Last updated on 7 July 2016

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

IDENTIFICATION

SCIENTIFIC NAME(s)

Pandalus borealis

SPECIES NAME(s)

Northern prawn, northern shrimp

COMMON NAMES

cold water prawn, northern shrimp, deep-sea prawn, deepwater prawn, pink shrimp

 The single stock is exploited in the Barents Sea and in the Svalbard fishery protection zone (SFPZ) by the Norwegian and Russian fleet; other vessels (Greenland, Iceland and EU) are restricted to the SFPZ and “Loop Hole” (NAFO/ICES, 2011).


ANALYSIS

Strengths

Discarding is thought to be minimal, as the fishery is not catch regulated but presents bycatch restrictions as sorting grids and closures areas. Current biomass is well above Bmsy and fishing mortality is well below Fmsy.

Weaknesses

No management objectives have been established. Prey-predator relationships, important to stock dynamics, are poorly known.

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

< 6

Managers Compliance:

≥ 6

Fishers Compliance:

≥ 8

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

10

Future Health:

10


RECOMMENDATIONS

CATCHERS & REGULATORS
  • Develop management objectives and a harvest control rule.
  • Set a total allowable catch.
  • Support enhanced biological data collection to improve the stock assessment.
  • Work actively to address and close out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery in the agreed timeframe.
  • Report achievements publicly to share progress with buyers.
    RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN
    • Contact the Norwegian and Russian fisheries administration and request that they develop management objectives.
    • Contact the Norwegian and the Russian research institutes and suggest that they collect further biological data on the stock to improve the stock assessment.
    • Monitor the progress in closing out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery and if agreed timelines are met.
    • Express your support to help meet conditions that may be at a government/regulatory level (where applicable).

      FIPS

      No related FIPs

      CERTIFICATIONS

      • Norway North East Arctic cold water prawn:

        MSC Certified

      Fisheries

      Within FishSource, the term "fishery" is used to indicate each unique combination of a flag country with a fishing gear, operating within a particular management unit, upon a resource. That resource may have a known biological stock structure and/or may be assessed at another level for practical or jurisdictional reasons. A fishery is the finest scale of resolution captured in FishSource profiles, as it is generally the scale at which sustainability can most fairly and practically be evaluated.

      ASSESSMENT UNIT MANAGEMENT UNIT FLAG COUNTRY FISHING GEAR
      Barents Sea Estonia Estonia Bottom trawls
      Faroe Islands Faroe Islands Bottom trawls
      Norway Norway Bottom trawls
      Russia Russian Federation Bottom trawls

      Analysis

      OVERVIEW

      Strengths

      Discarding is thought to be minimal, as the fishery is not catch regulated but presents bycatch restrictions as sorting grids and closures areas. Current biomass is well above Bmsy and fishing mortality is well below Fmsy.

      Weaknesses

      No management objectives have been established. Prey-predator relationships, important to stock dynamics, are poorly known.

      RECOMMENDATIONS

      Last updated on 4 January 2017

      Improvement Recommendations to Catchers & Regulators
      • Develop management objectives and a harvest control rule.
      • Set a total allowable catch.
      • Support enhanced biological data collection to improve the stock assessment.
      Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
      • Contact the Norwegian and Russian fisheries administration and request that they develop management objectives.
      • Contact the Norwegian and the Russian research institutes and suggest that they collect further biological data on the stock to improve the stock assessment.
      Norway

      Last updated on 4 January 2017

      Improvement Recommendations to Catchers & Regulators
      • Work actively to address and close out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery in the agreed timeframe.
      • Report achievements publicly to share progress with buyers.
      Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
      • Monitor the progress in closing out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery and if agreed timelines are met.
      • Express your support to help meet conditions that may be at a government/regulatory level (where applicable).

      1.STOCK STATUS

      STOCK ASSESSMENT

      Stock assessment is based on a Bayesian version of a surplus-production model that includes two survey indices and one commercial index; discards are not included. Uncertainties in the assessment are related to model insensitiveness to yearly changes and if rapid and large changes in recruitment happens; prey function of the Northern shrimp in the ecosystem especially by cod predation – that had recently increased (ICES, 2011b) – and alternative predators as capelin are still poorly known and may affect analysis (ICES, 2011a).

      SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

      ICES/NAFO analyzed the short-term risk scenarios for the stock and recommended that a TAC equal to or less than 60,000 tonnes be established for 2012, in order to ensure with a high probability, that F remains below Flim and B above Blim (ICES, 2011a).

      Reference Points

      The following reference points have been defined for the stock:

       TypeValueTechnical basis
      Precautionary approachBlim0.330% of Bmsy ; relative value
       BpaNot defined 
       Flim1.71.7 of Fmsy ; relative value
      TargetsNot definedNot defined 

      Source : ICES (2011a)

      Both biomass and fishing mortality for this stock are expressed as a ratio of their maximum sustainable yield value.

      CURRENT STATUS

      The stock is being sustainably harvested and in full reproductive capacity; is considered to be close to the carrying capacity (ICES/NAFO, 2011) and 2010 survey results demonstrated that the stock increased comparing with the last year (ICES, 2011c). As in previous years, stock biomass is above BMSY and fishing mortality below FMSY. Biomass is estimated to be well above Btrigger at the end of 2011 (ICES/NAFO, 2011). After a declining trend within 2004-2008, recruitment has been higher in 2009 and 2011 (ICES/NAFO, 2011).

      Trends

      Several countries joined Norway in the fishery since 1970s, contributing to a maximum of 128,000 tonnes in 1984. Catches have meanwhile varied within 21,000-61,000 tonnes, being around 75-93% of the total taken by the Norwegian fleet, with the rest by Russian, Icelandic, Greenlandic and EU vessels (NAFO/ICES, 2011). Since catches of 83,000 tonnes in 2000, values have been declining close to the lowest levels since the fishery developed, related to the reduced profitability of the fishery. Since 1995 the fleet has undergone major restructuring, existing nowadays fewer but larger and powerful factory trawlers (ICES, 2011a).

      2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

      MANAGEMENT

      Fishing is regulated through effort control, bycatch limits and a partial TAC only for the Russian zone. Fishing licenses are issued to Norwegian and Russian shrimp vessels; third countries’ vessels are limited to the Svalbard Fishery Protection Zone (SFPZ) and “Loop Hole”, and also through effort control (NAFO/ICES, 2011). Measures to limit bycatch include mandatory sorting grids and temporary area closures where high bycatch of fish juvenile or undersized shrimp (<15 mm) occurs. A minimum mesh size (stretched) of 35 mm is also enforced (ICES, 2011a).

      Recovery Plans

      Not applicable.

      COMPLIANCE

      Effort ceilings in the SFPZ only have been set so high as to not limit Russian and Norwegian effort but only restrict effort of third countries (ICES, 2008a). No overall TAC is set so fishers’ compliance is difficult to evaluate but catches are on a decreasing trend since 2000 due to reduced economic profitability (ICES, 2011a).

      3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

      BYCATCH
      ETP Species

      The marine mammals on Norway’s 2010 Red List include the right whale Balaena glacialis, bowhead whale Balaena mysticetus, blue whale Balaenoptera musculus, hooded seal Cystophora cristata, beluga whale Delphinapterus leucas, grey seal Halichoerus grypus, Sowerby’s beaked whale Mesoplodon bidens, narwhal Monodon monoceros, harbour seal Phoca vitulina, walrus Odobenus rosmarus (NBDI, 2011). No information could be found on possible interactions of these species with the fishery, in spite of Norway having initiated a programme to monitor marine mammal bycatch in 2004 (ICES, 2008b).

      Similarly, no reports were found of interactions with seabirds on the Red List, which include the black guillemot Cepphus grille, Atlantic puffin Fratercula arctica, Leach’s storm-petrel Oceanodroma leucorhoa, black-legged kittiwake Rissa tridactyla, Brunnich’s guillemot Uria lomvia and the common guillemot Uria aalge (NBDI, 2011).

      Other Species

      Northern shrimp is the main prey of cod, but also important for several other fish and marine mammals; prey-predator relationship are yet poorly known (ICES, 2011a). Shrimp trawling is generally seen as the fishery type which generates the most discards of unwanted catch (Alverson et al., 1994). Bycatch in this fishery is specifically composed of small cod, haddock, Greenland halibut and redfish in the size range 5-25 cm (NIPAG, 2008). However, bycatch quantities are minimal as a result of mandatory sorting grids and temporary close areas with high bycatch (ICES, 2011a).

      HABITAT

      Increased bottom temperature and salinity have been registered in much of the Barents Sea in recent years, with possible consequences on both shrimp growth and the abundance of shrimp predators (NIPAG, 2008).

      Benthic communities are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of bottom trawling, including sponges, anthozoans and corals as Lophelia pertusa(ICES, 2008b). Consequences of shrimp trawling on clay-silt bottoms were studied by Løkkeborg (2005) but are not clearly understood (ICES, 2011c).

      Marine Reserves

      A marine protected area network encompasses 36 sites and was implemented in Norway in 2008 (MFCA, 2009). Five cold-water coral reefs along the Norwegian coastline have been granted special protection status, with all towed fishing gears banned in the area (MFCA, 2006).The shrimp fishery is effort-regulated in the Svalbard Fishery Protection Zone since 1996 after concerns over the increasing size of the fleet (MFCA, 2008). Russia has not established yet a network of marine protected areas; Barents Sea is home to two of Russia’s federal Strictly Protected Reserves (zapovedniks), three Special Purpose Reserves and one other MPA, with five further Special Purpose Reserves currently proposed (Wood, 2007) although regulations on fishing are unclear.

      FishSource Scores

      Last updated on 26 January 2017

      MANAGEMENT QUALITY

      As calculated for 2014 data.

      The score is < 6.

      No management plan is known to be in place (ICES, 2011a).

      As calculated for 2014 data.

      The score is ≥ 6.

      There is no overall TAC but a partial TAC is set for the Russian zone; effort control, licensing and a minimum mesh size are employed as management measures. Mandatory sorting grids and temporary closures are used to reduce bycatch (ICES, 2011a).

      As calculated for 2014 data.

      The score is ≥ 8.

      Landings are well below advised levels and as the fishery is not limited by quotas, discarding is not thought to be an issue (NAFO/ICES, 2011). The stock is being sustainably harvested (ICES, 2011a).

      STOCK HEALTH:

      As calculated for 2012 data.

      The score is 10.0.

      This measures the Ratio B/Bmsy as a percentage of the B=MSY Btrigger.

      The Ratio B/Bmsy is 1.87 . The B=MSY Btrigger is 0.500 .

      The underlying Ratio B/Bmsy/B=MSY Btrigger for this index is 374%.

      As calculated for 2012 data.

      The score is 10.0.

      This measures the Ratio F/Fmsy as a percentage of the F=Fmsy.

      The Ratio F/Fmsy is 0.0400 . The F=Fmsy is 1.00 .

      The underlying Ratio F/Fmsy/F=Fmsy for this index is 4.00%.

      To see data for biomass, please view this site on a desktop.
      To see data for catch and tac, please view this site on a desktop.
      To see data for fishing mortality, please view this site on a desktop.
      No data available for recruitment
      No data available for recruitment
      To see data for management quality, please view this site on a desktop.
      To see data for stock status, please view this site on a desktop.
      DATA NOTES
      1. Both biomass and fishing mortality are determined relative to MSY estimates; scores are computed accordingly.
      2. The fishery is effort regulated so no TAC is set (partial TAC only for Russia zone), meaning management quality cannot be quantitatively scored.

      Download Source Data

      Registered users can download the original data file for calculating the scores after logging in. If you wish, you can Register now.

      Fishery Improvement Projects (FIPs)

      No related FIPs

      Certifications

      Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)

      SELECT MSC

      NAME

      Norway North East Arctic cold water prawn

      STATUS

      MSC Certified on 9 March 2012

      SCORES

      Principle Level Scores:

      Principle Score
      Principle 1 – Target Species 88.1
      Principle 2 - Ecosystem 90.0
      Principle 3 – Management System 86.6

      Certification Type: Silver

      Sources

      Credits

      Alverson DL, Freeberg MH, Murawski SA, Pope JG, 1994. A global assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper no. 339. Rome, FAO. http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/T4890E/T4890E00.htm

      ICES, 2002. Distribution of cold-water corals in the Northeast Atlantic in relation to fisheries.http://www.ices.dk/aboutus/pressrelease/coral.asp

      ICES, 2008a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, Book 3: The Barents and Norwegian Seas. 3.4.9 Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) (Barents Sea).http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2008/2008/pand-sub12.pdf

      ICES, 2008b. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, Book 3: The Barents and Norwegian Seas. 3.1 Ecosystem overview.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2008/2008/3.1-3.2%20Barents%20Sea%20Ecosystem%20overview.pdf

      ICES, 2011a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 3: The Barents Sea 3.4.9 Ecoregion: Barents Sea. Stock: Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in Subareas I and II (Barents Sea). Advice summary for 2012, 8 pp.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2011/2011/pand-barn.pdf

      ICES, 2011a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 3: The Barents Sea 3.4.9 Ecoregion: Barents Sea. Stock: Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) in Subareas I and II (Barents Sea). Advice summary for 2012, 8 pp.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2011/2011/pand-barn.pdf

      ICES, 2011b. Report of the Arctic Fisheries Working Group (AFWG), 28 April - 4 May 2011, Hamburg, Germany. ICES CM 2011\ACOM:05., 659 pp. http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2011/AFWG/AFWG%20Report%202011.pdf

      ICES, 2011c. ICES AFWG REPORT 2011, Ecosystem considerations (Figures 1.1-1.19, Tables 1.1-1.17)http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2011/AFWG/Sec%2001%20Ecosystem%20considerations.pdf

      MFCA, 2008. Norwegian Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs. Marine stocks: Shrimp.http://www.fisheries.no/marine_stocks/shellfish/shrimp.htm

      MFCA, 2009. Norwegian Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs. Integrated Coastal Zone Planning.http://www.fisheries.no/Environmental_impacts_aspects_Norwegian_fisheries_aquaculture/environmental_aspects_aquaculture/environmental_aquaculture_protected/Coastal_planning.htm

      NAFO/ICES, 2011. Report of the Joint NAFO/ICES Pandalus Assessment Working Group (NIPAG), 19–26 October 2011, Canada. ICES CM 2010/ACOM:14, 85 pp. http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2011/NIPAG/scs11-20-NIPAG%20Report%20FINAL.pdf

      NBDI, 2006. Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre. 2006 Norwegian Red List. http://www.biodiversity.no/Article.aspx?m=207&amid=3573

      Nikolaeva NG, Spiridonov VA, Krasnov YV, 2006. Existing and proposed marine protected areas and their relevance for seabird conservation: a case study in the Barents Sea region. Waterbirds around the world. Eds. Boere GC, Galbraith CA, Stroud DA. The Stationery Office, Edinburgh, UK. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/PDF/pub07_waterbirds_part5.5.2.pdf

      NIPAG, 2008. NAFO/ICES _Pandalus_ Assessment Group Meeting, 22-30 October 2008, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark.http://www.nafo.int/publications/meetproc/2006/sc/partc/nipag/nipag-rep-ices.html#III6

      The Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre (NBIC), 2011. The 2010 Norwegian Red List. [Available online on 26th December 2011]http://www.artsdatabanken.no/ThemeArticle.aspx?m=156&amid=2311

      Wood, LJ, 2007. MPA Global: A database of the world's marine protected areas. Sea Around Us Project, UNEP-WCMC & WWF.http://www.mpaglobal.org

      References

        Comments

        This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

        Comments on:

        Northern prawn - Barents Sea, Norway, Norway, Bottom trawls

        comments powered by Disqus