Haddock in the North-East Arctic (ICES subarea 1 and 2), Demersal otter trawl
- Content last updated
- 27 March 2019
- Haddock in the North-East Arctic (ICES subarea I and II)
- Russia and Norway
- Stock Status
Very low risk
North East Arctic Haddock (ICES Subareas 1 and 2) has been scored low risk. This is because the stock is at safe levels and although exploitation is not optimal it is inside safe biological limits. The spawning-stock biomass (SSB) has been above MSY Btrigger since 1989. Due to the strong recruitment-at-age 3 in 2007–2009 (2004–2006 year classes) the stock reached an all-time high level around 2013. SSB is now decreasing, along with advised catches, but remains well above MSY Btrigger, the action level. Fishing mortality has increased in recent years and is now above FMSY, which is the target for optimal fishing, but below Fpa which is the at risk level.
The management of Northeast Arctic Haddock has been scored a very low risk. This is because scientific stock assessment is carried out regularly based both on fishery dependent and independent data and there is management plan for the stock. There is also adequate enforcement of fishery control rules by Norway and Russia regulated by activity of Joint Russian–Norwegian Fisheries Commission.
The bycatch in trawl fisheries for Northeast Arctic Haddock has been scored a moderate risk. This is because the Arctic haddock is mainly fished by trawls being itself a bycatch in the fishery for cod, with some directed fisheries by longline and trawl. In this mixed cod-and-haddock fishery bycatch of non-commercial species is small, and there is no threat to vulnerable seabirds or marine mammals.
The habitat impact of the demersal otter trawls fishery has been scored a moderate risk. This is because, although demersal otter trawls are likely to have effects on seabed ecosystems, there is good understanding of these effects in this area. Mitigation measures based on this understanding, including designated marine protected areas in Norwegian and Russian waters, as well as measures which require fishers to avoid vulnerable habitats if they encounter them, are in place. Fishers tend to avoid vulnerable habitats to avoid damage to gear and reduced quality of catches. Continuing efforts to map seabed habitats, understand the implications of changes in ice cover due to ocean warming and reduce the physical effects of gear through technological improvements are aimed at reducing these effects.