Pollack

Pollack in the Celtic Seas and English Channel are overfished however there is no subject to overfishing.Landings of pollack in this area have steadily declined from over 8,000 tonnes in the 1980s to 2,144t in 2024. Pollack is caught by both commercial and recreational fishers, but there is no data on recreational catches. They could be equal to or higher than commercial catches.Stock assessments are carried out by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) the most recent assessment was published in 2025 using data up to 2025. The next assessment is expected in 2026.The assessment shows that biomass has declined steadily. It is estimated to have been above the level associated with Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) in the 1980s, although with high uncertainty. In 2025, SSB was 13,357t increasing slightly from the previous year, this is below MSY Btrigger (17,912t) and Bpa (15,401t) but is above Blim (12,890t). Therefore this stock is at an increased risk of deletion.Estimated fishing pressure has been above MSY since the 1980s. In 2024, it was 0.165, which is below FMSY (0.315). Therefore, there is no concern for fishing pressure.ICES advises that when the MSY approach is applied, there should beno more than 3,310 tonnes caught in 2026. The increase from zero catch advice is due to a change in assessment method and the new reference points following the 2025 benchmark. This is projected to cause biomass to decrease by 4.5% in 2027.

Management measures have not been following scientific advice. There is no precautionary recovery plan with targets or timelines to recover the stock.Commercial catches of pollack in the English Channel and Celtic Seas are mainly made by the UK, France, and Ireland. The EU has a Multiannual Plan (MAP) for its fleets, but the UK is not part of it. Instead, catch limits are agreed separately during negotiations between the UK and EU.Most catches (98%) are in area 7, which covers the Irish Sea, southwest UK and Ireland, and English Channel. A little is caught in area 6, which is the west of Scotland.Catch limits, known as Total Allowable Catches (TACs), are the main management measure. From 2019-2023, the advised maximum commercial catch was 3,360 tonnes. TACs averaged 9,850t, which is 293% of the advice. In 2024 and 2025 there was zero catch advice. However, TACs and the catch in 2024 (2,144t) were above this. Management is therefore not following the scientific advice and has not been controlling the fishery.A substantial amount is also caught by recreational fishing, but there are no figures for how much. It could be equal to or higher than commercial landings. As a result, total removals by fishing could have been above the recommended limits. There are no management measures for this sector.Stock assessments prior to 2023 were data limited, and it was unclear whether the declining trend in landings indicated a declining population. However, the management approach has not been precautionary, and monitoring of total removals has been inadequate. As a result, this stock is now heavily depleted and ICES recommended zero catch in 2024 and 2025.Discards are negligible (less than 1% of the commercial catch), likely because there are effectively no limits on how much can be landed. Pollack are mainly targeted during the first quarter of the year, which coincides with spawning. There is a minimum landing size of 30cm. Female pollack are thought to mature at 35cm or more, so this does not protect juveniles. 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. 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 impacts Targets for fishing pressure and biomass, and additional management when those targets are not being met, based on the best scientific evidence Timeframes for stock recovery Improved 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 bycatch Stakeholder engagement For more information about this fishery in Cornwall, see: https://www.cornwallgoodseafoodguide.org.uk/fish-guide/pollack.php

Some pollack in this area is caught by gillnets. Gillnets in this area can encounter bycatch of non-target fish, mammals and birds. This includes the harbour porpoise, which is vulnerable in Europe.Some catches of pollack in the English Channel and Celtic Seas are by gillnet and trammel net, responsible for around 34% of the total. Other catches are by bottom trawlers (around 29%), and set lines (37%). Almost all of it is caught in area 7, which covers the Irish Sea, southwest UK and Ireland, and English Channel.Gillnets and fixed nets can be very size selective, but can bycatch species such as sharks, cetaceans and other marine mammals. In particular, there is concern about bycatch of harbour porpoise. The IUCN lists harbour porpoise as being of least concern globally, but vulnerable in Europe. OSPAR has included the species on its List of Threatened and / or Declining Species and Habitats for the Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas, owing to evidence of a decline in populations, their sensitivity and the threat of incidental capture and drowning in fishing nets. They are also classified as a priority species in UK and EU law, under which there are explicit bycatch requirements. To comply with this, the UK recently designated five Special Areas for Conservation for harbour porpoises, but these areas are not yet managed. The UK Dolphin and Porpoise Conservation Strategy lists harbour porpoise as having 'medium' vulnerability to gillnetting for the UK as a whole. This is based on the species having a high sensitivity to gillnetting and medium exposure.The area of most concern is in the Celtic Seas, southwest of the UK, where most of the UK's gillnetting activity takes place. Exposure to gillnetting is high. A review of activities in the Bristol Channel Approaches Harbour Porpoise SAC lists "commercial fisheries with bycatch (predominantly static nets)" as a high risk, and a strandings report by Cornwall Wildlife Trust also shows that common dolphin bycatch is very high in this area.There is also bycatch of elasmobranch species which may be threatened or endangered. Porbeagle sharks are being caught as bycatch in gillnets but as they are a prohibited species, there is no official data on the numbers being caught and discarded. Spurdog bycatch is also thought to be of concern. The National Evaluation of Populations of Threatened and Uncertain Elasmobranchs (NEPTUNE) highlighted continued problems of spurdog bycatch and despite a supposed real time avoidance programme being implemented, 50 tonnes were still landed in Cornish ports in 2019.There is a relative lack of knowledge on the overall impact of fishing on seabird populations in Europe. Increasing evidence over the last decade has shown that seabirds are suffering mortality from bycatch, particularly in gillnets. Bycatch of seabirds in gillnet fisheries alone is estimated to kill around 400,000 birds globally each year. Diving seabirds, such as guillemots and cormorants, are generally more vulnerable to bycatch in gillnets than surface feeding seabirds. Most of the UK’s gillnetting takes place in the Celtic Seas, southwest of the UK and therefore there is concern for seabird populations here. In particular, species of concern include the razorbill (listed as Near Threatened in Europe by IUCN), puffin (listed as Endangered in Europe by IUCN) and the herring gull, arctic skua and roseate tern which are all classified in the UK as Red under the Birds of Conservation Concern 4: the Red List for Birds (2015).Some pilot projects are underway to improve reporting of bycatch and find ways to reduce it. This includes trialling various types of 'pingers' that would discourage cetaceans from approaching the nets. Pingers have been very effective at reducing porpoise and dolphin bycatch in some fisheries, but haven't been adopted on a large enough scale to significantly tackle the issue. Testing and trials are crucial and may need to be supported by other measures such as seasonal closures.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.

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 24.07.2025].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 24.07.2025].Chadwick, H., Clear, N., Crosby, A., Hawtrey-Collier, A. and Williams, R. Marine Strandings in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly: 2019 Annual Report. Report by Cornwall Wildlife Trust and Marine Strandings Network. Available at https://www.cornwallwildlifetrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/2020-12/2019%20Summary%20Report%20-%20Marine%20Strandings%20in%20Cornwall%20and%20the%20Isles%20of%20Scilly.pdf [Accessed on 24.07.2025].Cornwall Wildlife Trust. Seabirds. Available at https://www.cornwallwildlifetrust.org.uk/wildlife-explorer/birds/seabirds [Accessed on 24.07.2025].DEFRA, 2025. Fisheries: consultations between the UK and the EU for 2025. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fisheries-consultations-between-the-uk-and-the-eu-for-2025 [Accessed on 24.07.2025].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, 2024. Celtic Seas 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.25713033 [Accessed on 24.07.2025].ICES, 2025. Pollack (Pollachius pollachius) in subareas 6–7 (Celtic Seas and the English Channel). In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2025. ICES Advice 2025, pol.27.67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.27202803 [Accessed on 24.07.2025]ICES, 2025. Benchmark workshop on application of Stock Synthesis (SS3) on selected stocks (WKBSS3). ICES Scientific Reports. 7:25. 191 pp. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.28443992 [Accessed on 24.07.2025]ICES, 2025. Working Group for the Celtic Seas Ecoregion (WGCSE). ICES Scientific Reports. 7:52. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.29401877 [Accessed on 24.07.2025].JNCC, 2019. Harbour Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) Special Area of Conservation: Bristol Channel Approaches / Dynesfeydd Môr Hafren: Conservation Objectives and Advice on Operations. Published March 2019. Available at https://data.jncc.gov.uk/data/505b3bab-a974-41e5-991c-c29ef3e01c0a/BCA-ConsAdvice.pdf [Accessed on 24.07.2025].Omeyer, L.C.M., Doherty, P.D., Dolman, S., Enever, R., Reese, A., Tregenza, N., Williams, R. and Godley, B.J. 2020. Assessing the Effects of Banana Pingers as a Bycatch Mitigation Device for Harbour Porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). Frontiers in Marine Science. Front. Mar. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00285.OSPAR, 2017. Intermediate Assessment 2017: Harbour Porpoise Bycatch. Available at https://oap.ospar.org/en/ospar-assessments/intermediate-assessment-2017/biodiversity-status/marine-mammals/harbour-porpoise-bycatch/ [Accessed on 06.07.2021].Scottish Government, 2021. UK Dolphin and Porpoise Conservation Strategy: Technical Report. Published 22 March 2021. ISBN: 9781800048522. Available at https://www.gov.scot/publications/uk-dolphin-porpoise-conservation-strategy-technical-report/documents/ [Accessed on 24.07.2025].Species account by IUCN SSC Cetacean Specialist Group; regional assessment by European Mammal Assessment team. 2007. Phocoena phocoena. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2007: e.T17027A6734714. Available at https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/17027/6734714 [Accessed on 24.07.2025].UK Government, 2025. Statutory guidance: Minimum Conservation Reference Sizes (MCRS) in UK waters. Updated 14 February 2025. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/minimum-conservation-reference-sizes-mcrs/minimum-conservation-reference-sizes-mcrs-in-uk-waters Accessed on 24.07.2025].