Advisory Committee
24 September 2014
2014 ACOM and ACOM Expert Group ToR’s
Contents
Advisory Committee ...................................................................................................... 4
MIRIA – Meeting between ICES and Recipients of ICES Advice ........................ 6
MIRAC – Meeting between ICES and Regional Advisory Councils and
other Stakeholders ................................................................................................. 7
WGCHAIRS – Annual Meeting of Advisory Working Group Chairs ................. 8
Generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups ..................................... 9
AFWG – Arctic Fisheries Working Group ............................................................... 11
HAWG – Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62ºN..... 12
NWWG – North-Western Working Group .............................................................. 13
WGBAST – Baltic Salmon and Trout Assessment Working Group ................... 15
WGNAS – Working Group on North Atlantic Salmon ......................................... 16
WGBFAS – Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group .................................... 19
WGBIE– Working Group for the Bay of Biscay and Iberic waters Ecoregion .. 21
WGCSE – Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion ..................................... 23
WGNSSK – Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the
North Sea and Skagerrak ................................................................................... 26
NIPAG – Joint NAFO/ICES Pandalus Assessment Working Group .................. 28
WGWIDE – Working Group on Widely Distributed Stocks ............................... 29
WGHANSA – Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel Anchovy and
Sardine (formerly WGANSA) ........................................................................... 30
WGDEEP – Working Group on the Biology and Assessment of Deep-Sea
Fisheries Resources ............................................................................................. 31
WGEEL – Joint GFCM/EIFAAC/ICES Working Group on Eels .......................... 34
WGEF – Working Group on Elasmobranch Fishes ................................................ 36
WGHARP – Group on Harp and Hooded Seals ..................................................... 43
WGNEW - Working Group on Assessment of New MoU Species ..................... 44
1
WGMIXFISH-NS – Working Group on Mixed Fisheries Advice for the
North Sea ............................................................................................................... 46
WGMIXFISH-METH – Working Group on Mixed Fisheries Advice
Methodology......................................................................................................... 48
WGScallop – Scallop Assessment Working Group ............................................... 50
WKINTRO – Workshop to draft general advisory guidance document ............ 53
Ecosystem related Expert Groups .............................................................................. 54
WGECO – Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities ..... 54
WGMME – The Working Group on Marine Mammal Ecology........................... 56
WGBYC – Working Group on Bycatch of Protected Species ............................... 59
WGDEC – ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on Deep-water Ecology............. 61
Environmental related Expert Groups...................................................................... 65
WGBOSV – ICES/IOC/IMO Working Group on Ballast and Other Ship
Vectors ................................................................................................................... 65
WGITMO – Working Group on Introduction and Transfers of Marine
Organisms ............................................................................................................. 67
SGOA – Study group on Ocean Acidification ........................................................ 69
Data Related Expert Groups ....................................................................................... 71
PGCCDBS: Planning Group on Commercial Catches, Discards and
Biological Sampling ............................................................................................ 71
WKSABCAL - Workshop on Statistical Analysis of Biological Calibration
Studies ................................................................................................................. 112
WGCATCH Working Group on Commercial Catches ....................................... 115
WGBIOP - Working Group on Biological Parameters ........................................ 118
WGRFS – Working Group on Recreational Fisheries Surveys .......................... 119
SC-RDB - Steering Committee for the Regional Database FishFrame ............. 121
BenchmarkToRs for 2014 .......................................................................................... 123
WKBALFLAT – Benchmark Workshop on Baltic Flatfish stocks ..................... 123
WKSOUTH – Benchmark Workshop on Southern megrim and hake stocks . 124
WKHAD – Benchmark Workshop on northern Haddock stocks ...................... 126
WKCELT – Benchmark Workshop on Celtic Sea stocks ..................................... 127
WKPELA – Benchmark Workshop on Pelagic stocks .......................................... 129
WKDEEP – Benchmark Workshop on Deep sea stocks ...................................... 131
2
IBP-Bass – Inter-Benchmark Protocol for sea bass in the Irish Sea, Celtic
Sea, English Channel, and southern North Sea ........................................... 133
DCWKANG- Data Compilation Worksop on anglerfish stocks in the ICES
area........................................................................................................................ 134
New Expert Groups and other 2014 meetings (except Data related EGs) ........ 137
WKMSYREF2 - Workshop to consider reference points for all stocks............. 137
WKFooWI - Workshop to develop recommendations for potentially useful
Food Web Indicators ......................................................................................... 138
WKSALDAT - Workshop on salmon catch data in the Baltic ............................ 140
WKD3R - Workshop to draft recommendations for the assessment of
Descriptor D3 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive .................... 143
WKUPDATE - Workshop on updating ICES advice ........................................... 145
WKMEDS - Workshop on Methods for Estimating Discard Survival ............. 147
Resolutions added after ACOM meeting December 2013 .................................. 148
SC-RDB - Steering Committee for the Regional Database FishFrame ............. 148
WKRDB2014 - Workshop on Developing the RDB data format for design
based sampling and estimation for on shore sampling .............................. 148
WKLIFE IV– Workshop on the Development of Quantitative Assessment
Methodologies
based
on
Life-history
traits,
exploitation
characteristics, and other relevant parameters for data-limited stocks.... 149
WKHOMMP – Workshop on North Sea horse mackerel management plan .. 150
WKGMSFD-D3 - Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD Decision
Descriptor 3 - commercial fish and shellfish ................................................ 151
WKGMSFD-D4 - Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD decision
descriptor 4 – foodwebs .................................................................................... 152
WKGMSFD-D6 - Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD decision
descriptor 6 – seafloor integrity....................................................................... 153
WKMSYREF3 - Joint ICES-MYFISH Workshop to consider the basis for
FMSY ranges for all stocks .................................................................................. 154
WKSIBCA - Workshop on Scoping for Integrated Baltic Cod Assessment .... 156
WKHerringTAC - Workshop to evaluate the TAC calculation for herring in
IIIa ........................................................................................................................ 157
3
Advisory Committee
2013/2/ACOM01 The Advisory Committee (ACOM), chaired by Eskild Kirkegaard will
work on the following tasks:
a) Meet in plenary in Copenhagen, 2–5 December 2014 to:
i)
Review directions and guidelines provided by Council, Bureau and client
requests for information and advice;
ii) Review the performance of the advisory function in 2014 and agree on
remedial actions as appropriate;
iii) Review progress on Advisory Services in 2014
iv) Finalise the 2015 workplan
v) review and update plans regarding further development of the ICES advice
including further progress towards integrated assessments in integrated
assessment expert groups
vi) Review guidelines for the advisory work including the guidelines for data
limited stocks and for the basis for advice and amend as appropriate
vii) Consider research needs as input to the Scientific Committee and to DG RTD;
and provide advice and guidance on future scientific needs and priorities
related to the work of ACOM
b) Work by correspondence (web conferences) according to the workplan, inter alia
to adopt advice;
c)
Present the advice to ICES advice recipients by the ACOM Chair or his designate.
The advice on North Atlantic Salmon will be presented to NASCO by the chair of
WGNAS.
d) Present the ICES advice to stakeholders by the ACOM Chair or his designate.
e) Hold Consultations at national expense in La Coruña, Spain in September 2014
during the ASC Meeting to:
i)
Discuss the 2015 workplan including Terms of Reference, dates and venues
for groups reporting to ACOM in 2015;
ii) Conduct other business related to the functioning of ACOM.
Supporting Information
Priority:
High.
Scientific Justification and
relation to Action Plan:
Benchmark workshops will be held to peer review data and assessment
methods. Expert groups will analyze the available information,
develop draft advice, and audit that the stock annex has been applied.
Advice drafting groups will develop the draft advice text for adoption
by ACOM.
Resource Requirements:
Participants:
Chair, Vice-Chairs, and nationally nominated and ex officio members.
Chairs of the Expert groups with advisory tasks are invited to the
ACOM Consultations in September. The ACOM Chair may invite
experts to the September Consultations as appropriate.
Observers
Recipients of advice, Observers to the advisory process
Secretariat Facilities:
The ACOM meeting will normally be held at ICES HQ to benefit from
WebEx facilities and full Secretariat support
4
Financial:
Included in the Secretariat budget
Linkages to other
Committees or Groups:
SciCom (including Steering Groups) on research needs, Council,
Bureau
Linkages to other
Organisations:
EC (DG Fish, DG Env), HELCOM, OSPAR, AMAP, NASCO, NEAFC,
JNRFC, ICCAT, GFCM
5
MIRIA – Meeting between ICES and Recipients of ICES Advice
2013/2/ACOM02 ICES will invite recipients of ICES advice (Partner Commissions,
governments) to meet with the ACOM leadership, chaired by ACOM Chair, Eskild
Kirkegaard, 13–14 January 2014 to:
a) Review the performance of the ICES advisory system in 2013 and discuss
issues and concerns arising since the 2013 MIRIA meeting
b) Review progress with coordination of the scientific work in relation to advice
on marine management and specifically the coordination of the use of expert
resources
c)
Review the plan for further development of ICES advice in relation to marine
environmental issues, data limited stocks, MSY, mixed fisheries, integration of
multispecies considerations and further move towards integrated advice
d) Discuss policy choices of relevance to ICES advice regarding MSY,
multispecies and mixed fisheries and prepare for dialogue meeting regarding
MSY in an ecosystem context in the autumn of 2014
e) Review proposal for medium term ‘target categories’ for the fish stocks for
which advice is requested from ICES
f)
Discuss options regarding the frequency and criteria for updating fish stocks
advice
g) Provide information on and discuss the Workplan for ICES advice in 2014
including issues of timing, transparency, and quality assurance
h) Discuss how the cost sharing between the recipients of ICES advice can be
discussed between advice recipients in 2014
i)
Any other issues regarding future ICES advice as raised by the advice
recipients
MIRIA will report by xx February 2014 for the attention of the Advisory Committee.
6
MIRAC – Meeting between ICES and Regional Advisory Councils and
other Stakeholders
2013/2/ACOM03 ICES will invite the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) and other
stakeholders to meet with the ACOM leadership, chaired by ACOM Chair, Eskild
Kirkegaard, at ICES Headquarters 15–16 January 2014 to:
a) Discuss practical arrangements in 2014 for cooperation between
RACs/stakeholders and ICES, including procedures for delivering and
discussion of the ICES advice
b) Review progress on following up of action points from the 2013 MIRAC
meeting iscuss the plan for further development of ICES advice in relation to
MSY, mixed fisheries, integration of multispecies considerations and further
move towards integrated advice and prepare for dialogue meeting regarding
MSY in an ecosystem context in the autumn of 2014
c)
Invite RACs/stakeholders to report on their experience of working with ICES
during 2013 and to present their research and advisory needs, and discuss
ICES’ experience of participating in RAC meetings in 2013
MIRAC will report by xx February 2014 for the attention of the Advisory Committee.
7
WGCHAIRS – Annual Meeting of Advisory Working Group Chairs
2013/2/ACOM04
The Annual Meeting of Advisory Working Group Chairs
(WGCHAIRS), chaired by ACOM Chair, Eskild Kirkegaard, will meet at ICES
Headquarters, 28–30 January 2014 to:
First day of the meeting (combined ecology/environment/fisheries)
a) Review the expert group work in support of ICES advice in 2013 including
reviewing the requests for advice and identifying which groups
contributes, guidelines for expert group reports and recommendations and
advice drafting
b) Update on new developments of relevance to ICES advice including the
move towards integrated advice including integration of ecosystem aspects
in advice, ecosystem overviews and strategic initiatives
c)
Update on inputs from the recipients of advice (MIRIA) and stakeholders
(MIRAC) regarding ICES advice
d) Discuss benchmark progress: results from earlier benchmarks, preparation
process for future benchmarks in or outside of the EGs and means to
strengthen the integration of ecosystem aspects in fisheries related
benchmarks.
Second and third day of the meeting (mainly fisheries)
e) Review developments in analytic approaches and the basis and
framework for advice including data limited stocks (WKLIFE3) and
reference points (WKMSYREF2)
f) Review implementation of examples of mixed fisheries and multispecies
advice in 2013, plans for 2014 and update the draft plan for
implementation of mixed fisheries and multispecies advice in the ICES
ecoregions
WGCHAIRS will report by xx February 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
8
Generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups
The following ToRs apply to: AFWG, HAWG, NWWG, NIPAG, WGWIDE,
WGBAST, WGBFAS, WGNSSK, WGCSE, WGDEEP, WGBIE, WGEEL, WGEF,
WGHANSA, WGNEW and WGNAS.
The working group should focus on:
For the ecoregion:
a)
Consider ecosystem overviews where available, and propose and possibly
implement incorporation of ecosystem drivers in the basis for advice
b)
For the ecoregion or fisheries considered by the working group, produce a
brief report summarising for the stocks and fisheries where the item is
relevant:
i)
Mixed fisheries overview and considerations;
ii)
Species interaction effects and ecosystem drivers;
iii) Ecosystem effects of fisheries;
iv)
Effects of regulatory changes on the assessment or projections;
For all stocks:
c)
If no stock annex is available this should be prepared prior to the meeting,
based on the previous year’s assessment and forecast method used for the
advice, including analytical and data-limited methods
d)
Audit the assessments and forecasts carried out for each stock under
consideration by the Working Group and write a short report.
e)
Propose specific actions to be taken to improve the quality and transmission
of the data (including improvements in data collection).
f)
Propose indicators of stock size (or of changes in stock size) that could be used
to decide when an update assessment is required and suggest threshold % (or
absolute) changes that the EG thinks should trigger an update assessment on a
stock by stock basis.
g)
Prepare planning for benchmarks next year, and put forward proposals for
benchmarks of integrated ecosystem, multi or single species for 2016
h)
Check the existing static parts of the popular advice and update as required.
i)
In the autumn, where appropriate, check for the need to reopen the advice
based on the summer survey information and the guidelines in AGCREFA
(2008 report). The relevant groups will report on the AGCREFA 2008
procedure on reopening of the advice before 13 October and will report on
reopened advice before 29 October.
j)
Take into account new guidance on giving catch advice (ACOM, December
2013).
k)
Update, quality check and report relevant data for the stock:
1.
Load fisheries data on effort and catches (landings, discards, bycatch,
including estimates of misreporting when appropriate) in the
INTERCATCH database by fisheries/fleets, either directly or, when
9
relevant, through the regional database. Data should be provided to
the data coordinators at deadlines specified in the ToRs of the
individual groups. Data submitted after the deadlines can be
incorporated in the assessments at the discretion of the Expert Group
chair;
l)
2.
Abundance survey results;
3.
Environmental drivers.
Produce an overview of the sampling activities on a national basis based on
the INTERCATCH database or, where relevant, the regional database.
For update advice stocks:
m) Produce a first draft of the advice on the fish stocks and fisheries under
considerations according to ACOM guidelines and implementing the generic
introduction to the ICES advice (Section 1.2). If no change in the advice is
needed, one page ‘same advice as last year’ should be drafted.
n) For each stock , when possible prior to the meeting:
i)
Update the assessment using the method (analytical, forecast or trends
indicators) as described in the stock annex.
ii) Produce a brief report of the work carried out regarding the stock,
summarising for the stocks and fisheries where the item is relevant:
1.
Input data (including information from the fishing industry and
NGO that is pertinent to the assessments and projections);
2.
Where misreporting of catches is significant, provide qualitative and
where possible quantitative information and describe the methods
used to obtain the information;
3.
Stock status and catch options for next year;
4.
Historical performance of the assessment and brief description of
quality issues with the assessment;
5.
In cooperation with the Secretariat, update the description of major
regulatory changes (technical measures, TACs, effort control and
management plans) and comment on the potential effects of such
changes including the effects of newly agreed management and
recovery plans. Describe the fleets that are involved in the fishery.
o) Review the outcomes of WKMSRREF2 for the specific stocks of the EG.
Calculate reference points for stocks where the information exists but the
calculations have not been done yet and resolve inconsistencies between MSY
and precautionary reference points and if possible
For stocks with multiyear advice or biennial (2nd year) advice
p)
In principle, there is no reason to update this advice. The advice should be
drafted as a one page version referring to earlier advice. If a change in the
advice (basis) is considered to be needed, this should be agreed by the
working group on the first meeting day and communicated to the ACOM
leadership. Agreement by the ACOM leadership will revert the stock to an
update procedure.
10
AFWG – Arctic Fisheries Working Group
2013/2/ACOM05 The Arctic Fisheries Working Group (AFWG), chaired by Bjarte
Bogstad, Norway, will meet in Lisbon, Portugal 23 –29 April 2014 to:
a ) Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see table
below).
b ) For Barents Sea capelin oversee the process of providing intersessional
assessment.
c ) Assess the progress on the benchmark preparation of Cod in Subareas I
and II (Northeast Arctic), Cod in Subareas I and II (Norwegian coastal
waters), haddock in I and II (Northeast Arctic) and Barents Sea capelin.
d ) Continue compiling data for anglerfish in Subarea IIa.
e ) identification of species that are moving to Subareas I and II.
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
AFWG will report by 12 May 2014 (and 04 October 2014 for Barents Sea capelin) for
the attention of ACOM.
Fish
Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Coord.
Assesss.
Coord. 1
Assess.
Coord.2
Advice
cod-arct
Cod in Subareas I and II (Northeast Arctic)
Russia
Norway
Norway
Update
cod-coas
Cod in Subareas I and II (Norwegian
coastal waters)
Norway
Norway
Update
had-arct
Haddock in Subareas I and II (Northeast
Arctic)
Russia
Norway
Update
sai-arct
Saithe in Subareas I and II (Northeast
Arctic
Norway
Norway
Update
cap-bars
Capelin in Subareas I and II (Barents Sea),
excluding Division IIa west of 5°W
Norway
Russia
ghl-arct
Greenland halibut in Subareas I & II
Russia
Norway
Update
smn-arct
Redfish Sebastes mentella Subareas I and II
Russia
Norway
Update
smr-arct
Redfish Sebastes marinus Subareas I and II
Norway
Russia
No
updated
advice
ang-arct
Anglerfish in Subareas I and II (Northeast
Arctic)
Norway
Norway
Norway
Update
No advice
11
HAWG – Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62ºN
2013/2/ACOM06 The Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62ºN
(HAWG), chaired by Lotte Worsøe Clausen, Denmark and Beatriz Roel, UK will meet
at ICES Headquarters, 11–20 March 2014, incorporating an extra day for benchmark
preparation to:
a ) compile the catch data of North Sea and Western Baltic herring on 10–11
March
b ) address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups 12–19
March (see table below)
c ) prepare for benchmarks of herring in VIaN and herring in VIaS and VIIbc,
planned for 2015.
d ) Presentation and discussion of a potential LTMP for WBSS including TAC
share problems in IIIa.
e ) Presentation and discussion of a LTMP (MP) for NS sprat, including a
thorough discussion of the application of the Bescapement rule and setting
the Bescapement reference point.
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the Stock Annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 3 weeks prior to the starting date.
HAWG will report by 3 February 2014 (on sandeel), and by 8 April 2014 (all stocks
except sandeel) for the attention of ACOM
Fish
Stock Name
Stock
Stock
Assesss.
Assess.
Coord.
Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Advice
san-ns1
Sandeel in the Doggerbank area (SA 1)
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
Update
san-ns2
Sandeel in the South Eastern North Sea (SA 2)
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
Update
san-ns3
Sandeel in the Central Eastern North Sea (SA 3)
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
Update
san-ns4
Sandeel in the Central Western North Sea (SA 4)
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
Update
san-ns5
Sandeel in the Viking and Bergen Bank area (SA 5)
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
Update
san-ns6
Sandeel in Division IIIa East (Kattegat, SA6)
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
Update
san-ns7
Sandeel in the Shetland area (SA 7)
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
Update
her-3a22
Herring in Division IIIa and Subdivisions 22–24
Denmark
Sweden
Germany
Update
Germany
NL
Ireland
Ireland
Update
Ireland
Ireland
Update
UK
UK
(Northern
(Northern
Ireland)
Ireland)
(Western Baltic Spring spawners)
her-47d3
Herring in Subarea IV and Division IIIa and VIId
(North Sea Autumn spawners)
her-irls
Herring in Division VIIa South of 52° 30’ N and
VIIg,h,j,k (Celtic Sea and South of Ireland)
her-irlw
Herring in Divisions VIa (South) and VIIb,c
her-nirs
Herring in Division VIIa North of 52° 30’ N (Irish
Sea)
her-vian
Herring in Division VIa (North)
UK
(Scotland)
Sprat in Division IIIa (Skagerrak - Kattegat)
Norway
Denmark
spr-nsea
Sprat in Subarea IV (North Sea)
Norway
Denmark
spr-ech
Sprat in Division VIId,e
spr-celt
Sprat in the Celtic Seas
UK
UK
Update
Update
UK S
spr-kask
UK
UK
(Scotland)
Update
-
Update
Update
-
Update
Update
12
NWWG – North-Western Working Group
2013/2/ACOM07 The North-Western Working Group (NWWG), chaired by Petur
Steingrund, Faroes, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 24 April – 1 May, 2014 to:
a)
Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups.
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the
table below.
For capelin in Iceland-East Greenland-Jan Mayen area, Iceland will provide a WG
type report and a draft advice sheet on 18 April. NWWG will agree any changes to
the WG type report and the Advice sheet no later than 27 April. An ADG will
work by correspondence 29 April. The WEBEX will be 5 May, and the Advice
Release date 7 May.
Other material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group
no later than 14 days prior to the starting date.
NWWG will report by 9 May 2014 for the attention of ACOM. For capelin in IcelandEast Greenland-Jan Mayen area NWWG will report by 1 February 2014 for the
attention of ACOM.
Fish
Stock
Stock Name
Iceland
Assess.
Coord. 1
Faroe
Islands
Faroe
Islands
Faroe
Islands
Faroe
Islands
Iceland
Assess.
Coord. 2
Faroe
Islands
Faroe
Islands
Faroe
Islands
Faroe
Islands
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Greenland
Greenland
Germany
Greenland
Greenland
Germany
Greenland
Greenland
Iceland
Iceland
Iceland
Faroe
Islands
Iceland
Iceland
Germany
Iceland
Germany
Spain
Stock Coord.
cod-farp
Cod in Subdivision Vb1 (Faroe
Plateau)
Faroe Islands
cod-farb
Cod in Subdivision Vb2 (Faroe Bank)
Faroe Islands
had-faro
Haddock in Division Vb
Faroe Islands
sai-faro
Saithe in Division Vb
Faroe Islands
cod-iceg
Cod in Division Va (Icelandic cod)
Haddock in Division Va (Icelandic
haddock)
Saithe in Division Va (Icelandic
saithe)
Herring in Division Va (Icelandic
summer-spawners)
Capelin in Subareas V, XIV and
Division IIa west of 5˚W (Iceland-East
Greenland-Jan Mayen area
Inshore cod in NAFO Subarea 1
(Greenland cod)
Offshore cod in ICES Subarea XIV
and NAFO Subarea 1 (Greenland
cod)
Greenland halibut in Subareas V, VI,
XII and XIV
Redfish (Sebastes marinus) in Subareas
V, VI, XII and XIV
Beaked redfish (Sebastes mentella) in
Division Va and Subarea XIV
(Icelandic slope stock).
Beaked Redfish (Sebastes mentella) in
had-iceg
sai-icel
her-vasu
cap-icel
cod-ingr
cod-offgr
ghl-grn
smr-5614
smn-con
smn-sp
Advice
Update
Multiyear
Update
Update
Update
Update
Update
Update
Update
Update
Update
Update
Update
Multiyear
Update
13
smn-dp
smn-grl
Subareas V, XII, XIV and NAFO
Subareas 1+2 (Shallow Pelagic stock <
500 m deep)
Beaked Redfish (Sebastes mentella) in
Subareas V, XII, XIV and NAFO
Subareas 1+2 (Deep Pelagic stock >
500 m deep)
Beaked Redfish (Sebastes mentella) in
Subarea XIV (East Greenland Slope)
Iceland
Germany
Spain
Greenland
Greenland
Germany
Update
Update
14
WGBAST – Baltic Salmon and Trout Assessment Working Group
2013/2/ACOM08 The Baltic Salmon and Trout Assessment Working Group (WGBAST),
chaired by Tapani Pakarinen, Finland, will meet in Århus, Denmark, 26 March – 2
April 2014 to:
a ) Address relevant points in the Generic ToRs for Regional and Species
Working Groups;
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 6 weeks prior to the meeting.
WGBAST will report by 11 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM and PGCCDBS.
Stock
Coord.
Assess.
Coord. 1
Assess.
Coord. 2
Advice
Fish
Stock
Stock Name
sal2431
Salmon in the Main Basin and Gulf of
Bothnia (Salmon in Subdivisions 22–31)
Sweden
Finland
-
Update
sal-32
Salmon in Subdivision 32 (Gulf of
Finland)
Estonia
Finland
-
Biennial
trt-bal
Sea trout in Subdivisions 22–32 (Baltic
Sea)
Denmark
Poland
-
Biennial
15
WGNAS – Working Group on North Atlantic Salmon
2013/2/ACOM9 The Working Group on North Atlantic Salmon (WGNAS), chaired by
Ian Russell, UK, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 19–28 March 2014 to:
a ) Address relevant points in the Generic ToRs for Regional and Species
Working Groups for each salmon stock complex;
b ) Address questions posed by NASCO:
1.
With respect to Atlantic salmon in the North Atlantic area:
1.1
provide an overview of salmon catches and landings by country, including
unreported catches and catch and release, and production of farmed and
ranched Atlantic salmon in 20131;
1.2
report on significant new or emerging threats to, or opportunities for, salmon
conservation and management2;
1.3
provide a review of examples of successes and failures in wild salmon
restoration and rehabilitation and develop a classification of activities which
could be recommended under various conditions or threats to the persistence
of populations3;
1.4
provide a review of the stock status categories currently used by the
jurisdictions of NASCO, including within their Implementation Plans, and
advise on common approaches that may be applicable throughout the
NASCO area;
1.5
provide a compilation of tag releases by country in 2013;
1.6
identify relevant
requirements.
2.
area:
With respect to Atlantic salmon in the North-East Atlantic Commission
2.1
describe the key events of the 2013 fisheries4;
2.2
review and report on the development of age-specific stock conservation
limits;
2.3
describe the status of the stocks;
2.4
provide recommendations on how a targeted study of pelagic bycatch in
relevant areas might be carried out with an assessment of the need for such a
study considering the current understanding of pelagic bycatch impacts on
Atlantic salmon populations5.
In the event that NASCO informs ICES that the Framework of Indicators (FWI)
indicates that reassessment is required:*
2.5
provide catch options or alternative management advice for 2014-2017, with
an assessment of risks relative to the objective of exceeding stock
conservation limits and advise on the implications of these options for stock
rebuilding6;
2.6
update the Framework of Indicators used to identify any significant change
in the previously provided multi-annual management advice.
16
data
deficiencies,
monitoring
needs
and
research
3.
With respect to Atlantic salmon in the North American Commission area:
3.1
describe the key events of the 2013 fisheries (including the fishery at St Pierre
and Miquelon)4;
3.2
update age-specific stock conservation limits based on new information as
available;
3.3
describe the status of the stocks;
In the event that NASCO informs ICES that the Framework of Indicators (FWI)
indicates that reassessment is required:*
3.4
provide catch options or alternative management advice for 2014-2017 with
an assessment of risks relative to the objective of exceeding stock
conservation limits and advise on the implications of these options for stock
rebuilding6;
3.5
update the Framework of Indicators used to identify any significant change
in the previously provided multi-annual management advice.
4.
With respect to Atlantic salmon in the West Greenland Commission area:
4.1
describe the key events of the 2013 fisheries4;
4.2
describe the implications for the provision of catch advice of any new
management objectives proposed for contributing stock complexes7;
4.3
describe the status of the stocks8,
In the event that NASCO informs ICES that the Framework of Indicators (FWI)
indicates that reassessment is required:*
4.4
provide catch options or alternative management advice for 2014-2016 with
an assessment of risk relative to the objective of exceeding stock conservation
limits and advise on the implications of these options for stock rebuilding6;
4.5
update the Framework of Indicators used to identify any significant change
in the previously provided multi-annual management advice.
Notes:
1.
With regard to question 1.1, for the estimates of unreported catch the information
provided should, where possible, indicate the location of the unreported catch in the
following categories: in-river; estuarine; and coastal. Numbers of salmon caught and
released in recreational fisheries should be provided.
2.
With regard to question 1.2, ICES is requested to include reports on any significant
advances in understanding of the biology of Atlantic salmon that is pertinent to
NASCO, including information on any new research into the migration and
distribution of salmon at sea and the potential implications of climate change for
salmon management.
3.
With regards to question 1.3, NASCO is particularly interested in case studies
highlighting successes and failures of various restoration efforts employed across the
North Atlantic by all Parties/jurisdictions and the metrics used for evaluating
success or failure.
17
4.
In the responses to questions 2.1, 3.1 and 4.1, ICES is asked to provide details of
catch, gear, effort, composition and origin of the catch and rates of exploitation. For
homewater fisheries, the information provided should indicate the location of the
catch in the following categories: in-river; estuarine; and coastal. Information on any
other sources of fishing mortality for salmon is also requested.
5.
In response to question 2.4, if ICES concludes that there is a need for a study, provide
an overview of the parameters and time frame that should be considered for such a
study. Information reported under previous efforts and on migration corridors of
post-smolts in the Northeast Atlantic developed under SALSEA-Merge should be
taken into account.
6.
In response to questions 2.5, 3.4 and 4.4, provide a detailed explanation and critical
examination of any changes to the models used to provide catch advice and report on
any developments in relation to incorporating environmental variables in these
models.
7.
The proposal specifically refers to NAC(13)4, tabled during the North American and
West Greenland Commissions during the 2013 NASCO Annual Meeting.
8.
In response to question 4.2, ICES is requested to provide a brief summary of the
status of North American and North-East Atlantic salmon stocks. The detailed
information on the status of these stocks should be provided in response to questions
2.3 and 3.3.
*
The aim should be for NASCO to inform ICES by 31 January of the
outcome of utilising the FWI
18
WGBFAS – Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group
2013/2/ACOM10 The Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS), chaired by
Marie Storr-Paulsen, Denmark, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 3–10 April 2014 to:
a) Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see
table below);
b) Assess the progress on the benchmark preparation of Baltic Sea flatfish
(plaice 21–23 and plaice 24–-32) taking in to account the outcome of
WKFLABA 1 and 2 and WKPESTO and the ICES approach for DLS;
c)
Describe the likely impact of proposed catch options on biological processes
and interactions of key species in the Baltic Sea;
d) Provide a table of comparisons of FMSY and biomass reference points
between single species and multispecies stock assessments and comment
on differences observed.
e) Revised the reference points of sole Division IIIa and Subdivision 22–32
stock;
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date. Exempt from this are BITS data as the survey
ends only a few days prior to the start of the WGBFAS meeting.
All countries upload official landing statistics, effort statistics and biological sampling
data, for metiers relevant for cod catches into RDB-FishFrame version 5.0. The data in
RDB-FishFrame will be the basis for compilation of input data to stock assessment
models used by WGBFAS. This recommendation is relevant for all member countries
of the WGBFAS.
WGBFAS will report by 25 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM. The group will
report on the ACOM guidelines on reopening procedure of the advice before 14
October and will report on reopened advice before 29 October.
Fish
Stock
cod-
Stock Name
Cod in the Kattegat (part of Division IIIa)
kat
cod-
Cod in Subdivisions 22 to 24
2224
cod-
Cod in Subdivisions 25 to 32
2532
sol-
Sole in Division IIIa and Subdivision 20-
kask
32
her-
Herring in Subdivisions 25 to 29 and 32
2532-
minus Gulf of Riga
Stock
Assess.
Asses.
Coord.
Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Sweden
Sweden
Denmark
Multiyear*
Germany
Denmark
Sweden
Update
Denmark
Sweden
Denmark
Denmark
Sweden
Update
Sweden
Germany
Sweden
Update
Russian
Federation
Advice
Update
gor
19
Fish
Stock
her-
Stock Name
Herring in the Gulf of Riga
riga
her-30
Herring in Subdivision 30, Bothnian Sea
her-31
Herring in Subdivision 31, Bothnian Bay
spr-
Sprat in Subdivisions 22 to 32
2232
fle-
Flounder in Subdivisions 22 and 23**
2223
fle-
Flounder in Subdivisions 24 and 25**
2425
fle-
Flounder in Subdivisions 26 and 28**
2628
Stock
Assess.
Asses.
Advice
Coord.
Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Latvia
Latvia
Estonia
Update
Finland
Sweden
Sweden
Update
Finland
Finland
Sweden
Update
Estonia
Poland
Estonia
Update
Germany
Germany
Denmark
Update
Poland
Poland
Estonia
Update
Estonia
Estonia
Poland
Update
Latvia (tbc)
Update
fle-
Flounder in Subdivisions 27 and 29 to
Sweden
Sweden
2732
32**
(tbc)
(tbc)
bll-
Brill in Subdivisions 22 to 32
Germany
Germany
Multiyear
Germany
Germany
Update
Denmark
Denmark
Update
Germany
Germany
Update
Germany
Germany
Multiyear
2232
ple-
Plaice in Subdivisions 24 to 32
2432
ple-
Plaice in Subdivision 21 to 23
2123
dab-
Dab in Subdivisions 22 to 32
2232
tur-
Turbot in Subdivisions 22 to 32
2232
*An update assessment should be performed, if no changes from last year then 2013 advice is
still valid.
** New stock defined at WKBALFLAT 2014.
20
WGBIE– Working Group for the Bay of Biscay and Iberic waters Ecoregion
2013/2/ACOM11 The Working Group on the Assessment of Southern Shelf Stocks of Hake,
Monk and Megrim [WGHMM], will be renamed to Working Group for the Bay of
Biscay and the Iberic waters Ecoregion (WGBIE) chaired by Michel Bertignac
(France), will meet in Lisbon, Portugal, 7–13 May 2014 to:
a)
Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see table
below);
b)
Assess the progress on the benchmark preparation of nep-2324, nep-2829
and nep-30 for 2015;
c)
With reference to the recommendation of WKMSYREF2, reconsider MSY
reference points for northern hake. If possible, also establish precautionary
reference points. The application of updated reference points will,
however, be contingent on the availability of up to date fishery data to
calculate relevant values.
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. The data to perform the assessment should be
available 4 weeks before the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the
table below.
WGBIE will report by 24 May for the attention of ACOM. The group will report on
the ACOM guidelines on reopening procedure of the advice before 14 October and
will report on reopened advice before 29 October.
Fish Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Coordinator
Assess. Coord. 1
Assess.
Coord. 2
Advice
Spain
Spain
UK
Update
UK
UK
Spain
Update
Portugal
Portugal
Spain
Update
anp-78ab
Anglerfish (L. piscatorius) in Divisions
VIIb-k and VIIIa,b
anb-78ab
Anglerfish
(Lophius
budegassa)
Divisions VIIb-k and VIIIa,b
in
anb-8c9a
Anglerfish
(Lophius
Divisions VIIIc and IXa
budegassa)
in
Anp-8c9a
Anglerfish (L. piscatorius) in Divisions
VIIIc and IXa
Spain
Spain
Portugal
Update
Bss-8ab
Sea bass in Divisions VIIIa,b
France
France
none
Multiyear
Bss-8c9a
Sea bass in Divisions VIIIc and IXa
France
France
none
Multiyear
hke-nrtn
Hake in Division IIIa, Subareas IV, VI
and VII and Divisions VIIIa,b,d
(Northern stock);
Spain
Spain
none
Update
hke-soth
Hake in Division VIIIc and IXa (Southern
stock);
Spain
Spain
Portugal
Update
mgb-8c9a
Megrim
(Lepidorhombus
Divisions VIIIc and IXa
Spain
Spain
none
Update
mgw-8c9a
Megrim (Lepidorhombus whiffiagonis) in
Divisions VIIIc and IXa
Spain
Spain
none
Update
mgw-78
Megrim (L. whiffiagonis) in Subarea VII &
Divisions VIIIa,b,d,e
Spain
Spain
none
Multiyear
sol-bisc
Sole in Divisions VIIIa,b,d (Bay of Biscay)
France
France
none
Update
ple-89a
Plaice in Subarea VIII and Division IXa
Ireland
Ireland
none
Multiyear
boscii)
in
21
whg-89a
Whiting in Subarea VIII and Division IXa
Ireland
Ireland
none
Multiyear
nep-2324
Nephrops in Divisions VIIIa,b (Bay of
Biscay, FU 23, 24)
France
France
none
Biennial 1st
year
Spain
Spain
none
Biennial 1st
year
Spain
Spain
none
Biennial 1st
year
Portugal/
Spain
Portugal/
Spain
Portugal/
Spain
Biennial 1st
year
Biennial 1st
year
Biennial 1st
year
Nep-VIIIc
nep-25
nep-31
Nephrops in North Galicia (FU 25)
Nephrops in the Cantabrian Sea (FU 31)
Nep-IXa
nep-2627
nep-2829
nep-30
gug-89a
Nephrops in West Galicia and North
Portugal (FU 26-27)
Nephrops in South-West and South
Portugal (FU 28-29)
Nephrops in Gulf of Cadiz (FU 30)
Grey gurnard in Subarea VIII and
Division IXa
Spain/Portugal
Spain/Portugal
Spain/Portugal
Ireland
Spain/
Portugal
Spain/
Portugal
Spain/
Portugal
Ireland
none
Biennial
For the following stocks, WGBIE will finalise the draft text on ecosystem and
fisheries information based on draft advice prepared by WGNEW:
Fish Stock
Stock Name
pol-89a
Pollack in Subarea VIII and Division IXa
sol-8c9a
Sole in Divisions VIIIc and IXa
Stock
Coordinator
Assess. Coord. 1
Assess.
Coord. 2
Advice
Spain
Spain
none
WGNEW
Portugal
Portugal
none
WGNEW
22
WGCSE – Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion
2013/2/ACOM12 The Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion (WGCSE), chaired by
Helen Dobby, UK and Colm Lordan, Ireland will meet at ICES Headquarters, 13–22
May 2014 to:
a) Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see
table below);
b) Assess the progress on the benchmark preparation of cod in Division VIa
and anglerfish,
c)
Continue to compile data from megrim and anglerfish in Division VIIa
and evaluate the appropriateness to include this area under the stock
distribution of megrim (Lepidorhombus spp) in Subarea VI (West of
Scotland and Rockall) and sub-area IV (North Sea) and anglerfish (Lophius
piscatorius and L. budegassa) in Division IIIa, Subarea IV, VI, respectively;
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group by a formal data call.
WGCSE will report by 26 May 2014 for the attention of ACOM. The group will report
on the ACOM guidelines on reopening procedure of the advice before 14 October and
will report on reopened advice before 29 October. Nephrops survey results,
assessment, draft advice and audits should be available by 13 October.
Fish Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Coord.
Assessmen Assessment
t Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Advice
ang-ivvi
Anglerfish (Lophius piscatorius and L.
UK
UK
budegassa) in Division IIIa, Subarea IV, VI (Scotland) (Scotland)
bss-47
Sea bass in Divisions IVbc, VIIa and
VIId-h
FR, UK
Update
bss-wosi
Sea bass in Divisions VIa, VIIb, VIIj
FR, UK
Multiyear
cod-iris
Cod in Division VIIa (Irish Sea)
UK
UK
(England) (England)
Multiyear*
cod-rock
Cod in Division VIb (Rockall)
UK
UK
(Scotland) (Scotland)
Multiyear
cod-scow
Cod in Division VIa (West of Scotland)
UK
UK
(Scotland) (Scotland)
Update
cod VIIe-k
Cod in Division VIIe-k (Celtic Sea)
France
France
Ireland
Update
had-7b-k
Haddock in Divisions VIIb-k
Ireland
Ireland
France
Update
had-iris
Haddock in Division VIIa (Irish Sea)
had-rock
Haddock in Division VIb (Rockall)
Russia
Russia
UK
(Scotland)
Update
meg-4a6a
Megrim (Lepidorhombus spp.) in Divisions
IVa and VIa
Ireland
Ireland
UK
(Scotland)
Biennial*
meg-rock
Megrim (Lepidorhombus spp) in Division
VIb (Rockall)
Ireland
Ireland
UK
(Scotland)
Update
nep-11
Nephrops in Division VIa (North Minch,
FU 11)
Denmark,
Norway
UK
UK
(Scotland) (Scotland)
UK
UK
(Scotland) (Scotland)
Update
Update
Update
23
Fish Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Coord.
Assessmen Assessment
t Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Advice
nep-12
Nephrops in Division VIa (South Minch,
FU 12)
UK
UK
(Scotland) (Scotland)
Update
nep-13
Nephrops in Division VIa (Firth of Clyde
and Sound of Jura, FU 13)
UK
UK
(Scotland) (Scotland)
Update
nep-14
Nephrops in Division VIIa (Irish Sea East,
FU14)
UK
(England)
Update
nep-15
UK
UK
Nephrops in Division VIIa (Irish Sea West,
(Northern (Northern
FU15)
Ireland)
Ireland)
nep-16
Nephrops in Division VIIb,c,j,k (Porcupine
Bank, FU 16)
Ireland
Ireland
Update
nep-17
Nephrops in Division VIIb (Aran
Grounds, FU 17)
Ireland
Ireland
Update
nep-19
Nephrops in Division VIIa,g,j (South East
and West of IRL, FU 19)
Ireland
Ireland
Update
nep-22
Nephrops in the Smalls (FU 22)
France
France
Ireland
Update
nep-2021
Nephrops in the FU 20 (Labadie, Baltimore
and Galley), FU 21 (Jones and Cockburn
France
France
Ireland
Update
nop-scow
Norway pout in Division VIa (West of
Scotland)
ple-7b-c
Plaice in Division VIIb,c (West of Ireland)
Ireland
ple-7h-k
Plaice in Divisions VIIh,k (Southwest of
Ireland )
Ireland
ple-celt
Plaice in Divisions VIIf,g (Celtic Sea)
ple-echw
Ireland
ICES Secretariat
Update
Multiyear
Multiyear
Belgium
Reexamine**
UK
UK
(England) (England)
Belgium
Update
Plaice in Division VIIe (Western
Channel)
UK
UK
(England) (England)
France
Update
ple-iris
Plaice in Division VIIa (Irish Sea)
UK
UK
(England) (England)
san-scow
Sandeel in Division Via
sol-7b-c
Sole in Division VIIb, c (West of Ireland)
Ireland
Multiyear
sol-7h-k
Sole in Divisions VIIh-k (Southwest of
Ireland)
Ireland
Reexamine**
sol-celt
Sole in Divisions VIIf,g (Celtic Sea)
Belgium
sol-echw
Sole in Division VIIe (Western Channel)
sol-iris
Sole in Division VIIa (Irish Sea)
Belgium
Belgium
whg-7b-k
Whiting in Divisions VIIb,c,e-k
Ireland
Ireland
France
Update
whg-iris
Whiting in Division VIIa (Irish Sea)
Ireland
Ireland
UK
(Northern
Ireland)
Multiyear*
whg-rock
Whiting in Division VIb (Rockall)
Ireland
whg-scow
Whiting in Division VIa (West of
Scotland)
Ireland
Update
ICES Secretariat
Belgium
UK
UK
(England) (England)
UK
UK
(Scotland) (Scotland)
Multiyear
UK
(England)
Update
France
Update
Update
Multiyear
Update
24
*An update assessment should be performed, if no changes from last year then 2013 advice is
still valid.
**See WKLIFE3 comments on method used in 2013and propose a new approach.
For the following stocks, WGCSE will finalise the draft text on ecosystem and fisheries
information based on draft advice prepared by WGNEW
Fish Stock
Stock Name
gug-celt
Grey gurnard in Subarea VI and
Divisions VIIa-c and e-k (Celtic Sea and
West of Scotland)
pol-celt
Pollack in Subareas VI and VII (Celtic Sea
and West of Scotland)
Stock
Coord.
Assessmen Assessment
t Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Advice
WGNEW
France
WGNEW
25
WGNSSK – Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the
North Sea and Skagerrak
2011/2/ACOM13
The Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the
North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), chaired by Alexander Kempf*, Germany,
will meet at ICES Headquarters, 30 April – 7 May 2014 to:
a)
Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see
table below). The Norway pout assessments shall be developed by
correspondence;
b)
Assess the progress on the benchmark preparations and planning for
2015
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
WGNSSK will report by 20 May 2014, and by 22 September 2014 (Norway pout) for
the attention of ACOM. The group will report on the ACOM guidelines on reopening
procedure of the advice before 14 October and will report on reopened advice before
29 October.
Fish
Stock Name
Stock
cod-347d
had-34
nep-5
nep-6
nep-7
nep-8
nep-9
nep-10
nep-32
nep-33
Cod in Subarea IV, Divison VIId &
Division IIIa (Skagerrak)
Haddock in Subarea IV (North Sea) and
Division IIIa
Nephrops in Division IVbc (Botney Gut Silver Pit, FU 5)
Nephrops in Division IVb (Farn Deeps, FU
6)
Nephrops in Division IVa (Fladen
Ground, FU 7)
Nephrops in Division IVb (Firth of Forth,
FU8)
Nephrops in Division IVa (Moray Firth,
FU9)
Nephrops in Division IVa (Noup, FU 10)
Nephrops in Division IVa (Norwegian
Deeps, FU 32)
Nephrops in Division IVb (Off Horn Reef,
FU 33)
Stock
Coordinator
Assessment Assessment
Coord. 1
UK(Scotland) UK(England)
UK(Scotland) UK(Scotland)
Coord. 2
Denmark
UK(Englan
d)
Advice
Update
Update
UK(England) UK(England)
Denmark
Update
UK(England) UK(England)
Denmark
Update
UK(Scotland) UK(Scotland)
Denmark
Update
UK(Scotland) UK(Scotland)
Denmark
Update
UK(Scotland) UK(Scotland)
Denmark
Update
UK(Scotland) UK(Scotland)
Denmark
Update
Norway
Norway
Denmark
Denmark
Denmark
Sweden
Update
Update
26
nep-34
nep-iiia
nop-34
Nephrops in Division IVb (Devil’s Hole,
FU 34)
Nephrops in Division IIIa (Skagerak
Kattegat, FU 3,4)
Norway Pout in Subarea IV and Division
IIIa
ple-eche
Plaice in Division VIId (Eastern Channel)
ple-skag
Plaice in Subdivision 20 (Skagerrak)
ple-nsea
Plaice Subarea IV (North Sea)
Update
Denmark
Denmark
Sweden
Denmark
Denmark
Sweden
Denmark
Denmark
Norway
France
France
Belgium
Update
Denmark
Denmark
Sweden
Update
Netherlands
Netherlands
Belgium
Update
Norway
Norway
Germany
Update
Belgium
Belgium
France
Update
Netherlands
Netherlands
Belgium
Update
UK(Englan
Update
Update
Update
Saithe in Subarea IV (North Sea) Division
sai-3a46
IIIa West (Skagerrak) and Subarea VI
(West of Scotland and Rockall)
sol-eche
Sole in Division VIId (Eastern Channel)
sol-nsea
Sole in Subarea IV (North Sea)
whg-47d
whg-kask
bll-nsea
Whiting Subarea IV (North Sea) &
Division VIId (Eastern Channel)
Whiting in Division IIIa (Skagerrak Kattegat)
Brill in Subarea IV and Divisions IIIa and
UK(Scotland) UK(Scotland)
Sweden
Sweden
d)
Denmark
Kelle (NL)
Biennial 2nd
VIId,e
year
dab-nsea Dab in Subarea IV and Division IIIa
fle-nsea
Kay (DE)
--,,--
Flounder in Division IIIa and Subarea IV
lem-nsea Lemon sole in Subarea IV and Divisions
IIIa and VIId
wit-nsea
Multiyear
--,,-United
--,,--
Kingdom
Witch in Subarea IV, Division IIIa and
Sweden
--,,--
VIId
Tur-nsea Turbot in Subarea IV
Tur-kask Turbot in Division IIIa
mur347d
Striped red mullet in Subarea IV
(North Sea) and Divisions VIId
(Eastern Channel) and IIIa
(Skagerrak - Kattegat)
The
The
Netherlands
Netherlands
--,,--
Biennial 2nd
?
year
FR
--,,--
For the following stocks, WGNSSK will finalise the draft text on ecosystem and
fisheries information based on draft advice prepared by WGNEW
Fish
Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Coordinator
Assessment Assessment
Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Advice
Grey gurnard in Subarea IV (North Sea)
gug-347d and Divisions VIId (Eastern Channel)
WGNEW
and IIIa (Skagerrak - Kattegat)
pol-nsea
Pollack in Subarea IV and Division IIIa
Norway
WGNEW
27
NIPAG – Joint NAFO/ICES Pandalus Assessment Working Group
2013/2/ACOM14 The Joint NAFO/ICES Pandalus Assessment Working Group (NIPAG),
chaired by Peter Shelton, Canada (ICES) and Jean-Claude Mahé, France (NAFO), will
meet in Nuuk, Greenland 10–17 September 2014, to:
a)
Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see
table below);
b)
Consider shrimp stocks as decided by the NAFO Scientific Council
c)
Compile, update, analyse and document time-series of by-catches in the
shrimp fishery
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
NIPAG will report by 28 October 2014 on the ICES shrimp stocks for the attention of
ACOM.
Fish
Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Assessment Assessment
Coordinator Coord. 1
Coord. 2
Advice
pandbarn
Northern Shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in
Subareas I and II (Barents Sea)
Norway
Norway
Norway
Update
pandsknd
Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in
Division IIIa West and Division IVa East
(Skagerrak and Norwegian Deeps)
Denmark
Norway
Sweden
Update
pandflad
Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in
Division IVa (Fladen Ground)
Denmark
Denmark
Denmark
Multiyear
28
WGWIDE – Working Group on Widely Distributed Stocks
2013/2/ACOM15 The Working Group on Widely Distributed Stocks (WGWIDE), chaired
by Katja Enberg*, Norway, will meet in ICES HQ, Denmark, 26 August to 1
September, 2014 to:
a ) Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
WGWIDE will report by 8 September, 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Fish
Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Coord.
boc-nea Boarfish in the Northeast Atlantic
Assess.
Coord. 1
Assess.
Coord. 2
Ireland
Advice
Update
hernoss
Herring in the Northeast Atlantic
(Norwegian spring-spawning herring)
Norway
homnsea
Horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) in
Division IIIa, Division IVb,c and VIId
(North Sea stock)
Spain
UK
(England & Netherlands
Wales)
homwest
Horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) in
Divisions IIa, IVa, Vb, VIa,, VIIa-c, e-k,
VIIIa-e (Western stock)
Spain
UK
(England & Netherlands Update
Wales)
macnea
Mackerel in the Northeast Atlantic
(combined Southern, Western and North
Sea spawning components)
whbcomb
Blue whiting in Subareas I-IX, XII and XIV
(Combined stock)
Norway
Ireland
Netherlands
Spain
Denmark
Russia
Update
Multiyear
UK
(Scotland)
Update
Russia
Update
29
WGHANSA – Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel Anchovy and
Sardine (formerly WGANSA)
2013/2/ACOM16 The Working Group on Southern Horse Mackerel, Anchovy and
Sardine (WGHANSA), chaired by Lionel Pawlowski *, France, will meet in ICES HQ,
Copenhagen, Denmark, 20–25 June 2014 to:
a ) address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see table
below);
b ) assess the progress on the benchmark preparation of Anchovy in Division
IXa.
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
WGHANSA will report by 2 July 2013 for the attention of ACOM.
Fish
Stock
Stock Name
Stock
Coord.
Assess.
Coord. 1
Assess.
Coord. 2
Advice
anepore
Anchovy in Division IXa
Spain
Spain
Spain
Update
anebisc
Anchovy in Subarea VIII (Bay of Biscay)
Spain
Spain
France
Update
homsoth
Horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) in
Division IXa (Southern stock)
Portugal
Portugal
Spain
Update
sarsoth
Sardine in Divisions VIIIc and IXa
Portugal
Portugal
Spain
Update
sarbisc
Sardine in Divisions VIIIabd and
France
UK
Spain
Update
jaa-10
Blue jack mackerel (Trachurus picturatus)
in the waters of the Azores
Portugal
Portugal
Portugal
Update
subarea VII
30
WGDEEP – Working Group on the Biology and Assessment of Deep-Sea
Fisheries Resources
2013/2/ACOM17
The Working Group on the Biology and Assessment of Deep-Sea
Fisheries Resources (WGDEEP), chaired by Pascal Lorance*, France, and
Gudmundur Thordarson*, Iceland, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 4–11 April
2014 to:
a) Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see
table below).
b) Evaluate the harvest control rule for data-limited stocks developed by
WKLIFE and further develop methods to provide quantitative advice
consistent with the MSY framework for stocks assessed by WGDEEP.
c)
Complete the development of Stock Annexes for all the stocks assessed
by WGDEEP.
d) Update the description of deep-water fisheries in both the NEAFC and
ICES area(s) by compiling data on catch/landings, fishing effort (inside
versus outside the EEZs, in spawning areas, areas of local depletion, etc.),
and discard statistics at the finest spatial resolution possible by ICES
Subarea and Division and NEAFC RA.
e) Continue work on exploratory assessments for deep-water species.
f)
Assess the progress made on the benchmark WKDEEP 2014, including
blue ling in Vb, VI and VII, black scabbardfish in Vb, VI, and VII, black
scabbardfish in IXa, and ling in Va.
g) Evaluate the stock status of Icelandic stocks for the provision of
annual advice in 2014.
h)
Evaluate the stock status of all EU stocks for the provision of biennial
advice in 2014.
i)
Prepare for an evaluation of the stock status for the rest of stocks for
the provision of a rollover advice on 2014 and a biennial advice in
2015.
The assessments will be carried out on the basis of the stock annex in National
Laboratories, prior to the meeting. This will be coordinated as indicated in the table
below.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
WGDEEP will report by 25April 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Fish Stock
alf-comb
arg-icel
arg-oth
Stock name
Stock
Coord.
Assess. Cood.
Mário Rui Mário Rui Rilho
Alfonsinos/Golden eye perch (Beryx
Rilho de
de Pinho
spp.) in the Northeast Atlantic
Pinho
Gudmundur Gudmundur
Greater silver smelt (Argentina Silus) in
Thordarson Thordarson
Division Va
Greater silver smelt (Argentina Silus) in Hege
Subareas I, II, IV, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XII, Overboe
and XIV, and Divisions IIIa and Vb
Hansen
Elvar Halldor
Advice
updated
next on
2014
Advice
Biennial
2014
2015
Annual
Biennial
31
(other areas)
Blue ling (Molva dypterygia) in Division Gudmundur Gudmundur
bli-5a14 Va and Subarea XIV (Iceland and
Thordarson Thordarson
Reykjanes ridge)
Pascal
Pascal Lorance
Blue ling (Molva dypterygia) in
bli-5b67
Subdivision Vb, and Subareas VI and VII Lorance
Blue ling (Molva dypterygia) in Divisions Hege
Hege Overboe
bli-oth
IIIa, and IVa and Subareas I, II, VIII, IX, Overboe
Hansen
and XII
Hansen
Ivone
Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo) in Ivone
bsf-89
Figueiredo Figueiredo
Subareas VIII and IX
Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo) in Ivone
Ivone
bsf-nort in Subareas VI, VII, and Divisions Vb, Figueiredo Figueiredo
XIIb
Black scabbardfish (Aphanopus carbo) in Ivone
Ivone
bsf-oth
other areas (Subareas I, II, IV, X, XIV and Figueiredo Figueiredo
Divisions IIIa, Vb)
Guzmán Diez
Greater forkbeard (Phycis blennoides) in Guzmán
gfb-comb
Diez
the Northeast Atlantic
lin-arct
Ling (Molva molva) in Subareas I and II
lin-icel
Ling (Molva molva) in Division Va
lin-faro
Ling (Molva molva) in Division Vb
2014
2014
2015
2014
2014
2014
Biennial
Biennial
2015
Biennial
Gudmundur Gudmundur
Thordarson Thordarson
2014
Lise
2014
Lise
usk-arct
usk-icel
Tusk in Division Va and Subarea XIV
usk-oth
Biennial
Kristin Hell Kristin Hell
Juan Gil
Red (=blackspot) seabream (Pagellus Juan Gil
bogaraveo) in Subarea IX
Mário Rui Mário Rui Rilho
Red (=blackspot) seabream (Pagellus
Rilho de
de Pinho
bogaraveo) in Subarea X (Azores region)
Pinho
Kristin Helle Kristin Helle
Tusk in Subareas I and II (Arctic)
usk-mar
Biennial
Biennial
Ling in (Molva molva) Divisions IIIa and Kristin Hell Kristin Hell
IVa, and in Subareas VI, VII, VIII, IX,
XII, and XIV (other areas)
ory-comb
Leonie
Leonie
(ory-scrk; Orange roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus) Dransfeld Dransfeld
ory-vii;
in the Notheast Atlantic
ory-rest)
Roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides Vladimir T. Vladimir T.
rng-1012; rupenstris) in in Mid-Atlantic Ridge (Xb, Vinnichenko Vinnichenko
XIIc, Va1, XIIa1, XIVb1)
Hege
Hege Overboe
Roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides
rng-kask
Overboe
Hansen
rupenstris) in Division IIIa
Hansen
Roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides Lionel
Lionel
rng-675b rupenstris) in Subareas VI and VII, and Pawlowski Pawlowski
Divisions Vb and XIIb
Roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides Vladimir T. Vladimir T.
rng-oth
rupenstris) in all other areas (I, II, IV, Vinnichenko Vinnichenko
Va2, VIII, IX, XIVa, and XIVb2)
Guzmán
Guzmán Diez
Red (=blackspot) seabream (Pagellus
sbr678
bogaraveo) in Subareas VI, VII and VIII Diez
sbr-x
Biennial
2014
2014
lin-oth
sbr-ix
Annual
2014
2015
2014
2014
2015
Annual
Biennial
Biennial
Biennial
Biennial
Biennial
Biennial
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
2015
Gudmundur Gudmundur
Thordarson Thordarson
2014
Tusk in Division Subarea XII, excluding Kristin Helle Kristin Helle
XIIb (Mid Atlantic Ridge)
Tusk in Divisions IIIa, Vb, VIa, and XIIb, Kristin Helle Kristin Helle
and Subareas IV, VII, VIII, and IX (other
areas)
2015
2014
Biennial
Biennial
Annual
Biennial
Biennial
32
usk-rock Tusk in Division VIb (Rockall)
oth-comb Other deep sea species combined
Kristin Helle Kristin Helle
2014
Biennial
Tom
Blasdale
2015
Collated
Tom Blasdale
data
33
WGEEL – Joint GFCM/EIFAAC/ICES Working Group on Eels
2013/2/ACOM18
The Joint GFCM/EIFAAC/ICES Working Group on Eels (WGEEL),
chaired by Alan Walker, UK, will meet in Ramada Hotel, Tunisia, 4-10 November
2014 to:
a ) Assess the latest trends in recruitment, stock and fisheries, including effort,
indicative of the status of the stock in European and northern African
Mediterranean waters, and of the exploitation and other anthropogenic
factors;
b ) Further develop the stock–recruitment relationship and associated
reference points, using the latest available data;
c ) Work with ICES DataCentre to develop a database appropriate to eel along
ICES standards (and wider geography);
d ) Review the life-history traits and mortality factors by ecoregion;
e ) Explore the standardization of methods for data collection, analysis and
assessment;
f ) Respond to specific requests in support of the eel stock recovery
regulation, as necessary;
g ) Provide guidance on management measures that can be applied to both
EU and non-EU Mediterranean waters.
h ) Report to ACOM and GFCM Scientific Advisory Committee on the state of
the international stock and its mortality levels; and
i ) Address the generic EG ToR from ACOM.
WGEEL will report by 24 November 2014 for the attention of ACOM, WGRECORDS,
SSGEF and FAO, EIFAAC and GFCM.
Supporting Information
Priority
In 2007, the EU published the Regulation establishing measures for the recovery
of the eel stock (EC 1100/2007). This introduced new challenges for the Working
Group, requiring development of new methodologies for local and regional
stock assessments and evaluation of the status of the stock at the international
level.
In its Forward Focus (2011), WGEEL mapped out a process for post-evaluation
of the EU Regulation, based on 2012 reporting to the EU by Member States,
including an international assessment of the status of the stock and the levels of
anthropogenic mortalities.
The 2012 and 2013 meetings of WGEEL were the first step in this process. The
WGEEL meetings in 2013 highlighted the following main issues:
-lack of standardization of the methods used by MS to estimate the
required stock indicators
-lack of quality assessment of the assessment methods and reported
stock indicators
-incomplete reporting by MS of the required stock indicators to the
EU in 2012, and to ICES in 2013
-lack of stock indicators of countries that are outside the EU but inside
the natural range of the European eel (i.e. north African countries)
In its Forward Focus (2013), WGEEL mapped out a process how (some of) the
current limitations of the assessment process could be improved before the next
EMP evaluation in 2015. In order to complete the international stock assessment,
countries must be committed to this process in order for it to succeed. The
34
international assessment would be improved if it could include information
from outside the EU. ICES and the WG will continue to work with relevant
countries and umbrella institutions (e.g. GFCM) to facilitate the provision of
these indicators.
Scientific
justification
European eel life history is complex and atypical among aquatic species. The
stock is genetically panmictic and data indicate random arrival of adults in the
spawning area. The continental eel stock is widely distributed and there are
strong local and regional differences in population dynamics and local stock
structures. Fisheries on all continental life stages take place throughout the
distribution area. Local impacts by fisheries vary from almost nil to heavy
overexploitation. Other forms of anthropogenic mortality (e.g. hydropower,
pumping stations) also impact on eel and vary in distribution and local
relevance.
Exploitation that leaves 30% of the virgin spawning–stock biomass is generally
considered to be a reasonable target for escapement. The EC Regulation set a
limit for silver eel escapement to the sea of at least 40 % of the silver eel biomass
relative to the best estimate of escapement that would have existed if no
anthropogenic influences had impacted the stock.
WGEEL (ICES, 2010a; Annex 5) recommended that Eel Management Plan
reporting must provide the following biomass and anthropogenic mortality
data:
-Bpost, the biomass of the escapement in the assessment year;
-Bo, the biomass of the escapement in the pristine state. Alternatively,
one could specify Blim, the 40% limit of B0, as set in the Eel Regulation;
-Bbest, the estimated potential biomass in the assessment year,
assuming no anthropogenic impacts (and without stocking) have
occurred and from all potentially available habitats.
-∑A, the estimation of Bbest will require an estimate of A
(anthropogenic mortality (e.g. catch, turbines)) for densityindependent cases, and a more complex analysis for densitydependent cases.
Most but not all EU Member States reported quantitative estimates of the
required stock indicators to the EU in 2012. The reliability and accuracy of these
data have not yet been fully evaluated. Furthermore, the stock indicators of all
non-European countries that lay within the natural range of the European eel
are lacking.
Resource
requirements
Sharepoint; Access to the EU Commission evaluations of EMP progress reports.
Participants
ICES, GFCM and EIFAAC Working Group Participants, Invited Country
Administrations, EU representative, Invited specialists
Secretariat
facilities
Support to organize the logistics of the meeting.
Financial
At countries expense
Linkages to
advisory
committees
ACOM
Linkages to other
committees or
groups
WGRECORDS, SCICOM, SSGEF
Linkages to other
organizations
FAO EIFAAC, GFCM, EU DG-MARE, EU DG-ENV
35
WGEF – Working Group on Elasmobranch Fishes
2013/2/ACOM19 The Working Group on Elasmobranch Fishes (WGEF), chaired by Ivone
Figueirdo, Portugal, and Jim Ellis*, UK, will meet in Lisbon, Portugal, from 17–26
June 2014 to:
a ) Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups (see table
below);
b ) Update the description of elasmobranch fisheries for deep-water, pelagic
and demersal species in the ICES area and compile landings, effort and
discard statistics by ICES Subarea and Division, and catch data by NEAFC
area;
c ) Continue to work towards the FMSY Framework for the stocks listed in the
table below;
d ) Evaluate the stock status of skates (Rajidae) in Biscay, Iberia and Celtic
Seas for the provision of biennial advice in 2014.
e ) Prepare for an evaluation of the stock status of skates (Rajidae) in the
North Sea and sharks for the provision of biennial advice in 2015,
quadrennial advice for sharks with 0-catch advice.
f ) Develop stock annexes for skates (Rajidae) in the Celtic Seas, in the Biscay
and Iberian ecoregion and in the North Sea;
g ) Finalise stock annexes for demersal elasmobranchs in the Celtic Seas, and
demersal elasmobranchs in the North Sea; and blue shark in the North East
Atlantic;
h ) Make a first draft of the advice using the updated template for rays,
developed by WKUPDATE and WGEF, in 2012 and 2013.
i ) Continue the necessary planning for a future PSA for elasmobranchs in the
ICES area by
1) Reviewing existing approaches; and
2) Intersessionally, compiling the input of parameters required for a
regional PSA.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the Group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
WGEF will report by 1 August 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
FishStock
stock name
EcoRegion
dgs-nea
Spurdog (Squalus
acanthias) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Ole Thomas
Albert
Portuguese
dogfish
(Centroscymnus
coelolepis) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Tom Blasdale
Leafscale gulper
Widely
Tom Blasdale
cyo-nea
guq-nea
Stock Coord.
Assess.
Coord.
Advice
updated
next on
José De
Oliveira
Advice
2015
Quadren
nial
2015
Quadren
nial
2015
Biennial
Teresa
Moura
Teresa
36
sck-nea
por-nea
bsk-nea
rjr-234
rjb-34
rjn-34
rjh-4c7d
rjh-4aVI
rjc-347de
shark
(Centrophorus
squamosus) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Moura
Kitefin shark
(Dalatias licha) in
the Northeast
Atlantic
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Mário Rui
Rilho de Pinho
Porbeagle (Lamna
nasus) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Graham
Johnston
Basking shark
(Cetorhinus
maximus) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Ole Thomas
Albert
Starry ray
(Amblyraja
radiata) in
Subareas II-IV
(Norwegian Sea,
North Sea and
Skagerrak)
North Sea
Harriët van
Overzee
Common skate
(Dipturus batiscomplex) in
Subarea IV and
Division IIIa
(North Sea and
Skagerrak)
North Sea
Cuckoo ray
(Leucoraja naevus)
in Subarea IV and
Division IIIa
(North Sea and
Skagerrak)
North Sea
Blonde ray (Raja
brachyura) in
Divisions IVc and
VIId (Southern
North Sea and
eastern English
Channel)
North Sea
Blonde ray (Raja
brachyura) in
Division IVa and
subarea VI
(Northern North
Sea and west of
Scotland)
North Sea
Thornback ray
(Raja clavata) in
Subarea IV, and
Divisions IIIa and
VIId (North Sea,
Skagerrak,
North Sea
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Mário Rui
Rilho de
Pinho
2015
Quadren
nial
in
conjunction
with ICCAT
2015
Quadren
nial
2015
Quadren
nial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
Ole Thomas
Albert
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
37
Kattegat and
eastern English
Channel)
rjm-347d
raj-347d
syc-347d
rjb-celt
rjn-celt
rji-celt
rjf-celt
rjh-7afg
rjh-7e
rje-7fg
Spotted ray (Raja
montagui) in
Subarea IV, and
Divisions IIIa and
VIId (North Sea,
Skagerrak,
Kattegat, and
Eastern English
Channel)
North Sea
Other skates and
rays in Subarea
IV, and Divisions
IIIa and VIId
(North Sea,
Skagerrak,
Kattegat, and
Eastern English
Channel)
North Sea
Lesser-spotted
dogfish
(Scyliorhinus
canicula) in North
Sea ecoregion
(Subarea IV and
Divisions IIIa and
VIId)
North Sea
Common skate
(Dipturus batiscomplex) in the
Celtic Seas
ecoregion
Celtic Seas
Cuckoo ray
(Leucoraja naevus)
in the Celtic Seas
ecoregion
Celtic Seas
Sandy ray
(Leucoraja
circularis) in the
Celtic Seas
ecoregion
Celtic Seas
Shagreen ray
(Leucoraja
fullonica) in the
Celtic Seas
ecoregion
Celtic Seas
Blonde ray (Raja
brachyura) in
Divisions VIIa, f,
g (Irish and Celtic
Sea)
Celtic Seas
Blonde ray (Raja
brachyura) in
Division VIIe
(western English
Channel)
Celtic Seas
Small-eyed ray
Celtic Seas
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Sophy McCully
Sophy McCully
Graham
Johnston
Sophy McCully
Sophy McCully
Alain Tetard
Alain Tetard
Harriët van
Overzee
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
Harriët van
Overzee
Harriët van
Overzee
Sophy
McCully
Sophy
McCully
Graham
Johnston
Sophy
McCully
Sophy
McCully
Sophy
McCully
Sophy
38
(Raja
microocellata) in
the Bristol
Channel
(Divisions VIIf, g)
McCully
Small-eyed ray
(Raja
microocellata) in
the English
Channel
(Divisions VIId,e)
Celtic Seas
Thornback ray
(Raja clavata) west
of Scotland
(Subarea VI)
Celtic Seas
Thornback ray
(Raja clavata) in
Irish and Celtic
Sea (VIIa, f, g)
Celtic Seas
Thornback ray
(Raja clavata) in
Division VIIe
(Western English
Channel)
Celtic Seas
Spotted ray (Raja
montagui) in
northern Celtic
Seas ecoregion
(Subarea VI and
Divisions VIIb,j)
Celtic Seas
Spotted ray (Raja
montagui) in
southern Celtic
seas ecoregion
(Divisions VIIa, e,
f-h)
Celtic Seas
Undulate ray
(Raja undulata) in
the English
Channel
(Divisions VIId,e)
Celtic Seas
Undulate ray
(Raja undulata) off
south-west
Ireland
(Divisions VIIb,j)
Celtic Seas
raj-celt
Other skates and
rays in the Celtic
Sea ecoregion
Celtic Seas
syc-celt
Lesser-spotted
dogfish
(Scyliorhinus
canicula) in Celtic
Seas ecorgeion
(subarea VI and
Divisions VIIa–c,
e–j)
Celtic Seas
Greater-spotted
dogfish
Celtic Seas
rje-7de
rjc-VI
rjc-7afg
rjc-7e
rjm-67bj
rjm-7aefg
rju-7de
rju-7bj
syt-celt
Alain Tetard
Sophy
McCully
Graham
Johnston
Graham
Johnston
Sophy McCully
Sophy
McCully
Alain Tetard
Graham
Johnston
Sophy McCully
Alain Tetard
Graham
Johnston
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
Sophy
McCully
Graham
Johnston
Sophy
McCully
Sophy
McCully
Graham
Johnston
Graham
Johnston
Graham
Johnston
Graham
Johnston
Graham
Johnston
Sophy McCully
2014
Sophy
39
(Scyliorhinus
stellaris) in the
Celtic Seas
ecoregion
sho-celt
rjb-89a
rjn-bisc
rjn-9a
rjh-9a
rjc-bisc
rjc-9a
rjm-bisc
rjm-9a
rju-8ab
McCully
Black-mouth
dogfish (Galeus
melastomus) in the
Celtic Seas
ecoregion
Celtic Seas
Graham
Johnston
Common skate
(Dipturus batiscomplex) in
Subarea VIII and
Division IXa (Bay
of Biscay and
Atlantic Iberian
waters)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cuckoo ray
(Leucoraja naevus)
in Subarea VIII
(Bay of Biscay
and Cantabrian
Sea)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Guzmán Diez
Cuckoo ray
(Leucoraja naevus)
in Division IXa
(west of Galicia,
Portugal, and
Gulf of Cadiz)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cristina
RodriguezCabello
Teresa
Moura
Blonde ray (Raja
brachyura) in
Division IXa
(west of Galicia,
Portugal, and
Gulf of Cadiz)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cristina
RodriguezCabello
Teresa
Moura
Thornback ray
(Raja clavata) in
Subarea VIII (Bay
of Biscay and
Cantabrian Sea)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Guzmán Diez
Pascal
Lorance
Thornback ray
(Raja clavata) in
Division IXa
(west of Galicia,
Portugal, and
Gulf of Cadiz)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cristina
RodriguezCabello
Teresa
Moura
Spotted ray (Raja
montagui) in
Subarea VIII (Bay
of Biscay and
Cantabrian Sea)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Guzmán Diez
Pascal
Lorance
Spotted ray (Raja
montagui) in
Division IXa
(west of Galicia,
Portugal, and
Gulf of Cadiz)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cristina
RodriguezCabello
Teresa
Moura
Undulate ray
(Raja undulata) in
Bay of
Biscay and
Gerard Biais
Pascal
Lorance
Guzmán Diez
Graham
Johnston
2015
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
Pascal
Lorance
Pascal
Lorance
40
rju-8c
rju-9a
raj-89a
syc-bisc
syc-8c9a
sho-89a
raj-mar
trk-nea
agn-nea
rja-nea
the Bay of Biscay
(Divisions
VIIIa,b)
Iberian seas
Undulate ray
(Raja undulata) in
the Cantabrian
Sea (Divisions
VIIIc)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cristina
RodriguezCabello
Teresa
Moura
Undulate ray
(Raja undulata) in
Division IXa
(west of Galicia,
Portugal, and
Gulf of Cadiz)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cristina
RodriguezCabello
Guzmán
Diez
Other skates and
rays in Subarea
VIII and Division
IXa (Bay of
Biscay and
Atlantic Iberian
waters)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Guzmán Diez
Guzmán
Diez
Lesser-spotted
dogfish
(Scyliorhinus
canicula) in
Divisions
VIIIa,b,d (Bay of
Biscay)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Lesser-spotted
dogfish
(Scyliorhinus
canicula) in
Divisions VIIIc
and IXa (Atlantic
Iberian waters)
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Cristina
RodriguezCabello
Black-mouth
dogfish (Galeus
melastomus) in the
Bay of Biscay and
Atlantic Iberian
waters
Bay of
Biscay and
Iberian seas
Guzmán Diez
Rays and skates
(mainly
thornback ray) in
the Azores and
Mid-Atlantic
Ridge
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Mário Rui
Rilho de Pinho
Starry smoothhound (Mustelus
asterias) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
Graham
Johnston
Angel shark
(Squatina
squatina) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
Other
Armelle Jung
White skate
(Rostroraja alba) in
Other
Guzmán Diez
Armelle Jung
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2014
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Biennial
2015
Quadren
nial
2015
Biennial
Pascal
Lorance
Teresa
Moura
Pascal
Lorance
Mário Rui
Rilho de
Pinho
Graham
Johnston
Jim Ellis
Jim Ellis
41
the Northeast
Atlantic
gag-nea
Tope (Galeorhinus
galeus) in the
Northeast
Atlantic
Widely
distributed
and
migratory
stocks
-
2015
Quadren
nial
*Proposed assessment species, see ICES-EU MOU
42
WGHARP – Group on Harp and Hooded Seals
2011/2/ACOM20
The ICES/NAFO Working Group on Harp and Hooded Seals
(WGHARP) chaired by Mike Hammill, Canada, will meet in venue, date,2015 to
(ToRs to be updated):
a ) Review results of 2012–2013 surveys
b ) Provide quota advice to ICES/NAFO member states of their harvests of
harp and hooded seals as follows (request from Norway):
-
an assessment of status and harvest potential of the harp seal stocks in
the Greenland Sea and the White Sea/ Barents Sea, and of the hooded
seal stock in the Greenland Sea.
-
assess the impact on the harp seal stocks in the Greenland Sea and the
White Sea/ Barents Sea of an annual harvest of:
• current harvest levels,
• sustainable catches(defined as the fixed annual catches that stabilizes
the future 1 + population),
• catches that would reduce the population over a 10-years period in
such a manner that it would remain above a level of 70% of current
level with 80% probability.
c ) Provide advice on other issues as requested
WGHARP will report by date 2015 for the attention of the ACOM.
Supporting Information
Priority:
High priority as a tool for the assessment and management of harp and hooded
seal in the North Atlantic Ocean. WGHARP receives requests for advice from
member countries through ACOM and/or NAFO Scientific Council, including
recognition of the need for a precautionary approach to management of seal
populations
Scientific
justification:
A number of North Atlantic nations currently harvest harp and hooded seal
stocks and there is a need for a relatively neutral forum for developing and
vetting scientific advice on sustainable harvests of these stocks. The WGHARP
provides this forum through the inclusion of ICES and NAFO member state
scientific experts in pinniped biology and the quantitative techniques necessary
for development of sound catch advice; members represent all harvesting
nations as well as nations without seal harvests.
ToR b) is a request from Norway.
Resource
requirements:
None beyond the contributions from member states
Participants:
The Group is normally attended by some 10-15 members and guests.
Secretariat facilities
None
Financial:
None
Linkages to
advisory
committees:
WGHARP reports to ACOM and NAFO Sc.C.
Linkages to other
committees or
groups:
SSGHIE, SSGSUE, WGMME
Linkages to other
organizations:
NOAA/NMFS, NAMMCO, Joint Norwegian-Russian Fisheries Committee. The
work of this group is closely aligned with harp and hooded seal research and
management programs conducted by the governments of Canada, Greenland,
Norway, Russia, and the United States
43
WGNEW - Working Group on Assessment of New MoU Species
2013/2/ACOM21
The Working Group on Assessment of New MoU Species
(WGNEW), chaired by Jan Jaap Poos, The Netherlands will meet in Copenhagen,
Denmark 24–28 March 2013 to:
a ) Address generic ToRs for Regional and Species Working Groups for the stocks
in the table below. For stocks for which Advice should be drafted, the
assessment and draft advice should be available to the respective ecoregion
assessment expert group, for further improvements to the fisheries and
ecosystem sections.
b ) For stocks without an advice request, development on stock identity and data
compilation should be undertaken as far as possible.
c ) For gurnard stocks the overall distribution between catch and survey
information on the species needs to be presented and indications on the way
advice can be given for this conglomerate of species are welcomed.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
WGNEW will report by 10 April 2014 to ACOM and SSGSUE, and relevant ecoregion
assessment working groups.
Fish
Stock
Stock
Coord.
Stock name
Sol-8c9a
Sole in Divisions VIIIc and IXa
Pol-89a
Pollack in Subarea
Division IXa
Pol-celt
Assess.
Coord.
Advice
needs
Advice
PT
Data needed
from
all
countries
Update
?
Data needed
Update
Pollack in Subareas VI and VII
?
Data needed
Update
Pol-nsea
Pollack in Subarea
Division IIIa
?
Data needed
Update
gur-comb
Red gurnard in the Northeast
Atlantic
FR
gug-347d
Grey gurnard in Subarea IV
(North Sea) and Divisions VIId
(Eastern Channel) and IIIa
(Skagerrak - Kattegat)
?
gug-celt
Grey gurnard in Subarea VI and
Divisions VIIa-c and e-k (Celtic
Sea and West of Scotland)
?
Guucomb
Tub gurnard in the Northeast
Atlantic
?
Mur-west
Striped red mullet in Subareas
and Divisions VI, VIIa–c, e–k,
VIII, and IXa (Western area)
FR
VIII and
IV
and
Update
Data needed
for combined
gurnard to
see what
advice
options are
possible
Update
Update
Not
required
Data needed
Update
44
Supporting Information
Priority:
The MoU listed these species as new in 2011 and these species still
need extra work to improve the assessment options in order to give
EC and NEAFC advice on their management.
Scientific Justification and
relation to Action Plan
Since 2011 the MoU between the EC and ICES lists a number of new
species for which the EC wants routine advice from ICES regarding
management of the fishery on them.
This WG is regarded to deal with the issues of analysing available
data and setting up and further developing qualitative and
quantitative assessment methods for the fish species mentioned.
Resource Requirements:
No specific resource requirements, beyond the need for members to
prepare for and participate in the meeting.
The experts at the meeting will change between years due to the
necesity to review different stocks that are relatively new in the ICES
advice.
A data call will be sent out to ascertain the appropriate data are
available at the meeting
Participants:
10–15
Secretariat Facilities:
Production of report
Financial:
Linkages to Advisory
Committees:
WGNEW reports to ACOM
Linkages to other Committees SSGSUE
or Groups:
Linkages to other
Organisations:
45
WGMIXFISH-NS – Working Group on Mixed Fisheries Advice for the
North Sea
2013/2/ACOM22
The Working Group on Mixed Fisheries Advice (WGMIXFISHADVICE), chaired by Paul Dolder, UK, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 26–30
May 2014 to:
a)
Carry out mixed demersal fisheries projections for the North Sea taking
into account the single species advice for cod, haddock, whiting, saithe,
plaice, sole and Nephrops that is produced by WGNSSK in April 2014, and
the management measures in place for 2015;
b ) Produce a draft North Sea mixed-fisheries section for the ICES’ advisory
report 2014 that includes a presentation of the fleet and fisheries data and
forecasts;
c ) Depending on the availability of expertise, undertake preliminary
compilation and review of available fleet and fisheries data for West of
Scotland fisheries. Consider the feasibility and best timing for producing a
draft West of Scotland mixed-fisheries section for the ICES’ advisory report
2014 that includes a presentation of the fleet and fisheries data and
forecasts for the west of Scotland region, taking into account advice
released for Nephrops stocks in autumn;
d ) Depending on the availability of expertise, undertake preliminary
compilation and review of available fleet and fisheries data for Iberian
fisheries. Consider the feasibility of, and identify the steps needed to,
accomplish a mixed-fisheries approach in Iberian waters taking account of
the timing of relevant expert groups (WGBIE, WGHANSA, WGWIDE).
WGMIXFISH will report by 2 June 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting Information
Priority:
The work is essential for ICES to progress in the development of its capacity to
provide advice on multi-species fisheries. Such advice is necessary to fulfil the
requirements stipulated in the MoUs between ICES and its client commissions.
Scientific justification
The issue of providing advice for mixed fisheries remains an important one for
and relation to action
ICES. The Aframe project, which started on 1 April 2007 and finished on 31 march
plan:
2009 developed further methodologies for mixed fisheries forecasts. The work
under this project included the development and testing of the Fcube approach to
modelling and forecasts.
In 2008, SGMIXMAN produced an outline of a possible advisory format that
included mixed fisheries forecasts. Subsequently, WKMIXFISH was tasked with
investigating the application of this to North Sea advice for 2010. AGMIXNS
further developed the approach when it met in November 2009 and produced a
draft template for mixed fisheries advice. WGMIXFISH has continued this work
since 2010.
Resource
No specific resource requirements, beyond the need for members to prepare for
requirements:
and participate in the meeting.
Participants:
Experts
with
qualifications
regarding
mixed
fisheries
aspects,
fisheries
management and modelling based on limited and uncertain data.
Secretariat facilities:
Meeting facilities, production of report.
Financial:
None
46
Linkages to advisory
ACOM
committee:
Linkages to other
SCICOM through the WGMG. Strong link to STECF.
committees or groups:
Linkages to other
This work serves as a mechanism in fulfilment of the MoU with EC and fisheries
organizations:
commissions. It is also linked with STECF work on mixed fisheries.
47
WGMIXFISH-METH – Working Group on Mixed Fisheries Advice
Methodology
2013/2/ACOM23
The Working Group on Mixed Fisheries Advice Methodology
(WGMIXFISH-METH), chaired by Paul Dolder, UK, will meet in London, 20–24
October 2014 to:
a) Review progress on mixed fisheries methodologies and consider how they
might be taken forward and incorporated into the advisory process.
Issues to consider include; short term catch forecasting methods, including
methods to incorporate data-poor stocks taking account of uncertainties;
medium term MSE approaches to mixed fisheries, in order to evaluate the
performance of mixed-fishery models within a management strategy
evaluation framework; alternative or additional indictors and metrics
encapsulating key indicators from mixed fisheries outputs; scenarios
incorporating more realistic assumptions in relation to fleet dynamics; and
application of methodology to other ICES regions, fisheries and stocks.
b) In conjunction with WGSAM, consider how models providing advice on
multi-species interactions and models providing advice on mixed fisheries
interactions might complement or inform each other with a view to
providing more holistic ecosystem advice.
WGMIXFISH-METH will report by 15 November 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting Information
Priority:
The work is essential for ICES to progress in the development of its capacity to
provide advice on multi-species fisheries. Such advice is necessary to fulfil the
requirements stipulated in the MoUs between ICES and its client commissions.
Scientific
justification and
relation to action
plan:
The issue of providing advice for mixed fisheries remains an important one for
ICES. However, in practice all recent advice in this area has resulted from the work
and analyses done by sub-groups of STECF rather than ICES. The Aframe project,
which started on 1 April 2007 and finished on 31 march 2009 developed further
methodologies for mixed fisheries forecasts. The work under this project included
the development and testing of the Fcube approach to modelling and forecasts.
In 2008, SGMIXMAN produced an outline of a possible advisory format that
included mixed fisheries forecasts. Subsequently, WKMIXFISH was tasked with
investigating the application of this to North Sea advice for 2010. AGMIXNS further
developed the approach when it met in November 2009 and produced a draft
template for mixed fisheries advice. WGMIXFISH has continued this work in 2010
to 2012.
Resource
requirements:
No specific resource requirements, beyond the need for members to prepare for and
participate in the meeting.
Participants:
Experts with qualifications regarding mixed fisheries aspects, fisheries management
and modelling based on limited and uncertain data.
Secretariat
facilities:
Meeting facilities, production of report.
Financial:
None
Linkages to
advisory
committee:
ACOM
Linkages to other
committees or
groups:
SCICOM through the WGMG. Strong link to STECF.
48
Linkages to other
organizations:
This work serves as a mechanism in fulfilment of the MoU with EC and fisheries
commissions. It is also linked with STECF work on mixed fisheries.
49
WGScallop – Scallop Assessment Working Group
2013/ACOM24
The Scallop Assessment Working Group (WGScallop), chaired by
Kevin Stokesbury, USA, will meet 6–10 October 2014 in Ifremer Center, Nantes,
France, to:
a) Building on the 2013 working group meeting and report review and
update the information on the 7 ToRs:
1) Distribution of fishing effort and landings for scallop inshore and offshore
waters, and explore the development of a common data base.
2) Identification of stock assessment and management units
3) Biological parameters
4) Stock assessment methods and evaluation of indicators of stock status and
identification of reference points
5) Data provision and feasibility of obtaining data
6) Efficacy of scallop fisheries management measures
7) Impact of scallop harvesting on habitat and habitat recovery rates
b) There is a problem of global assessment; for example in ICES division VIId
there is a problem of regulation of the stock (between UK, Ireland and
France), and VIIA is a complex mix of ‘stocks’ with Irish, Northern Irish,
Scottish, Isle of Man and English vessels. Discuss and build upon the
experience in other fisheries and working groups (i.e. Nephrops; the North
Western Waters Advisory Council (NWWAC).
c)
Continuing the discussion on standardizing between surveys, age
methods, and life-history/reference points is critical to sustainable
management.
d) Determine the connectivity’s between adult scallop beds. Scallop stock
structure is not well understood and the assessment areas were defined to
reflect the characteristics of the fisheries in the past rather than on the basis
of evidence to support discrete populations. It is fundamental to the
assessments and subsequent management of scallop stocks that the
connectivity’s between adult scallop beds is better understood.
e) Examine the different management alternatives including spatial
management and the increasing use of closed areas and their effect on
scallop stock and habitats.
WGScallop will report by 15 November 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting Information
Priority:
Essential
50
Scientific
The proposal to initiate a WG on scallops is justified on the basis of the The
justification:
proposal to initiate a WG on scallops is justified on the basis of the national
and international importance of this fishery in a number of countries in
north west Europe and North America. There is currently no common
scientific or assessment forum for discussion and development of common
assessment methods for scallops. These justifications used in 2013 continue
to be valid and provide a basis to build upon.
ToR a1 will provide the data on the distribution of fishing effort and
landings for scallop in inshore and offshore waters in ICES Areas VI and
VII. These data have not been compiled for the region to date.
The meeting in 2014 will review information, including simulations of larval
dispersal and seabed habitat, to identify stock assessment and management
units (ToR a2). This work will identify priority source areas for larval
production and generally increase understanding of the source-sink
dynamics of scallops.
The biological characteristics of scallop are known to vary geographically.
ToR a3 will review the available information and cross-reference to the
proposed assessment units (ToR a2). Progress towards provision of
scientific advice on scallops will be greater where a common approach to
assessment of stocks can be developed. Various approaches are currently
used, in many cases without a sound biological basis. ToR a4 will review
the application of various methods with a view to developing a standard
approach and will consider the indicators that could be used to identify safe
biological limits for scallop stocks as required by the Marine Strategy
framework Directive (MSFD) (2010/477/EU) in terms of the level of fishing
pressure, reproductive capacity of the stock and population age and size
distributions.
Data provision and the feasibility of obtaining data relevant to appropriate
assessment methods is an important consideration in developing an
advisory system for scallops and will be discussed in ToR a5.
Scallop fisheries are managed under legislation at the national level and
more locally (e.g. in Special Areas of Conservation in the UK). The scientific
rationale behind present scallop fisheries management measures and their
effectiveness, both in terms of maximising productivity and minimising
ecosystem impacts, will be investigated to allow advice to be provided
where data deficiency prevents formal stock assessments (ToR a6).
Understanding the direct and indirect impacts of scallop dredging and
trawling on ecosystems, especially on benthic habitats, is fundamental to
achieving successful management of scallop fisheries and to evaluate the
effect of the fishery on good environmental status (GES) of the seafloor as
required by the MSFD (Descriptor 6, seafloor integrity) and favourable
conservation status (FCS) of habitats where these fisheries occur in
European marine Sites (designated under the Habitats Directive). Under
ToR a7 the impact of scallop dredging will be examined in relation to
habitat type (cross-referencing with ToR a2) using fishery-dependent and
fishery-independent data (ToR a4). Quantifying recovery rates of benthic
flora and fauna will facilitate the provision of advice in an ecosystem
context.
Resource
None.
requirements:
Participants:
Oliver Tully, Ireland (Marine Institute), Lee Murray, Isle of Man (Bangor
University), Ewen Bell, England (CEFAS), Helen Dobby, Scotland (Marine
Scotland Science), Eric Foucher, France (IFREMER), Spyros Fifas, France
51
(IFREMER), Gwladys Lambert, Wales (Bangor University), Kevin Stokesbury,
United States (University of Massachusetts), Brad Harris, United States
(Alaska Pacific University), Heather Moore, Northern Ireland (AFBI), David
Palmer (CEFAS), Lynda Blackadder Scotland (Marine Scotland Science), Jonas
Jónasson, Iceland (HAFRO), Carrie McMinn, Northern Ireland (AFBI), Sarah
Clarke, Ireland (Marine Institute), Isobel Bloor, Isle of Man (Bangor
University), Bryce Beukers-Stewart England (University of York), Strand
Øivind, Norway (IMR), if nominated as well as other nominated members
Secretariat facilities:
None.
Financial:
No financial implications.
Linkages to
ACOM
advisory
committees:
Linkages to other
There are no obvious direct linkages.
committees or
groups:
Linkages to other
There are no obvious direct linkages.
organizations:
52
WKINTRO – Workshop to draft general advisory guidance document
2013/2/ACOM25
The Workshop to draft general advisory guidance document
(WKINTRO), chaired by Eskild Kirkegaard, will meet by correspondence 23–24
January, to:
a ) Draft an update of the General introduction to ICES advice to reflect inter
alia:
1) The move towards integrated assessments and advice
2) An increased number of environmental requests, including requests
dealing specifically with MSFD descriptors and monitoring
3) The move towards catch based advice including considerations in
relation to landing obligations.
4) Further development of the approach to Data Limited Stocks as
developed at WKLIFE3
5) Advisory approaches to mixed fisheries and multispecies considerations
6) A possible change in the frequency of advice towards multiannual
advice and update thresholds based on indicators
b ) Identify areas where more work is needed to develop the concepts and
principles of ICES advice further and possible processes to implement these
developments
WKINTRO will report by 30 January to the attention of ACOM.
Material and data relevant for the meeting must be available to the group no later
than 14 days prior to the starting date.
Supporting Information
Priority:
The General introduction to ICES advice describes the concepts and principles
used as the basis for ICES advice for guidance in the ICES process and for
explanation to the recipients opf advice and stakeholders. The General
introduction is increasingly seen as a statement of advice principles which are
both guiding and defining the advice.
Scientific
justification and
relation to action
plan:
Resource
requirements:
Participants:
Secretariat
facilities:
None.
Financial:
No financial implications.
Linkages to
advisory
committees:
WKINTRO reports to ACOM.
Linkages to other
committees or
groups:
WKINTRO is likned to WKLIFE3, WKMSYREF2 and other expert groups
developing new approaches to advice
Linkages to other
organizations:
53
Ecosystem related Expert Groups
WGECO – Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities
2013/2/ACOM26
The Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities
(WGECO), chaired by Anna Rindorf* (Denmark), will meet in Copenhagen, Denmark
8–15 April 2014 to:,
a) Continue the development of food web indicators and comment on the
suggested food web indicators from WKFooWI and WGSAM
b) Continue work on the large fish indicator, especially in waters other than
the North Sea.
c)
Consider the ecosystem consequences of “balanced fishing” regimes.
d) Work towards including new research on reducing effects on the seabed
and associated communities of fishing operations and gears, including
ghost fishing in ecosystem advice.
e) Recommend priority areas of study to determine the ecosystem
consequences of landing obligations/discard bans, including survival
associated with releasing fish caught
f)
Review knowledge of the consequences to stocks of prey fish (and other
parts of the ecosystem) of restoring / maintaining stocks of predatory fish
to MSY and recommend priority areas for study.
WGECO will report by 1 May to the attention of the Advisory Committee.
Supporting Information
Priority
The current activities of this Group will lead ICES into issues related to the
ecosystem affects of fisheries, especially with regard to the application of the
Ecosystem Approach. Consequently, these activities are considered to have a
very high priority.
Scientific
justification
Term of Reference a)
This area has been a major topic in WGECO over the past years and is
increasing in importance. In 2014, it is being adressed by a total of three groups,
WGECO, WKFooWI and WGSAM, each examining different perspectives.
WGECO will continue the development of food web indicators based on
existing knowledge in the group as well as input from the two other groups and
report the progress to CSGMSFD to repsond to a request from the European
Commission.
Term of Reference b)
This is a request from the European Commission in relation to Descriptor 4
(Food webs) of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. WGECO has
considered the large fish indicator many times in past meetings, but this has
mostly been in relation to the North Sea and to a lesser extent the Irish Sea.
Term of Reference c)
“Balanced fishing” implies removal of a more even top to bottom slice of the
marine food-chain than the present practice that targets particular sizes of fish.
“Balanced fishing” may be difficult to achieve in practice, but it would be useful
to consider the advantages and disadvantages of fishing to a more balanced
target.
54
Term of Reference d)
All fishing activities have influences that extend beyond removing target
species. The approach recommended by FAO is that responsible fisheries
technology should achieve management objectives with a minimum of side
effects and that they should be subject to ongoing review. WGFTFB members
and others are currently undertaking a range of research programmes to
provide the means to minimize side effects. Input from the FP7 project
BENTHIS is also available and a joint effort to operationalise these results will
improve advice on this aspect.
Term of Reference e)
The EU landing obligation/discard ban is being introduced in a phased manner
over the next 4-5 years. This may give the opportunity to study the ecosystem
effects of this change in bycatch management. Other areas on the planet already
have discard bans, so lessons might be learned from those waters too. This
question will also be posed to WGBIRD, so WGECO could most usefully focus
on other parts of the marine ecosystem. Several countries are conducting or
have recently completed significant studies in this area and the subject would
benefit from a review of progress and an evaluation of the results obtained. The
last review of significant studies occurred in 1996 by the ICES Study Group on
Unaccounted Mortalities. A review of more recent work will determine the need
for revision and update on planning and methodology for studying this subject.
Term of Reference f
There are indications that if commercially important fish stocks increase
following the decision to fish at Maximum Sustainable Yield, then stocks of prey
species will fall, with possible consequences to other dependent predators. It
would be useful to eamine if it would be possible to separate the effects of the
landing obligation/discard ban from the ffects caused by a move to MSY.
Resource
requirements
None above the normal welcoming approach of the ICES Secretariat
Participants
The Group is normally attended by 20–25 members and guests.
Secretariat
facilities
Two or three meeting rooms for the period of the meeting.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to
ACOM and its
expert groups
ACOM is the parent committee of WGECO
Linkages to
SCICOM and its
expert groups
There are linkages to several other expert groups. For example WGSE will
consider the effects of the discard ban on seabirds; WGSAM has considered
(briefly) the implications of balanced fisheries on fish stocks; WGFAST has
considered the technologies to reduce seabed effects
Linkages to other
organizations
55
WGMME – The Working Group on Marine Mammal Ecology
2013/2/ACOM27
The Working Group on Marine Mammal Ecology (WGMME),
chaired by Eunice Pinn, UK, will meet in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA, 10–13
March 2014 to:
a) Review and report on any new information on population sizes,
population/stock structure and management frameworks for marine
mammals; specifically. This will contribute to the work required for the
MoU between the European Commission and ICES to “provide new
information regarding the impact of fisheries on other components of the
ecosystem including small cetaceans and other marine mammals…” and to aid
“scientific and technical developments in the support of the Marine Strategy
Framework Directive, such as by designing marine monitoring and assessment
programmes, identifying research needs and methodologies advice”. OSPAR is
also seeking advice from ICES in relation to the development of
indicators and targets for determining Good Environmental Status (GES)
under MSFD to which this will contribute;
b) Provide information on abundance, distribution, population structure
and incidental capture of marine mammals in the western North Atlantic
(North Atlantic right whale, harbour porpoise and white-sided dolphin);
c)
To review the further development of the Bycatch Limit Algorithm
framework for determining safe bycatch limits. This work should
include harbour porpoise, short-beaked common dolphin and
consideration of additional species for which bycatch estimates have
been made or suggested as a potential MSFD indicators (e.g. bottlenose
dolphin, striped dolphin, harbour seal and grey seal). This should
include a comparison with approaches used to assess bycatch in USA;
d) Assess the Joint Cetacean Protocol outputs with a view to their
contribution to international transboundary reporting requirements (e.g.
for Article 17 of the Habitats Directive) and the operationalization of
MSFD indicators, targets and appropriate baselines. Consideration
should also be given to other approaches, such as those of the Atlantic
marine Assessment programme (AMAPPS) which coordinates data
collection and analysis for marine mammals and reptiles for population
assessments;
e) Update on development of database for seals and status of intersessional
work, contribution to the and the operationalization of MSFD indicators,
targets and appropriate baselines. Consideration should also be given to
other approaches, such as those of the Atlantic Marine Assessment
programme (AMAPPS);
f)
Outline and review approaches to marine mammal survey design used
during pre- and post-consenting monitoring in the offshore marine
renewables (wind, wave, tide) industry, and provide recommendations
for best practice.
g) Special request:
Interactions between wild and captive fish stocks (OSPAR 4/2014)
1)
Recalling the conclusion of the QSR 2010 that mariculture is a
growing activity in the OSPAR maritime area, EIHA 2012
considered the potential for increasing environmental pressure
relating to the growth of this industry. As yet this is not an
56
established work stream within EIHA, and Contracting Parties
have requested that more information be brought forwards on this
issue. This was reiterated by EIHA 2013.
2)
Mariculture has a number of associated environmental pressures
such as the introduction of non_indigenous species, which can have
ecological and genetic impacts on marine environment and
especially on wild fish stocks; in addition, pressures from
mariculture might include:
i) introduction of antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals;
ii) transfer of disease and parasite interactions;
iii) release of nutrients and organic matters;
iv) introgression of foreign genes, from both hatchery-reared fish and
genetically modified fish and invertebrates, in wild populations;
v) effects on small cetaceans, such as the bottlenose dolphin, due to
their interaction with aquaculture cages
3)
EIHA proposes that OSPAR requests ICES to provide:
i) an update on the available knowledge on these issues;
ii) concrete examples of management solutions to mitigate these
pressures on the marine environment;
iii) advice on which pressures have sufficient documentation regarding
their impacts to implement relevant monitoring and suggest a way
forward to manage these pressures.
4)
It may be appropriate to explore cooperation with other competent
authorities working in this field, such as the European Food Safety
Authority with respect to disease transfer or parasites, or the North
Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO), in particular
with respect to existing cooperation between NASCO and ICES on
issues pertaining to pressures from mariculture.
WGMME is requested in particular to address point bv. Also WGAQUA,
WGPDMO and WGAGFM will address this request.
5)
Special request: Marine mammals (OSPAR 6/2014)
• Advise on appropriate management units (MUs) for grey and
harbour seals in the OSPAR Maritime area;
• Provide technical and scientific advice on options for ways of setting
targets for the OSPAR common MSFD Indicators for marine
mammals and where possible, provide examples of the application
of these options. The advice should consider the suitability of
various options for relevant marine mammal species/ MUs/
indicators. In considering target setting options, also consider the
consequences that this may have for the monitoring programme
(including spatial and temporal implications). Consideration
should be given to precision in target setting and monitoring. (Note
that ICES are not asked to take any societal/ policy choices, but if
necessary should identify the need for such choices and their
potential implications);
57
• Provide an overview of existing monitoring per OSPAR common
MSFD indicator and marine mammal species, including the
description of current monitoring frequency (and whether this is
likely to be sufficient to meet the assessment requirement);
• Provide an overview of possible future monitoring requirements and
methodology per OSPAR common MSFD indicator and marine
mammal species.
The request is to cover OSPAR regions II, III and IV.
The existing indicator technical specifications developed by COBAM
should form the basis of this work.
WGMME will report by 4 April 2014 for to the attention of the Advisory Committee.
58
WGBYC – Working Group on Bycatch of Protected Species
2013/2/ACOM28
The Working Group on Bycatch of Protected Species (WGBYC),
chaired by Bram Couperus, NL, will meet 4–7 February 2014 in ICES HQ
Copenhagen, Denmark, to:
a ) Work on the incorporation of monitoring requirements into the new DCF,
in line with a move to a wider ecosystem approach to fisheries monitoring
to include bycatch of cetaceans, seals, birds, turtles and non-target fish
species. This includes collaboration with PGCCDBS, WGCATCH and
Regional Coordination Meetings;
b ) Review annual national reports submitted to the European Commission
under Regulation 812/2004 and other published documents and collate
bycatch estimates of protected species (birds, mammals, reptiles, fish);
c ) Evaluate the impacts of bycatch on each relevant species and where
possible at a population level, furthering the approach adopted by
WKREV812 to assess likely conservation level threats;
d ) Collate and review information from National 812 reports and elsewhere
relating to the implementation of bycatch mitigation measures and
ongoing bycatch mitigation trials, compile recent results and coordinate
further work on protected species bycatch mitigation;
e ) Working with the ICES Data Centre, continue to develop a database on
bycatch monitoring and relevant fishing effort in European waters; review
attempts made intersessionally to populate the existing database with
monitoring and effort data for the relevant fleets for 2008–2010;
f ) Continue to develop, improve and coordinate methods for bycatch
monitoring and assessment.
WGBYC will report by 24 February 2014 for to the attention of the Advisory
Committee.
Supporting Information
Priority:
Scientific
a) The European Commission has decided not to amend Res. 812/2004 and to
justification and
integrate monitoring of protected and endangered species into the new DCF
relation to action
(DCMAP). It is essential to cooperate with the scientists who design observer
plan:
schemes and protocols for the monitoring of catch and discards.
b) This is essential for use in answering part of the European Commission MoU
request to “provide any new information regarding the impact of fisheries on
marine mammals, seabirds...”
c) ICES Member Countries are required to reduce levels of bycatch under
several pieces of legislation; the response to this ToR will help meet that aim.
d) An operating database will allow a more efficient response to future advice
requests in this area and additional provide an audit trail for information used
in the Group’s reports.
e) Working with PGCCDBS and WGCATCH will ensure more effective crossICES work.
f) Bycatch monitoring and assessment is fundamental to the work of the group;
any improvements in methods will help the group and other workers in this
field.
59
Resource
None beyond usual Secretariat facilities.
requirements:
Participants:
13–21 members
Secretariat
Secretariat support with meeting organization and final editing of report.
facilities:
Financial:
No financial implications.
Linkages to
ACOM
advisory
committees:
Linkages to other
WGFTFB, WGMME, WGSE, WGEF, PGCCDBS, WGCATCH, SCICOM.
committees or
groups:
Linkages to other
NAMMCO, ASCOBANS, ACCOBAMS, GFCM, EC, IWC
organizations:
60
WGDEC – ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on Deep-water Ecology
2013/2/ACOM29
The ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on Deep-water Ecology
(WGDEC), Chaired by Neil Golding*, UK, will meet 24–28 February 2014 at ICES
Headquarters in Copenhagen, Denmark:
a ) Provide all available new information on distribution of VMEs in the
North Atlantic and update maps with a view to advising on any boundary
modifications of existing closures to bottom fisheries; (NEAFC/EC request)
b ) Develop a system of weighting the reliability and significance of VME
indicator records so that advice on closures can be more clearly presented
and interpreted;
c ) Catalogue sources of multibeam/swathe bathymetry data for deep-water
areas throughout the North Atlantic so that such data can be more readily
accessed and used by WGDEC in its advice;
d ) Review the state-of-the-art of high resolution ‘terrain-based models’ for
predicting VME distribution and developments in understanding the
functional significance of VMEs, notably as providers of essential habitat
for fish.
WGDEC will report by 5 April for the attention of the Advisory Committee.
Supporting Information
Priority:
High as a Joint group with NAFO and is essential for feeding information to
help answer external requests
Scientific
a)
These maps are required to meet part of the European Commission MoU
justification and
request to “provide any new information regarding the impact of fisheries
relation to action
on ..... sensitive habitats” and the NEAFC request “ to continue to provide
plan:
all available new information on distribution of vulnerable habitats in the
NEAFC Convention Area and fisheries activities in and in the vicinity of
such habitats.” The location of newly discovered/mapped sensitive habitats
is critical to these requests. It is essential that ICES/WG chair asks its
Member Countries etc. to supply as much information that they may have
on Hatton and Rockall fisheries distribution and “habitat catch” by one
month in advance of the WGDEC meeting. Otherwise the answer to most
of the sub-question will be “no data available to ICES”
b)
This is an important development of the VME database. Records within
the VME database originate from a number of different sources; from
specific targeted habitat mapping surveys with a high degree of spatial
accuracy through to bycatch records from towed gear/longlining. Through
developing a weighting system for these records, the information
underpinning any new recommendations on closures, or modifications to
existing closures, can be assessed and weighted based on reliability and
significance.
c)
Following a request from NEAFC within the 2013 WGDEC ToR to map
VME elements (e.g. geomorphological features), a catalogue of existing
multibeam/swathe bathymetry data will be extremely valuable for the
development of future WGDEC advice, with VME occurrences often
associated with VME elements.
d)
High resolution ‘terrain based models’ are becoming more prevalent as a
method of identifying potential VME occurrences in information being
61
brought to the groups attention. The review will assess the provenance of
data generated by these models, and how such data should be used by the
group.
Resource
The usual helpful support from the Secretariat will be appreciated.
requirements:
Participants:
The Group is normally attended by some 15-20 members and guests.
Secretariat
None.
facilities:
Financial:
No financial implications.
Linkages to
ACOM is parent group. WGDEEP is related, but no explicit overlap in work
ACOM and its
this year.
expert groups
Linkages to
SCICOM and its
expert groups
Linkages to other
organisations:
JWGBI RD Joint I CES/OSPA R group on seabir ds
2013/2/ACOM30
The Joint ICES/ OSPAR Working Group on Seabirds (JWGBIRD), cochaired by Ian Mitchell (UK) and XX will meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, 17-21 November
2014, to work on ToRs and generate deliverables as listed below:
a) Test the operation of OSPAR MSFD common indicators: B1 – marine bird abundance and
B3 – marine bird breeding success. A project issued by OSPAR, will produce an assessment
for these indicators in the Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas. JWGBird will review the
outputs of the project and provide recommendations on the future operation of these
indicators by Contracting Parties. The reporting will follow a format pre-defined by OSPAR
via ICG-COBAM and will ensure access to the underlying data used to produce the
assessment. The report will include:
i. Recommendations for gap-filling for monitoring of breeding seabirds, breeding waterbirds
and non-breeding shorebirds and seabird breeding success in each sub-region;
ii. Arrangements for data-handling, storage and analysis of data
b) Design a protocol (or protocols) for assessing the effects on seabirds of the new CFP
Landings Obligations. Data collated under ToR a) could be used in the protocol, which
could include the following:
i.
Sensitivity scoring of species to reduction in food from discards (and offal)
ii. Pre- and post-Obligations comparison of abundance and breeding success of those
species scored as most sensitive.
iii. Meta-analysis of diet studies of seabird species thought to depend largely on discards
to seek species-specific, temporal and regional differences in such dependencies, to be
able to predict where birds might be most affected.
iv. An inventory of the seabird colonies which may be vulnerable to the changed
availability of discards to ‘generalist piscivores‘ and studies into appropriate remedial
action.
c) Review utility and accuracy of habitat preference models for identifying suitable marine
protected areas for seabirds.
d) Summarise evidence in support of Area-restricted Search as a Foraging strategy.
62
e) Scope-out work required to compile an inventory of threats and measures concerning nonnative predators at seabird colonies on offshore islands.
f) Review studies on the impact of fishing for seabird prey species on seabird demographics
and consider how impacts may be included in ICES advice on fish stock management.
JWGBIRD will report on the activities of 2014 by 10 December 2014 to ACOM, SCICOM
and OSPAR 1.
Supporting information
Priority
The ToRs are listed in order of priority. OSPAR Contracting Parties are expecting
the group to deliver ToR (a) related to the operation of two MSFD Common
Indicators. The new CFP Landings Obligations and their effects on discards and
knock-on impacts on seabirds are high profile within the fishing industry, within
marine conservation and with the European Public. Therefore, ToRs (i.e. b)
related to the impacts of the changing fisheries practices have high priority.
Recent work by WGSE regarding behavioural ecology of seabirds, habitat models
in relation to conservation policy will be continued (ToRs c & d).
ToRs e) & f) are concerned with potentially manageable pressures on seabirds:
fishing as a competitor for prey, and predation by invasive non-native mammals
will both help to define future work areas for the group.
Scientific
justification
a) ICES has played a key role in supporting the development of regional
indicators of bird population status in the Greater North Sea since the
inception of EcoQOs in 2001. In 2013, OSPAR adopted a first set of common
indicators to support the implementation of the EU MSFD including two
common indicators for marine birds. This joint OSPAR/ICES working group
was formed in order e.g. to take forward the further development and testing
of these indicators. This task under the ToR will be to review the assessments
and report including recommendations on the future operation of these
indicators by Contracting Parties.
b) The new CFP Landings Obligations will come into force for pelagic fisheries
in 2015, for Baltic fisheries by 2015 and 2017 (depending on the fishery), for
key demersal species (cod, hake, sole) in North Atlantic waters by 2016 and
for all other commercial species in all waters by 2017. With some
derogations, fishers will be obliged to land all commercial species they catch
and will not be allowed to discard these species. The Landings Obligation is
often referred to as the ‘discard ban’. This ToR is aimed at developing a
protocol that could be used to assess the impact of the Landings Obligations
on seabirds through potential changes in their food supply.
c) In 2013, WGSE started a review of the utility and accuracy of habitat
preference models for identifying suitable marine protected areas for
seabirds. They reviewed Local Enhancement and its impact on conservation
issues and the use of “Habitat Models” to predict seabird hotspots. The
group should continue this work, with the goal of producing a publishable
review.
d) The group will review and summarise evidence in support of Area-restricted
Search as a foraging strategy. They will use mainly tracking data to assess to
what extent they use new searches as opposed to memory to find food. The
goal is to produce a publishable review.
e) In addition to fisheries impacts, the other potentially manageable pressure
from seabirds is from predation by non-native mammals that invade
previously predator free islands. The scale of the ongoing impact or
potential impact from non-native mammals is unknown. The group will
possibly develop a ToR for JWGBird in 2015, by scoping-out the work
required to compile an inventory of threats and measures concerning nonnative predators at seabird colonies on offshore islands. The work will also
inform EU Member States on whether they should be further developing the
OSPAR MSFD candidate indicator M4 - Non-native/invasive mammal
presence on island seabird colonies.
f) Determining a causal link between fishing activities and apparent shortages
1
A provisional report of the outcomes of JWG Bird as regards ToR a) should be made to OSPAR ICGCOBAM (3) 2014 in December 2014.
63
of prey for seabirds has proved difficult to obtain. But could seabird
demographic data (e.g. on breeding population size, breeding success),
which is currently collected, be used to inform management of fish stocks,
so that fishing does not have a detrimental impacts on the food supply of
seabirds? The group will review studies on the impact of fishing for seabird
prey species on seabird demographics and consider how impacts may be
included in ICES advice on fish stock management.
Resource
requirements
The research programmes which provide the main input to this group are already
underway, and resources are already committed. The additional resource required
to undertake additional activities in the framework of this group is negligible.
Participants
About 15 participants are expected in the newly merged group.
Secretariat
facilities
Two rooms in ICES HQ at the time of the meeting and the usual helpful
Secretariat support.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to
ACOM and
groups under
ACOM
This is an ACOM group. Its outputs may inform the work of other groups
working on integrated ecosystem assessments
Linkages to othe There is a close working relationship with all the groups of SSGEPI.
committees or
groups
Linkages to othe OSPAR (in particular ICG-COBAM and BDC) and potentially HELCOM
organizations
64
Environmental related Expert Groups
WGBOSV – ICES/IOC/IMO Working Group on Ballast and Other Ship
Vectors
2013/2/ACOM31
The ICES/IOC/IMO Working Group on Ballast and Other Ship
Vectors (WGBOSV), chaired by Sarah Bailey, Canada will meet in Klaipėda,
Lithuania from 17–19 March 2014, with a full day joint meeting with the Working
Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Organisms (WGITMO) to:
a ) Continue to critically review and report on the status of shipping vector
research with an emphasis on studies of shipping transport vectors,
shipping vector management activities and risk assessment. (ToR lead
Sarah Bailey)
b ) Further discuss and evaluate sampling and analysis strategies for type
approval and compliance testing of ballast water treatment technologies
under consideration at IMO or by other regulators (e.g. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency). (ToR lead Lisa Drake)
c ) Further discuss and evaluate available information on the effects of treated
or exchanged ballast water on the aquatic environment and provide input
on strategies which could be used to increase confidence surrounding
environmental safety of treated ballast water being discharged. (ToR lead
Andrea Sneekes)
d ) Investigate and report on new developments in non-native species issues
associated with biofouling (e.g. artificial structures in the marine
environment and recreational boating) (joint Term of Reference with
WGITMO). (ToR lead Sarah Bailey/Henn Ojaveer)
e ) Investigate and report on new developments in non-native species issues
in the Arctic (joint Term of Reference with WGITMO). (ToR lead Anders
Jelmert)
f ) Collaborate with ICES Study Group on Integrated Morphological and
Molecular Taxonomy (SGIMT) regarding identification, early detection
and monitoring of non-native species, as appropriate. (ToR lead Maiju
Lehtiniemi)
WGBOSV will report by 15 April 2014 for the attention of the Advisory Committee.
Supporting Information
Priority:
The Working Group review and report on the scientific and
technical development in relation to ballast water and
shipping vectors. As a joint working group it also follows
and supports the work within IMO and IOC on these
topics.
Scientific justification
WGBOSV has a long history of providing scientific support
to the development of international measures to reduce the
risk of transporting non native species via shipping vectors.
The group has had input into the issue of Ballast Water
Sampling guidelines in several ways.
and relation to action
plan:
The issue has been discussed at the annual meetings of the
Working Group
The working group has previously submitted documents to
meetings at IMO to support the development of guidelines.
65
This type of input helps ensure that the guidelines are
based on accurate scientific information and supports the
implementation of the Ballast Water Management
Convention.
Resource
None
requirements:
Participants:
The Group is normally attended by some 25–35 members.
Secretariat facilities:
None.
Financial:
No financial implications.
Linkages to advisory
ACOM
committees:
Linkages to other
committees or groups:
Linkages to other
organizations:
There is a very close working relationship with the working
Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine
Organisms (WGITMO) and the Working Group on
Harmful Algal Bloom Dynamics (WGHABD). There is also
a link to PICES.
The work of this group is closely linked to work carried out
by the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), the
International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC).
66
WGITMO – Working Group on Introduction and Transfers of Marine
Organisms
2013/2/ACOM32
The ICES Working Group on Introduction and Transfers of Marine
Organisms (WGITMO), chaired by Henn Ojaveer, Estonia, will meet in Klaipeda,
Lithuania, from 19–21 March 2014, with a back to back meeting with the
ICES/IOC/IMO Working Group on Ballast and Other Ship Vectors (WGBOSV) to:
a ) Synthesize and evaluate national reports using the adopted format for
reporting and contributions to the database that includes species, locations
(latitude and longitude), status of invasions as appropriate, region of
origin, status of eradication efforts, and habitat, and develop an annual
summary table of new occurrences/introductions of aquatic nonindigenous species.
b ) Continue verifying selected datasets of the newly developing database on
marine and other aquatic organisms in European waters by making other
components of the database available online, in addition to the Baltic Sea
which is already available. This activity will mostly be carried out
intersessionally and take several years.
c ) Continue addressing EU MSFD D2 on further developing alien species
indicators, incl. evaluating of ecological impacts caused by alien species.
d ) Continue identification and evaluation of climate change impacts on the
establishment and spread of non-indigenous species. Produce draft
manuscript on temperature effects on non-indigenous species and develop
further research agenda. This activity will mostly be carried out
intersessionally and take several years.
e ) Investigate and report on new developments in non-native species issues
associated with biofouling (e.g. artificial structures in the marine
environment and recreational boating) (joint Term of Reference with
WGBOSV).
f ) Investigate and report on new developments in non-native species issues
into and through the Arctic region (joint Term of Reference with
WGBOSV).
g ) Collaborate with ICES Study Group on Integrated Morphological and
Molecular Taxonomy (SGIMT) regarding identification, early detection
and monitoring of non-native species, as appropriate (joint Term of
Reference with WGBOSV).
h ) Finalise the draft alien species alert report on Ensis directus.
WGITMO will report by 14 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting Information
Priority:
The work of the Group is the basis for essential advice to prevent future
unintentional movements of non-indigenous species. The work of this Group
supports the core role of ICES in relation to planned introductions and transfers
of organisms.
Scientific
We are routinely updating data and information on new introductions or
justification and
expanding introductions.
67
Relation to action
The group will contribute to MSFD Descriptor 2 issues, incl. providing
plan:
guidance and generic suggestions for designing future alien species
monitoring programs.
We are planning to actively contribute in verification of selected datasets of
the newly developing database on marine and other aquatic organisms in
European waters. This will be essentially important for WGITMO to
contribute as a group into this database building.
We plan to identify and evaluate climate change impacts on the establishment
and spread of alien species; this activity will result in scientific publication.
We’ll investigate and report increasingly important issue of various artificial
structures for alien species spread and invasions.
We’ll initiate cooperation with Working Group on Integrated Morphological and
Molecular taxonomy (WGIMT).
We’ll produce next alien species alert report (on Ensis directus).
Resource
None required other than those provided by ICES Secretariat and national
requirements:
members
Participants:
WGITMO nominated members and invited experts from, e.g. Mediterranean
Sea countries that are not members of ICES.
Secretariat
Meeting room providen by the host
facilities:
Financial:
None required
Linkages to
WGITMO reports to ACOM
advisory
committees:
Linkages to other
WGHABD, WGEIM, WGBOSV, WGAGFM, WGMASC, WGBIODIV
committees or
groups:
Linkages to other
WGITMO urges ICES to encourage and support a continued dialogue with
organizations:
PICES, CIESM, IMO, HELCOM, OSPAR and EIFAC.
68
SGOA – Study group on Ocean Acidification
The Joint OSPAR/ICES Study Group on Ocean Acidification (SGOA), co-chaired by
Evin McGovern, Ireland, and Mark Benfield, USA, will meet in Copenhagen,
Denmark from 6–9, October 2014. The Terms of Reference remain the original ones
for the Group. SGOA 2014 will produce a final consolidated report of SGOA’s output
for submission to OSPAR.
a ) Collate chemical data and information on ocean acidification in the OSPAR
Maritime Area;
b ) Seek information from relevant international initiatives on Ocean
acidification; as listed in OSPAR MIME 11/3/3 (e.g. EU, Arctic Council);
c ) Collect and exchange information on biological effects on plankton, and
macrozoobenthos;
d ) Consider the strategy that would be required for an assessment framework
appropriate for long-term assessment of the intensity/severity of the effects
of ocean acidification, including any assessment criteria required;
e ) Inform the development of biological effects indicators for ocean
acidification, including the identification of suitable species and key areas 2;
f ) Elaborate reporting requirements to ICES (taking account of the
information in Table at OSPAR MIME 2011 SR Annex 6);
g ) Report a first assessment of all available data in the OSPAR maritime area.
h ) OSPAR 1/2015 request:
Review of draft OSPAR JAMP
phytoplankton species composition.
Eutrophication
Guidelines
on
ICES is requested to advise OSPAR on the revision of the OSPAR JAMP
Eutrophication Guidelines which will be revised by experts from
Germany, The Netherlands and Sweden.
It is the intention of the revision that the existing aims described in the
guidelines will be supplemented with the following:
•
to identify harmful algae species and blooms in line with MSFD
Descriptor 5.
•
to identify invasive (non-indigenous) species in line with MSFD
Descriptor 2.
•
to monitor effects of ocean acidification as e.g. on
coccolithophorids (e.g. Emiliania huxleyi) in line with Descriptor 1 in
MSFD.
The revised guidelines should incorporate coming monitoring and
measurement techniques such as (but not limited to) spectrofluorometry,
2
OSPAR Footnote to TOR f) OSPAR BDC, in understanding the interactions between ocean
acidification and biodiversity agreed that although it is not possible to identify parameters at
this time, there is a need for the monitoring of biodiversity aspects for MSFD to look at the
issues of climatic variation and ocean acidification. It was agreed that there are research gaps
and hence to put forward a request for advice from ICES to inform the development of
OSPAR monitoring tools to detect and quantify the effects of ocean acidification and climate
change on species, habitats and ecosystem function, including the identification of suitable
species and key areas (OSPAR BDC 2012 SR, Annex 16, §A3).
69
flow cytometry and qualitative observations of foam production, and
should make use of existing standards, such as EN 15972 and EN 15204
and reflect developments within the OSPAR ICG – COBAM which is
working on biodiversity monitoring and assessment. Data handling issues,
such as the format required for reporting to ICES, should also be
addressed.
SGOA is asked to address the ocean acidification issue as outlined above
and relevant monitoring and measurement techniques as mentioned
above.
SGOA will report by 1 December 2014 for the attention of the Advisory Committee
(ACOM).
Supporting information:
Priority
The Study group is established based on a request from OSPAR to further
the current activities on Ocean Acidification. Consequently, these activities
are considered necessary and to have a very high priority.
The expected timeframe for the Study group is two to three years.
Scientific justification
The current level of scientific knowledge is not sufficiently developed for
monitoring of biological parameters. Data on physical and chemical
parameters relating to ocean acidification are a prerequisite for
understanding the potential response of biological organisms. At the same
time, monitoring of physical and chemical parameters should be informed
by susceptibilities of species and habitats, depending on their situation
(e.g. biogeographic range). It is, therefore essential that the consideration of
biological parameters is taken into account, so that as knowledge advances,
this can inform the evolution of monitoring for ocean acidification in an
iterative manner.
Resource requirements
The research programmes which provide the main input to this group are
already underway, and resources are already committed. The additional
resource required to undertake additional activities in the framework of
this group is negligible.
Participants
The Group is expected to be attended by 15–25 members and guests.
Secretariat facilities
Meeting room
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to advisory
committees
ACOM.
Linkages to other
committees or groups
SCICOM. The work is also relevant to the Marine Chemistry group
Linkages to other
organizations
OSPAR
(MCWG), the Working Group on Deep-water Ecology (WGDEC), the
Working Group on Zooplankton Ecology (WGZE) and Working Group on
Biological Effects of Contaminants (WGBEC).
70
Data Related Expert Groups
PGCCDBS: Planning Group on Commercial Catches, Discards and
Biological Sampling
2013/2/ACOM34
The Planning Group on Commercial Catches, Discards and Biological
Sampling [PGCCDBS] chaired by Mike Armstrong, UK, and Gráinne Ní Chonchúir,
Ireland, will meet in Horta (Azores), Portugal 17–21 February 2014, to:
Review last year’s PGCCDBS recommendations and responsive actions taken.
a) Review the outcomes of workshops, study groups, exchange schemes and
other intersession work related to sampling design, collection, interpretation
and quality assurance of data on stock-related biological variables (age and
growth; maturity and fecundity; sex ratio).
b) Review the outcomes of workshops, study groups and other intersession
work related to sampling design, collection, interpretation and quality
assurance of data on fleet/métier related variables (discards estimates and
length/age compositions of landings and discards).
c)
Respond to data issues reported to PGCCDBS by ICES Expert Groups,
Assessment Working Groups (including PGCCDBS-AWG contact persons)
and RCMs by providing advice on suitable actions and responsibilities for
those actions. .
d) Evaluate the future structure of this EG considering the establishment of two
new experts groups dealing with sound statistical catch sampling
(WGCATCH) and quality assurance of biological parameters (WGBIOP).
PGCCDBS will report by 28th March 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
71
Supporting Information
Priority:
Scientific
justification:
Essential
T
h
e
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
G
r
o
u
p
a
n
d
w
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
s
a
r
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
i
n
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
o
72
t
h
e
E
C
I
C
E
S
M
o
U
t
h
a
t
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
I
C
E
S
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
D
a
t
73
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
F
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
(
D
C
F
;
E
C
R
e
g
.
1
9
9
/
2
0
0
8
a
n
d
6
6
5
/
2
0
0
8
,
D
e
c
i
s
74
i
o
n
s
2
0
0
8
/
9
4
9
/
E
C
a
n
d
2
0
1
0
/
9
3
/
E
U
)
.
P
G
C
C
D
B
S
i
s
t
h
e
I
C
E
S
f
o
r
u
m
f
o
r
p
75
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
d
a
t
a
f
o
r
s
t
o
c
k
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
76
e
n
t
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
;
i
t
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
s
a
n
d
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
e
s
t
h
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
m
e
t
77
h
o
d
s
a
n
d
a
d
o
p
t
s
s
a
m
p
l
i
n
g
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
a
n
d
g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
.
M
a
n
y
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
78
s
i
n
t
h
i
s
g
r
o
u
p
a
r
e
c
l
o
s
e
l
y
l
i
n
k
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
E
U
D
C
79
F
a
n
d
D
G
M
A
R
E
i
s
a
m
e
m
b
e
r
o
f
P
G
C
C
D
B
S
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
80
n
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
D
C
F
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
.
S
t
o
c
k
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
d
a
t
a
c
o
v
e
r
i
n
81
g
t
h
e
t
o
t
a
l
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
f
i
s
h
s
t
o
c
k
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
P
G
s
e
r
v
e
s
a
s
a
f
82
o
r
u
m
f
o
r
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
n
o
n
E
U
m
e
m
b
e
r
c
o
u
n
t
r
i
e
s
w
h
e
r
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
83
a
t
e
.
T
h
e
P
G
s
h
a
l
l
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
a
n
d
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
b
e
s
t
s
a
m
p
l
i
n
g
84
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
w
i
t
h
i
n
i
t
s
r
e
m
i
t
s
a
n
d
f
o
r
f
i
s
h
e
r
i
e
s
i
n
t
h
e
I
C
E
S
a
r
e
a
.
85
T
h
e
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
i
s
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
e
d
r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
a
n
d
86
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
.
T
h
e
P
G
c
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
s
i
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
s
f
o
r
w
o
r
k
s
87
h
o
p
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
.
T
h
e
s
u
c
c
e
88
s
s
o
f
t
h
e
w
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
a
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
p
r
e
p
a
r
a
t
o
r
y
89
w
o
r
k
i
n
t
h
e
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
i
e
s
.
T
h
i
s
p
r
e
p
a
r
a
t
o
r
y
w
o
r
k
i
s
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
90
l
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
i
e
s
.
I
C
E
S
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
i
n
f
o
r
m
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
91
h
i
s
w
o
r
k
i
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
n
n
u
a
l
D
C
F
w
o
r
k
p
l
a
n
s
.
U
n
d
e
r
92
T
o
R
a
)
a
n
d
b
)
,
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
f
u
r
t
h
e
r
w
o
r
k
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
c
o
m
p
i
l
93
e
d
a
n
d
a
w
o
r
k
p
l
a
n
f
o
r
2
0
1
4
a
n
d
2
0
1
5
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
g
r
e
e
d
.
T
o
R
c
)
i
n
c
l
94
u
d
e
s
t
h
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
t
a
s
k
s
:
R
e
v
i
e
w
a
n
y
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
A
d
v
i
s
o
95
r
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
s
a
n
d
I
C
E
S
i
n
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g
r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
t
a
s
k
f
o
r
c
e
s
t
o
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
96
d
a
t
a
d
e
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
i
m
p
e
d
i
n
g
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s
,
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
97
n
d
h
o
w
t
h
e
s
e
c
o
u
l
d
l
i
n
k
m
o
s
t
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
w
i
t
h
P
G
C
C
D
B
S
.
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
98
a
s
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
t
y
p
e
s
o
f
d
a
t
a
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d
t
o
P
G
C
C
99
D
B
S
,
a
n
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
d
v
i
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
L
i
a
i
s
o
n
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
r
e
l
e
v
a
n
t
R
C
M
s
100
o
n
w
h
e
r
e
r
e
c
u
r
r
i
n
g
p
r
o
b
l
e
m
s
c
o
u
l
d
b
e
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
e
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
101
t
s
i
n
s
a
m
p
l
i
n
g
d
e
s
i
g
n
,
c
o
v
e
r
a
g
e
,
i
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
l
l
102
a
b
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
E
U
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
F
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
.
T
o
R
d
)
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
103
l
o
f
t
w
o
n
e
w
I
C
E
S
E
G
,
W
G
C
A
T
C
H
a
n
d
W
G
B
I
O
P
,
o
v
e
r
l
a
p
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
u
b
g
r
104
o
u
p
s
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
o
f
P
G
C
C
D
B
S
.
O
t
h
e
r
a
s
p
e
c
t
s
o
f
d
a
t
a
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
105
l
d
a
l
s
o
t
b
e
t
a
k
e
n
i
n
t
o
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
,
s
u
c
h
t
h
e
f
i
s
h
e
r
i
e
s
i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
s
u
106
r
v
e
y
s
,
r
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
f
i
s
g
h
e
r
i
e
s
s
u
r
v
e
y
s
,
e
e
l
a
n
d
s
a
l
m
o
n
d
a
t
a
c
o
l
l
e
107
c
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
e
P
G
C
C
D
B
S
c
o
u
l
d
e
v
o
l
v
e
t
o
a
c
t
a
s
a
n
s
t
e
e
r
i
n
g
g
r
o
u
p
s
d
e
a
l
108
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
a
s
p
e
c
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
d
a
t
a
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
e
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
w
i
l
l
t
a
k
e
109
p
l
a
c
e
i
n
C
o
n
s
t
a
n
t
a
,
R
o
m
a
n
i
a
,
a
n
d
w
i
l
l
b
e
h
e
l
d
i
n
p
a
r
a
l
l
e
l
w
i
t
h
t
110
h
e
c
o
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
g
r
o
u
p
f
o
r
t
h
e
M
e
d
i
t
e
r
r
a
n
e
a
n
E
U
f
i
s
h
e
r
i
e
111
s
(
P
G
M
E
D
)
.
Resource
requirements:
Expert on sampling designe, data collection and biological parameters.
Participants:
Scientists involved in the EU Data Collection Framework and other data collection
schemes, usually 30-40 participants.
Secretariat
facilities:
None.
Financial:
None.
Linkages to
advisory
committees:
ACOM
Linkages to other
committees or
groups:
SCICOM, fish stock assessment working groups, RCG’s, European Commission
Linkages to other
organizations:
DG MARE (DCF), STECF-EWG on data collection, PGMed
WKSABCAL - Workshop on Statistical Analysis of Biological Calibration
Studies
2013/2/ACOM35
A Workshop on Statistical Analysis of Biological
Calibration Studies [WKSABCAL] will be established Lotte Worsøe Clausen,
Denmark and Ernesto Jardim, Portugal, and will meet in Lisbon 13–17 October 2014
to:
a ) Compile statistical methods for analysing reader agreement;
b ) Identify the strengths and weaknesses of each method for fisheries
calibration studies;
c ) Review existing software for analysing calibration workshop data;
d ) Define data summaries and analysis outputs required by calibration
workshop participants and as stock assessment input;
e ) Draft a review paper based on workshop presentations, discussions and
results.
112
WKSABCAL will report by 3 November 2014 for the attention of ACOM and
PGCCDBS.
Supporting Information
Priority:
High. Age and maturity data are fundamental parts of the stock assessment
process and a great deal of effort is put into ensuring the data are of high
quality. Therefore it is important that the analytical tools used at age,
maturity and other calibration workshops are fit for purpose, delivering
informative outputs for the workshop participants and the stock assessment
process.
Scientific
justification and
relation to action
plan:
This work relates to quality assurance of biological measurements as part of
ICES’ goal to advise on the sustainable use of living marine resources.
Calibration workshops dealing with age and maturity estimation are funded
and held under the auspices of the PGCCDBS. The main objectives of these
important workshops are to decrease bias and improve the precision of
age/maturity determinations between scientists from different laboratories.
The end results are published in extensive ICES reports. However, there is a
question of whether the right audience is reached by these reports. Moving
beyond precision is increasingly common in calibration workshops and
creating outputs better tailored to input for stock assessment models would
greatly improve the application of the results.
PGCCBDS (2010) also recognized that there is a need to review current
methods of analysing data from calibration studies and consider issues such
as agreement measures for the age of long-lived species and the best way to
incorporate histologically validated samples for maturity staging
comparisons.
Finally, at a broader level, there is a large body of research on agreement
statistics and methodology available from the field of medical statistics so it
would be beneficial to transfer this knowledge into the fisheries arena.
Resource
requirements:
No specific resource requirements beyond the need for members to prepare
for and participate in the meeting.
Participants:
Participants should include a mixture of scientists with expertise in
statistical methods, stock assessment, age reading and maturity staging.
Secretariat facilities:
None.
113
Financial:
Funding for external experts on the statistical methods may be required. The
chairs seek to collaborate with NAFO to ease the invitation of experts
outside the ICES system.
Linkages to advisory
committees:
The workshop will link to ACOM through PGCCDBS.
Linkages to other
committees or
groups:
The outputs will be directly relevant to all age reading and maturity staging
workshops. PGMed
Linkages to other
organizations:
This topic links to the EU DCF, the COST (European Cooperation in the field
of Scientific and Technical Research) Action FA0601 “Fish Reproduction and
Fisheries” (FRESH) and the WebGR project (http://webgr.azti.es).
114
WGCATCH Working Group on Commercial Catches
2013/2/ACOM36
The Working Group on Commercial Catches (WGCATCH), chaired
by Mike Armstrong (UK) and Hans Gerritsen (Ireland), will be established and will
meet in ICES HQ, Denmark, ICES, 10–14 November 2014 to:
a ) Develop the longer term work plan for WGCATCH
b ) Evaluate methods and develop guidelines for best practice in carrying out
sampling of commercial fish catches on shore
c ) Provide advice on adapting sampling protocols to anticipated changes in
management measures (e.g. discard ban) or technical advances in
monitoring.
d ) Provide advice to the RDB Steering Group on development of the RDB to
support design-based data collection and estimates.
WGCATCH will report by 5 December 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
PGCCDBS recommends that a new expert group WGCATCH be
established in 2014, based on the merging and extension of WKPICS and
SGPIDS, and the equivalent work conducted within PGCCDBS. A main
objective of WGCATCH will be to support the development and quality
assurance of regional and national catch sampling schemes that can
provide reliable input data to stock assessment and advice, while making
the most efficient use of sampling resources. As catch data are the main
input data for most stock assessment and mixed fishery modelling, these
activities are considered to have a very high priority.
Scientific justification
The data collected from the commercial fisheries have a primary function
of supporting stock assessments and informing fleet-based management
decisions. The WGCATCH will work to help European countries achieve
sufficient accuracy (increase precision and minimize bias) of catch and
catch composition estimates (for a given level of sampling effort) that are
used as input to the ICES stock assessment, mixed-fishery, and
ecosystem-based analysis and associated advisory process. The WG will
operate within the ICES Quality Assurance Frame-work and respond to
the requirements of the EU Data Collection Framework (DCF) and future
DC-MAP, and recommendations from end-users.
Currently all EU Member States collect commercial catch data (e.g.,
estimates of discards and size/age composition of catches) according to
practices under the DCF. The EU commission spends large budget on
DCF-related data-collections from fisheries. However, to make the most
efficient use of EMFF funds for sampling resources in the DC-MAP, a
statistically sound sampling programme should be implemented in all
member states. Such programmes are also needed for non-EU countries
supplying data for the assessments. If statistically-based designs are
implemented, these have the advantage of being flexible and will allow
changes in stratification and allocation of sampling efforts over time
without jeopardizing the continuity of the data series.
WGCATCH will act as a link to the RCMs (RCGs) by developing data
quality Indicators and reports for national and regionally aggregated
data sets, and by advising on analysis modules for regional databases
(RDB). WGCATCH will provide RCMs/RCGs with the tools to review
efficiencies and adapt and improve on their programmes, and will
provide end users such as ICES assessment EGs and STECF with
procedures for auditing the quality of data used in analyses
underpinning stock-based, fleet-based and ecosystem-based fishery
115
management advice.
The combination of statistical expertice in survey design and analyses
methods and practical implementation skills makes this working group
unique, and ensures it effectively bridges the gap between data collection
and data end-users which is essential to collecting effective scientific
evidence for fishery management.
WGCATCH will have the following overall remit
Continue the development of methods and guidelines for best practice in
quantifying commercial catches and catch compositions where sampling
programmes are needed at sea or on shore, covering design of sampling
schemes, practical aspects of data collection, data archiving, and analysis
of data to provide estimates meeting end-user needs.
Develop and update quality assurance procedures and quality indicators
for data and estimates derived from catch sampling programmes, for
example to support the ICES benchmark assessment process.
Review the progress in implementing statistically-sound catch sampling
programmes within Europe and in developing collaborative regional
approaches including sampling of national vessels landing in foreign
countries.
Evaluate how changes in fishery management measures are affecting
fishery sampling schemes and the quality of the data, and recommend
solutions.
Develop approaches for evaluating impacts of changes in sampling
design to continuity of data series.
Respond to requests for technical and statistical advice related to fishery
sampling from Regional Coordination Groups and the main data endusers.
Provide advice on development of regional databases (RDB FISHFRAME) to include estimation modules that are in accordance with
statistically-sound survey design, and modules for data quality reporting.
Identify and promote technological developments for improving the
efficiency of catch sampling and improvement in data quality.
Develop and maintain a reference list of key publications or other
available resources dealing with design and implementation of fishery
sampling schemes and associated data analysis, and annually review new
publications of relevance to WGCATCH.
Identify future research needs.
Resource
requirements
The WG builds extensively on experiences gained within PGCCDBS,
WKACCU, WKPRECISE, WKMERGE, WKPICS, SGPIDS and WGRFS.
European countries are encouraged to provide the WG with
documentation of their sampling programmes, updated manuals and
protocols for review and feedback by the WG, and to ensure that their
national members of WGCATCH have sufficient resources to conduct the
necessary intersessional work to address the ToRs.
Participants
It is expected that WGCATCH will normally be attended by some 20–25
members.
Secretariat facilities
None.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to advisory
committees
WGCATCH supports ACOM by promoting improvements in quality of
fishery data underpinning stock-based and mixed fishery assessments,
and ecosystem indicators related to fishery impacts, and in developing
data quality indicators and quality reports for use by assessment EGs and
benchmark assessments.
Linkages to other
committees
WGCATCH links with PGCCDBS in relation to collection of stock-based
biological variables from sampling of fishery catches. It links to stock
assessment EGs and benchmark assessment groups by providing input
on the data quality of commercial catches. WGCATCH also links closely
with Regional Coordination Groups, the Regional Database Steering
or groups
116
Group, STECF EWGs dealing with DC-MAP and the Liaison Meeting.
Linkages to other
organizations
The outputs of WGCATCH will be of interest to FAO and RFMOs, and
productive linkages may be established over time.
117
WGBIOP - Working Group on Biological Parameters
2013/2/ACOM37
The Working Group on Biological Parameters (WGBIOP), chaired
by Lotte Worsøe Clausen (Denmark), Francesca Vitale (Sweden), and Pedro Torres
(Spain), will be established and will meet in Malaga XX 2015 to:
a ) Address generic ToR’s:
1) Continue the development of methods and guidelines for best practice in
the analysis of biological samples providing parameters meeting end-user
needs.
2) Develop and update quality assurance procedures and quality indicators
for biological parameters derived from catch sampling programmes and
RV surveys, to support the ICES Assessment WG’s, in particular during
the benchmark assessment process.
3) Review the progress of increasing precision and accuracy in estimating
biological parameters and creating outputs better tailored to input for
stock assessment models.
4) Respond to requests for technical and statistical advice related to
biological parameters from Regional Coordination Groups and the main
data end-users (assessment EG’s).
5) Identify and promote technological developments for assuring an efficient
collection and an accurate estimation of biological parameters, including
the maintenance and update of tools for the exchanges and workshops
(e.g. WebGR, other statistical tools, age readers forum).
6) Review the outcomes of workshops, study groups, exchange schemes and
other intersession work related to interpretation and quality assurance of
data on stock-related biological variables, i.e. age and growth; maturity
and fecundity; sex ratio (as previously dealt with under the remits of
PGCCDBS).
7) Data table formulation and update in order to meet the needs from EG’s
on biological parameters; synchronize with the Benchmark process.
8) Updating and maintaining the Interactive spreadsheet of workshops and
exchanges (from PGCCDBS).
b ) Address specific ToR’s
1) Review and discuss all National protocols on Quality Assurance and
Control and thus to drive up standards
2) Review and promote the Task Sharing between National laboratories
3) Reviewing status of the CRR on age-estimations
4) Updating/reviewing EARF content and operationality
5) Follow up on the WebGR upgrade developments
6) Establishment of WGBIOP’s aims and objectives with respect to the needs
of the end users
WGBIOP will report by XX for the attention of ACOM.
118
WGRFS – Working Group on Recreational Fisheries Surveys
2013/2/ACOM38
The Working Group on Recreational Fisheries Surveys (WGRFS),
chaired by Harry Vincent Strehlow, Germany, and Kieran Hyder Cefas (UK) will
meet in Sukarrietta, Spain, 2–6 June 2014 to:
The ToRs for the meeting were split into multi-annual ToRs that will be addressed
each year as they represent core outputs and specific ToRs for issues that will be
addressed at this particular meeting. The ToRs are outlined below.
Multi-annual ToRs:
a) Collate and evaluate national recreational catch (harvest & release)
estimates. Evaluate the use of recreational catch estimates
b) Assessing different survey designs (onsite, offsite) for improved data
collection
Specific ToRs:
c)
Review and update the ‘WGRFS Quality Assurance Toolkit (QAT)’ based
on the experience of filling in the spread sheets at country level
d) Provide guidelines on effective communication with stakeholders
(content, timing)
e) Mini workshop: Reviewing and collecting the available information on
socio–economic data in marine recreational fisheries (Country examples).
f)
Mini Review: Evaluate the role of post-release mortality estimates.
WGRFS will report by 1 July 2014 to the attention of ACOM.
Supporting Information
Priority
Scientific
justification
High – Because recreational catches can be high for some stocks
This work is required under the EC-ICES MoU that requests ICES to provide
support for the Data Collection Framework (EC Reg. 199/2008 and EC
Decision 2008/949/EC). WGRFS is the ICES forum for planning and coordination of marine recreational fishery data collection for stock assessment
purposes. DG MARE should be a member of WGRFS to ensure proper
coordination with the DCF activities. WGRFS shall develop and approve
standards for best sampling practices within its remits and for marine
recreational fisheries in the ICES area, in line with the ICES Quality Assurance
Framework.
Resource
requirements
Bringing in outside experts from the US and Australia has played a fundamental
role in building up the scientifc expertise of WGRFS to meet its ToRs.
Participants
Co-Chairs, nationally nominated members and outside experts.
The Group is normally attended by some 20–25 members and guests.
Secretariat
facilities
Normal backstopping support in the organization of the group.
Financial
The avaliability of funds to bring in outside experts to maintain the collaborative
work is vital.
Linkages to
advisory
committees
ACOM
119
Linkages to
other
committees or
groups
Linkages to
other
organizations
WGBFAS, WGEEL, WGBAST
WECAFC/OSPESCA/CRFM/CFMC Working Group on Recreational Fisheries
Many linkages to national angling associations, since WGRFS members estimate
national marine recreational catches.
120
SC-RDB - Steering Committee for the Regional Database FishFrame
2013/2/ACOM39 The Steering Committee for the Regional Database FishFrame (SCRDB), chaired by Katja Ringdahl (Sweden) will meet 8–9 January 2014 in
Copenhagen (ICES HQ), Denmark, to:
Respond to recommendations put forward to the SC-RDB by the Liaison
Meeting and summarise how FishFrame has been used in the regional
coordination meetings;
b) Update the data policy document dealing with access rights, data
confidentiality and data ownership issues;
c) Develop a strategy including a workplan for a roadmap on development of
RDB-FishFrame, taking requirements from a design based approach to
sampling and raising into account;
d) Agree on ToRs for the SC-RDB 2014/2015 meeting.
a)
Supporting information
Priority
WKNARC recommends that a new expert group WGBIOP
should be established in 2015, based on the extension of
WKNARC, and the equivalent work conducted within
PGCCDBS. A main objective of WGBIOP will be to support the
development and quality assurance of regional and national
provision of biological parameters as reliable input data to
stock assessment and advice, while making the most efficient
use of expert resources. As biological parameters are among
the main input data for most stock assessment and mixed
fishery modelling, these activities are considered to have a very
high priority.
Scientific justification
The biological parameters collected from the commercial
fisheries and RV surveys have a primary function of
supporting stock assessments and informing fleet-based
management decisions. The WGBIOP will work to help
European countries achieve sufficient accuracy (increase
precision and minimize bias) of biological parameters that are
used as input to the ICES stock assessment, mixed-fishery, and
ecosystem-based analysis and associated advisory process. The
WG will operate within the ICES Quality Assurance
Framework and respond to the requirements of the EU Data
Collection Framework (DCF) and future DC-MAP, and
recommendations from end-users.
Currently all EU Member States provide biological parameters
from their catch and survey (e.g., estimates of maturity ogives,
size/age composition of catches) according to practices under
the DCF. The EU commission spends large budget on DCFrelated data collections from fisheries. Biological parameters
are essential features in fish stock assessment to estimate the
rates of mortalities and growth. However, the approach has
several limitations and shortcomings such as stock structure,
natural mortality and growth. Biological parameters based on
121
sampled data from catch and surveys are provided by different
countries and are estimated using international criteria which
may have not been validated.
For the purpose of inter-calibration between all laboratories
across Europe and non-MS WKBIOP will review methods by
species and areas, material and techniques development,
methods in processing, and the validation methods.
WGBIOP will provide RCM’s/RCG’s with the tools to review
efficiencies and adapt and improve on their programmes, and
will provide end users such as ICES assessment EGs and
STECF with procedures for auditing the quality of data used in
analyses underpinning stock-based, fleet-based and ecosystembased fishery management advice.
Resource
requirements
The WG builds extensively on experiences gained within
PGCCDBS, WKACCU, WKPRECISE, WKNARC 1 and 2 and all
past calibration workshops. MS and non-MS are encouraged to
provide the WG with documentation of their biological analysis
programmes, updated manuals and protocols for review and
feedback by the WG, and to ensure that their national members of
WGBIOP have sufficient resources to conduct the necessary intersessional work to address the ToR’s.
Participants
It is expected that WGBIOP will normally be attended by some 20–
25 members from all MS and non-MS.
Secretariat facilities
None.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to advisory WGBIOP supports ACOM by promoting improvements in quality
committees
of biological parameters from fishery and survey data
underpinning stock-based and mixed fishery assessments, and
ecosystem indicators related to fishery impacts, and in developin
data quality indicators and quality reports for use by assessment
EGs and benchmark assessments.
Linkages to other
committees
or groups
WGBIOP links with PGCCDBS and PGMED in relation to
collection of stock-based biological variables from sampling of
fishery and survey catches. It links to stock assessment EGs
and benchmark assessment groups by providing input on the
data quality of commercial catches. WGBIOP also links closely
with Regional Coordination Groups, the Regional Database
Steering Group, STECF EWGs dealing with DC-MAP and the
Liaison Meeting.
Linkages to other
organizations
The outputs of WGBIOP will be of interest to FAO and RFMOs,
and productive linkages may be established over time.
122
BenchmarkToRs for 2014
WKBALFLAT – Benchmark Workshop on Baltic Flatfish stocks
2013/2/ACOM40 A Benchmark Workshop on Baltic Flatfish Stocks (WKBALFLAT),
chaired by External Chair Elizabeth Brooks, USA and ICES Chairs Margit Eero,
Denmark and Mikaela Bergenius, Sweden, and attended by two invited external
experts, Anne Hollowed, USA, and Mark Fowler, Canada, will be established and
will meet at ICES HQ for a data compilation meeting 26–28 November 2013 and at
ICES HQ for the Benchmark meeting, 27–31 January 2014:
a) Evaluate the appropriateness of data and methods to determine stock status
and investigate methods for short term outlook taking agreed or proposed
management plans into account for the stocks listed in the text table below.
The evaluation shall include consideration of:
i.
Stock identity and migration issues;
ii.
Life history data;
iii.
Fishery-dependent and fishery independent data;
iv.
Further inclusion of environmental drivers, multi-species
information, and ecosystem impacts for stock dynamics in the assessments
and outlook
b) Agree and document the preferred method for evaluating stock status and
(where applicable) short term forecast and update the stock annex as
appropriate. Knowledge about environmental drivers, including multispecies
interactions, and ecosystem impacts should be integrated in the methodology
If no analytical assessment method can be agreed, then an alternative method
(the former method, or following the ICES data-limited stock approach)
should be put forward;
c)
Evaluate the possible implications for biological reference points, when new
standard analyses methods are proposed. Propose new MSY reference points
taking into account the WKFRAME results and the introduction to the ICES
advice (section 1.2).
d) Develop recommendations for
methodology and data collection;
future
improving
of
the
assessment
e) As part of the evaluation:
i)
Conduct a 3 day data compilation workshop (DCWK). Stakeholders are
invited to contribute data (including data from non-traditional sources)
and to contribute to data preparation and evaluation of data quality. As
part of the data compilation workshop consider the quality of data
including discard and estimates of misreporting of landings;
ii) Following the DCWK, produce working documents to be reviewed
during the Benchmark meeting at least 7 days prior to the meeting
Stock
dab2232
Dab in Subdivisions 22 - 32
fle-2232
Flounder in Subdivisions 22 - 32
Assessment Leader
Rainer Oeberst
Didzis Ustups
ICES Expert group
WGBFAS
WGBFAS
The Benchmark Workshop will report by 15 March 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
123
WKSOUTH – Benchmark Workshop on Southern megrim and hake
stocks
2013/2/ACOM41 A Benchmark Workshop on Southern megrim and hake stocks
(WKSOUTH), chaired by External Chair Catherine Michielsens, Canada and ICES
Chair Lisa Readdy, UK, and attended by three invited external experts Alexandre
Aires-Da-Silva (USA), Catherine Michielsens (USA), Daniel Howell (NO) and
Carmen Fernandez will be established and will meet in Vigo, Spain 12–14 November
2013 for a data compilation meeting and at ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark for a 5
day Benchmark meeting 3–7 February 2014to:
a) Evaluate the appropriateness of data and methods to determine stock status
and investigate methods for short term outlook taking agreed or proposed
management plans into account for the stocks listed in the text table below.
The evaluation shall include consideration of:
i.
Stock identity and migration issues;
ii.
Life history data;
iii.
Fishery-dependent and fishery independent data;
iv.
Further inclusion of environmental drivers, multi-species
information, and ecosystem impacts for stock dynamics in the assessments
and outlook
b) Agree and document the preferred method for evaluating stock status and
(where applicable) short term forecast and update the stock annex as
appropriate. Knowledge about environmental drivers, including multispecies
interactions, and ecosystem impacts should be integrated in the methodology
If no analytical assessment method can be agreed, then an alternative method
(the former method, or following the ICES data-limited stock approach)
should be put forward;
c)
Evaluate the possible implications for biological reference points, when new
standard analyses methods are proposed. Propose new MSY reference points
taking into account the WKFRAME results and the introduction to the ICES
advice (section 1.2).
d) Develop recommendations for
methodology and data collection;
future
improving
of
the
assessment
e) As part of the evaluation:
i)
Conduct a 3 day data compilation workshop (DCWK). Stakeholders are
invited to contribute data (including data from non-traditional sources)
and to contribute to data preparation and evaluation of data quality. As
part of the data compilation workshop consider the quality of data
including discard and estimates of misreporting of landings;
ii) Following the DCWK, produce working documents to be reviewed
during the Benchmark meeting at least 7 days prior to the meeting
Stock
Assessment Lead
WG
mgb8a9c
Four-spot
megrim
(Lepidorhombus boscii) in
Divisions VIIIc and IXa
WGHMM
mgw8a9c
Megrim
(Lepidorhombus
whiffiagonis) in Divisions
WGHMM
124
VIIIc and IXa
Hkenrth
Hake in Division IIIa, Subareas
IV, VI, and VII, and Divisions
VIIIa,b,d.
WGHMM
Hkesoth
Hake in Divisions VIIIc and
IXa.
WGHMM
The Benchmark Workshop will report by 1 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
125
WKHAD – Benchmark Workshop on northern Haddock stocks
2013/2/ACOM42 A Benchmark Workshop on northern Haddock stocks (WKHAD),
chaired by External Chair Noel Cadigan, Canada and ICES Chair Coby Needle, UK,
and attended by three invited external experts [to be decided] will be established and
will meet in Aberdeen, UK, 27–19 January for a data compilation meeting and 24–28
February at t ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark to:
a) Evaluate the appropriateness of data and methods to determine stock status
and investigate methods for short term outlook taking agreed or proposed
management plans into account for the stocks listed in the text table below.
The evaluation shall include consideration of:
i.
Stock identity and migration issues;
ii.
Life history data;
iii.
Fishery-dependent and fishery independent data;
iv.
Further inclusion of environmental drivers, multi-species
information, and ecosystem impacts for stock dynamics in the assessments
and outlook
b) Agree and document the preferred method for evaluating stock status and
(where applicable) short term forecast and update the stock annex as
appropriate. Knowledge about environmental drivers, including multispecies
interactions, and ecosystem impacts should be integrated in the methodology
If no analytical assessment method can be agreed, then an alternative method
(the former method, or following the ICES data-limited stock approach)
should be put forward;
c)
Evaluate the possible implications for biological reference points, when new
standard analyses methods are proposed. Propose new MSY reference points
taking into account the WKFRAME results and the introduction to the ICES
advice (section 1.2).
d) Develop recommendations for
methodology and data collection;
future
improving
of
the
assessment
e) As part of the evaluation:
i)
Conduct a 3 day data compilation workshop (DCWK). Stakeholders are
invited to contribute data (including data from non-traditional sources)
and to contribute to data preparation and evaluation of data quality. As
part of the data compilation workshop consider the quality of data
including discard and estimates of misreporting of landings;
ii) Following the DCWK, produce working documents to be reviewed
during the Benchmark meeting at least 7 days prior to the meeting
Stock
had-34
Hadscow
Haddock in Subarea IV (North
Sea) and Division IIIa West
(Skagerrak)
Haddock in Division VIa
(West of Scotland)
Assessment Lead
WG
WGNSSK
Coby Needle
WGCSE
The Benchmark Workshop will report by 1 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
126
WKCELT – Benchmark Workshop on Celtic Sea stocks
2013/2/ACOM43 A Benchmark Workshop on Celtic Sea stocks (WKCELT), chaired by
External Chair Dankert Skagen, Norway and ICES Chair Colm Lordan, Ireland, and
attended by two invited external experts Terrance Quinn, US and Gary Melvin,
Canada will be established and will meet at Galway, Ireland for a data compilation
meeting 10-12 December 2013 and at ICES HQ for a 5 day Benchmark meeting 3–7
February 2014 to:
a) Evaluate the appropriateness of data and methods to determine stock status
and investigate methods for short term outlook taking agreed or proposed
management plans into account for the stocks listed in the text table below.
The evaluation shall include consideration of:
i.
Stock identity and migration issues;
ii.
Life history data;
iii.
Fishery-dependent and fishery independent data;
iv.
Further inclusion of environmental drivers, multi-species
information, and ecosystem impacts for stock dynamics in the assessments
and outlook
b) Agree and document the preferred method for evaluating stock status and
(where applicable) short term forecast and update the stock annex as
appropriate. Knowledge about environmental drivers, including multispecies
interactions, and ecosystem impacts should be integrated in the methodology
If no analytical assessment method can be agreed, then an alternative method
(the former method, or following the ICES data-limited stock approach)
should be put forward;
c)
Evaluate the possible implications for biological reference points, when new
standard analyses methods are proposed. Propose new MSY reference points
taking into account the WKFRAME results and the introduction to the ICES
advice (section 1.2).
d) Develop recommendations for
methodology and data collection;
future
improving
of
the
assessment
e) Compile and review available fleet and fisheries data for fisheries in the Celtic
Sea (VIIfg);
f)
Produce a mixed fisheries annex for the Celtic Sea region (VIIfg);
g) As part of the evaluation:
i)
Conduct a 3 day data compilation workshop (DCWK). Stakeholders are
invited to contribute data (including data from non-traditional sources)
and to contribute to data preparation and evaluation of data quality. As
part of the data compilation workshop consider the quality of data
including discard and estimates of misreporting of landings;
ii) Following the DCWK, produce working documents to be reviewed
during the Benchmark meeting at least 7 days prior to the meeting
Stock
Sol-celt
Whg7e-k
Nep-20-
Assessment Lead
Sole in Divisions VIIf, g (Celtic
Sea)
Whiting in Division VIIe-k
Nephrops
in
the
FU
20
Willy Vanhee
Sarah Davie
Spyros Fifas
WG
WGCSE
WGCSE
WGCSE
127
21
(Labadie,
Baltimore
and
Galley), FU 21 (Jones and
Cockburn)
Nep-19
Nephrops
off
the
southeastern
and
southwestern coasts of
Ireland (FU 19)
WGCSE
Jennifer Doyle
The Benchmark Workshop will report by 1 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
128
WKPELA – Benchmark Workshop on Pelagic stocks
2013/2/ACOM44 A Benchmark Workshop on Pelagic stocks (WKPELA), chaired by
External Chair Jon Deroba, US and ICES Chair Ciaran Kelly, Ireland, and attended by
three invited external experts Kiersti Curti, US, Michael Frisk, US and Verena
Trenkel, France will be established and will meet at Copenhagen for a data
compilation meeting 30 October–1 November 2013 and at Copenhagen for a 5 day
Benchmark meeting 17–21 February 2014 to:
a) Evaluate the appropriateness of data and methods to determine stock status
and investigate methods for short term outlook taking agreed or proposed
management plans into account for the stocks listed in the text table below.
The evaluation shall include consideration of:
i.
Stock identity and migration issues;
ii.
Life history data;
iii.
Fishery-dependent and fishery independent data;
iv.
Further inclusion of environmental drivers, multi-species
information, and ecosystem impacts for stock dynamics in the assessments
and outlook
b) Agree and document the preferred method for evaluating stock status and
(where applicable) short term forecast and update the stock annex as
appropriate. Knowledge about environmental drivers, including multispecies
interactions, and ecosystem impacts should be integrated in the methodology
If no analytical assessment method can be agreed, then an alternative method
(the former method, or following the ICES data-limited stock approach)
should be put forward;
c)
Evaluate the possible implications for biological reference points, when new
standard analyses methods are proposed. Propose new MSY reference points
taking into account the WKFRAME results and the introduction to the ICES
advice (section 1.2).
d) Develop recommendations for
methodology and data collection;
future
improving
of
the
assessment
e) As part of the evaluation:
i)
Conduct a 3 day data compilation workshop (DCWK). Stakeholders are
invited to contribute data (including data from non-traditional sources)
and to contribute to data preparation and evaluation of data quality. As
part of the data compilation workshop consider the quality of data
including discard and estimates of misreporting of landings;
ii) Following the DCWK, produce working documents to be reviewed
during the Benchmark meeting at least 7 days prior to the meeting
Stock
macnea
her-irls
Mackerel in the Northeast
Atlantic
(combined
Southern, Western and
North
Sea
spawning
components)
Herring in Division VIIa
South of 52° 30’ N and
VIIg,h,j,k (Celtic Sea and
Assessment Lead
WG
WGWIDE
Emma Hatfield
HAWG
Afra Egan
129
South of Ireland)
The Benchmark Workshop will report by 1 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
130
WKDEEP – Benchmark Workshop on Deep sea stocks
2013/2/ACOM45 A Benchmark Workshop on Deep sea stocks (WKDEEP), chaired by
External Chair Jim Berkson, USA, and ICES Chair Tom Blasdale, UK, and attended by
two invited external experts David Die and Telmo Morato will be established and
will meet ICES HQ for a data compilation meeting 26–28 November 2013 and at
ICES HQ for a Benchmark meeting 3–7 February 2014 to:
a) Evaluate the appropriateness of data and methods to determine stock status
and investigate methods for short term outlook taking agreed or proposed
management plans into account for the stocks listed in the text table below.
The evaluation shall include consideration of:
i.
Stock identity and migration issues;
ii.
Life history data;
iii.
Fishery-dependent and fishery independent data;
iv.
Further inclusion of environmental drivers, multi-species
information, and ecosystem impacts for stock dynamics in the assessments
and outlook
b) Agree and document the preferred method for evaluating stock status and
(where applicable) short term forecast and update the stock annex as
appropriate. Knowledge about environmental drivers, including multispecies
interactions, and ecosystem impacts should be integrated in the methodology
If no analytical assessment method can be agreed, then an alternative method
(the former method, or following the ICES data-limited stock approach)
should be put forward;
c)
Evaluate the possible implications for biological reference points, when new
standard analyses methods are proposed. Propose new MSY reference points
taking into account the WKFRAME results and the introduction to the ICES
advice (section 1.2).
d) Develop recommendations for
methodology and data collection;
future
improving
of
the
assessment
e) As part of the evaluation:
i)
Conduct a 3 day data compilation workshop (DCWK). Stakeholders are
invited to contribute data (including data from non-traditional sources)
and to contribute to data preparation and evaluation of data quality. As
part of the data compilation workshop consider the quality of data
including discard and estimates of misreporting of landings;
ii) Following the DCWK, produce working documents to be reviewed
during the Benchmark meeting at least 7 days prior to the meeting
Stock
bli-5b67
Lin-icel
bsf-nrtn
bsf-89
Blue ling in Division Vb, and
Subareas VI, VII
Ling in Division Va
Black
scabbardfish
(Aphanopus
carbo)
in
Subareas VI, VII and
Divisions Vb and XIIb
Black
scabbardfish
(Aphanopus
carbo)
in
Assessment Lead
WG
WGDEEP
WGDEEP
WGDEEP
WGDEEP
131
bsf-oth
Subareas VIII and IX
Black
scabbardfish
(Aphanopus carbo) in other
areas (Subareas I, II, IV, X,
XIV and Divisions IIIa, Vb)
WGDEEP
The Benchmark Workshop will report by 1 April 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
132
IBP-Bass – Inter-Benchmark Protocol for sea bass in the Irish Sea,
Celtic Sea, English Channel, and southern North Sea
2013/2/ACOM46
Inter-Benchmark Protocol for sea bass in the Irish Sea, Celtic Sea,
English Channel, and southern North Sea (IBPBass) that will serve as in InterBenchmark Protocol, chaired by Chris Legault, USA and Jan Jaap Poos, the
Netherlands, will meet by correspondence (01 January –30 April 2014) to:
a ) Review the proposed updates in data analysis and assessment
methodology as described in a working document containing improvement
of data and assessment methodology, more specifically;
i ) Refine the fleet structure, length-age compositions and selectivity models
used in the Stock Synthesis assessment
ii ) Evaluate other potential tuning data
b ) Prioritize the issues and provide guidance to stock experts on methods
with which to solve issues, such as:
i)
the evaluation of sensitivity of the Stock Synthesis assessment to scale of
geographic aggregation of data, plausible scenarios for pre-1985
commercial fishery landings series, and other input parameters;
ii ) Develop catch forecasts
c ) Describe the choice of preferred method and settings for data analysis and
assessment in a concise report; Include recommendations on progress to be
made in cases where work is not yet finalized;
d ) Describe the resulting data
methodology in the stock annex;
e)
analysis
procedure
and
assessment
Review and agree on the resulting stock annex.
The stock experts will prepare a working document with detailed description on
proposed changes in relation to previous assessment presented at IBPNEW 2012 and
WGCSE 2013. A draft stock annex will also be prepared by the stock experts and
available to the invited experts by 1 April .
IBPBass will report by no later than 30thApril
WGCSE.
for the attention of ACOM and
133
DCWKANG- Data Compilation Worksop on anglerfish stocks in
the ICES area
2013/2/ACOM47
A Data Compilation Workshop of anglerfish stock in the ICES area
will be established, chaired by Helen Dobby (UK), will meet by correspondence, 3–7
November 2014, to:
1 ) Review stock structure and unit stock definitions and consider if changes
to existing definitions are required.
2 ) Review and recommend life history parameters (e.g. growth parameters,
maturity ogives, fecundity, natural mortality), for use in assessments.
3 ) Develop time-series of commercial and recreational fishery catch estimates,
including both retained and discarded catch, with associated measures or
indicators of bias and precision.
4 ) Estimate the length and age distributions of fishery landings and discards
if feasible, with associated measures or indicators of bias and precision.
5 ) Develop recommendations for addressing fishery selectivity (pattern of
catchability at length or age) in the assessment model. Recommend values
for discard mortality rates, where appropriate, and indicate the range of
uncertainty in values.
6 ) Review all available and relevant fishery dependent and independent data
sources on fish abundance, and recommend which series are considered
adequate and reliable for use in stock assessments. Provide measures or
indicators of bias and precision over the time series.
7 ) Review progress on existing recommendations for research to develop and
improve the input data and parameters for assessments, and develop and
prioritise new proposals.
8 ) Agree with input datasets to be used for stock assessment.
9 ) Develop a list of tasks to be completed following the workshop for a future
benchmark preparation.
DCWK-Anglerfish will report by 1st November for the attention of the ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
High priority. The outcomes for the data compilation workshop will provide
the necessary background for a future benchmark of anglerfish stocks. Most
of the anglerfish stocks in the ICES area are under stock category 3, whilethe
target category for these stocks is 1. This workshop will be an important
step to “upgrade” the anglerfish stocks”.
Scientific
justification
Term of Reference b)
Review, discuss, and tabulate available life history information.
Provide appropriate models to describe growth, maturation, and
fecundity by age, sex, or length as applicable. Provide a written
description of the sampling programs providing life history
information, and develop bias and precision indicators to determine
the adequacy of available life-history information for conducting stock
assessments. Document the nature and magnitude of errors in age
reading and maturity identification based on outcomes of ICES QA
134
workshops and exchanges.
Term of Reference c)
Provide maps of fishery effort and harvest, by fleet sector where
appropriate. Describe the sources of data on landings and discards,
and any sampling schemes and raising procedures for estimating
catches from non-census data. Evaluate biases in catch estimation
schemes over time, including using the WKACCU score card
approach where possible. Describe any procedures adopted to correct
for bias, for example due to non-response in vessel selection schemes.
Describe any methods of impution of missing values and their impact
on estimates. For non-census data, provide estimates or indicators of
precision in landings and discards estimates, and tabulate achieved
sampling rates (e.g. numbers of discard sampling trips by year, area
and fleet sector, in relation to total fleet activity).
Term of Reference d)
Provide a written description of the shore-based and at-sea sampling
programs and the methods of raising data and estimating length and
age compositions at the national and international scale. Evaluate the
adequacy of the sampling schemes in terms of bias over the time series
(WKACCU scorecard approach and tabular / graphical presentation
of sampling coverage) and in terms of precision where this can be
estimated. Tabulate achieved national annual sampling rates in terms
of numbers of trips sampled for length and age, and/or effective
sample sizes (not just numbers of fish measured or aged). Describe
any methods of impution of missing values and their impact on
estimates. Evaluate the internal consistency of catch-at-age data sets
in terms of consistent tracking of year classes.
Term of Reference e)
Review existing information on selectivity characteristics of the main
types of fishing gears used for the assessed stock, including inferences
on relative selectivity from available length and age composition
information.
Term of Reference f)
Review available research and published literature on discard
mortality rates. Where supported by data or comparisons with
similar stocks studies elsewhere, recommend discard mortality rates
and range of uncertainty. Include thorough rationale for
recommended discard mortality rates. Provided justification for any
recommendations that deviate from the range of discard mortality
provided in available research and published literature.
Term of Reference g)
(i) For fishery-independent surveys: Document all surveys evaluated,
addressing objectives, methods, coverage, sampling intensity, and
other relevant characteristics. Provide maps of survey coverage.
Evaluate the suitability of the survey for the species being assessed, in
terms of known aspects of fish behaviour and vertical-horizontal
distribution in relation to gear design and survey coverage. Evaluate
the potential for changes in catchability over time due to changes in
vessels, fishing gear and methods, and survey timing and coverage,
135
including documentation of any calibration factors applied following
vessel or gear changes. Describe the methods for data selection (e.g.
stations or strata used for indices, or selection of tows according to
time of day). Describe the methods of analysis, including derivation
of indices by sex, maturity, length or age class. Provide measures of
precision and indicators of bias. For age-based indices, evaluate
internal consistency of age compositions and correlations between
surveys.
(ii) For fishery-dependent data: Document all fishery CPUE series
evaluated, addressing fleet sectors, fishing gears, target species,
coverage, and regulatory measures affecting fleet behaviour. Evaluate
the suitability of the CPUE fleet for the species being assessed, in
terms of known aspects of fish behaviour and vertical-horizontal
distribution in relation to gear design and fleet coverage. Evaluate the
potential for changes in catchability over time due to changes in
vessels, fishing gear and methods, or spatio-temporal activities.
Document the methods and rationale for any factors to correct for
changes in fishing efficiency, and feasible ranges for time-trends in
efficiency. Describe the methods for data selection (e.g. sub-setting of
fishery trips according to vessel size, time, area, gear or species
composition). Provide maps of coverage of the selected vessels.
Describe methods of analysis of CPUE data including any statistical
modelling carried out. Provide measures of precision and indicators
of bias over the time series. For age-based CPUE indices, evaluate
internal consistency of age compositions and correlations between
CPUE series and surveys, and the extent to which age compositions
are independent of the total catch at age matrix.
Resource
The research programmes which provide the main input to this group are
requirements already underway, and resources are already committed. The additional resourc
required to undertake additional activities in the framework of this group is
negligible.
Participants
The Group is normally attended by some 10- 15 scientists and stakeholders.
Secretariat
facilities
None.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to
advisory
committees
ACOM.
WGBIE, WGCSE, AFWG
Linkages to
other
committees or
groups
None.
Linkages to
other
organizations
136
New Expert Groups and other 2014 meetings (except Data related EGs)
WKMSYREF2 - Workshop to consider reference points for all stocks
2013/2/ACOM48
The Workshop to consider reference points for all stocks
(WKMSYREF2), chaired by John Simmonds*, UK, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 8–
10 January 2014, for the stocks covered by the working groups AFWG, HAWG,
NWWG, NIPAG, WGWIDE, WGBFAS, WGNSSK, WGCSE, WGEF, WGDEEP,
WGHMM, and WGANSA, to:
a) On basis of work in WKMSYREF, WKLIFE3 and WGMSE, evaluate the basis
for reference points for fish stocks for which ICES is requested to provide
advice and propose operational definitions. This relates to the reference
points within the ICES MSY framework (MSY Btrigger, FMSY) and Blim and,
where relevant, Bescapement. For FMSY, consider principles for identifying
FMSY as a range which can be used for instance when advising on fisheries
options in a mixed fisheries context.
b) Evaluate the consistency of these reference points for stocks for which such
reference points have been identified and propose modifications wherever
such reference points are found to be inconsistent.
c)
Evaluate the options and propose candidate reference points for stocks for
which no MSY reference points were indentified in the 2013 advice.
WKMSYREF will report by 24 January 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
This work is a prerequisite for the further implementation of the MSY
approach in ICES advice
Scientific justification
The group will continue and finalise the work started by WKMSYREF
Resource requirements
Members of stock assessment working groups attending
Participants
The Group is expected to be attended by some 20–25 participants.
Secretariat facilities
None.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to advisory
committees
ACOM
Linkages to other
committees or groups
Based on WKLIFE3, WKFRAME2 and WKMSE, forms basis for MSY
implementation in 2014 in all stock assessment working groups.
Linkages to other
organizations
137
WKFooWI - Workshop to develop recommendations for potentially useful
Food Web Indicators
2013/2/ACOM49
The ACOM Workshop to develop recommendations for potentially
useful Food Web Indicators (WKFooWI), chaired by Stuart Rogers* (UK) and Jason
Link* (USA), will meet 31 March – 3 April 2014 at ICES HQ, to:
a)
b)
c)
d)
Review Pragmatically Estimable Food Web Indicators
Evaluate said Indicators Against Standard Criteria for Indicator Use
Develop a proposal for food web indicators for marine ecosystem based
management incl. relevant to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive
(MSFD)
Suggest and plan the way forward (i.e. preparation of a roadmap how to get
there)
WKFooWI will report by 1 May to ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
High.
Scientific justification
There is a well established need to use food web indicators (structure and
function) in the management of marine ecosystems, and the management
of the components in those marine ecosystems. Many typical metrics used
to manage marine ecosystems and living marine resources are indicative
of state variables and structural properties (e.g. biomass); as such they
often miss many of the key features, dynamics and properties of marine
ecosystems that can lead to biased or mis-informed management advice.
Food web indicators better and more directly represent measures of rates,
networks features, connectivities, and functioning of these marine
ecosystems and living marine resources. As such they can provide
augmenting information pertaining to Good Environmental Status.
In the light of the EC Marine Strategy Framework Directive there is an
urgent need for operational indicators for food web structure and
function, that can be used to advice management of human activities in
the marine ecosystem and monitor the response of the system towards
Good Environmental Status (GES).
Tor c and d. The EC has requested ICES to develop a proposal on
indicators for descriptor 4 of MSFD (food webs). As stated in the
Commission Decision (20010/477/EU) additional scientific and technical
support is required for the further development of criteria and potentially
useful indicators to address the relationships within the food web.
In this framework, ICES shall work towards recommendations for
potentially useful indicators(to be considered for the revision of the
Commission Decision) with a roadmap how to get there.(DG ENV
request 1d)
Resource requirements
None. The research programmes providing input to this WK are already
underway and resources committed. The additional resource required for
the WK is negible.
Participants
Approximately 25-30 experts with interest in suggesting and applying
indicators on foodweb structure and function.
Secretariat facilities
Two meeting rooms at ICES HQ
Financial
No extra funding requested.
Linkages to advisory
committees
This work will feed directly into the work byACOM, and support the
ICES Council Steering Group on the MSFD.
138
Linkages to other
committees or groups
WGECO, WGSAM,and the groups under the RSP of ICES.
Linkages to other
organizations
EC and the EU Member States, the Regional Seas Commissions in Europe
(e.g. OSPAR and HELCOM) EEA, NOAA, PICES, ESSAS, IMBER, IOOS
139
WKSALDAT - Workshop on salmon catch data in the Baltic
Workshop was cancelled
2013/2/ACOM50
The Workshop on salmon catch data in the Baltic (WKSALDAT),
chaired by Tapani Pakarinen*, Finland, will be established and will meet in ICES HQ,
Denmark, 12–14 February 2014 to:
a) Compile the relevant data and information on the catch compositions
(proportions of salmon and sea trout) in the coastal and offshore salmon
fisheries in the Baltic Sea, particularly in Danish, Polish and Swedish
waters. In addition officially reported catches, logbook data and fisheries
inspection data will be compiled.
b) Compile the expert estimations and available data on the rates of potential
unreporting of the catches and fishing efforts in the different commercial
salmon and sea trout fisheries in the Baltic Sea.
c)
Compile the available data and information on the recreational salmon
catches in the Baltic Sea.
d) Compile the available data and expert evaluations on the discards in the
different salmon fisheries.
e) Provide the best unbiased estimates of coastal and open sea commercial
catches of salmon and seatrout in the Baltic Sea for 2012-2013
f)
Update similar data as far as possible further back in time by use of
appropriate assumptions and models.
ICES will send an official petition to Denmark, Poland and Sweden to provide
the Workshop with relevant data or potential reports on the catch
compositions (proportions of salmon and sea trout) in the Polish coastal and
offshore fisheries as far as possible back in time in the last 20 years.
ICES will also send an official petition to the European Commission and
European Fisheries Control Agency to make the potential data (proportions of
salmon and sea trout) and detailed reports from inspection campaigns
available to the WK.
Meeting of the WKSALDAT will be conditional to the availability of the
relevant data. Two weeks before the intended WK meeting the quality of the
supplied data will be evaluated by the WK chair and the ICES Secretariat and
the final decision on the meeting will be taken accordingly.
WKSALDAT will report by 16 March 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
140
Supporting information
Priority
The activities of this Experts Group will lead ICES into improved quality of the Baltic salmon
and sea trout assessment. Consequently, these activities are considered to have a very high
priority.
Scientific justification
There is a suspected misreporting of salmon as sea-trout in the Polish sea fishery. Data
(proportions of sea trout/salmon) from inspection campaigns coordinated by EU authorities
should be made available to the working group to facilitate a more precise estimation of the rate
of misreporting. In addition Polish national institute should provide to the working group the
catch sampling data collected under the DCF on the proportions of salmon and sea trout in the
coastal and offshore catches separately.
An assumingly substantial recreational salmon and sea trout fishing takes place in the Baltic Sea,
but the catches of these fisheries are partly poorly known. Catch estimation of these fisheries
need to be axplored.
Resource requirements
The research programmes which provide the main input to this group are already underway,
and resources are already committed. The additional resource required to undertake additional
activities in the framework of this group is negligible.
Participants
European Fisheries Control Agency, European Commission, Polish national institute under DCF,
data experts from WGBAST, and data collectors / submitters of of DCF data,in total 5-10 experts.
Resource requirements
No
Secretariat facilities
Meeting room and the normal support.
Financial
No financial implications
Linkages to advisory
committees
ACOM
Linkages to other
committees or groups
WGBAST
Linkages to other
organizations
European Fisheries Control Agency
141
WKBla ckS - Workshops to provide capacity building fo r the
Marine Stra tegy Fr amework Directive Common
Impleme nta tion Strategy (MSFD CI S) in the Black Sea
2013/2/ACOM51
The two Workshops to provide capacity building for the MSFD
CIS 3 in the Black Sea chaired by Mark Tasker, UK, will meet at locations in Bulgaria
and Romania in April 2014, to:
a) Contribute to the development of the Black Sea components of the
preparation of the MSFD CIS WP 2014-18 in cooperation with Black Sea
EU MS authorities. The activities include the organisation of two capacity
building workshops with (focus on preparation of content, programme,
speakers and conclusions) on integrated monitoring and financing of
monitoring infrastructure, one in Bulgaria and one in Romania.
b) ICES shall make efforts to coordinate closely with activities in the
framework of Regional Sea Conventions and to include in the preparatory
work experts covering the four marine regions of MSFD as necessary.
WKBlackS will report by 30 May 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
According to the MoU between ICES and the European Commission
ICES shall provide further scientific advice in support of MSFD on the
correct implementation of the descriptor 3 on populations of all
commercially exploited fish and shellfish, including fisheries-related
information for the other related descriptors (mainly D1, D4 and D6) as
described in the draft MSFD Commission Staff Working Paper 4.
Scientific justification
The work will support the development and regional coordination of the
MSFD implementation in the Black Sea.
Resource requirements
The EC has provided travel/PD/ funds for 3 experts incl. the chair
Participants
From Bulgarian and Romanian authorities
Secretariat facilities
None
Financial
No financial implications for ICES.
Linkages to ACOM and its
groups
ACOM
Linkages to SCICOM and its
groups
Linkages to other
organizations
DG ENV MSFD implementation groups
3 Common Implementation Strategy
4
SEC(2011) 1255 final. Commission Staff Working Paper. Relationship between the initial assessment
of
marine
waters
and
the
criteria
for
good
environmental
status.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/pdf/SWD_2012_365.pdf
142
WKD3R - Workshop to draft recommendations for the assessment of
Descriptor D3 of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive
2013/2/ACOM52
The Workshop to draft recommendations for the assessment of
Descriptor D3, chaired by Carl O’Brien*, UK, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 13–17
January 2014, to provide:
a) Draft recommendations for the assessment of Descriptor D3, as e.g. the
monitoring recommendations (strategic document and technical annexes 5)
building on the work of ICES (D3+ report), the discussions at the two
workshops on "Descriptor 3+ regarding all commercial exploited fish and
shellfish stocks in relation to GES", organised by DG ENV (8–9 April 2012
held in Paris, 9–10 April 2013 held in Brussels), the outcome of the CFP
reform, the application of the precautionary principle and the results of the
MSFD Article 12 report.
b) ICES should also provide and implement a consultation process plan of the
draft recommendations.
c)
ICES shall make efforts to coordinate closely with activities in the framework
of Regional Sea Conventions and to include in the preparatory work experts
covering the four marine regions of MSFD (Baltic Sea, North-east Atlantic
Ocean, Mediterranean and Black Sea). In the development of the draft
recommendations for the assessment of Descriptor D3 it will also consult
Member States and relevant stakeholders.
WKD3R will report by 30 January 2014 for the attention of ACOM and SCICOM.
Supporting information
Priority
According to the MoU between ICES and the European Commission
ICES shall provide further scientific advice in support of MSFD on the
correct implementation of the Descriptor D3 on populations of all
commercially exploited fish and shellfish, including fisheries-related
information for the other related descriptors (mainly D1, D4 and D6) as
described in the draft MSFD Commission Staff Working Paper 6.
Scientific justification
The work is a continuation of work undertaken by ICES during 2012 and
2013.
Resource requirements
The EC has provided travel/per diem funds for 5 experts including the
chair.
Participants
The Group is expected to be attended by some 20 participants.
5
https://circabc.europa.eu/d/a/workspace/SpacesStore/6902dba0-53e4-4cf4-8483689fc1daffdb/Recommendation%20for%20monitoring%20-%202%20May%202013.doc
6 SEC(2011) 1255 final. Commission Staff Working Paper. Relationship between the initial assessment
of
marine
waters
and
the
criteria
for
good
environmental
status.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/pdf/SWD_2012_365.pdf
143
Secretariat facilities
None apart from meeting room.
ICES can provide a platform for experts from the EU member states to
meet and progress the assessment methodology and draft
recommendations. We envisage a 2-day workshop to discuss the
horizontal remaining gaps and settle issues, followed immediately by a
3-day workshop with 4 parallel sessions drafting recommendations and
regional assessments/ overviews for the 4 regional seas. The full event
should be completed within 5 days.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to ACOM and its ACOM
groups
Linkages to SCICOM and SCICOM (SGIEOM)
its groups
Linkages to other
organizations
DG ENV MSFD implementation groups
144
WKUPDATE - Workshop on updating ICES advice
2013/2/ACOM53
The Workshop on updating ICES advice (WKUPDATE) chaired by
ACOM chair J.-J. Maguire, will meet at ICES Headquarters, 27–29 November 2013 to:
a ) Develop a protocol for determining what changes in the indicators of stock
size and exploitation would be sufficient to warrant updating the advice.
1) The protocol will apply to stocks that are harvested within
precautionary limits and where no transition plans apply
2) The protocol should be applicable to category 1–2 stocks, where the
information may be absolute or relative estimates of fishing mortality,
recruitment and/or biomass from a quantitative assessment, as well as
category 3–6 stocks for which stock size and/or exploitation rates
indicators are available;
3) The protocol should take into account the current status of the stock and
how precisely it is estimated, the current status of exploitation and how
precisely it is estimated and the life history characteristics of the stock
(e.g. longevity). Consider whether stocks with poorly estimated biomass
or exploitation status would need greater percentage change to trigger
action;
4) The protocol should take into account whether the annual assessment is
of importance to the final management decisions - stocks for which
advice has been the same for several years without consistent
management action being taken do not need to be updated every year
while some agreed management plans may require annual updates of
advice in legal text;
b ) Suggest, for a representative set of stocks in each category, the percentage
changes in stock size/exploitation rate indicators, including F, R and SSB
from quantitative assessments, that would trigger an updating of the
advice taking into account that the stock is/is not in a management plan.
For category 1–2 stocks, the decision to update the advice could be based
on whether the updated assessment results are consistent with projections
from the previous assessment;
c)
For stocks under a management plan consider if updated advice could
consist of providing the option table annually with detailed text less
frequently. Consider whether this would be consistent with existing
management plan evaluations or if new evaluations would be needed.
d ) Suggest, for a representative set of stocks in each category, the frequency at
which the advice will be updated even if there have not been significant
changes as identified in b above;
e ) Regarding the percentage change and advice frequency discussed in b)
and c), suggest criteria for how these relate to the population structure of
populations which may change with changes in mortality;
f ) Suggest criteria to update the advice for stocks where stock size indices are
available at e.g. three year intervals as for some egg surveys. The
possibility that the assessment could be substituted by an annual forward
projection in which the actual catches are taken into account, should be
investigated;
g ) Suggest a protocol for providing advice when there are large changes in
the perception of the stock or in reference points; in particular, consider
145
whether some gradual transition to the new advice would be appropriate
and how it could be implemented.
WKUPDATE will report by 3 December 2013 for the attention of ACOM.
146
WKMEDS - Workshop on Methods for Estimating Discard Survival
2013/2/ACOM54 The Workshop on Methods for Estimating Discard Survival (WKMEDS),
chaired by Mike Breen* (Norway) and Thomas Catchpole* (UK), will be established
and will meet at ICES HQ, Copenhagen 17–21 February 2014 and in two consecutive
Workshops in 2015 and 2016 to: .
a) Develop guidelines and where possible identify best practice for
undertaking discard survival studies (using the framework detailed in the
report of STECF Expert Working Group EWG 13-16) (2014 meeting);
b) Identify approaches for measuring and reducing, or accounting for, the
uncertainty associated with mortality estimates.
c)
Critically review current estimates of discard mortality, with reference to
the guidelines detailed in 1, and collate existing validated mortality
estimates;
d) Conduct a meta-analysis, using the data detailed in 3, to improve the
understanding of the explanatory variables associated with discard
mortality and identifying potential mitigation measures.
e) Based on ToR a) to d) a CRR should be developed for SCICOM
consideration.
WKMEDS will report by 14 April for the attention of WGFTFB, ACOM and SCICOM
Supporting information
Priority
The European Commission has requested that an Expert Group to
Develop Methods for Estimating Discard Survival is established to
address the urgent need for guidance on methods Consequently, these
activities are considered to have a very high priority.
Resource requirements
Production of Working Group Report.
Participants
It is anticiapted the group will be attended by approximately 20 members
and guests.
Secretariat facilities
Share point site.
Financial
Support for travel experiences and per diem for 3 non-European experts to
attend the WG meeting.
Support for travel expenses for WG members to attend the WG meeting.
Support for travel expenses for WG members to attend the RACs
Linkages to ACOM and
groups under ACOM
This group will report directly to ACOM. The work of this group will
enable the collection of standardised discard mortality survival data for a
number of European fisheries, and therefore will provide supporting
information for the advisory groups.
The guidelines on discard survival assessment will be reviewed by
ACOM.
Linkages to other
committees or groups
The activities of this group will be coordinated by SCICOM, through
SSGESST. It will work closely with WGFTFB, and will develop links with
other WGs and advisory groups utilising data from discard survival
assessments.
Linkages to other
organizations
The guidelines on survival assessments produced by this group will be of
interest to various Regional Advisory Councils, as well as institutes and
organisations conducting discard survival assessments in support of the
Landing Obligation of the new EU Common Fisheries Policy.
147
Resolutions added after ACOM meeting December 2013
SC-RDB - Steering Committee for the Regional Database FishFrame
2013/2/ACOM55 The Steering Committee for the Regional Database FishFrame (SCRDB), chaired by Katja Ringdahl (Sweden) will meet 25–26 November 2014 in
Copenhagen (ICES HQ), Denmark, to:
Respond to recommendations put forward to the SC-RDB by the Liaison
Meeting and expert groups.
b) Summarize how the RDB has been used in the regional coordination
meetings;
c) Respond to recommendations from the supra-RDB technical group dealing
with governance of exchange formats and tools.
d) Review the data policy document, dealing with access rights, data
confidentiality and data ownership issues, and update if necessary.
e) Develop a strategy under the revised DCF and new EMFF regulation,
including a workplan for a roadmap on development of RDB-FishFrame,
taking requirements from a design based approach to sampling and raising
into account.
f) Agree on ToRs for the SC-RDB 2015 meeting.
a)
WKRDB2014 - Workshop on Developing the RDB data format for design
based sampling and estimation for on shore sampling
2013/2/ACOM56 A workshop to develop the RDB data format for design based sampling
and estimation for on shore sampling (WKRDB 2014) will be established and chaired
by Alastair Pout (UK) Liz Clarke (UK) will meet in Aberdeen 27–31 October 2014 to:
a) Document a range of case studies of the on-shore sampling protocols used to
collect data on a variety of fish and shellfish sample in a variety of situations
on shore, e.g. landing port, markets, and processors. Identifying the primary
sampling units and all stages in the hierarchical cluster sampling involved.
b) Determine the extent, to which these current sampling protocols can be
effectively recorded on the RDB data exchange format (csData tables). Where
necessary suggest modifications,
c)
Generate sample weight for the PSU using sampling probabilities as recorded
from the sampling data recorded in the data exchange format.
d) Following design based sampling principles (i.e. based on sampling frames of
ports, markets or processors), consider the extent to which population
estimates for a variety of domains can be effectively derived from the sample
data and post stratification weights using the available landing and effort
data in CL and CE format. Suggest modifications accordingly and combine
with suggestions from previous meetings.
148
WKLIFE IV– Workshop on the Development of Quantitative Assessment
Methodologies based on Life-history traits, exploitation
characteristics, and other relevant parameters for data-limited stocks
2013/2/ACOM57 The Workshop on the Development of Quantitative Assessment
Methodologies based on Life-history traits, exploitation characteristics, and other
relevant parameters for data-limited stocks (WKLIFE IV), chaired by Carl O’Brien
(UK) and Manuela Azevedo (Portugal) will meet in Lisbon, Portugal 27–31 October
2014 to:
a) Developing length-based targets and F-based proxies;
b) Operationalizing size-based assessment methods;
c)
Developing the precautionary buffer, the length of time to apply and the size;
d) Maintaining the precautionary approach throughout, from category 1 to
category 6, under the different exploitation scenarios;
e) Developing life-history informed assessments, especially for short-lived
species and stocks;
f)
Using survey data and developing targets for category 3 stocks;
g) Incorporating landing obligations in the ICES DLS approach; and
h) Further developing risk-based, biodiversity-focused methods.
i)
Collate the simulation work undertaken to date based on ICES work in a
number of its expert groups; e.g. WKFRAME, WKLIFE, RGLIFE, WKLIFE 2
and WKLIFE III.
Some length based models take into account that selection is size based, often
targeting the largest individuals of recruiting cohorts reducing the mean weight of
the cohort. Using these kinds of models with two selection patterns describing the
catching operation and the other the landing operation could be a useful exercise
where discards are large part of total catch. The models could either be superindividual models or populations models keeping track of age and length like
GADGET. Using this kind of information could give quite different picture of yieldper-recruit compared to age-based models.
Postscript
Much international research, both within and outside the ICES community, has
concentrated on the approach to DLS. Following the WKLIFE III meeting, ICES has
been developing approaches to the evaluation and assessment of Descriptor 3 under
the MSFD and has been further reviewing methodological approaches.
Specifically, an FAO technical report on data-poor methods testing (Rosenberg et al.,
2014) provides important results in the context of the remit of WKLIFE and was
briefly discussed during ICES WKD3R workshop, held at ICES Headquarters, 13–17
January 2014 (ICES, 2014). The report is based on the result of an FAO organized
working group to test four candidate data-limited methods, divided in empirical and
catch-based methods. A simulation testing framework was developed to assess the
four potential data-limited models. The results suggested that Catch–MSY, a catchbased method, was the best performer, although the different models performed
similarly in many cases. Catch–MSY was more effective in estimating status over
short time-scales and could be particularly applicable for use in countries where data
time-series are shorter. Harvest dynamics was the most important explanatory
variable in determining performance, which emphasizes the importance of having
accurate information on total removals and fishing effort.
149
At the next meeting of WKLIFE to be held in autumn 2014, the FAO technical report
should be reviewed and appropriate methods investigated further with respect to the
ICES DLS Categories 5 and 6.
WKHOMMP – Workshop on North Sea horse mackerel management plan
2013/2/ACOM58
The Workshop on North Sea horse mackerel management plan
(WKHOMMP) will meet 17–18 June 2014 in IJmuiden, the Netherlands, chaired by
Aukje Coers and David Miller, the Netherlands, to work on response to request from
Netherlands. The work will be to:
a) Evaluate the proposal for a multi-annual plan for horse mackerel in the
North Sea as specified in the request from the Netherlands
WKHOMMP will report by 25 June 2014 for the attention of the Advisory Committee.
Supporting Information
Priority:
Very high
Scientific justification and relation to action plan: To answer the request from Netherlands
Resource requirements:
Core horse mackerel experts
Participants:
External reviewers Höskuldur Björnsson,
Iceland, and Ernesto Jardim, Portugal
Secretariat facilities:
-
Financial:
Meeting costs covered by client member
country.
Travel and per diem will be covered for
reviewers.
Linkages to advisory committees:
Reports to ACOM.
Linkages to other committees or groups:
WGWIDE
Linkages to other organizations:
None
150
WKGMSFD-D3 - Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD Decision
Descriptor 3 - commercial fish and shellfish
2013/2/ACOM59
The Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD Decision
Descriptor 3 - commercial fish and shellfish (WKGMSFD-D3), chaired by Gerjan
Piet, The Netherlands, will meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, 4–5 September 2014 to:
a) Consider the issues raised by the ICES science team on the scientific
challenges associated with the implementation of the MSFD decision.
b) Provide guidance for the finalisation of the review
c)
Report on additional scientific challenges to the implementation of the MSFD
decision (D3) criteria.
WKGMSFD-D3 will report by 15 September for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
High. This workshop is part of a process to respond to a request to ICES
from DGENV for a technical service to review the descriptors for the MSFD
2010/477 Decision.
Scientific
justification
The 2010 Decision of the MSFD raised many challenges. Many of these are
concerned with the scientific interpretation of the ideas and concepts of the
Decision. This workshop will focus on the scientific challenges for D3commercial fish and shellfish with a view to clarify the text and make the
Decision more understandable. Recent relevant ICES Advice should be taken
into account in the review.
Resource
requirements
None
Participants
Experts with expertise in MSFD implementations or scientific issues
regarding the descriptor are encouraged to participate. Each country can
send 1–2 participants. If nominations exceed the meeting space available
ICES reserves the right to reject participants. This will be done based on the
experts' relevant qualifications for the Workshop and geographical coverage.
National participants join the workshop at national expense.
The Workshop will be open to stakeholders.
Secretariat
facilities
Secretariat support and meeting room
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to
advisory
committees
Direct link to ACOM.
Linkages to other
committees or
Direct link to the CSGMSFD
groups
Linkages to other
Links to DGENV and the EU GES/MSCG
organizations
151
WKGMSFD-D4 - Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD decision
descriptor 4 – foodwebs
2013/2/ACOM60
The Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD decision
descriptor 4 – foodwebs (WKGMSFD-D4), chaired by Anna Rindorf, Denmark, will
meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, 26–27 August 2014 to:
a) Consider the issues raised by the ICES science team on the scientific
challenges associated with the implementation of the MSFD decision.
b) Provide guidance for the finalisation of the review
c)
Report on additional scientific challenges to the implementation of the MSFD
decision (D4) criteria.
WKGMSFD-D4 will report by 15 September for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
High. This workshop is part of a process to respond to a request to ICES
from DGENV for a technical service to review the descriptors for the MSFD
2010/477 Decision.
Scientific
justification
The 2010 Decision of the MSFD raised many challenges. Many of these are
concerned with the scientific interpretation of the ideas and concepts of the
Decision. This workshop will focus on the scientific challenges for D4foodwebs with a view to clarify the text and make the Decision more
understandable. Recent relevant ICES Advice should be taken into account
in the review.
Resource
requirements
None
Participants
Experts with expertise in MSFD implementations or scientific issues
regarding the descriptor are encouraged to participate. Each country can
send 1–2 participants. If nominations exceed the meeting space available
ICES reserves the right to reject participants. This will be done based on the
experts relevant qualifications for the Workshop and geographical coverage.
National participants join the workshop at national expense.
The Workshop will be open to stakeholders.
Secretariat
facilities
Secretariat support and meeting room
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to
advisory
committees
Direct link to ACOM.
Linkages to other
committees or
Direct link to the CSGMSFD
groups
Linkages to other
Links to DGENV and the EU GES/MSCG
organizations
152
WKGMSFD-D6 - Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD decision
descriptor 6 – seafloor integrity
2013/2/ACOM60
The Workshop on guidance for the review of MSFD decision
descriptor 6 – seafloor integrity (WKGMSFD-D6), chaired by Jake Rice, Canada, will
meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, 2–3 September 2014 to:
a) Consider the issues raised by the ICES science team on the scientific
challenges associated with the implementation of the MSFD decision.
b) Provide guidance for the finalisation of the review
c)
Report on additional scientific challenges to the implementation of the MSFD
decision (D6) criteria.
WKGMSFD-D6 will report by 15 September for the attention of ACOM.
Supporting information
Priority
High. This workshop is part of a process to respond to a request to ICES
from DGENV for a technical service to review the descriptors for the MSFD
2010/477 Decision.
Scientific
justification
The 2010 Decision of the MSFD raised many challenges. Many of these are
concerned with the scientific interpretation of the ideas and concepts of the
Decision. This workshop will focus on the scientific challenges for D6seafloor integrity with a view to clarify the text and make the Decision more
understandable. Recent relevant ICES Advice should be taken into account
in the review.
Resource
requirements
None
Participants
Experts with expertise in MSFD implementations or scientific issues
regarding the descriptor are encouraged to participate. Each country can
send 1–2 participants. If nominations exceed the meeting space available
ICES reserves the right to reject participants. This will be done based on the
experts' relevant qualifications for the Workshop and geograp ical coverage.
National participants join the workshop at national expense.
The Workshop will be open to stakeholders.
Secretariat
facilities
Secretariat support and meeting room
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to
advisory
committees
Direct link to ACOM.
Linkages to other
committees or
Direct link to the CSGMSFD
groups
Linkages to other
Links to DGENV and the EU GES/MSCG
organizations
153
WKMSYREF3 - Joint ICES-MYFISH Workshop to consider the basis for
F MSY ranges for all stocks
Draft resolution
2013/2/ACOM61
The Joint ICES-MYFISH Workshop to consider the basis for FMSY
ranges for all stocks (WKMSYREF3), co-chaired by John Simmonds, ICES, and Anna
Rindorf, Denmark, will meet at DTU Aqua, Charlottenlund Castle, 17–21 November
2014, to establish FMSY ranges for North Sea demersal stocks, Baltic Sea stocks,
anchovy in Subarea VIII and horse mackerel (Western stock) which are compatible
with obtaining no less than 95% of the estimated maximum sustainable yield and
which are considered precautionary in implementation. The specific ToRs for the
workshop is
a) Based on the stocks listed below collate necessary data and information for
these stocks prior to the workshop.
b) Identify appropriate methods and criteria to determine 5 year FMSY ranges
which result in no less than 95% of the estimated maximum sustainable yield
based on individual weight, maturity, natural mortality and selection for the
most recent 10 year period and stock recruitment time ranges as defined in
recent benchmarks.
c)
Establish methods to where necessary modify upper limits to FMSY ranges
compatible with ensuring a <5% risk of the stock falling below Blim not only in
assessment years but also in forecast years under full MSEs
d) Estimate 5 year values of FMSY and MSYBtrigger and FMSY ranges for each of the
stocks listed below such that management following advice based on these
FMSY ranges will be precautionary and yield are no less than 95% of MSY.
e) Provide a draft advice on FMSY and MSYBtrigger and FMSY ranges for each of the
stocks listed below.
f)
Establish guidelines and where appropriate indicate suitable software for the
estimation of FMSY ranges for category 1 stocks where full MSE analyses are
not available.
WKMSYREF3 will report by 1 December 2014 for the attention of ACOM.
Background
The European Commission has requested to ICES to receive advice based on FMSY
ranges rather than single points as the basis for area management plans.
Appropriately selected ranges should have the advantage of ensuring precautionarity
in advice under implementation while providing greater flexibility in advice to
consider economic and social aspects in subsequent negotiations. The flatness of the
curve describing yield as a function of fishing mortality near the maximum value
often leads to great variability between FMSY point estimates based on different
methods. Small changes in biological parameters can sometimes change the location
of the maximum while ranges may be more stable. The peak of the yield curve has
no guarantee of being precautionary in the implementation phase unless evaluations
contain the implementation aspects compatible with MSE. Finally, use of point
estimates is generally incompatible with a mixed fisheries approach to advice. FMSY
154
ranges which include MSE considerations have the potential to be strictly
precautionary in implementation while incorporating economic (Maximum Economic
Yield) and social (Maximum Social Yield) considerations which e.g. are compatible
across all species in mixed fisheries and.
Data Call
Before September 17th, data for all relevant stocks should be uploaded in a ready-touse format to the ICES sharepoint. Responsible persons are appointed once
participation is confirmed.
Bay of Biscay
Anchovy in Subarea VIII (Bay of Biscay)
Baltic Sea
Cod in Subdivisions 22–24 (Western Baltic Sea)
Cod in Subdivisions 25–32(Eastern Baltic Sea)
Herring in Division IIIa and Subdivisions 22–24 (Western Baltic spring spawners)
Herring in Subdivisions 25–29 and 32 (excluding Gulf of Riga herring)
Herring in Subdivision 28.1 (Gulf of Riga)
Herring in Subdivision 30 and 31 (Bothnian Sea)
Sprat in Subdivisions 22–32 (Baltic Sea)
North Sea
Cod in Subarea IV (North Sea) and Divisions VIId (Eastern Channel) and IIIa West (Skagerrak)
Haddock in Subarea IV and Divisions IIIa West and VIa (North Sea, Skagerrak, and West
of Scotland)
List of stocks to be covered by WKMSYREF3
Nephrops in Division IIIa
Nephrops in Division IV (North Sea) if necessary by FU
Nephrops in Botney Gut – Silver Pit (FU 5)
Nephrops in Farn Deeps (FU 6)
Nephrops in Fladen Ground (FU 7)
Nephrops in Firth of Forth (FU 8)
Nephrops in Moray Firth (FU 9)
Nephrops in Noup (FU 10)
Nephrops in Norwegian Deeps (FU 32)
Nephrops off Horn’s Reef (FU 33)
Nephrops in Devil’s Hole (FU 34)
Plaice in Division IIIa West (Skagerrak)
Plaice in Subarea IV (North Sea)
Plaice in Division VIId (Eastern Channel)
Saithe in Subarea IV (North Sea) Division IIIa (Skagerrak) and Subarea VI (West of
Scotland and Rockall)
Sole in Division IIIa and Subdivisions 22–24 (Skagerrak, Kattegat, and the Belts)
Sole in Subarea IV (North Sea)
Sole in Division VIId (Eastern Channel)
Whiting in Division IIIa (Skagerrak – Kattegat)
Whiting in Subarea IV (North Sea) and Division VIId (Eastern Channel)
155
Widely Distributed stocks
Horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) in Divisions IIa, IVa, Vb, VIa, VIIa-c, e-k, and Subarea
VIII (Western stock)
WKSIBCA - Workshop on Scoping for Integrated Baltic Cod Assessment
Approved by ACOM and SCICOM in September
2013/2/ACOM62
The Workshop on Scoping for Integrated Baltic Cod Assessment
(WKSIBCA), chaired by Marie Storr-Paulsen, Denmark, and Maciej Tomczak,
Sweden, will be established and will meet in Gdynia, Poland, 1–3 October 2014 to:
a) Collate revised data for the single-species stock assessments agreed at the
most recent benchmark (WKBALT, 2013) following intersessional work
outlined by the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS, 2014);
this includes revised age-reading data, considerations of potential
catchability changes and increased discard rates. Examine the results and
identify additional work, as required;
b) Present a status report of relevant work from the Working Group on
Integrated Assessment of the Baltic Sea (WGIAB) and connected activities (in
particular, results from the meeting on the assessment of the Baltic cod, sprat
and herring environment, held in Sweden in August 2014);
c)
Identify ecosystem processes that explain the recent changes detected in the
Baltic cod stocks (i.e. especially reduced growth, spatial distribution, stock
mixing);
d) Identify which ecosystem information (related to processes, parameters and
data) can be included in an integrated assessment of the Baltic cod stocks and
the fisheries, and how;
e) Identify potential gaps in information and knowledge necessary to derive an
assessment, and how they can be closed;
f)
Set up a process to ensure the transfer of existing science into WGBFAS
(including a plan of work to be conducted in the remainder of 2014 and in
early 2015).
WKSIBCA will report by 15th October 2014 for the attention of the ACOM and
SCICOM.
Supporting information
Priority
The current activities of this workshop are in line with the ICES
strategic plan to progress towards integrated ecosystem assessments.
This initiative was triggered by the problems detected on the
previously benchmarked assessment of Eastern Baltic cod (developed
at the benchmark WKBALT, 2013) at the WGBFAS 2014 meeting. The
latter meeting identified the need for a more comprehensive
benchmark assessment that considers ecosystem aspects, as well as the
need to review the available data. Consequently, these activities are
considered to have a very high priority.
156
Scientific justification
The workshop will: (i) Examine the revised data following from the
intersessional work outlined by WGBFAS 2014; (ii) identify available
ecosystem knowledge, and how to incorporate the knowledge into an
integrated assessment for the cod stocks and the fisheries in the Baltic
Sea.
Resource
requirements
The research programmes which provide the main input to this group
are already underway, and resources are already committed. The
additional resource required to undertake additional activities in the
framework of this group is negligible.
Participants
Experts on integrated assessment, fish stock assessment models and
Baltic Sea ecosystem. The workshop is open to observers.
Secretariat facilities
None.
Financial
No financial implications.
Linkages to advisory
committee
There are close links with ACOM and SCICOM.
Linkages to other
committees or groups
There is a very close working relationship with the ACOM/SCICOM
Benchmarking Steering Group (BSG), WGIAB, WGBFAS, SGSPATIAL
and other groups (WGISDAA, WGFTFB, WGSAM, WGMM,…)
holding information about the Baltic Sea System.
Linkages to
organizations
HELCOM, BSAC
other
WKHerringTAC - Workshop to evaluate the TAC calculation for herring in
IIIa
Draft resolution
2014/2/ACOM63 The Workshop to evaluate the TAC calculation for herring in IIIa
(WKHerTAC, chaired Lotte Worsøe Clausen, Denmark, will meet at the ICES
Secretariat, 6–9 November 2014 to:
a) Evaluate the outcome of implementing the TAC calculation strategyi on the
stock of Western Baltic Spring Spawning herring for the next 5 years, with
particular reference to:
i.
the probability of the fishing mortality being at or below Fmsy yearon-year;
ii.
future yields on a 5 year basis; and
iii.
the probability of the spawning biomass falling below Blim and Btrigger;
b) Assuming that:
i.
50% of the ICES MSY advised catch for WBSS will be allocated to SD
22-24.
ii.
The flexibility provision whereby up to 50% of the IIIa TAC can be
fished in the North Sea will apply, and that all of the catch that could
be taken in the North Sea under this provision will actually be taken
in the North Sea.
iii.
the WBSS TAC will be fixed according to the ICES MSY approach
(linear reduction of F) when the stock is below MSY-Btrigger
157
iv.
c)
the +/- 15% TAC constraint applies only to the TAC for the mixed
NSAS/WBSS in IIIa, not to the WBSS TAC in SD 22-24.
Draft advice on whether the aforementioned strategy is consistent with ICES
precautionary approach in the next five years.
WKHerringTAC will report by 14 November, 2014 for the attention of the Advisory
Committee.
Supporting information
Priority
The activities of this Workshop are in response
to a joint request from the EC and Norway.
Based on the request it is agreed with the EC
and Norway that advice will be delivered 24
November 2014.
WKHerringTAC will develop the analytic basis
for the response to the request
Scientific justification
Resource requirements
The research programmes that provide the
main input to this group are already
underway, and resources are already
committed. The additional resource required to
undertake additional activities in the
framework of this group is negligible.
Participants
It is expected that the Workshop will be
attended by 9 experts, 2 external reviewers,
and stakeholders.
Secretariat facilities
Baltic room
Financial
The EC and Norway will cover travel and per
diem for 9 experts attending the Workshop.
Two external experts will attend all meetings.
Linkages to advisory committees
The workshop is directly linked to the
Advisory Committee.
Linkages to other committees or groups
HAWG
Linkages to other organizations
EC and Norway
i
Considering the method of calculating the TAC for herring in the Skagerrak and Kattegat (C
fleet) is set as a sum of two components:
a.
b.
A fixed percentage of the TAC for NSAS in the North Sea (A fleet) that
results from the application of the EU-Norway management plan; and
A fixed percentage of the ICES MSY advice for the WBSS total catch.
i. These percentages are fixed at 3.5% and 41% respectively, based
on the average catch composition of NSAS and WBSS by the C
fleet. The TAC is therefore given by the following formula:
158
TAC Skagerrak and Kattegat = (TACNSAS [A-fleet] * 3.5% ) + (WBSS ICES MSY
advice * 41%)
If the TAC resulting from the application of this formula results in a TAC that is less than
85% or greater than 115% of the TAC in the previous year, the TAC in IIIa will be fixed at a
level that is respectively 85% or 115% of the TAC in the previous year.
WKMACLTMP – Workshop on mackerel management plan evaluation
Draft resolution
2014/2/ACOMXX
The Workshop on mackerel management plan evaluation
(WKMACLTMP) will meet 17–19 November 2014 in ICES Headquarter chaired by Katja
Enberg, Norway, to work on response to a request from EU, Norway and the Faroe Islands.
The work will be to:
a)
Evaluate the proposal for a multi-annual plan for mackerel in the Northeast Atlantic
as specified in the request from EU, Norway and the Faroe Islands
WKMACLTMP will report by 25 November 2014 for the attention of the Advisory
Committee.
Supporting Information
Priority:
Very high
Scientific justification and relation to action To answer the request from EU, Norway and
plan:
the Faroe Islands
Resource requirements:
Core mackerel experts
External reviewers Kiersten Curti
Participants:
Mac Cardinale
Secretariat facilities:
Meeting costs covered by client member
country.
Financial:
Travel and per diem will be covered for
reviewers.
Linkages to advisory committees:
Reports to ACOM.
Linkages to other committees or groups:
WGWIDE
159
Linkages to other organizations:
None
160