 2015 is the same catch advice than for 2013 and 2014 (even if it cannot be quantified) not that a further 20% reduction in catch be implemented. NB: new Advice will be provided in 2015.

ICES concludes that overall the programme produces and delivers data products, maps, and dissemination materials that are in accordance with sound scientific standards and which meet the needs of the assumed objectives of the programme.ICES advises that, following the forthcoming user review, a clear set of programme objectives for the MAREANO programme are defined and published.ICES concludes that the external communication of MAREANO’s results generally works well, both in terms of products and of target groups by making reports, publications, and map products available to policy-makers, the general public, and to the scientific community. ICES further concludes that the data produced by the programme are available to potential users and that the future quality and availability of these data is largely secured. Some improvements are suggested to ensure that outputs are of greatest use to others.While the external communication is in reasonably good shape, ICES advises all parties implementing MAREANO to strengthen the internal communication and data exchange. This includes improving transparency of decision-making, better consideration of internal data users, and ensuring that all information and data are available across the programme.ICES advises that the considerable external data holdings should be used more effectively by MAREANO, and that development of data collection standards would enhance the usefulness of future data collection external to MAREANO.ICES advises that better use should be made of information from physical samples of the benthos than is currently the case.

The advice given in 2012 for this stock is biennial and valid for 2013 and 2014 (see ICES, 2012a): “Based on ICES approach to data-limited stocks, ICES advises that catches should be reduced by 4%. Because the data for catches of smooth-hounds are not fully documented and considered highly unreliable (due to the historical use of generic landings categories), ICES is not in a position to quantify the result. This is the first year ICES is providing quantitative advice for data-limited stocks.” The advice for 2014 is the same catch advised for 2013 (even though its value cannot be quantified), not that a further percentage reduction in catch be implemented. The advice is summarized in the table below.

ICES advises that an appropriate Blim to be used as a basis for ICES Advice Rule cannot be identified with the currently available data for this stock. As a consequence of this, the proposed harvest control rule (HCR) and rebuilding plan are not considered consistent with the precautionary approach or ICES MSY approach. ICES further advises that a precautionary HCR for the stock is a fishing mortality of F0.1, a conservative proxy for FMSY, applied at all stock sizes above Bloss (minimum observed spawning-stock biomass [SSB]).

The advice given in 2012 for this stock is biennial and valid for 2013 and 2014 (see ICES, 2012a): “ICES advises on the basis of the precautionary approach that there should be no catches of Portuguese dogfish.” The advice is summarized in the table below.

At the 73rd Statutory Meeting in London it was decided (C.Res.1985/2:3:2) that the Mackerel Working Group (Chairman: Dr. S.J. Lockwood) should meet at lCES headquarters from 17 February to 26 February 1986 to: a) consider the report of the Mackerel Egg Production Workshop; b) provide a comprehensive examination of the Norwegian tagging data used as a basis for estimating the rate of mixing between the North Sea and Western stocks of mackerel in Divisions IIa, Vb, and VIa and Sub-area IV; c) assess the status of and provide catch options for 1987 for the mackerel stocks in Sub-areas lI-VII and Divisions Villa and b within safe biological limits; d) specify safe biological limits for the two mackerel stocks; e) provide quarterly catch-at-age and mean weight-at-age data for 1985 mackerel as input for the Multispecies VPA, and provide information on the likely level of the Western stock mackerel which are seasonally present in the North Sea f) provide information relative to the following request from the EEC pertaining to the closed area for fishing for mackerel in Divisions Vlle,f,g: "ACFM is requested to evaluate the effect of this closure on the evolution of the Western mackerel stock and in the light of both this evaluation and the current state of this stock, in particular of its distribution, advise the Commission of the European Communities: - whether the existing provisions concerning the closed area should be retained in their present form, modified or completely repealed; - whether alternative or additional measures should be introduced and, if so, to advise what these measures should be. If different opinions exist for achieving the objective of protecting the juvenile component of the stock, these should be described and their advantages and disadvantages examined".

ICES advises that the harvest control rules (HCRs) considered in this request for cod and haddock are all precautionary inaccordance with the ICES standard that the annual probability of SSB falling below Blim should be no more than 5%.For cod, scenarios with a higher F (HCRs 3 to 10) than used presently (HCR 2) result in 1%–4% higher long-term median yield,but there is up to a threefold increase in interannual TAC variability. The median long-term SSB expected with the higher FHCRs is 4%–16% lower than under the HCR used presently. The HCR with the lowest F (HCR 1) leads to a 7% decrease inmedian long-term catch relative to HCR 2, lower interannual variability in TAC, and higher SSB.For haddock, scenarios with a higher F (HCRs 3, 5, and 6) than under the one used presently (HCR 2) result in 0%–4% higherlong-term median yield, with an increase in interannual TAC variability between 13% and 36%. The median long-term SSBexpected with the higher F HCRs is around 20% lower than under the HCR used presently. HCRs 1 (lower target F) and 4 (10%limit on interannual TAC variation) lead to lower long-term catch, lower interannual TAC variability, and higher median longtermSSB than HCR 2.For cod, yield is expected to decline relative to the 2015 TAC and SSB is expected to stabilize in the short term (next threeyears), whereas for haddock both yield and SSB are expected to decline in the short term for all the HCRs in the request.For capelin, the HCRs based on the 90%, 85%, and 80% criteria are not precautionary in the ICES evaluation context bydefinition; only the rule implemented in the current management plan, corresponding to the 95% criterion, may beprecautionary. An examination of the stock dynamics in recent decades, when the current HCR (based on 95% criterion) orthe previous HCR (based on a similar escapement strategy) were in operation suggests that these HCRs resulted insustainable exploitation. The overall effect of allowing a higher probability of SSB < Blim would be that the fishery would beopened at a lower survey biomass (maturing capelin), the TAC would increase and the resulting spawning biomass would belower, potentially increasing the risk of recruitment failure. The 2015 survey estimate for capelin was low and would have ledto closure of the fishery in 2016 under all suggested HCRs.

ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied there should be no directed fisheries for blue ling in theseareas for the years 2016 and 2017, and a reduction in bycatches should be considered until the scientific information is sufficient to prove the fishery sustainable. Measures should be implemented to minimize the bycatch. Closed areas to protect spawning aggregations should be maintained and expanded where appropriate.

Stock specific documentation of standard assessment procedures used by ICES. Stock: Spurdog Working Group: Working Group on Elasmobranch Fishes (WGEF) Last updated: August 2022 (WGEF 2022); March 2021 (WKNSEA 2021)

ICES advises on the basis of the precautionary approach that there should be no targeted fishery and that catches in mixed fisheries should be reduced to the lowest possible level. A rebuilding plan should be developed for this stock.

The status of eel remains critical and ICES advises that all anthropogenic mortality (e.g. recreational and commercial fishing, hydropower, pumping stations, and pollution) affecting production and escapement of silver eels should be reduced to – or kept as close to – zero as possible.

Description not yet available

Description not yet available

ICES advises that when the MSY approach is applied, catches in 2024 should be no more than 41 286 tonnes. Management of Sebastes mentella and S. norvegicus catches in east Greenland under a combined species TAC prevents effective control of the single-species exploitation rates, and is causing overexploitation of S. mentella for which there is zero catch advice. ICES advises that management should be implemented at the species level.

ICES advises that when the MSY approach is applied, catches in 2023 should be no more than 782 066 tonnes.

ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied for European eel, all anthropogenic mortality (e.g. recreational and commercial fishing on all stages, hydropower, pumping stations, and pollution) affecting production and escapement of silver eels should be reduced to – or kept as close to – zero as possible.

Description not yet available

Based on the most recent estimates of SSB and recruitment, ICES classifies the stock as having full reproductive capacity. The maturing component in autumn 2009 was estimated to be 2.3 million tonnes. The spawning stock in 2010 will consist of fish from the 2006 and 2007 year classes, but the 2006 year class will dominate. The survey estimate at age 1 of the 2008 year class is below the long-term average, while 0-group observations during the joint Russian-Norwegian ecosystem survey in August-September 2009 indicated that the 2009 year class is strong.

Based on the most recent estimates of SSB (in 2009) and fishing mortality (in 2008), ICES classifies the stock as having full reproductive capacity and being harvested sustainably. The SSB has been above Bpa since 1989. Fishing mortality was reduced from above Flim in 1988 to below Fpa in 2000–2002, and has since been around Fpa. Recruitment at age 3 has been at or above average since 2000. The year classes 2004–2006 are estimated to be very strong. Surveys indicate that the year classes 2007 and 2008 are below average

ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied, catches should be no more than 5894 tonnes in each of theyears 2017 and 2018. All catches are assumed to be landed.Distributed by area this corresponds to annual catches of no more than 2802 tonnes in subareas 6 and 7 and divisions 5.band 12.b, annual catches of no more than 2726 tonnes in Subarea 8 and Division 9.a, and annual catches of no more than366 tonnes in subareas 1, 2, 4, and 10 and divisions 3.a and 5.a.

The objective of The Working Group on International Deep Pelagic Ecosystem Surveys (WGIDEEPS) is to plan and conduct international deep pelagic ecosystem surveys in the Irminger Sea and adjacent waters and in the Norwegian and Barents Seas. The main focus of the group is to measure abundance and map the distribution of beaked redfish (Sebastes mentella). The participating nations are Germany, Iceland, Norway and Russia.The group had some success transferring data from the WGIDEEPS surveys into the ICES-DATRAS data-base including the Norwegian Sea International Deep Pelagic Surveys (NS-IDPS) for 2009, 2013, and 2016, and the Icelandic Irminger Sea International Deep Pelagic Surveys (IS-IDPS) for 2009. This will allow for future efficient and transparent access to WGIDEEPS data.The group discussed a new method for the estimation of abundance and biomass of redfish in the deeper layers in the Irminger Sea. Testing of this proposed method should be a future goal.The group also aimed to set up a formal procedure for the use and transfer of Norwegian survey data to other ICES groups including Arctic Fisheries Working Group (AFWG) and The Working Group on the Integrated Assessments of the Norwegian Sea (WGINOR). Estimated numbers-at-age from the pelagic sur-vey in the Norwegian Sea were presented at the 2018 benchmark assessment and used in the analytical assessment for the stock.The 2017 Workshop on Monitoring Technologies for the Mesopelagic Zone (WKMESO) improved collabo-ration with other ICES expert groups and WGIDEEPS plans to continue developing pathways for improved coordination.The working group also worked on planning and reporting of the surveys in the Irminger Sea and Norwe-gian Sea. The Irminger Sea survey was planned during the meeting in February 2018, was conducted in June/July 2018 and the outcome of the survey was published in the WGIDEEPS interim report in August 2018. Originally, Germany, Iceland and Russia planned to carry out the survey, but technical and other problems meant that Iceland and Germany were not able to participate. Accordingly, the scope of the sur-vey had to be altered and the emphasis was on the detailed coverage of the pelagic redfish above and below 500 m depth in in the northeast part of the survey area. About 103 000 NM2 were covered compared to 340 000 NM2 in 2013.The survey in the Norwegian Sea conducted by Norway in August 2019 showed (1) the extended survey area still does not cover the full extent of the population of beaked redfish in the Norwegian Sea, (2) biomass estimates for 2019 are back in the range of surveys prior to 2016, suggesting that the low estimates for 2016 are due to the bulk of the population being out of the survey area or due to methodological reasons, (3) the observed length structure and the slightly reduced mean length suggest that both the old fish in the popu-lation and the new cohorts observed in 2016 are growing and that young fish become more important nu-merically as the mean length is reduced.

Description not yet available

The Working Group of International Pelagic Surveys (WGIPS) met in Santa Cruz, Tenerife, Spain on 14–18 January 2019, under the chairmanship of Bram Couperus, Netherlands and Michael O’Malley, Ireland. This was the first meeting in the multi-annual ToR term. The core objectives of the Expert Group are to combine and review results of annual pelagic ecosystem surveys to provide indices for the stocks of herring, sprat, mackerel, boarfish, and blue whiting in the NortheastAtlantic, Norwegian Sea, North Sea, and Western Baltic; and to coordinate timing, coverage and methodologies for the upcoming 2019 surveys.A session was held in 2019 to assess auxiliary pelagic ecosystem surveying techniques currently used on surveys coordinated by WGIPS. It was decided that this approach will be continued in future meetings during this term whereby results from the auxiliary monitoring of ecosystem components will be presented in a separate session from the standard fishery survey results for the target species. In practice this means that the session planned under Term of Reference (ToR)h for 2019 will be repeated in 2020 and 2021.Additionally, progress, developments and experiences with the survey analysis software StoX as well as with the ICES acoustic database repository were analysed and discussed amongst users and developers during the meeting and the intention to further consolidate both the software and the database as common tools to be utilized among all surveys coordinated within WGIPS was stated. Further work progressed on editing the current version of the SISP 9 Manual forInternational Pelagic Surveys and will continue intersessionally.WGIPS requests a workshop to establish and agree on survey design and protocols for coordinating and conducting acoustic surveys on herring spawning aggregations. The workshop will focus on industry acoustic surveys on herring spawning aggregations in 6.a and in the Irish Sea. WGIPS also requests a workshop on scrutinising procedures of acoustic data from surveys participating in the IESSNS survey. Scrutinisation procedures, including using biological samples and allocation of species to echotraces need to be scientifically reviewed periodically for all acoustic surveys and a set of technical procedures agreed for each survey.A new Term of Reference (ToR) was added to the Working Group ToRs. The purpose of the ToR is to review the work, and report of workshops organized by WGIPS and develop formal ICES recommendations. This should include SISP updates and adopting changes to survey coordination where deemed appropriate.Results from the WGIPS surveys in 2018 as well as coordination plans for the 2019 individual and multinational pelagic acoustic surveys in Northeast Atlantic waters (Multinational surveys: IBWSS, IESNS, IESSNS, HERAS, and individual surveys: CSHAS, WESPAS, ISAS, PELTIC, GERAS, PELACUS, Irish Sea spawning survey and industry acoustic surveys in 6.a/7.b/c) are given in Annexes 3 -14 of this report.

Description not yet available.

In the absence of defined reference points, the state of the stock cannot be fully evaluated. The assessment is considered indicative of stock trends, and provides relative measures of stock status. The stock has been below Bmsy since the mid- 1990s and is presently at a historical low at 40% of Bmsy. Present fishing mortality is estimated at twice the fishing mortality that is associated with maximum sustainable yield.