Profile updated on 25 July 2018

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

IDENTIFICATION

SCIENTIFIC NAME(s)

Ammodytes spp.

SPECIES NAME(s)

Sandeels nei, Sandlances nei

The complete stock structure of North Sea sandeel is unclear, and although several reproductively isolated sub-populations have been identified, some exchange appears to take place between neighbouring populations in early life stages. From 2010 onwards ICES has presented advice for the North Sea sandeel divided into 7 management areas, based on the assumption that this will better reflect the stock structure and enable improved management avoiding local depletion (ICES, 2010a). This profile represents the Dogger Bank area – SA1.  


ANALYSIS

Strengths
  • Stock assessments are now conducted separately for each of the sandeel management areas in the North Sea. The combination of a new assessment model “SMS-effort” with the specific area-based approach is considered to have improved the quality of the assessment. 
  • In recent years, the EU has used real-time monitoring for setting TACs within the fishing year, explicitly taking into consideration closing areas known to be commercially depleted.
  • Misreporting in the Danish fleet has been resolved with the introduction of the only one fishing area per trip rule.
  • Closures of depleted areas and for certain periods are used as a management measure on a local scale. Several coastal areas and zones of known deep-water coral communities in the North Sea have been closed to fishing.
Weaknesses
  • No fishing mortality reference points are defined.
  • A retrospective pattern is present which overestimates SSB in the terminal year.
  • Stock is currently below escapement level.
  • A management plan needs to be developed.
  • Additional information on the interaction of the gear with bottom habitat is needed.
  • Additional information on the effects of sandeel removal on ETP stocks, as well as direct accounting for sandeels as forage in the harvest control rule, is needed.
  • Fishing mortality has recently increased substantially.
  • Current recruitment is below average and the fishery is working on older individuals.

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

≥ 6

Managers Compliance:

10

Fishers Compliance:

10

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

5.3

Future Health:

6.9


RECOMMENDATIONS

RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN
  • Press regional advisory bodies, national fisheries administrations and the European Commission to develop a multi-species, ecosystem-based management plan for North Sea pelagic fisheries, including a harvest control rule(s).
  • 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.
  • For stocks with high and increasing fishing mortality, poor recruitment and/or low stock status push managers to be responsive to the status of the stock and make precautionary management decisions.
  • Engage as a stakeholder in all fisheries in the MSC certification programme for this stock and support the MSC Client groups to ensure all conditions attached to the Certifications are fully addressed and, where stock depletion has occurred, fishing mortality is appropriately reduced to ensure rapid stock recovery.

FIPS

No related FIPs

CERTIFICATIONS

  • DFPO and DPPO North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat sandeel, sprat and Norway pout:

    MSC Certified

  • Norway sandeel, pout and north sea sprat:

    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
Dogger Bank area Norway/EU North Sea SA 1 Denmark Small mesh bottom trawls
Norway Small mesh bottom trawls

Analysis

OVERVIEW

Last updated on 29 June 2019

Strengths
  • Stock assessments are now conducted separately for each of the sandeel management areas in the North Sea. The combination of a new assessment model “SMS-effort” with the specific area-based approach is considered to have improved the quality of the assessment. 
  • In recent years, the EU has used real-time monitoring for setting TACs within the fishing year, explicitly taking into consideration closing areas known to be commercially depleted.
  • Misreporting in the Danish fleet has been resolved with the introduction of the only one fishing area per trip rule.
  • Closures of depleted areas and for certain periods are used as a management measure on a local scale. Several coastal areas and zones of known deep-water coral communities in the North Sea have been closed to fishing.
Weaknesses
  • No fishing mortality reference points are defined.
  • A retrospective pattern is present which overestimates SSB in the terminal year.
  • Stock is currently below escapement level.
  • A management plan needs to be developed.
  • Additional information on the interaction of the gear with bottom habitat is needed.
  • Additional information on the effects of sandeel removal on ETP stocks, as well as direct accounting for sandeels as forage in the harvest control rule, is needed.
  • Fishing mortality has recently increased substantially.
  • Current recruitment is below average and the fishery is working on older individuals.
RECOMMENDATIONS

Last updated on 8 August 2019

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
  • Press regional advisory bodies, national fisheries administrations and the European Commission to develop a multi-species, ecosystem-based management plan for North Sea pelagic fisheries, including a harvest control rule(s).
  • 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.
  • For stocks with high and increasing fishing mortality, poor recruitment and/or low stock status push managers to be responsive to the status of the stock and make precautionary management decisions.
  • Engage as a stakeholder in all fisheries in the MSC certification programme for this stock and support the MSC Client groups to ensure all conditions attached to the Certifications are fully addressed and, where stock depletion has occurred, fishing mortality is appropriately reduced to ensure rapid stock recovery.
Denmark
Small mesh bottom trawls

Last updated on 11 July 2019

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
  • Monitor the progress in closing out conditions placed upon the MSC certification of the fishery and if agreed timelines are met. Offer assistance in closing conditions where possible.
Norway
Small mesh bottom trawls

Last updated on 11 July 2019

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain
  • Monitor the progress in closing out conditions placed upon the MSC certification of the fishery and if agreed timelines are met. Offer assistance in closing conditions where possible.

1.STOCK STATUS

STOCK ASSESSMENT

Last updated on 29 June 2019

Since 2010, stock assessment is conducted separately for each of the sandeel management areas in the North Sea. A Seasonal age-based analytical model (SMS-effort), based on data from dredge surveys and total international fishing effort, is used for the assessment (ICES 2019). According to ICES, this combination of the new assessment model “SMS-effort” with the specific area-based approach has much improved the quality of the assessment, though a retrospective pattern of overestimating SSB and overestimating recruitment is still apparent (ICES 2019). The quality of the assessment is considered to be good (ICES 2019) and may improve further with the expansion of the survey area as proposed by ICES.

In 2014 and 2015 some misreporting of catches taken in SA 1, was erroneously reported to SA 3 (Central Eastern North Sea). The catches and fishing effort were corrected and revised based on information from VMS (ICES 2018)(ICES 2019).

SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

Last updated on 29 June 2019

Advice for this stock, like other sandeel stocks, is based on an MSY escapement approach. An Fcap is in place to ensure there is less than a 5% chance that SSB < Blim, and is used in setting quotas. Natural mortality is derived from a multi-species assessment that incorporates predation by important predator species (ICES 2018). The 2019 year saw a lowering of the advice compared to previous years (from 134,461 to 91,916 tonnes) due to reductions in recruitment seen in the stock (ICES 2019)

As mentioned above misreporting has occurred in this fishery in the recent past. As a solution ICES recommended that monitoring measures similar to those applied in the Danish fishery (i.e. one area per trip rule), should be taken to avoid similar misreporting in the future (ICES 2018)

CURRENT STATUS

Last updated on 29 June 2019

The stock is considered to be “below escapement” and experiencing “reduced reproductive capacity” in 2019. The spawning stock biomass (SSB) is estimated at around 97.6 thousand tonnes (ICES 2019). This is a large reduction in SSB from 232 thousand tonnes in 2018 as a result of poor recruitment in 2017, and the stock is below the 145 thousand tonnes escapement level. Fishing mortality in 2018 (0.63) is also larger than Fcap (0.49). Fcap is not used as a reference point, but only for determining quota values (ICES 2018)(ICES 2019).

2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

MANAGEMENT

Last updated on 29 June 2019

Since 2011 separate quotas are defined for each of the seven North Sea sandeel management areas. The EU has been using real-time monitoring for setting TACs (more information in the Scientific Advice section). For 2018, the European Commission set the TAC and quotas provisionally at zero before ICES scientific advice has been released. The EU established the final TAC value for Dogger Bank (SA 1r) in 2018 and followed the scientific (EUR-Lex 2018) advice setting the area quota at ~134,000 t. Managers have set quotas in line with scientific advice since 2017, with the exception of 2016 (ICES 2019)

Temporal closures from January 1st – March 31st and from August 1st – December 31st, apply to all management areas for towed gears with a mesh size less than 16 mm (e.g. European Commission 2017). No specific management plan is known for this fishery (ICES 2018). Also to avoid area misreporting, only one fishing area per trip is mandatory for the Danish fishery since 2015 (ICES, 2016a).

For reference points, the MSY-Escapement approach is used.  An MSY Bescapement has been defined at 145,000 tonnes (= Bpa). For the precautionary approach (PA) a lower limit threshold biological reference point, Blim, has been defined at 110,000 tonnes, corresponding to the lowest SSB at which high recruitment is observed. Bpa has been defined at 145,000 tonnes, which is the level of biomass that has <5% chance of being below Blim (ICES 2019). ICES also introduced a ceiling on Fishing mortality (Fcap). The Fcap is the maximum fishing mortality that will have a <5% chance of the stock falling below Blim in any year. The value of Fcap was defined at Fcap=0.49 for this stock in the last benchmark (ICES 2019).

COMPLIANCE

Last updated on 29 June 2019

Prior to 2010 set TACs referred to the entire North Sea area (which encompasses the zone 3a, EC waters of Division 2a and Subarea 4). Historically compliance has been strong in the North Sea sandeel fishery; with the exception of 2007 and 2010, overall landings in the North Sea have not surpassed set TACs in recent years (ICES 2019).

For the Dogger Bank area, landings have considerably surpassed the set TAC in 2012, 2014, and 2015.  Discards are considered to be negligible (ICES 2017). Catches in 2017, and preliminary catches for 2018, appear to be in-line with the scientific advice and set quotas (ICES 2019)

In the past, misreporting occurred of catches taken in SA 1, but reported to SA 3 (Central Eastern North Sea) due to which ICES reallocated a total of 44,000 tonnes in 2014 and 15,000 tonnes in 2015 from SA 3 to SA 1 during the 2017 assessment. Management measures to only allow one fishing area per trip adopted in 2015 eliminated the misreporting issue for Danish catches. However, this situation seems to also occur in other nations. As such, ICES recommends that similar management measures should be implemented across all countries (ICES 2018)(ICES 2019).

3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

BYCATCH
ETP Species

Last updated on 20 June 2018

In the North Sea ecosystem, sandeel is considered a very important prey species for a variety of predators, including fish, marine mammals and seabirds. In general, fishing on sandeel aggregations at a distance less than 100 km from seabird colonies has been found to affect some surface feeding bird species, especially kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla; IUCN, 2012: “Least Concern”) and sandwich tern (Sterna sandvicensis; IUCN, 2012: “Least Concern”) (ICES, 2010a; ICES, 2010d). There are some concerns that the industrial fishery may indirectly impact predatory fishes by depriving them of food (Engelhard et al., 2008; Cook et al., 2014). According to Daunt et al. (2008), years of bad recruitment in sandeels have led to poor breeding success in seabirds (e.g., little tern and black-legged kittiwakes) that feed mainly the 0-group cohorts. Fish and mobile marine mammals’ populations are assumed to be less vulnerable to local sandeel depletion (ICES, 2010c).

Other than trophic effects direct impacts of the fishery on ETP species is not thought to be problematic (Rice et al. 2017).

Other Species

Last updated on 20 June 2018

Sandeel catches include several Ammodytoidei species but consist largely of Ammodytes marinus. At some of the grounds in the Dogger Bank area the smooth sandeel Gymnammodytes semisquamatus can be important (ICES, 2007c). The levels of bycatch in the sandeel fishery are considered to be very low. In years with low abundance of sandeel, bycatches of sprat, herring, mackerel and whiting may occur, however in recent years, those species represented less than 1% of sandeel (Scheveningen Group, 2014). Heath et al. (2014) alerts for possible ecological effects of eliminating fishery discards.

Sandeel fishing effort on the Dogger Bank is concentrated when and where sandeels are most available and where, in turn, they are locally preyed upon by at least 10 predatory fish species (e.g. dab, whiting, lesser weever and grey gurnard), including 8 commercially important ‘human consumption’ species. Despite this, direct interactions with these important predators is considered low as a result of the gear used and the overall fishing method employed by the fleet (Rice et al. 2017). This fishery is under the landing obligation for the EU (Rice et al. 2017).

HABITAT

Last updated on 20 June 2018

Information on exact fishing location is avail bile thought the vessel monitoring system (VMS) used by the fleet. Additionally, detailed habitat maps of the normal fishing grounds are also available. However direct observational studies of the physical impacts of this gear on the seabed are not available (Rice et al. 2017).

While this fishery uses bottom trawling gear, impacts to the sea-bed are not thought to be problematic.  This is in part due to the lack of tickle chains, sweeps, or bobbins, other gear on the bottom of the net near the foot rope. Additionally, the sand eel fishery is conducted in areas of sand, which tend to be high energy environments in their natural state. As such the limited disturbance of the gear is not thought to be important when compared to natural disturbances (Rice et al. 2017).

Several coastal areas and zones of known deep-water coral communities in the North Sea have been closed to fishing, in order to protect both benthic communities/habitats and juvenile demersal fish (OSPAR, 2009).

FishSource Scores

Last updated on 30 July 2019

SELECT SCORES

MANAGEMENT QUALITY

As calculated for 2019 data.

The score is ≥ 6.

Since 2011, ICES bases the advice on the MSY approach, allowing for sufficient stock (MSY Bescapement) to remain for successful recruitment. No formal management plan is in place, but in recent years EU have used real-time monitoring for setting TACs within the fishing year, explicitly taking in consideration closing areas known to be commercially depleted.

As calculated for 2019 data.

The score is 10.0.

This measures the Set TAC as a percentage of the Advised TAC.

The Set TAC is 91.9 ('000 t). The Advised TAC is 91.9 ('000 t) .

The underlying Set TAC/Advised TAC for this index is 100%.

As calculated for 2018 data.

The score is 10.0.

This measures the Catch as a percentage of the Set TAC.

The Catch is 133 ('000 t). The Set TAC is 134 ('000 t) .

The underlying Catch/Set TAC for this index is 98.8%.

STOCK HEALTH:

As calculated for 2019 data.

The score is 5.3.

This measures the SSB as a percentage of the Blim.

The SSB is 97.6 ('000 t). The Blim is 110 ('000 t) .

The underlying SSB/Blim for this index is 88.8%.

As calculated for 2018 data.

The score is 6.9.

This measures the F as a percentage of the Fcap.

The F is 0.630 (age-averaged). The Fcap is 0.490 .

The underlying F/Fcap for this index is 129%.

ECOSYSTEM IMPACTS

Click on the score to see subscore

Click on the score to see subscore

Click on the score to see subscore

×

Bycatch Subscores

There is good information available on the bycatch of other species in the fishery (Rice et al. 2017)​.

There are few interactions with ETP species (Rice et al. 2017).

Bycatch of other non-ETP species is extremely low (Rice et al. 2017).

Different components has different justification at the fishery level. Please look at the individual fisheries using the selection drop down above.

×

Habitat Subscores

Studies of how the gear physically interacts with the sediment in the area are lacking, but similar gears have few impacts in other areas (Rice et al. 2017).

Detailed habitat maps are available for the primary fishing grounds of this fishery though quality of coverage varies by location (Rice et al. 2017).

The fishery is unlikely to have large habitat impacts given gear configuration and location of fishing activity (Rice et al. 2017).

Some measures, including closed areas and seasons, are in effect for this fishery in this area (Rice et al. 2017). Enforcement is not thought to be an obstacle.

×

Ecosystem Subscores

There are multiple ecosystem and multispecies models for this fishery. These show little impact of removals on predators (Rice et al. 2017).

There are multiple ecosystem and multispecies models and studies that define the ecosystem state in the absence of fishing, as well as the roles of forage species in this area. (Rice et al. 2017).

The fishery does not deleteriously impact the North Sea ecosystem and is not likely to in the future if current measures are adhered too (Rice et al. 2017).

A comprehensive Ecosystem Based Fishery Management Plan is not in effect. However, the assessment  information from multispecies models to determine stock status and for management advice (Rice et al. 2017).

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
  • Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) estimate for 2018 was calculated using mean weight-at-age from 2013 to 2017 and proportion mature from December 2016 (ICES 2019).
  • The Fishing mortality (F) management target here is taken as the defined reference point Fcap=0.49, the ceiling fishing mortality (upper limit).
  • Catches are represented as the ICES estimated catches for the SA1r area. Catches for 2018 are preliminary.
  • Ecosystem impact scores were not updated in 2019.  

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

DFPO and DPPO North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat sandeel, sprat and Norway pout

STATUS

MSC Certified on 17 March 2017

SCORES

  Sandeel Sprat  Pout  
Principle Trawl   Trawl     Purse seines

Trawl

Principle 1 - Target Species 82.3 84.4 81.3
Principle 2 - Ecosystem 82.3 82.3 85.0 82.3
Principle 3 - Management System 87.5

Sandeel stocks in areas 1r and 2r are suspended from 21st July 2019.

Certification Type: Silver

Sources

Credits
  1. Bergman, M.J.N., and van Santbrink, J. W. 2000. Mortality in megafaunal benthic populations caused by trawl fisheries on the Dutch continental shelf in the North Sea in 1994. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57: 1321–1331.Bergman_and_Santbrink_impact_trawl_North_Sea_IJMS_2000.pdf
  2. 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/articles/meps_oa/m346p027.pdf
  3. Cook, Aonghais S.C.P., Dadam, D., Mitchell, I., Ross-Smith, V.H., Robinson, R.A., 2014. Indicators of seabird reproductive performance demonstrate the impact of commercial fisheries on seabird populations in the North Sea.Ecological Indicators 38:1-11http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X13003981
  4. Council Regulation (EU) No 2016/72 of 22 January 2016 fixing for 2016 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, and amending Regulation (EU) 2015/104. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32016R0072&from=EN
  5. Council Regulation (EU) No 297/2013 of 27 March 2013 amending Regulations (EU) No 44/2012, (EU) No 39/2013 and (EU) No 40/2013 as regards certain fishing opportunities.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:090:0010:0047:EN:PDF
  6. Daunt, F., Wanless, S., Greenstreet, S.P.R., Jensen, H., Hamer, K.C. & Harris, M.P., 2008. The impact of the sandeel fishery closure in the northwestern North Sea on seabird food consumption, distribution and productivity. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 65: 362-381https://core.ac.uk/download/files/79/62542.pdf
  7. Deurs, M.,Jørgensen, C., Fiksen, Ø., 2015. Effects of copepod size on fish growth: a model based on data for North Sea sandeel. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 520: 235–243.http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps_oa/m520p235.pdf
  8. Eigaard, O.R., Deurs, M., Behrens, J.W., Bekkevold, D., Brander, K., Plambech, M., Plet-Hansen, K.S., Mosegaard, H., 2014. Prey or predator—expanding the food web role of sandeel Ammodytes marinus. Marine Ecology Progress Series 516:267-273 doi:10.3354/meps11064http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v516/p267-273/
  9. Engelhard, G.H., van der Kooij, J., Bell, E.D., Pinnegar, J.K., Blanchard, J.L., Mackinson, S., Righton, D.A., 2008. Fishing mortality versus natural predation on diurnally migrating sandeels Ammodytes marinus. Marine Ecology Progress Series, Vol. 369: 213–227http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps2008/369/m369p213.pdf
  10. European Commission (EC), 2011a. Council Regulation (EC) No 57/2011 of 18 January 2011, fixing for 2011 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:024:0001:0125:EN:PDF
  11. European Commission (EC), 2011b. Council Regulation (EC) No 476/2011 of 17 May 2011, amending Council Regulation (EU) No 57/2011 as regards catch limits for the fisheries on sandeel in EU waters of ICES zones IIa, IIIa and IV.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:131:0012:0013:EN:PDF
  12. European Commission (EC), 2012a. Council Regulation (EU) No 44/2012 of 17 January 2012, fixing for 2012 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and, to EU vessels, in certain non- EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreements.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:025:0055:0147:EN:PDF
  13. European Commission (EC), 2012b. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 368/2012 of 27 April 2012 amending Council Regulation (EU) No 44/2012 fixing for 2012 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and, to EU vessels, in certain non-EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreement.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:116:0017:0018:EN:PDF
  14. European Commission (EC), 2013a. Council Regulation (EU) No 40/2013 of 21 January 2013 fixing for 2013 the fishing opportunities available in EU waters and, to EU vessels, in certain non- EU waters for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks which are subject to international negotiations or agreements.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:023:0054:0153:EN:PDF
  15. Greenstreet S., Armstrong E., Mosegaard H., Jensen H., Gibb I., Fraser H., Scott B., Holland G. and Sharples J. 2006. Variation in the abundance of sandeels Ammodyes marinus off southeast Scotland: an evaluation of area-closure fisheries management and stock abundance assessment methods. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 63: 1530 - 1550.Greenstreet_et_al_ICES_J_M_Sci_2006.pdf
  16. Hiddink J.G, Kennings S., and Kaiser, M.J., 2006. Indicators of the ecological impact of bottom-trawl disturbance on seabed communities. Ecosystems, 9: 1190-1199. Hiddink_et_al._Ecosystems.pdf
  17. ICES, 2007a. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak – Combined Spring and Autumn (WGNSSK); 4 – Sandeel in IV. 66 p.04-Sandeel__WGNSSK_Sep_07_.pdf
  18. ICES, 2007b. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Book 6 – North Sea, section 6.4.24 – Sandeel in subarea IV. 12 p.san-nsea_advice07.pdf
  19. ICES, 2007c. North Sea sandeel Quality Handbook. In Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak – Combined Spring and Autumn (WGNSSK) – Annex 2 (Stock Annexes). 04-Sandeel__WGNSSK_Sep_07__-_ANNEXES.pdf
  20. ICES. 2008a. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak – Combined Spring and Autumn (WGNSSK), 7–13 May 2008 (ICES CM 008/ACOM:09).http://www.ices.dk/products/icesadvice/2008/ICES%20ADVICE%202008%20Book%206.pdf
  21. ICES. 2008b. Report of the Ad Hoc Group on Sandeel (AGSAN), 25 ‐ 30 August 2008, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen. Diane. 68 pp. http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2008/AGSAN/AGSAN08.pdf
  22. ICES, 2009a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.4.22 Sandeel in Subarea IV excluding the Shetland area.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2009/2009/san-nsea.pdf
  23. ICES, 2009b. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.4.23 Sandeel in Division IVa North of 59ºN and West of 0ºE (Shetland area).http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2009/2009/san-shet.pdf
  24. ICES, 2009c. Report of the Ad hoc group on Sandeel – II, 19-21 October 2009, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES Advisory Committee (ICES CM 2009\ACOM:51).http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2009/AGSAN/AGSAN-2%20report%202009.pdf
  25. ICES, 2009d. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.3.3.1 EC and Norway request on in-year management advice for sandeel in the North Sea http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2009/Special%20Requests/EC%20Norway%20in-year%20management%20advice%20for%20Sandeels-2009.pdf
  26. ICES, 2010a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.4.21 Sandeel in Division IIIa and Subarea IV.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2010/2010/san-34.pdf
  27. ICES, 2010b. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.3.3.1 EC request on in-year management advice for sandeel in the North Seahttp://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2010/Special%20Requests/EC%20in-year%20management%20advice%20for%20sandeel.pdf
  28. ICES, 2010c. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 5 -11 May 2010, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ICES CM 2010/ACOM:13). 1058 pp.http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2010/WGNSSK/WGNSSK%202010.pdf
  29. ICES, 2010d. Report of the Benchmark Workshop on Sandeel (WKSAN), 6–10 September 2010, Copenhagen, Denmark (ICES CM 2010/ACOM:57). 201 pp.http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2010/WKSAN/wksan_2010.pdf
  30. ICES, 2011a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.4.21 Sandeel in Division IIIa and Subarea IV.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2011/2011/san-34.pdf
  31. ICES, 2011b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK Feb. 2011); 4 – Sandeel in IV. 95 pp.http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2011/WGNSSK/Sec%2004%20Sandeel.pdf
  32. ICES, 2012a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.4.21 Sandeel in Division IIIa and Subarea IV.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2012/2012/san-34.pdf
  33. ICES, 2012b. Report of the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK), 27 April - 3 May 2012, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen. ICES CM 2012/ACOM:13. 1346 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2012/WGNSSK/WGNSSK%202012.pdf
  34. ICES, 2012c. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.3.3.1 Sandeel real-time monitoring assessment. Special request, Advice May 2012. 7 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2012/Special%20Requests/EC_Sandeel_Real_Time_Monitoring_assessment.pdf
  35. ICES, 2013a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.4.21 Sandeel in Division IIIa and Subarea IV. Advice February 2013. 33 pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2013/2013/san-34.pdf
  36. ICES, 2014a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.4.22. Sandeel in Division IIIa and Subarea IV. Advice s for 2014. 33 pphttp://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2014/2014/san_34.pdf
  37. ICES, 2015b. Report of the Herring Assessment Working Group for the Area South of 62° N. Sec. 11 Sandeel in IV and IIIa (HAWG Feb. 2015). 116pp http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2015/HAWG/13%20HAWG%20Report%20-%20Sec%2011%20Sandeel%20in%20IV.pdf
  38. ICES, 2015. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. Book 6: North Sea. 6.3.42. Sandeel (Ammodytes spp.) in Divisions IVb and IVc, SA 1 (central and south North Sea, Dogger Bank) ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort Greater North Sea Ecoregion. 8 pp http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/san-ns1.pdf
  39. ICES, 2016a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee. ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort Greater North Sea Ecoregion. 6.3.41 Sandeel (Ammodytes spp.) in Divisions 4b and 4c, SA 1 (Central and South North Sea, Dogger Bank) http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2016/2016/san-ns1.pdf
  40. ICES, 2016b. ICES Special Request Advice Greater North Sea Ecoregion. 6.2.3.1 Danish request regarding real-time monitoring for sandeel in Divisions 4b and 4c, SA 1 (Central and South North Sea, Dogger Bank).http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2016/Special_Requests/Denmark_RealTimeMonitoring.pdf
  41. IUCN, 2012. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. Downloaded on 18 February 2012.http://www.iucnredlist.org
  42. JNCC, 2014. Scottish MPA Project – Fisheries Management Guidance. Sandeels (Ammodytes marinus and A. tobianus). July 2014. 5pp http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/Sandeels_Fisheries_Management_Guidance_v2_0_July14.pdf
  43. Lancaster, J. (Ed.), McCallum, S., Lowe A.C., Taylor, E., Chapman A. & Pomfret, J.,2014. Development of detailed ecological guidance to support the application of the Scottish MPA selection guidelines in Scotland’s seas. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.491. Sandeels – supplementary documenthttp://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A1211586.pdf
  44. MFCA, 2010. Agreed Record of Fisheries Consultations between Norway and the European Union for 2011, Bergen, 4 December 2010. Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs.http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FKD/Vedlegg/Kvoteavtaler/2011/EU/Final-Agreed_record-North_Sea-2011.pdf
  45. NSRAC, 2012. Final Position Paper April 2012. Fisheries management in relation to nature conservation for the combined area of 3 national Natura 2000 sites (SACs) on the Dogger Bank. The North Sea Regional Advisory Council. April 2012. 31pphttp://nsrac.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/NSRAC-1112-7-2012-04-09-Dogger-Bank-SACs-Position-Paper-FINAL.pdf
  46. OSPAR, 2009. OSPAR assessment of the environmental impact of fishing. Publ. no. 465/2009. OSPAR Commission. 89 pp.http://qsr2010.ospar.org/media/assessments/p00465_JAMP_QSR_fisheries_assessment.pdf
  47. OSPAR, 2010. 2009/10 Status Report on the OSPAR Network of Marine Protected Areas. Publ. no. 493/2010. OSPAR Commission: Biodiversity Series. 61 pp.http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00493_Status%20report%20MPAs.pdf
  48. OSPAR Commission, 2011. OSPAR Network of Marine Protected Areas. [Assessed on 09 June 2011].http://www.ospar.org/
  49. Regjeringen, 2010. Agreed Record of Conclusions of Fisheries Consultations between the European Union and Norway for 2010, Brussels, 26 January 2010.http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FKD/Vedlegg/Kvoteavtaler/2010/EU/fiskeriavtale%20Norge%20EU.pdf
  50. Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC. Official Journal of the European Union 28.12.2013.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1380&from=EN
  51. Regulation (EU) No 43/2014 of 20 January 2014 fixing for 2014 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, to Union vessels, in certain non-Union waters . Official Journal of the European Union.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2014:024:0001:0145:EN:PDF
  52. Scheveningen Group, 2014. Joint recommendation of the Scheveningen Group Discard plan for the industrial fisheries in Kattegat, Skagerrak and the North Sea. http://www.nsrac.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Sch-Ind-Fish-NS-final-2014-07-17.pdf
References

    Comments

    This tab will disappear in 5 seconds.

    Comments on:

    Sandeels nei - Dogger Bank area

    comments powered by Disqus