Common octopus

There is concern for the biomass of common octopus in the UK, however there is no concern for fishing pressure.Route 2 scoring has been applied to this rating due to the lack of reference points for biomass. Common octopus is considered to have a high resilience to fishing pressure.Octopus are primarily landed in southern Europe, with the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris) being the main species. In the Northeast Atlantic, common octopus ranges from Dublin and Liverpool Bay to the southern British coasts and occasionally reaches the southern North Sea. This species is a significant commercial cephalopod in European waters, with high economic value. In the UK, most octopus catches, including common octopus, horned octopus, and musky octopus, occur in ICES Subarea 7, covering the Bristol Channel, English Channel, Celtic Sea, and southwest of Ireland.Commercial catches of Octopodidae primarily include the common octopus (Octopus vulgaris), horned octopus (Eledone cirrhosa), and musky octopus (Eledone moschata). Common octopus is more prevalent in southern areas and the Azores, horned octopus is more abundant in northern regions, and musky octopus inhabits southern waters from ICES area 27.9.a. Between 2000 and 2022, average annual catches (total for all species combined) were 14,080 tons, decreasing to 12,121 tons in the last three years.No recent stock assessments have been conducted for this species, and biomass estimates rely entirely on survey trends. In the Celtic Seas, the species remains in poor condition but shows signs of recovery with recent increasing trends. In the North Sea, English Channel and Bay of Biscay recent means exceed historical trends. However, in the absence of stock assessments there is concern for biomass in some areas. These trends indicate a lack of specific biomass information across different areas.UK octopus landings have recently increased in the North Sea, English Channel, and Bay of Biscay, with 17 tonnes in the North Sea and stable catches of about 100 tonnes in the Celtic Sea. English Channel landings average around 200 tonnes. However, these figures are low compared to southern European fisheries. Therefore, there is no concern for the fishing pressure at this time.The sensitivity of octopus to environmental influences (such as variations in temperature and salinity/rainfall) results in natural inter-annual variability of abundance. There appears to be little commercial interest in Horned octopus, in the Northeast Atlantic but the species economic value gives it a relatively high importance among the exploited molluscs. It is routinely discarded by Scottish boats and is among the cephalopod species most commonly discarded by Spanish boats fishing in northern waters.

There are no appropriate effective management measures in place for common octopus in UK or European waters.There is no appropriate effective management measures for common octopus fisheries in British or European waters, with no landings quotas, routine stock assessments, or minimum legal sizes in place. Most octopus are caught by small-scale fisheries, regulated regionally with varying industry involvement. Trawling is restricted by EC mesh size regulations, but these are not effective for controlling horned octopus catches. The species is marketed in two size categories, with small specimens being economically valuable and targeted during their recruitment period. Discards in Subarea 7 range from 0.1% to 28.1%. Due to limited management and inadequate data collection, and with cephalopods increasingly targeted as alternatives to overexploited finfish, future management efforts are likely necessary.In the English Channel, a 750g weight limit is set for octopus in ICES divisions 7d and 7e. However, some experts argue this limit does not align with the species' size at maturity. Regulation (EU) 2019/1241 also includes technical measures for towed gear, beam trawls, and restricted fishing areas in UK waters. The EU and UK both have fishery management measures, which can include catch limits, population targets, and gear restrictions. However, compliance in the EU and UK has been inconsistent, with ongoing challenges in implementing some regulations. The goal of reaching Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) by 2020 was missed, with less than half of UK TACs in 2024 following ICES advice. In 2024, the EU and UK reaffirmed their commitment to sustainable fisheries by aligning management with scientific advice to gradually approach MSY. However, no new target date has been set for achieving MSY across all fisheries.The Marine Conservation Society views Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) with cameras is one of the most cost-effective tools for providing reliable fisheries data and aiding informed management decisions. Fully monitored fisheries enhance collaboration, data accuracy, stock recovery, and reduce impacts on marine wildlife and habitats. However, the full potential of REM may only be achieved when it tracks fishing location and documents catch and bycatch, particularly where vulnerable species and habitats are at risk. As of January 2024, the EU is introducing a Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) mandate for EU vessels, including CCTV cameras on vessels 18m or more that pose a potential risk of non-compliance, within the next 4 years. Across the UK, different approaches to REM are being taken and legislation is expected to be in place across all 4 countries within the next few years.The Fisheries Act (2020) requires the development of Fisheries Management Plans (FMPs) (replacing EU Multi-Annual Plans) in the UK. 43 FMPs have been proposed and are at various stages of development and implementation, these should all be published by the end of 2028. FMPs have the potential to be very important tools for managing UK fisheries, although data limitations may delay them for some stocks. It is also essential the UK governments define and adopt a standardised approach or model across the four nations to a universally defined FMP design, to ensure the consistence, quality and coherence of all the proposal FMPs.The Marine Conservation Society is keen to see publicly available Fishery Management Plans for all commercially exploited stocks, especially where stocks are depleted, that include:An overview of the fishery including current stock status, spatial coverage, current fishing methods and impactsTargets for fishing pressure and biomass, and additional management when those targets are not being met, based on the best scientific evidenceTimeframes for stock recoveryImproved data collection, transparency, and accountability, supported by technologies such as Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM)Consideration of wider environmental impacts of the fishery, including habitat impacts and minimising bycatchStakeholder engagementA Channel demersal non-quota FMP was published on 14 December 2023, that incorporates both common and horned octopus. However, at the time of writing, it is too soon to know whether proposed management measures will be effective in managing the stock. For more information about this FMP and expected progress and timelines, see [https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/fisheries-management-plans#published-fmps].

Some common octopus are caught by otter trawling is likely to cause some damage to the seabed. Bycatch is moderate and may include vulnerable species.Of the total UK octopus catch, around 24% are taken by demersal otter trawl, and 75% was taken by beam trawl, with the remaining <1% by other gears (drift and fixed nets 0.27%; pots or trap 0.17%; dredge 0.09%; and gears using hooks 0.02%).Demersal otter trawls use doors to hold nets open that penetrate the seabed, resulting in the abrasion of habitat features and smothering in soft sediment areas. The ground ropes, sweeps and bridles of the trawl can have similar abrasive impact.Common octopus is a merobenthic species, found from the coast out to the outer edge of the continental shelf (200 m) and tolerates temperatures as low as 6 Celsius in the English Channel. Local density of common, as has been documented for other species of octopuses, is affected by the availability of solid material (rocks, stones, shells, anthropogenic litter, etc.) to be utilised for den construction. Demersal otter trawling can catch a number of unwanted species, including commercial species, and vulnerable species such as sharks and rays. Bycatch of non-target species can make up a high proportion of catch weight in demersal otter trawls and can take bycatch of endangered, threatened or protected species in certain circumstances.Eight species of elasmobranchs that occur in the Greater North Sea ecoregion are listed on OSPAR’s list of threatened and declining species. Some of these are rare (e.g. basking shark, common skate, starry ray, and angel shark) and seldom caught in fisheries. Marine mammals and birds are also rarely recorded in otter trawls.Otter trawls are common in the Greater North Sea and English Channel, catching various species with mesh sizes under 100 mm. These trawls impact the seabed, with the extent depending on habitat sensitivity. MPAs across Europe protect benthic features, and bottom trawling in these areas could receive a default red rating unless proven non-damaging through environmental assessments. EU regulations restrict bottom trawling below 800m, and spatial management is evolving to protect sensitive seabed habitats, though some areas remain at risk.To improve monitoring and reporting of fishing activity, the Marine Conservation Society would like to see remote electronic monitoring (REM) with cameras implemented, used and enforced. To reduce the impacts of fishing on the marine environment we would like to see a just transition to the complete removal of bottom towed gear from offshore Marine Protected Areas designated to protect the seabed. We also want to see reduction and mitigation of environmental impacts including emissions and blue carbon habitat damage.

Breuer, M. and Marti, C., 2015. Workshop on a new technical measure framework for the new common fisheries policy. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/563403/IPOL_STU(2015)563403_EN.pdf [Accessed on 06.09.2024].GOV, 2018. Minimum Conservation Reference Size (MCRS) in UK waters. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/minimum-conservation-reference-sizes-mcrs/minimum-conservation-reference-sizes-mcrs-in-uk-waters [Accessed on 06.09.2024].ICES, 2023. Working Group on Cephalopod Fisheries and Life History (WGCEPH; outputs from 2022 meeting). ICES Scientific Reports. 5:01. 163 pp. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.21976718 [Accessed on 06.09.2024].ICES, 2024. Celtic Seas Ecoregion – Ecosystem overview. ICES Advice 2024, Section 7.1. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.25713033 [Accessed on 06.09.2024].ICES, 2024. Ecosystem Overviews – Greater North Sea ecoregion. ICES Advice 2024. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.25714239 [Accessed on 06.09.2024].ICES, 2024. Bay of Biscay and the Iberian Coast ecoregion – Ecosystem overview. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2024. ICES Advice 2024, Section 6.1, Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.27899889 [Accessed on 06.09.2024].Jereb, P., Allcock, L., Lefkaditou, E., Piatkowski, U., Hastie, L. and Pierce, G., 2015. Cephalopod biology and fisheries in Europe: II. Species Accounts. ICES Cooperative Research Report. Available at: http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Cooperative%20Research%20Report%20(CRR)/CRR325.pdf [Accessed on 06.09.2024].Otero, J., González, A., Guerra, A., Regueira, M. and Garci, M., 2004. Reproductive biology of Octopus vulgaris in an upwelling area (NE Atlantic). ICESCM 2004/CC:01. Available at: http://ices.dk/sites/pub/CM%20Doccuments/2004/CC/CC0104.pdf [Accessed on 06.09.2024].Otero, J., González, A., Sieiro, M. and Guerra, A., 2013. Reproductive cycle of Octopus vulgaris in a wind-driven upwelling area (Galicia, NE Atlantic). Available at: http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/53832/3/Reproductive_cycle_octopus.pdf [Accessed on 06.09.2024].Pita, C., Matos, F., Roumbedakis, K., Fonseca, T., Villasante, S., Pita, P., Bellido, J.M., Gonzalez, A.F., García Tasende, M., Lefkaditou, E., Adamidou, A., Cuccu, D., Belcari, P. and Pierce, G.J., 2020. Octopus fisheries in Europe: socioeconomic importance and management. Fishers Research. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/345908438_Octopus_fisheries_in_Europe_socioeconomic_importance_and_management [Accessed on 06.09.2024].Regulation (EU) 2019/1241 of the European Parliament and of the Council, 2019. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2019/1241 [Accessed on 06.09.2024].Saucer, W. et al., 2019. World Octopus Fisheries. Reviews in Fisheries Science and Aquaculture. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23308249.2019.1680603?journalCode=brfs21 [Accessed on 06.09.2024].SeaLifeBase, 2020. Octopus vulgaris. Available at: https://www.sealifebase.se/summary/Octopus-vulgaris.html [Accessed on 06.09.2024].