Pollack

Pollack in the North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat is a very data limited stock. There is no information about biomass, but fishing pressure does not seem to be of concern.Route 2 scoring has been applied to this rating owing to the lack of reference points for fishing pressure and biomass. Pollack is considered to have a medium resilience to fishing pressure.Stock assessments are carried out by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). The most recent assessment was published in 2024 using data from 2021 – 2023. Assessments are updated every three years; the next one is expected in 2027.There is no information about the size of the pollack stock in this area, therefore there is concern for biomass due to a lack of information.Pollack is not targeted by any major fisheries, but it is caught as bycatch and by recreational fishers. Recreational catches could be substantial, but there's no data on this. Known landings in the commercial fisheries have been stable at 1,500-3,000 tonnes since 1998. As there is no targeted fishery, and landings are stable, fishing pressure does not appear to be of concern.ICES advises that when the precautionary approach is applied, catches in the years 2025–2027 should be no more than 1,462 tonnes. This is based on the previous catch advice from 2022- 2024 (1,828t), with a 20% reduction. This reduction is applied for data limited stocks every three years. Information available for the Skagerrak and Kattegat suggests that this stock declined substantially from 1950 until around 2000. More recently, during routine surveys in areas 3 and 4, pollack catches have been irregular, with no clear pattern. The surveys do not cover the full geographic distribution of the species. However, if the stock increases, it is expected that present trawl surveys would be able to detect the trend.

Pollack in the North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat have few appropriate management measures in place. The stock is mainly caught as bycatch, and so there is no targeted fishery that needs management measures. However, the stock is very data limited and there are no catch limits or protections in place to ensure it is not overexploited.North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat pollack is not targeted by any fisheries. Instead, it is almost entirely caught as bycatch, and there are also some catches by recreational fishers. Discards were only reported by bottom trawl fleets and beam trawl fleets from Belgium, UK Scotland and Sweden.Preliminary landings for 2023 (2,072 tonnes) were 12 % above scientific advice (1,828 tonnes).The only management measure is a minimum landing size of 30cm for UK waters and EU member states. Female pollack are thought to mature at 35cm or more, so this does allow for juveniles to be caught. However, most juvenile pollack stay in coastal areas where they are less likely to be caught. The majority of fish caught in western Norwegian fjords had a size range of 60–80 cm, compared to 50–70 cm in the SkagerrakThere is no management plan in place, no assessments have been carried out for this pollack stock.There is no joint management between the EU, UK and Norway although it is caught by all three. Most catches happen in March and April, which could be associated with spawning aggregations. Overexploitation of pollack is a risk because there are no catch limits, there is no information about what catch level can be sustained by the population, and there is no knowledge about whether the stock is in a healthy state.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 Landing Obligation (LO), an EU law retained by the UK post-Brexit, requires all quota fish to be landed, even if unwanted (over-quota or below minimum size). It aims to encourage more selective fishing methods, reduce bycatch, and improve catch reporting. However, compliance is poor, and accurate discard levels are hard to quantify with current monitoring programmes. The UK is in the process of replacing the LO with country-specific Catching Policies. 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.

Some pollack is caught by gillnetting. Gill net fisheries can be very selective with regards to targeted fish species. However, they can encounter bycatch of vulnerable species including porpoise, sharks and seabirds.In 2023, 23% of pollack landings in North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat were by gillnetting, and 64% of landing by otter trawl.Fixed gillnets consist of a single vertical netting wall hanging between a float line and a weighted ground line which have little to no impact on the habitat, and very low levels of disturbance to the seabed. Gillnets and fixed nets can be very size selective, but can bycatch species such as sharks, cetaceans and other marine mammals. They are recognised as the highest risk type of fishery for cetaceans globally, especially for small cetaceans in coastal areas. In the UK, the species most affected is the harbour porpoise, but a number of other species have been reported, and it should be assumed that most cetaceans are vulnerable to gill net bycatch. Gillnets pose serious risk to harbour porpoise wherever they are used around the UK and other cetaceans where their distribution overlaps with gill net use.The IUCN lists harbour porpoise as being of least concern globally, but vulnerable in Europe. They are also classified as a priority species under the UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework and are protected under the European Union (EU) Habitats Directive and Habitats Regulations as transposed into UK law, under which there are explicit bycatch requirements. To comply with the Habitats Directive, the UK has recently designated five Special Areas for Conservation for harbour porpoises, however, there is currently no management in place for these. In the North Sea, however, it is not through that gillnets are a threat to the population.Increasing evidence over the last decade has shown that seabirds are suffering mortality from bycatch, particularly in gillnets. Bycatch of seabirds in gillnet fisheries is estimated to kill ~400,000 birds globally, each year. Diving seabirds are generally more vulnerable than surface feeding seabirds. If lost, gillnets can continue to fish for several weeks before becoming tangled and bundled up, a phenomenon known as ghost fishing. Fishing gears represent an investment by fishermen, thus there are incentives to avoid losing or damaging gear.Because of gillnets' durability (they are made of nylon), if lost, they can continue to fish for several weeks before becoming tangled and bundled up, a phenomenon known as 'ghost fishing'. However, static nets, as with all gear, represent an investment by fishermen, and therefore there are incentives to avoid losing or damaging gear.

ASCOBANS, 2009. Conservation Plan for Harbour Porpoises in the North Sea as adopted at the 6th Meeting of the Parties to ASCOBANS, Bonn, Germany. 16 - 18 September 2009. Available at https://www.ascobans.org/sites/default/files/document/ASCOBANS_NorthSeaPlan_MOP6.pdf [Accessed on 19.07.2024].Bradbury, G., Shackshaft, M., Scott-Hayward, L., Rexstad, E., Miller, D., and Edwards, D., 2017. Risk assessment of seabird bycatch in UK waters. Produced by Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (Consulting) Ltd for Defra project MB0126. Available at: http://sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=14620_MB0126RiskassessmentofseabirdbycatchinUKwaters_updated21Oct2019.pdf [Accessed on 19.07.2024].Calderan, S. and Leaper, R., 2019. Review of harbour porpoise bycatch in UK waters and recommendations for management. January 2019, WWF. Available at https://www.wwf.org.uk/sites/default/files/2019-04/Review_of_harbour_porpoise_in_UK_waters_2019.pdf [Accessed on 19.07.2024].Carlén, I., Nunny, L. and Simmonds, M. P. 2021. Out of Sight, Out of Mind: How Conservation Is Failing European Porpoises. Frontiers in Marine Science. Available at https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2021.617478/fullFroese R. and Pauly D. (Editors), 2024. Pollachius pollachius, Pollack. Available at: https://fishbase.mnhn.fr/summary/Pollachius-pollachius.html [Accessed on 19.07.2024].Glemarec, G., Kindt-Larse, L., Scherffenberg Lundgaard, L. and Larsen, F. 2020. Assessing seabird bycatch in gillnet fisheries using electronic monitoring. Biological Conservation. 243. 108461. Available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108461ICES, 2024a. Pollack (Pollachius pollachius) in Subarea 4 and Division 3.a (North Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat). In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2024. ICES Advice 2024, pol.27.3a4. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.25019474 [Accessed on 19.07.2024].ICES, 2024b. Greater North Sea ecoregion – Ecosystem overview. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2024. ICES Advice 2024, Section 7.1, Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.25714239 [Accessed 19.07.2024].ICES, 2023. Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak (WGNSSK). ICES Scientific Reports. 5:39. 1547 pp. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.22643143 [Accessed on 19.07.2024].ICES, 2018. ICES Advice: Bycatch of small cetaceans and other marine animals - review of national reports under Council Regulation (EC) No. 812/2004 and other information. Published 11 September 2018. Available at https://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Advice/2018/2018/byc.eu.pdf [Accessed on 19.07.2024].Leeney, R. H., Amies, R., Broderick, A.C., Witt, M. J., Loveridge, J., Doyle, J. and Godley, B. J. 2008. Spatio-temporal analysis of cetacean strandings and bycatch in a UK fisheries hotspot. Biodiversity and Conservation. 17, 2323. Available at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10531-008-9377-5#citeasSeafish, 2024. Gill nets. Available at https://www.seafish.org/responsible-sourcing/fishing-gear-database/gear/gill-nets/ [Accessed on 19.07.2024].UK Government, 2018. Minimum Conservation Reference Sizes (MCRS) in UK waters, Updated 12 November 2018. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/minimum-conservation-reference-sizes-mcrs/minimum-conservation-reference-sizes-mcrs-in-uk-waters [Accessed 19.07.2024].