Last updated on 19 September 2016

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

IDENTIFICATION

SCIENTIFIC NAME(s)

Sebastes norvegicus

SPECIES NAME(s)

Golden redfish

There are  two possible genetic distinct groups, one located on the east and west coasts of Greenland, and the other from the Flemish Cap to the south of Iceland and the coast of Norway (Pampoulie et al. 2009). However, the same authors consider that further genetic analysis are required to understand golden redfish stock structure in North Atlantic. Two units are therefore assumed in the NE Atlantic region for assessment and management purposes: Iceland and Faroes grounds, West of Scotland, North of Azores, East of Greenland including Subareas V, VI, XII, and XIV (ICES, 2014a) and Barents Sea and Norwegian Sea covering Subareas I,II (ICES, 2014b).

Sebastes marinus was replaced by S. norvegicus as the taxonomic name to identify golden redfish, according to ICES (2015a).


ANALYSIS

Strengths
  • An analytical stock assessment is performed but is only based on surveys in Division Va.
  • The stock biomass index is close to the precautionary reference point and recruitment appears to be improving.
Weaknesses
  • There is no formal management agreement and advised catches are consistently exceeded despite Sebastes marinus’ vulnerability to overexploitation.
Options
  • A management plan should be adopted so that TACs are set in line with ICES advice.
  • Separate TACs should be set for the two demersal redfish species.
  • Further measures to protect juvenile redfish are needed in the Greenland fishery.
  • Specific effects on the habitat and vulnerable species should be determined.

FISHSOURCE SCORES

Management Quality:

Management Strategy:

< 6

Managers Compliance:

10

Fishers Compliance:

10

Stock Health:

Current
Health:

9.9

Future Health:

≥ 8


RECOMMENDATIONS

CATCHERS & REGULATORS

1. Work actively to address and close out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery in the agreed timeframe.
2. Report achievements publicly to share progress with buyers.

1. Start a fishery improvement project to address sustainability issues in this fishery. For advice on starting a FIP, see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs at http://www.sustainablefish.org/publications/2014/04/30/the-seafood-industry-guide-to-fips.
2. Communicate to fishery managers that there are sustainability issues in this fishery that may be affecting the sale of products, and request that they comprehensively evaluate and address such issues.

RETAILERS & SUPPLY CHAIN

1. Monitor the progress in closing out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery and if agreed timelines are met.
2. Express your support to help meet conditions that may be at a government/regulatory level (where applicable). Please contact the relevant SFP Sector Group or Supplier Roundtable for more specific information.

1. Encourage your supply chain to start a fishery improvement project. For advice on starting a FIP see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs at http://www.sustainablefish.org/publications/2014/04/30/the-seafood-industry-guide-to-fips.
2. Work with other suppliers and buyers on a pre-competitive basis to start a supplier roundtable to review improvement needs in this and other similar fisheries, catalyze fishery improvement projects, and monitor progress in improvement efforts.


FIPS

No related FIPs

CERTIFICATIONS

  • ISF Iceland golden redfish:

    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
Iceland, Faroes and E Greenland Iceland Iceland Bottom trawls
Danish seines
Gillnets and entangling nets
Handlines hand operated
Longlines
Twin bottom otter trawls

Analysis

OVERVIEW

Last updated on 24 March 2010

Strengths
  • An analytical stock assessment is performed but is only based on surveys in Division Va.
  • The stock biomass index is close to the precautionary reference point and recruitment appears to be improving.
Weaknesses
  • There is no formal management agreement and advised catches are consistently exceeded despite Sebastes marinus’ vulnerability to overexploitation.
Options
  • A management plan should be adopted so that TACs are set in line with ICES advice.
  • Separate TACs should be set for the two demersal redfish species.
  • Further measures to protect juvenile redfish are needed in the Greenland fishery.
  • Specific effects on the habitat and vulnerable species should be determined.
RECOMMENDATIONS

Last updated on 28 June 2016

Improvement Recommendations to Catchers & Regulators

1. Work actively to address and close out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery in the agreed timeframe.
2. Report achievements publicly to share progress with buyers.

1. Start a fishery improvement project to address sustainability issues in this fishery. For advice on starting a FIP, see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs at http://www.sustainablefish.org/publications/2014/04/30/the-seafood-industry-guide-to-fips.
2. Communicate to fishery managers that there are sustainability issues in this fishery that may be affecting the sale of products, and request that they comprehensively evaluate and address such issues.

Recommendations to Retailers & Supply Chain

1. Monitor the progress in closing out conditions placed upon the certification of the fishery and if agreed timelines are met.
2. Express your support to help meet conditions that may be at a government/regulatory level (where applicable). Please contact the relevant SFP Sector Group or Supplier Roundtable for more specific information.

1. Encourage your supply chain to start a fishery improvement project. For advice on starting a FIP see SFP’s Seafood Industry Guide to FIPs at http://www.sustainablefish.org/publications/2014/04/30/the-seafood-industry-guide-to-fips.
2. Work with other suppliers and buyers on a pre-competitive basis to start a supplier roundtable to review improvement needs in this and other similar fisheries, catalyze fishery improvement projects, and monitor progress in improvement efforts.

1.STOCK STATUS

STOCK ASSESSMENT

Last updated on 24 March 2010

Icelandic (Division Va), German (in Subarea XIV) and Faroese (Division Vb) surveys are conducted but only Icelandic fishery independent data is used in the assessment and forecast. Both the survey index series and catch data from Va are used in an analytical GADGET model to provide the projections on which advice is based (ICES, 2009a).

Although 90% of the catches have been from Division Va since 1985, this approach may lead to a bias in the assessment (ICES, 2009a). Furthermore the survey index indicates a large measurement error in some years due to few tows accounting for a large part of catches and reflected in large year-to-year changes (ICES, 2009b). Recruitment has been underestimated recently and could indicate recruitment from other areas. Subarea VI is also part of the management area but no landings from the area were reported in 2006 and 2007 and just 64 t in 2008 (ICES, 2009b). Commercial catches of both species of demersal redfish (S. marinus and S. mentella) are reported together and subsequently split according to logbooks and samples from the landings (ICES, 2008a).

SCIENTIFIC ADVICE

Last updated on 24 March 2010

ICES advises that catches be kept below 30,000 t in in 2010, the limit expected to keep the fishable stock above Upa in the medium term (ICES, 2009a). Management decisions should consider that as a species with slow growth and late maturation, S. marinus is vulnerable to overexploitation (ICES, 2009a). ICES also advises that separate TACs or effort limits should be set for Sebastes marinus and S. mentella to allow separate management of the fisheries (ICES, 2009a).

Reference Points

Last updated on 24 Mar 2010

Upon the advice of ICES, an index derived from the Icelandic spring groundfish survey is used to assess the relative state of the stock. A relative index is used as the time series is short compared to the lifespan of the species (ICES, 2008a). U represents the fishable biomass but is employed as a proxy for the spawning stock biomass (SSB). The precautionary value, Upa, is defined as 0.6*Umax, which is the fishable biomass associated with the most recent strong year class (ICES, 2009a) and Ulim is defined as 0.2*Umax.

 TypeValue
PrecautionaryUlim55
approachUpa155
 FlimUndefined
 FpaUndefined
TargetsUyUndefined
CURRENT STATUS

Last updated on 24 March 2010

The stock is at increased risk of having reduced reproductive capacity, according to the most recent indicator of spawning stock biomass (ICES, 2009a). The survey index is close to Upa in Icelandic waters (Division Va) , where 98% of the catch is currently taken, and indices of recruits and fishable fish are increasing off East Greenland (Subarea XIV; ICES, 2009a). Faroese abundance (Division Vb) is low but has been stable since 2001 (ICES, 2009a).

Landings in 2008 were of around 45,000 t, 5,000 t more than in 2007 (ICES, 2009b). The catch is currently dominated by two strong year classes – 1985 and 1990 – but there are indications of improving new year classes in areas Va and XIV and the fishable stock is expected to remain stable in the short term (five years) although the total biomass is expected to decrease (ICES, 2009b).

Trends

Last updated on 24 Mar 2010

Total landings peaked in 1982 at 130,000 t then decreased to 37,000 t in 1996, since when they have remained approximately stable. The Icelandic groundfish survey index decreased from a fishable biomass of 286,000 t in 1987 to 92,000 t in 1995. The index has increased since then due to improved recruitment (ICES, 2009b) and presently appears to be slightly below Upa. Faroese survey indices remain at a low level. Greenlandic survey trends show the recovery of a severely depleted fishery in the 1990s to a record high biomass in 2007, followed by a lower high value in 2008 (ICES, 2009b).

2.MANAGEMENT QUALITY

MANAGEMENT

Last updated on 24 March 2010

No formal management agreement has been reached by the three coastal states: the Faroe Islands, Greenland and Iceland and, as such, there are no explicit management objectives in place (ICES, 2009a). Iceland sets a joint TAC for both demersal redfish (S. marinus and S. mentella) on the shelf of Division Va (ICES, 2009a). The Greenland fishery is also TAC regulated, with a joint TAC similarly set (ICES, 2009a), and the Faroes limit fishing effort through the use of individual transferable quotas (ICES, 2009b).

Icelandic management measures also include a temporary area closure if over 20% of landed redfish are below 33 cm and a closed area west and southwest of the island to protect juveniles (ICES, 2009b).Other measures to protect juvenile redfish include the mandatory use of sorting grids with 22 mm bar spacing in the Icelandic shrimp fishery since the 1980s, to reduce bycatch of juveniles of several species including redfish, and the introduction of the same sorting grid in the offshore shrimp fishery of Greenland in October 2000 (ICES, 2008a). Fishing on the Faroe Bank has been closed to all gears since the start of 2009 due to decline in cod abundance (ICES, 2009b).

Recovery Plans

Last updated on 24 Mar 2010

No formal recovery plans are in place. ICES advised a catch reduction to 30,000 t in 2009 and maintained that advice for 2010 (ICES, 2009b).

COMPLIANCE

Last updated on 24 March 2010

With the exception of 2004, ICES’ advised catches have consistently been exceeded in the past 15 years, as a result of the joint quotas issued for golden redfish and demersal S. mentella, which impedes direct management. Discarding of redfish is not thought to be an issue, due to closures of important nursery grounds and the introduction of sorting grids in the shrimp fishery (ICES, 2009b).

3.ENVIRONMENT AND BIODIVERSITY

BYCATCH
ETP Species

Last updated on 24 March 2010

Overwintering seabirds are an important part of the west Greenland ecosystem. Long-lines are the main gear implicated in seabird bycatch although golden redfish is also bycatch in this gear and not a target species (ICES, 2008a).

Marine mammal species diversity is broad, reflecting the region’s Atlantic and Arctic proximities (ICES, 2008c). Of these, hooded seals and sperm whales are considered by IUCN’s Red List to be vulnerable and fin whales and sei whales to be endangered (IUCN, 2010), although other reports consider fin whales, which are commercially taken by Iceland, to be increasing in the East Greenland-Iceland area for the past 20 years and to be close to “pre-exploitation abundance” (ICES, 2008c; NAMMCO, 2003). Both belugas and narwhals, which occur in the more northerly parts of west Greenland, are considered to be ‘near threatened’. Additionally killer whales, long-finned pilot whales, northern bottlenose whales and walruses are present but their stock status are unknown (IUCN, 2010). Most mammal bycatch appears to occur in gillnets (Read et al., 2006) but this gear is similarly not used to target redfish but lands it as bycatch (ICES, 2008a).

Several species of sharks and skates are caught in the Icelandic fisheries, but records of catches are incomplete, and the status of these species is not known (ICES, 2009b). The trunkback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), a Red List critically endangered species, has been reported in Icelandic waters but there are no record of fishing bycatch (IMFA, undated 1).

Other Species

Last updated on 24 March 2010

Cod and redfish have historically been taken together in Subarea XIV as they inhabit the same areas and depths and the redfish fishery may therefore affect cod in areas such as Greenland waters where it is advised that there be no cod catch (ICES, 2009a). Measures to reduce effort on cod should be considered in the redfish fishery, including a ptential closure of the redfish fishery north of 63º in Greenland waters to accompany the directed cod trawling moratorium in the same area (ICES, 2009b).

HABITAT

Last updated on 24 March 2010

The S. marinus nursery grounds are located in Icelandic and Greenlandic waters, with none yet found off the Faroe Islands (ICES, 2009b) and measures such as the mandatory use of sorting grids in the shrimp fishery to prevent bycatch of juvenile redfish should be kept in place around Greenland, particularly as the stock appears to be increasing in this area (ICES, 2008b). The Icelandic nursery grounds are found mainly to the west and north, at depths between 50 and 350 m, from where the juveniles migrate along the north coast to the main distribution area off the west coast, further to the southeast and east to the Faroes (ICES, 2008a).

Iceland may impose a temporary closure of small areas if over 20% of landed redfish are below 33 cm and a large area west and southwest of the island is closed to fishing to protect juvenile golden redfish (ICES, 2009b).

Large areas of Lophelia pertusa corals exist around Iceland: on the Reykjanes Ridge and off southeast Iceland, with numerous other, smaller areas known; gorgorian corals are also present but uncommon on the shelf (<500 m), being generally found in deeper waters (ICES, 2008a). Known coral distribution areas are closed to fishing with demersal gear (IMFA, undated 2). Further information on Icelandic benthic fauna and effects of fisheries is to be collected by the BIOICE programme. L. pertusa areas of the Faroese shelf have been reduced due to trawling and three areas have been closed to that gear since 2004 (ICES, 2008d).

A no-trawl zone is defined at less than 200 m depth on the Faroe Bank (ICES, 2008a).

Marine Reserves

Last updated on 24 Mar 2010

Iceland operates a number of area closures: a quick closure system prohibits fishing for two weeks if juveniles exceed a set percentage of catches (in the case of redfish, over 20% of fish under 33 cm); temporary or permanent closures protect juveniles including a large area south-west of Iceland protecting juvenile redfish; and closures of spawning grounds of cod, plaice and wolfish are also enforced (ICES, 2009b). The Faroe Islands closed fishing on the Bank in 2009 due to the decline of Faroe Bank cod (ICES, 2009b). Eight Marine Protected Areas have been designated around Iceland (Wood, 2007), of which it is known that dragged fishing gear is forbidden in Surtsey Nature Reserve, traditional fishing practices are permitted in Hornstrandir and Búdahraun Nature Reserves and no fishing restrictions operate in Breiðafjörður Conservation Area (EAI, 2004).

Greenland National Park covers a broad marine portion (111,000 km2) but regulations covering fishing are not known (Wood, 2007). On the Faroe Plateau, spawning grounds are closed and large areas are permanently or temporarily closed to trawling (ICES, 2008d).

FishSource Scores

Last updated on 20 January 2017

SELECT SCORES

MANAGEMENT QUALITY

As calculated for 2011 data.

The score is < 6.

There are no specific management objectives and a formal agreement among the three coastal states on the management of this species is lacking (ICES, 2011a).

As calculated for 2011 data.

The score is 10.0.

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

The Set TAC is 30.0 ('000 t). The Advised TAC is 30.0 ('000 t) .

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

As calculated for 2010 data.

The score is 10.0.

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

The Catch is 38.7 ('000 t). The Set TAC is 56.0 ('000 t) .

The underlying Catch/Set TAC for this index is 69.1%.

STOCK HEALTH:

As calculated for 2011 data.

The score is 9.9.

This measures the U as a percentage of the Upa.

The U is 227 ('000 t). The Upa is 155 ('000 t) .

The underlying U/Upa for this index is 146%.

As calculated for 2011 data.

The score is ≥ 8.

Exploratory assessment results indicates that F is close to 0.15, a proxy of FMSY, but Ftrp is not defined (ICES, 2011a).

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) Advised catches in 2001 are for Va only. 
2) Set TACs are Iceland only up to 2006 and Iceland and Greenland in 2007, 2008 and 2010, and are for S. mentella and S. marinus combined.
3) The TAC for 1991 was for year ending 31 August.
4) Spawning stock biomass is not determined but a survey index is used to evaluate fishable biomass which has been used as a proxy for SSB to determine the scores. This series and the fishing mortality (ages 15-25) series are only for subarea Va, where the majority of catches is taken. As no fishing mortality reference points are defined by managers, the precaution of the management strategy and the future health of the fish stock have been scored qualitatively.
5) Only for 2011 has the TAC been set in line with the advised level.

6) No reference points are defined for fishing mortality but only a proxy for FMSY.

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

ISF Iceland golden redfish

STATUS

MSC Certified on 9 October 2014

SCORES

Principle Level Scores:

Principle Score
Principle 1 – Target Species  84.4
Principle 2 - Ecosystem - Bottom Trawl 85.3
Principle 2 - Ecosystem - Danish Seine 87.7
Principle 2 - Ecosystem - Longline 84.7
Principle 2 - Ecosystem - Handline 87.7
Principle 2 - Ecosystem - Gillnet 85.0
Principle 2 - Ecosystem - Nephrops trawl 86.0
Principle 3 – Management System 93.6

Certification Type: Bronze

Sources

Credits

EAI, 2004. National Parks: Protected areas. The Environmental Agency of Iceland.http://english.ust.is/National-Parks/Protectedareas/

ICES, 2008a. Report of the North-Western Working Group (NWWG), 21-29 April 2008, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ICES CM 2008/ACOM:03).http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2008/NWWG/NWWG08.pdf

ICES, 2008b. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, Book 2: Iceland and East Greenland. 2.4.7 Sebastes marinus in ICES Divisions Va, Vb, VI, and XIV. http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2008/2008/smr-5614.pdf

ICES, 2008c. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, Book 2: Iceland and East Greenland. 2.1 Ecosystem Overview.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2008/2008/2.1-2.2%20Greenland%20and%20Iceland%20ecosystem%20overview.pdf

ICES, 2008d. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, Book 4: Faroe Plateau Ecosystem. 4.1 Ecosystem components.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2008/2008/4.1-4.2%20Faroe%20plateau%20ecosystem%20overview.pdf

ICES, 2009a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Book 2: Iceland and East Greenland. 2.4.7 Golden redfish (Sebastes marinus) in ICES Divisions Va, Vb, VI, and XIV. http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2009/2009/smr-5614.pdf

ICES, 2009b. Report of the North-Western Working Group (NWWG), 29 April-5 May 2009, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen (ICES CM 2009\ACOM:04).http://www.ices.dk/reports/ACOM/2009/NWWG/NWWG09.pdf

ICES, 2011a. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, Book 2: The Iceland and East Greenland 2.4.7 Ecoregion: Iceland and East Greenland. Stock: Golden redfish (Sebastes marinus) in Subareas V, VI, XII, and XIV. Advice summary for 2012, 7 pp.http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/report/2011/2011/smr-5614.pdf

ICES, 2014a. Report of the North-Western Working Group (NWWG), 24 April-1 May 2014, ICES HQ, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2014/ACOM:07.902 pp.http://ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2014/NWWG/01%20NWWG%20Report%202014.pdf

ICES, 2014b. Report of the Arctic Fisheries Working Group (AFWG), 2014 ,Lisbon, Portugal. ICES CM 2014/ACOM:05. 656 pp.http://ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2014/AFWG/01%20AFWG%20-%20Report%20of%20the%20Arctic%20Fisheries%20Working%20Group.pdf

ICES, 2015a. ICES Advice 2015, Book 2: 2.3.3 Introduction to the redfish (Sebastes spp.) complex in ICES Subareas V, VI, XII and XIV (Iceland and Faroes grounds, north of Azores, and east of Greenland)ICES Advice on fishing opportunities, catch and effort Iceland Sea and Oceanic Northeast Atlantic Ecoregions, 14pp.http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2015/2015/smn-intro.pdf

IMFA, undated 1. Icelandic Fisheries. Marine Mammals. Information Centre of the Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculturehttp://www.fisheries.is/the-main-species/mammals-and-birds/

IMFA, undated 2. Management of the Icelandic Redfish Fisheries. http://www.fisheries.is/management/government-policy/responsible-fisheries/redfish-fisheries/

IUCN, 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.1 [Downloaded on 24 March 2010].http://www.iucnredlist.org/

NAMMCO, 2003. Study of Marine Mammals in the North Atlantic: the Fin Whale.http://www.nammco.no/webcronize/images/Nammco/651.pdf

Pampoulie, C., Gíslason, D., and Daníelsdóttir, A. K. 2009. A “seascape genetic” snapshot of Sebastes marinus calls for further investigation across the North Atlantic. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 2219–2222http://www.hafro.is/Bokasafn/Greinar/ices_j_mar_sci_66-2219.pdf

Read AJ, Drinker P, Northridge S, 2006. Bycatch of Marine Mammals in U.S. and Global Fisheries. Conservation Biology 20 (1): 163-169.http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118564093/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

Vottunarstofan Tún, 2014. ISF Iceland Golden Redfish Fishery - Public Certification Report. October 2014. 588pphttp://www.msc.org/track-a-fishery/fisheries-in-the-program/certified/north-east-atlantic/isf-iceland-golden-redfish/assessment-downloads-folder/20141008_PCR_v2_RED404.pdf

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:

    Golden redfish - Iceland, Faroes and E Greenland

    comments powered by Disqus