Last updated on 20 August 2018

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

IDENTIFICATION

SCIENTIFIC NAME(s)

Sprattus sprattus

SPECIES NAME(s)

European sprat

Previous attempts to identify different populations of European sprat during the 1980-1990s were unsuccessful (Nielsen 1994). Gulf of Lyon and the Adriatic Sea populations have the “biggest genetic distance” within the Mediterranean and any population differentiation was found between the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the Bay of Biscay (Debes et al. 2008). Genetic analysis showed a clear genetic distinction from the NE Atlantic Ocean and the Baltic Sea and a high differentiation of the Adriatic Sea population from all northern samples (Limborg et al. 2012). More recently, a “complex population structure is considered across the species’ distribution” (Limborg et al. 2012). Nevertheless ICES recommends the conduction of further studies to clarify this structure (e.g. apparent overlap between North Sea and English Channel spratts) thus here we consider the existing assessment units (ICES 2014):
- Celtic Sea and West of Scotland in Subarea VI and Divisions VIIa–c and f–k
- Skagerrak and Kattegat in Division IIIa
- North Sea in Subarea IV
- English Channel in Divisions VIId,e
- Baltic Sea in Subdivisions 22–32.


ANALYSIS

Strengths
  • A multiannual plan (MAP) for the stocks of cod, herring and sprat in the Baltic Sea was established in 2016. ICES advice is based on this MAP and is considered precautionary.
  • Spawning stock biomass has been welll above the target reference point in the last years and has increased since 2014.
  • Specific management measures are incoporated in the MAP in case SSB is below the limit reference point.
  • Fishers compliance with set TAC has been high in the last years in general.
  • Around 11% of the marine and coastal areas are currently being protected by the network of Baltic Sea Protected Areas. 
Weaknesses
  • The retrospective pattern of the main assessment model (XSA model) shows quite large deviations of estimates for certain years, specially for fishing mortality, and  as compared to the secondary model (SAM).
  • Fishing mortality in 2017 was slightly above the upper limit advised by ICES.
  • The sum of EU TAC plus Russian autonomous quota for 2018 is slightly above the upper advised catch by ICES in 2018.
  • The amount of discarding of age-groups 0 and 1 in fisheries directed to human-consumption is unknown.
  • A spatial management plan must consider prey availability for the recovery of cod in Subdivisions 25-26 and redistribution of the fishery in Subdivisions 27–32 to promote growth of cod's prey species (e.g. sprat, herring).
  • Gillnetters, especially the smaller ones that usually operate closer to the shore occasionally can have rather big number of birds in the nets.
Options
  • Develop a spatial management plan for the fisheries that catch sprat, with the aim to improve cod condition.
  • Reduce uncertainties regarding landings by each species and amount of discarding of recruits, as these uncertainties could influence the estimates of absolute stock size and fishing mortality.

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

≥ 8

Managers Compliance:

9.8

Fishers Compliance:

10

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

10

Future Health:

7.7


RECOMMENDATIONS

RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN
  • Work with managers to develop a spatially explicit management plan for the fisheries that catch Baltic sprat, ensuring there are adequate amounts of sprat in all areas to serve as prey for cod stocks and other ecosystem needs.
  • Improve catch, discard, and bycatch data reporting.  Catch and discard data should be reported at a species specific level, and bycatch data collection should include interactions with birds and mammals, especially for the gillnet fleet. 
  • Ensure future TACs are set in accordance with scientific advice.
  • Ensure these recommendations are represented to the EU Pelagic Advisory Council (https://www.pelagic-ac.org/) directly or through one of the General Assembly members. 

FIPS

No related FIPs

CERTIFICATIONS

  • LFPO pelagic trawl sprat (Sprattus sprattus):

    MSC Certified

  • SPPO Baltic herring and sprats:

    Withdrawn

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
Baltic Sea EU Latvia Single boat midwater otter trawls
Poland Midwater trawls
Sweden Midwater trawls

Analysis

OVERVIEW

Last updated on 19 July 2018

Strengths
  • A multiannual plan (MAP) for the stocks of cod, herring and sprat in the Baltic Sea was established in 2016. ICES advice is based on this MAP and is considered precautionary.
  • Spawning stock biomass has been welll above the target reference point in the last years and has increased since 2014.
  • Specific management measures are incoporated in the MAP in case SSB is below the limit reference point.
  • Fishers compliance with set TAC has been high in the last years in general.
  • Around 11% of the marine and coastal areas are currently being protected by the network of Baltic Sea Protected Areas. 
Weaknesses
  • The retrospective pattern of the main assessment model (XSA model) shows quite large deviations of estimates for certain years, specially for fishing mortality, and  as compared to the secondary model (SAM).
  • Fishing mortality in 2017 was slightly above the upper limit advised by ICES.
  • The sum of EU TAC plus Russian autonomous quota for 2018 is slightly above the upper advised catch by ICES in 2018.
  • The amount of discarding of age-groups 0 and 1 in fisheries directed to human-consumption is unknown.
  • A spatial management plan must consider prey availability for the recovery of cod in Subdivisions 25-26 and redistribution of the fishery in Subdivisions 27–32 to promote growth of cod's prey species (e.g. sprat, herring).
  • Gillnetters, especially the smaller ones that usually operate closer to the shore occasionally can have rather big number of birds in the nets.
Options
  • Develop a spatial management plan for the fisheries that catch sprat, with the aim to improve cod condition.
  • Reduce uncertainties regarding landings by each species and amount of discarding of recruits, as these uncertainties could influence the estimates of absolute stock size and fishing mortality.
RECOMMENDATIONS

Last updated on

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
  • Work with managers to develop a spatially explicit management plan for the fisheries that catch Baltic sprat, ensuring there are adequate amounts of sprat in all areas to serve as prey for cod stocks and other ecosystem needs.
  • Improve catch, discard, and bycatch data reporting.  Catch and discard data should be reported at a species specific level, and bycatch data collection should include interactions with birds and mammals, especially for the gillnet fleet. 
  • Ensure future TACs are set in accordance with scientific advice.
  • Ensure these recommendations are represented to the EU Pelagic Advisory Council (https://www.pelagic-ac.org/) directly or through one of the General Assembly members. 

1.STOCK STATUS

STOCK ASSESSMENT

Last updated on 19 July 2018

The model used is an age-based analytical assessment (XSA) that uses catches in the model and in the forecast (ICES 2018). The sprat assessment was benchmarked in 2013 (ICES 2013) . Input data include commercial catches, two acoustic surveys (BASS and BIAS), natural mortalities from the multispecies model (SMS) and regression of predation mortality against eastern Baltic cod spawning stock biomass (ICES 2018).

Discards are not included as they are considered negligible (ICES 2018).

Regarding the quality of the input data, it is expected that misreporting of catches occur as the estimates of species composition of the cupleid catches are imprecise in some mixed pelagic fisheries (ICES 2018). These uncertainties could influence the estimates of absolute stock size and fishing mortality (ICES 2018).

"The retrospective pattern show quite large deviations of estimates for certain years. In case of fishing mortality the deviations are to some extent caused by Fbar based on three values only (F-at-age 3–5), that is sensitive to bias in F-at-age, occurring especially for weak year classes neighbouring a strong year class. The predicted SSB for the year following the prediction year is very sensitive to the assumed (GM) year class strength" (ICES 2018)

A SAM model was also attempted at benchmark workshop as second stock assessment option (ICES 2013) and last available SAM estimates come from the 2017 assessment (ICES 2017). "For 2016 the SAM estimate of SSB and recruitment are lower than the XSA estimate by 16% and 42% while the fishing mortality is higher by 23% than the XSA value. The XSA estimates are contained within SAM confidence intervals" (ICES 2018). The residuals distributions for SAM model show similar patterns as in the case of the XSA model (ICES 2018).  The retrospective analysis for the SAM model was better than for the XSA model (ICES 2018).

SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

Last updated on 19 July 2018

Since 2017, ICES provides advice on the fishing opportunities for sprat in the Baltic Sea according to the EU multiannual plan (MAP) established in 2016 (EU 2016). The MPA and ICES advice are considered precautionary. For advice, the ICES rule is used, i.e. F is adjusted by the factor SSB/MSY Btrigger when SSB is below MSY Btrigger. For this stock, the SSB in 2018 is predicted to be above MSY Btrigger. In this situation, catch scenarios applicable under the MAP correspond to the following range of fishing mortalitites: Flower =0.19 and Fupper=0.27 (EU 2016).

For 2019, ICES advices than "when the EU MAP is applied, catches that correspond to the F ranges are between 225,752 tonnes and 311,523 tonnes. According to the MAP, catches corresponding to F higher than FMSY (301,125 tonnes) can only be taken under conditions specified in the MAP" (ICES 2018).

ICES recommends that a spatial management plan is developed for the fisheries that catch sprat, with the aim to improve cod condition (ICES 2018).

CURRENT STATUS

Last updated on 19 July 2018

The spawning stock biomass has been low in the first half of 1980s. In the beginning of 1990s the stock started to increase rapidly and in 1996–1997 it reached the maximum observed spawning stock biomass of 1.9 million tonnes in 1996. The stock size increased due to the combination of strong recruitments and decline in natural mortality (effect of low cod biomass). In the following years the stock declined and since 2002 the spawning biomass has been fluctuating at range of 0.9–1.2 million t., and declined again below the average (~0.95 million t.) during 2011-2015. In recent years SSB has increased and it has been relatively stable after 2016 with values around 1.3 million t (ICES 2018)(ICES 2018)

After 2000 fishing mortality increased and fluctuated usually between Fpa and Flim, with a significant decrease after 2015 to values around FMSY.

According to the last ICES report fishing pressure in 2017 was 0.28, which is slightly above FMSY (0.26) and below Fpa (0.32) and Flim (0.39). The stock is at full reproductive capacity (ICES 2018). SSB in 2017 was at 1,303,000 tonnes and the predicted value in 2018 is 1,366,000 tonnes, well above MSY Btrigger (570,000 tonnes), Bpa (570,000 tonnes) and Blim (410,000 tonnes). Recruitment (age 1) in 2018 was 112,860 thousand individuals representing a considerable increase with previous year and making 2017 the second best year-class in the last decade after the 2014 year class (ICES 2018).

2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

MANAGEMENT

Last updated on 19 July 2018

Until 2005, the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission (IBSFC) was responsible for the management of the fishing resources in the Baltic Sea, including sprat. A Long-Term Management Strategy for the Sprat Stock in the Baltic Sea was adopted in 2000 but terminated in 2006. Baltic Sea fisheries management is under the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and Russian Ministry of Agriculture legislation.

Since 2016, the stocks of sprat, cod and herring in the Baltic Sea are managed through a multiannual plan (MAP) (EU 2016). The MAP is considered to be precautionary. The MAP establishes a range of target fishing mortality corresponding to the objective of "reaching and maintaining MSY as ranges of values which are consistent with achieving maximum sustainable yield (FMSY). Those ranges, based on scientific advice, are necessary in order to provide flexibility to take account of developments in the scientific advice, to contribute to the implementation of the landing obligation and to take into account the characteristics of mixed fisheries. The FMSY ranges are derived to deliver no more than a 5 % reduction in long-term yield compared to MSY. The upper limit of the range is capped, so that the probability of the stock falling below the limit spawning stock biomass reference point (Blim) is no more than 5 %. That upper limit also conforms to the so-called ICES advice rule, which indicates that when the spawning stock biomass is below the minimum spawning stock biomass reference point (MSY Btrigger), F is to be reduced to a value that does not exceed an upper limit equal to the FMSY point value multiplied by the spawning stock biomass in the TAC year, divided by MSY Btrigger" (EU 2016).

"ICES uses those considerations and the advice rule in its provision of scientific advice on fishing mortality and catch options" (EU 2016).

"For the purposes of fixing fishing opportunities, there should be an upper threshold for FMSY ranges in normal use and, provided that the stock concerned is considered to be in a good state (above MSY Btrigger), an upper limit for certain cases" (EU 2016).

The EU set a TAC of 262,300 tonnes for the EU countries in 2018, whereas the Russian autonomous quota for the same year is 42,600 tonnes. This means that the total TAC for Baltic sprat in 2018 is 304,900 tonnes (European Council (EU) 2017), slightly above the upper advised catch by ICES (301,722 tonnes).

When scientific advice indicates that a stock is at low biomass levels "safeguard measures should include the reduction of fishing opportunities and specific conservation measures" (EU 2016).

The use of fishing logbooks as required under Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 should be extended to fishing vessels of an overall length of 8 metres or more (EU 2016).

The following reference points have been established for this stock (ICES 2018) :

FrameworkReference pointValueTechnical basis
MSY approachMSY Btrigger570,000Assumed at Bpa
 FMSY0.26Stochastic simulations with segmented regression and Ricker stock–recruitment curves from the 1992–2013 time-series.
Precautionary approachBlim410,000Stock–recruitment relationship (biomass which produces half of the maximal recruitment in a Beverton–Holt model).
 Bpa570,000Blim × 1.4
 Flim0,39Consistent with Blim.
 Fpa0,32Consistent with Bpa.
Management planMAP MSY Btrigger570,000MSY Btrigger
 MAP Blim410,000Blim
 MAP FMSY0.26FMSY
 MAP target range Flower-FMSY0.19-0.26Consistent with the ranges provided by ICES (2015), resulting in no more than 5% reduction in long-term yield compared with MSY.
 MAP target range FMSY-Fupper0.26-0.27Consistent with the ranges provided by ICES (2015), resulting in no more than 5% reduction in long-term yield compared with MSY.
COMPLIANCE

Last updated on 19 July 2018

Managers have set TACs close to or above the advised catch in the last years. In 2018, advised catch was in the range 219,152-301,722 tonnes but the total TAC set by the EU plus the Russian autonomous quota was 304,900 tonnes. Fishers compliance has been good in last years with catches higher than the total TAC only in years 2009 (2.0% above), 2015 (2,9%) and 2016 (1,5%) (ICES 2018)

This fishery operates under the landing obligation of the EU. Historically, discards in most countries have probably been small because the undersized and lower quality fish can be used for production of fish meal and feeding in animal farms. In fisheries directed for human consumption (see (Lassen 2011)), however, young fish (0 and 1 age groups) were discarded at unknown, but likely high, rates especially in years when strong year classes recruit to the fishery (ICES 2017)

3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

BYCATCH
ETP Species

Last updated on 8 April 2014

There are no records of bycatch of seabirds and mammals in sprat industrial fishery in the Baltic. However, some studies have shown that fishing nets, in particular set nets, have caused considerable mortality for long-tailed ducks Clangula hyemalis (Vulnerable in 2012 IUCN Red list; BirdLife International, 2012a), velvet scoters Melanitta fusca (Endangered in 2013 IUCN Red list; BirdLife International, 2013a), Common eiders Somateria mollissima (Least concern in 2012 IUCN Red list; BirdLife International, 2012b), Common scoters Melanitta nigra (Least concern in 2013 IUCN Red list; BirdLife International, 2013b) and Greater scaup Aythya marila (Least concern in 2012 IUCN Red list; BirdLife International, 2012c) (Žydelis et al, 2009).
At least four species of marine mammals can be found in the Baltic Sea: Grey seal Halichoerus grypus (Least concern in 2008 IUCN Red list; Thompson and Härkönen, 2008), Harbour seal Phoca vitulina vitulina (Vulnerable; HELCOM Red list), ringed seal Phoca hispida botnica (Vulnerable; HELCOM Red list), and small population of harbour porpoise Phocaena phocaena (Critically Endangered; HELCOM Red list) (HELCOM, 2013; ICES, 2010b).

Reports suggest that fisheries bycatch amount to 0.5-0.8% of the porpoise population in the southwestern part of the Baltic Marine Area each year, and 1.2% of the porpoise population in the Kiel and Mecklenburg Bays and inner Danish waters. Estimates of the harbour porpoise population are uncertain, however, and the number of porpoises incidentally caught in fisheries is probably underestimated. Based on 2009 bycatch, indicates a bycatch rate of between 3.9% and 15.2% of the local population (ASCOBANS, 2012). The loss of porpoises to fishery in the Baltic Marine Area may be too high to sustain the population (ICES, 2008c, 2009c; HELCOM, 2009). Reliable data concerning sprat fisheries-related losses of harbour porpoises are not available. Trawls have little bycatch of marine mammals and seabirds. However, bycatch information on marine mammals and sea birds is poor (ICES, 2010d).
According to Dagys et al. (2009), trawlers do not cause any bycatch of birds or mammals in the offshore fishery in the Baltic Sea and Riga Gulf. However the gillnetters, especially the smaller ones that usually operate closer to the shore occasionally can have rather big number of birds in the nets. Bycatch of sea mammals is rare.

Other Species

Last updated on 5 March 2014

Sprat is taken with a bycatch of herring to an extent that depends on season and area. This means that the fishing options for sprat should take account of the state of Baltic herring stocks, especially the central Baltic herring stock, as they overlap in distribution and fishing area. From 2005, EU vessels operating in the sprat and herring fishery are no longer allowed to land unsorted catches, unless there is a proper sampling scheme to monitor species composition. This is thought to have led to a reduction in the amount of misreported species (ICES, 2013a). Work is in progress to identify and quantify non-target species in the fishery (ICES, 2013b).

Sprat and herring are the main preys of Atlantic cod in the Baltic Sea and cod growth is limited by prey availability (ICES, 2013a).

HABITAT

Last updated on 7 March 2014

The fisheries for industrial purposes generally use pelagic or light bottom trawl and thus habitat impacts are low. In addition, there are demersal trawling activities for sprat in some parts of the Baltic. Sprat fishing is carried out all year round with the main fishing season in the first half of the year. The major sprat landings come from subdivisions 25-29 (open sea): about 85% of the landings in 2009. The Gulf of Finland accounted for about 9% mainly landed by Estonia and used for human consumption (Lassen, 2011).

The topography of the Baltic seafloor is diverse, with around 30% of its area composed by shallow areas (< 25m), interspersed by a number of deeper basins. Benthic communities of the hard substrates are dominated by mussels, while burrowing forms dominate on soft bottoms. Some coastal areas are also colonized by seaweeds and seagrasses, which serve as important nursery grounds for fish species (ICES, 2010b).
 
The main part of the sprat catches is taken by pelagic single and pair trawling (using a mesh size of 16 mm in the codend). In addition there are demersal trawling activities for Baltic sprat in some parts of the Baltic. There are no records of significant impacts of fishing activities on benthos in the Baltic Sea, although the negative impacts of bottom trawling on the sessile benthic fauna of hard substrates have been demonstrated (Callaway et al., 2007; ICES, 2008c).

Marine Reserves

Last updated on 07 Mar 2014

Measures are being taken to protect species and habitats in the Baltic Sea area, the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) has prepared a “Red List” of marine biotopes and biotope complexes. Additionally, 11% of the marine and coastal areas are currently being protectedby the network of Baltic Sea Protected Areas (BSPAs). However, protection is not equally distributed around all sub basins of the Baltic sea, and protection of offshore waters is still inadequate (HELCOM, 2010). Several projects have been developed to access the MPA and spatial planning in Baltic Sea (e.g. MPA in Eastern Baltic Sea, BaltSeaPlan, MARMONI and Hinrichsen). BALTFIMPA project aims to help countries to manage regional fisheries and the objectives of marine protected areas in the Baltic Sea (Helcom, 2014).

Proposed in 2011, new BSPA and the coverage of offshore waters and host habitats, aim to complete the network of marine protected areas in the Baltic Sea (FS, 2012).

FishSource Scores

Last updated on 24 July 2018

SELECT SCORES

MANAGEMENT QUALITY

As calculated for 2018 data.

The score is ≥ 8.

A multiannual plan for the stocks of cod, herring and sprat was established in 2016. This plan, and ICES advice based on it, are considered precautionary. The multiannual plan incorporates specific management measures in case SSB is below the limit reference point.

As calculated for 2018 data.

The score is 9.8.

This measures the Sum of unilateral TACs as a percentage of the Advised TAC.

The Sum of unilateral TACs is 305 ('000 t). The Advised TAC is 302 ('000 t) .

The underlying Sum of unilateral TACs/Advised TAC for this index is 101%.

As calculated for 2017 data.

The score is 10.0.

This measures the Catch as a percentage of the Sum of unilateral TACs.

The Catch is 286 ('000 t). The Sum of unilateral TACs is 304 ('000 t) .

The underlying Catch/Sum of unilateral TACs for this index is 94.2%.

STOCK HEALTH:

As calculated for 2018 data.

The score is 10.0.

This measures the SSB as a percentage of the MSY Btrigger.

The SSB is 1370 ('000 t). The MSY Btrigger is 570 ('000 t) .

The underlying SSB/MSY Btrigger for this index is 240%.

As calculated for 2017 data.

The score is 7.7.

This measures the F as a percentage of the F management target.

The F is 0.280 (age-averaged). The F management target is 0.260 .

The underlying F/F management target for this index is 108%.

HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE RISK

High Medium Low

This indicates the potential risk of human rights abuses for all fisheries operating within this stock or assessment unit. If there are more than on risk level noted, individual fisheries have different levels. Click on the "Select Scores" drop-down list for your fisheries of interest.

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.
To see data for recruitment, please view this site on a desktop.
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
  • Information on catches, SSB, and advice is provided by ICES in late May every year (ICES 2018).
  • Although specific management measures are provided in the multiannual plan in case SSB is below the limit reference point, no fishing mortality to be adopted at low biomass is defined, so score #1 was determined qualitatively.
  • ICES advice for 2019 is based on the use of FMSY ranges, specifically fishing between FMSY and Flower, where [Flower , Fupper] are derived to deliver no more than 5% reduction in long-term yield compared with FMSY (ICES 2018). However for scoring purposes Ftarget=FMSY=0.26.
  • Data on fishing mortality and biomass are derived from a  Extended Survivors Analysis (XSA) model which is currently considered the main assessment model for sprat (ICES 2018).
  • Advised TAC corresponds to the upper advised catch by ICES (ICES 2018). The Managers compliance score is based in the upper advised catch limit because the Management strategy score is ≥ 6. The lower advised catch is provided as an optional variable.
  • The spawning stock biomass estimate for 2018 is a predicted value (ICES 2018).
  • Set TAC is calculated as EU + Russian autonomous quota (for 2011 onwards) (ICES 2018).

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

LFPO pelagic trawl sprat (Sprattus sprattus)

STATUS

MSC Certified on 22 May 2017

SCORES

Principle Level Scores:

Principle Score
Principle 1 – Target Species 96.7
Principle 2 – Ecosystem 92.0
Principle 3 – Management System 91.3

Certification Type: Platinum

Sources

Credits
  1. Aps, R. and Lassen, H. 2010. Recovery of depleted Baltic Sea fish stocks: a review, ICES J. Mar. Sci. 67 (9): 1856-1860http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/67/9/1856.full
  2. ASCOBANS, 2012. Strategies for the Prevention of Bycatch of Seabirds and MarineMammals in Baltic Sea Fisheries. 19th ASCOBANS Advisory Committee Meeting. Galway, Ireland, 20-22 March,. 69pp http://www.ascobans.org/pdf/ac19/AC19_4-17_BycatchPreventionBaltic.pdf
  3. BirdLife International, 2012a. Clangula hyemalis. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2013.2 [Accessed 08 April 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org
  4. BirdLife International, 2012b. Somateria mollissima. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2013.2 [Accessed 08 April 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org
  5. BirdLife International, 2012c. Aythya marila. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2013.2 [Accessed 08 April 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org
  6. BirdLife International, 2013a. Melanitta fusca. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2013.2 [Accessed 08 April 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org
  7. BirdLife International, 2013b. Melanitta nigra. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2013.2 [Accessed 08 April 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org
  8. Callaway, R., Engelhard, G.H., Dann, J., Cotter, J.and Rumohr, H., 2007. A century of North Sea epibenthos and trawling: comparison between 1902-1912, 1982-1985 and 2000. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 346: 27-43.http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v346/p27-43/
  9. Dagys, M., Ložys, L., Žydelis, R., Stipniece, A., Minde, A., Vetemaa, M., 2009. Action C1 – Assessing and reducing impact of fishery by-catch on species of community interest. Final report. LIFE Nature project “Marine Protected Areas in the Eastern Baltic Sea” Reference number: LIFE 05 NAT/LV/000100. 48pphttp://www.balticseaportal.net/media/upload/File/Deliverables/Action%20reports/C1_final_report.pdf
  10. EC 1088/2012. Council Regulation (EU) No 1088/2012 of 20 November 2012 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in the Baltic Sea. Official Journal of the European Union, 22.11.2012.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:323:0002:0009:EN:PDF
  11. EC 1256/2011, Council Regulation (EU) No 1256/2011 of 30 November 2011 fixing for 2012 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicablein the Baltic Sea and amending Regulation (EU) No 1124/2010http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:320:0003:0011:EN:PDF
  12. EC, 2010. Council Regulation (EC) No 1124/2010 of 29 November 2010 fixing the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in the Baltic Sea for 2011.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:318:0001:0009:EN:PDF
  13. Eero, M. 2012. Reconstructing the population dynamics of sprat (Sprattus sprattus balticus) in the Baltic Sea in the 20th century. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 69 (6): 1010-1018. http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/69/6/1010.full
  14. European Comission (EC), 2013. Proposal for a Council Regulation fixing for 2014 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks applicable in the Baltic Seahttp://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2013:0598:FIN:EN:PDF
  15. European Commission, 2008. Environment: Nature & Biodiversity.http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/index_en.htm
  16. European Commission (EC), 2012. Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries. Baltic Sea, North Sea and Landlocked Member States, State of play with the Management plan for Baltic stocks of cod, herring and sprat, 7 pp.http://www.fishsec.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Baltfish-Sept2012-LTMP-note-V2.pdf
  17. FIRMS (Fishery Resources Monitoring System). 2006. Marine Resource Fact Sheet. Stock Status Report: Sprat - Baltic Sea. 2006. Sprat in Sub-divisions 22-32http://firms.fao.org/firms/resource/10472
  18. HELCOM, 1994. HELCOM Recommendation 15/5: System of Coastal and Marine Baltic Sea Protected Areas (BSPA).http://www.helcom.fi/Recommendations/en_GB/rec15_5/
  19. HELCOM, 2008a. Baltic Sea Protected Areas (BSPA).http://www.helcom.fi/environment2/biodiv/en_GB/bspas/
  20. HELCOM, 2008b. Helsinki Commission Nature Protection and Biodiversity Group, Tenth meeting, Warsaw, Poland, 5-9 May 2008.http://meeting.helcom.fi/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=84208&name=DLFE-33541.pdf
  21. Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), 2010. Press release - HELCOM Information Service. 16.02.2010. HELCOM passes the 10% landmark for the Baltic Sea protected areas.http://www.helcom.fi/press_office/news_helcom/en_GB/HABITAT_Meeting_12/?u4.highlight=protected%20areas
  22. Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), 2013. HELCOM Red List of Baltic Sea species in danger of becoming extinct. Balt. Sea Environ. Proc. No. 140, 106 pp.http://helcom.fi/Lists/Publications/BSEP140.pdf
  23. Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), 2014. Managing fisheries in Baltic Marine Protected Areas (BALTFIMPA): inception phase (2012-2013), Flagship project under EUSBSR PA BIO [Accessed 05 March 2014]http://helcom.fi/helcom-at-work/projects/baltfimpa
  24. Hinrichsen, H-H., Kraus, G., Böttcher, U., and Köster, F. 2009. Identifying eastern Baltic cod nursery grounds using hydrodynamic modelling: knowledge for the design of Marine Protected Areas. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 101–108http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/66/1/101.full
  25. ICES. 2003. Environmental Status of The European Seas. Federal Ministry for the Environment. Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety.http://www.ices.dk
  26. ICES, 2006. ICES-FishMap. Sprat-Sprattus sprattus. Family Clupidae. http://www.ices.dk
  27. ICES, 2006. Report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO). 5-12 April 2006, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ACE:05).http://www.ices.dk/
  28. ICES. 2007. ICES Advise 2007. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management. Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems. 2007. Book 8. Baltic Seahttp://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2007/may/Baltic%20Sea.pdf
  29. ICES, 2007. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 8. 8.4.8 Sprat in Subdivisions 22-32.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Advice/2007/ICES%20ADVICE%202007%20Book%208.pdf
  30. ICES, 2008a. Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Group (WGBFAS). 8-17 April 2008, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ICES CM 2008\ACOM:06).http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2008/WGBFAS/WGBFAS08.pdf
  31. ICES, 2008b. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 8. 8.4.8 Sprat in Subdivisions 22-32. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Advice/2008/ICES%20ADVICE%202008%20Book%208.pdf
  32. ICES, 2008c. Report of the Working Group for Regional Ecosystem Description (WGRED), 25-29 February 2008, ICES, Copenhagen, Denmark (ICES CM 2008/ACOM:47).http://www.ices.dk
  33. ICES, 2008d. Report of the Working Group on Integrated Assessments of the Baltic Sea (WGIAB). 25-29 March 2008 Öregrund, Sweden (ICES CM 2008/BCC:04).http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/SSGRSP/2008/wgiab08.pdf
  34. ICES, 2009a. Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS), 22 - 28 April 2009, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ICES CM 2009\ACOM:07).http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2009/WGBFAS/WGBFAS09.pdf
  35. ICES, 2009b. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 8: The Baltic Sea. 8.4.8 Sprat in Subdivisions 22–32 (Baltic Sea).http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Advice/2009/ICES%20ADVICE%202009%20Book%208.pdf
  36. ICES, 2009c. Report of the Working Group on the Ecosystem Effects of Fishing Activities (WGECO), 15-21 April 2009, Copenhagen, Denmark (ICES CM 2009/ACOM:20).http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2009/WGECO/wgeco_final_2009.pdf
  37. ICES, 2010a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 8: The Baltic Sea. 8.4.8 Sprat in Subdivisions 22–32 (Baltic Sea), 9 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Advice/2010/ICES%20ADVICE%202010%20BOOK%208.pdf
  38. ICES, 2010b. Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS), 15 - 22 April 2010, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ICES CM 2010/ACOM:10). 633 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2010/WGBFAS/WGBFAS%202010.pdf
  39. ICES, 2010c. ICES Advice 2010, Book 1. Introduction, Overviews and SpecialRequests.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Advice/2010/ICES%20ADVICE%202010%20BOOK%201.pdf
  40. ICES, 2010d. Report of the Study Group on Bycatch of Protected Species (SGBYC), 1– 4 February 2010, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2010/ACOM:25, 123 pphttp://www.ascobans.org/pdf/ac19/AC19_4-11_ICES2010_SGBYC.pdf
  41. ICES, 2011a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 8: The Baltic Sea 6.4.12 Ecoregion: Baltic Sea. Stock: Sprat in Subdivisions 22–32 (Baltic Sea). Advice summary for 2012, 10 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2011/2011/spr-2232.pdf
  42. ICES, 2011b. Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS): Annex 12 – Stock Annex Baltic Sprat 12 - 19 April 2011, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ICES CM 2011/ACOM:10). pp. 610-619 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2011/WGBFAS/WGBFAS%20Report%202011.pdf
  43. ICES, 2012. Sprat in Subdivisions 22–32 (Baltic Sea). ICES Advice 2012, Book 8, 8.4.8.: 54-64http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2012/2012/spr-2232.pdf
  44. ICES, 2013a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 8: Baltic Sea 8.4.15 Ecoregion: Baltic Sea. Stock: Sprat in Subdivisions 22–32 (Baltic Sea). Advice summary for 2014, 12 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2013/2013/spr-2232_201304142254.pdf
  45. ICES, 2013b. Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS), 10 - 17 April 2013, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen. ICES CM 2013/ACOM:10. 747 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2013/WGBFAS/WGBFAS%202013.pdf
  46. ICES, 2013c. Multispecies considerations for the central Baltic stocks: cod in Subdivisions 25–32, herring in Subdivisions 25–29 and 32, and sprat in Subdivisions 22–32. 6pphttp://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2013/2013/Baltic%20Multispecies%20Advice.pdf
  47. ICES, 2014. Report of the Joint ICES-MYFISH Workshop to consider the basis for FMSY ranges for all stocks (WKMSYREF3).ICES CM 2014/ACOM:64http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2014/WKMSYREF3/WKMSYREF32014.pdf
  48. ICES, 2015a. Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS), 14– 21 April 2015, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2015/ACOM:10. 811 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2015/WGBFAS/01%20WGBFAS%20Report%202015.pdf
  49. ICES. 2015b. EU request to ICES to provide F MSYranges for selected North Sea and Baltic Sea stocks. In Report of the ICESAdvisory Committee, 2015. ICES Advice 2015, Book 6, Section 6.2.3.1. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/Special_Requests/EU_FMSY_ranges_for_selected_NS_and_BS_stocks.pdf
  50. ICES Advice 2008, Book 8. The Baltic Sea. Ecosystem overviewhttp://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Advice/2008/ICES%20ADVICE%202008%20Book%208.pdf
  51. ICES. WGSE. 2004. Report of the Working Group on Seabird Ecology (WGSE). 29 March-2 April 2004. Aberdeen, UK.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/lrc/2004/wgse/WGSE04.pdf
  52. Lassen, 2011. Industrial fisheries in the Baltic Sea. European Parlament: Directorate General for Internal policies, Policy Departmnet B: Structural and Cohesion policies. Fisheries. 48pp http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/pech/studiesdownload.html?languageDocument=EN&file=36968
  53. Simmonds, J. and Jardim, E. 2012. Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) Multispecies management plans for the Baltic (STECF-12-06), JRC Scientific and Policy Reports, 71 pp.http://stecf.jrc.ec.europa.eu/documents/43805/291494/12-05_STECF+12-06+-+Multispecies+management+plans+Baltic_JRCxxx.pdf
  54. The Fisheries Secretariat (FS), 2012. New Baltic Sea Marine Protected Areas proposed in Sweden, Denmark, and Finland. Oceana Report on Baltic Marine Protected Areas [Accessed 07 March 2014]http://www.fishsec.org/2012/01/15/oceana-on-a-mission-new-baltic-sea-marine-protected-areas-proposed-in-sweden-denmark-and-finland/
  55. Thompson, D. and Härkönen, T. (IUCN SSC Pinniped Specialist Group), 2008. Halichoerus grypus. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2013.2 [Accessed 08 April 2014]http://www.iucnredlist.org
  56. Žydelis, R., Bellebaum, J., Österblom, H., Vetemaa, M., Schirmeister, B., Stipniece, A., Dagys, M., van Eerden, M. and S. Garthe. 2009. By-catch in gillnets fisheries – An overlooked threat to waterbird populations, Biological Conservation 142:1269–1281http://www.balticseabird.com/BiolConsZydelisetal_Bycatch2009.pdf
References

    Comments

    This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

    Comments on:

    European sprat - Baltic Sea

    comments powered by Disqus