Publication Reports Cooperative Research Report (CRR)

 

The aim of this report is to give the general background for the conditions in the Baltic, to define and formulate research problems related to the pollution situation, and to identify the most urgently needed studies.

This report has been prepared by members of the ICES Data Collection and Gear Engineering Working Groups.

Multispecies assessment in the North Sea ecosystem. Theory of exploited fish population dynamics. This project was aimed at quantitative answers to the question 'Who eats who?' among the exploited fish species in the North Sea. Edited by Niels Daan.

In 1982, it was decided to change the time table for the ACFM meetings and make two meetings out of one on a yearly basis.

Acoustic and egg surveys in the southwestern waters of Europe.

Acoustic surveys provide estimates of stock abundance and its precision, maps of geographical distribution and biological information such as stock age and maturity structure.

The main objective is to give an overview of the data available from surveys and at the same time provide knowledge of the spatial distribution. In addition, it will provide a baseline which will reveal secondary effects or changes in the fauna.

Evaluation of identified interactions between seabirds and fish, and between seabirds and shellfish; estimates of seabird consumption of prey, by prey species; and analysis of prey consumption by examining the size- or year classes of prey taken.

This guide is an attempt to develop novel techniques and methods for dietary analysis. The use of skeletal elements/remains are considered a potential source of information to identify prey.

Direct exchange of views between professionals from the fish production sector; fisheries managers, and fisheries scientists. Organized by the Spanish Institute of Oceanography and co-sponsored by ICES and the European Commission.

Assessment of individual age through the use of calcified structures (scales, otoliths,
opercular bones, fin rays, etc.) has been proven to be very useful in assessing the status
of any fish stock. According to Panfili et al. (2002), data on age and growth of fish are
essential for understanding vital traits of species and populations (e.g. lifespan, age at
recruitment, age at sexual maturity, reproduction periods, migrations, mortality) and
the study of population demographic structure and its dynamics (e.g. age-based stock
assessment). The age profile of a fish stock can be indicative of its general “health”, as
one will expect to see evidence of a broad range of ages in a healthy population. A lack
of young fish may indicate recruitment failure, which will have repercussions in future
years, while a lack of older fish can signal overexploitation of the stock. Fisheries scientists
are especially concerned with the dynamics of exploited populations, with the
view to providing advice about the sustainable harvesting of the resource. In the ICES
Area, this task is generally focused on providing a quantitative assessment and forecast
on a stock, with age data at its core. Hilborn and Walters (1992) pointed out that the
“aim of such studies is not only to assess the state of stocks and fisheries relative to
historical states, biological reference points or management targets, but also to evaluate
the consequences for both fish stocks and fishermen, of alternative management scenarios.”
Therefore, it is clear that reliable age–length data are important for the management
and sustainable exploitation of fish stocks. The need for reliable data is especially
acute in times when stock levels are low and errors in predictions can have devastating
effects on the resources.

Nominal catches in the North Sea area (Sub-area IV and Division IlIa), the Norwegian Sea and
off the Faroes (Divisions IIa and Vb), the Western area (Sub-areas VI and VII and Divisions
Vllla,b,d,e) and the Southern area (Division Vlllc and Sub-area IX) are given in Tables
6.1.1-6.1.4.
These tables do not give actual catches by area for 1969 due to misreporting. Estimates of
quarterly catch of mackerel by division or sub-area in 1969 are given in Table 6.1.5.
Two stock units - North Sea and Western - are considered. The stocks mix during the second
half of the year, particularly in the northern North Sea (Division IVa), but the proportion
of mackerel from the North Sea stock in the catches is very small due to the inferior size
of this stock in relation to the Western stock.
As for previous years, it has not been possible to split the 1969 catches by stock. All
mackerel caught in Sub-areas II, IV, VI, VII and Divisions IlIa, Vb, Vllla,b were allocated
to the Western stock. This includes an estimated quantity of about 3,000 t North Sea
mackerel which is considered insignificant in relation to a total catch of 567,000 t assessed
as Western stock mackerel.
Data on actual, quarterly distribution of the mackerel fisheries in 1969 are available. Compared
to 1966, the distribution was, as in 1967, more southerly during the July-October
period, illustrating previously observed year-to-year variations in distribution and migration.
Data relating to the fisheries for mackerel in the Southern area (Divisions Vlllc and IXa)
are now being collected and analyzed, but are yet insufficient for any analytical assessment.

This Cooperative Research Report (parts 1 and 2) contains the reports of the Advisory Committee on Fishery
Management in 1991.
After the May meeting, ICES issued the complete Report to the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission
(IBSFC), Part I of the Report to the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), and the Report to the
North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization (NASCa). The second part of the Report to NEAFC was issued
after the November meeting, together with the Report to the Commission of the European Community on European
Eels and the Report to the Government of Norway on Harp and Hooded Seals. In order to provide the advice to
managers as fast as possible, the reports were issued in sections and distributed immediately after they had been
completed.
The two reports to NEAFC have been edited into one report, placing the stocks in logical sequence and including
all advice on each stock in one place.
The Report to NEAFC is followed by the Reports to mSFC, NASCa, the EC, and Norway.

A general review of officially-reported catches in the Baltic is given in Tables 1.1.-1.5. These are the catches
officially reported to ICES by national statistical offices for publication in the ICES Fishery Statistics.
In the assessments, the working groups try to estimate discards and slipped fish, landings which are not officially
reported, and the composition of by-catches. These amounts are included in the estimates of total catch for each
stock and are used in the assessments; thus, they appear in the tables and figures produced by working groups.
These estimates vary considerably between different stocks and fisheries, being negligible in some cases and
constituting important parts of the total removals from other stocks. Further, the catches used by the working
groups are broken down into sub-divisions, whereas the officially-reported figures are reported by the larger
Divisions IIIb,c and d.

This issue contains the edited Report of a workshop held in Reykjavik in 1991 to consider the applicability
of spatial statistical techniques to acoustic survey data.
Some programs were rerun after the meeting yielding modifications to some of the tables in the report, and
two appendices have been added.
Following the suggestions in this report, a successful workshop was held at Fontainebleau, France in
February, 1992, where participants from the fisheries sciences were introduced to geostatistics

Officially reported catches in the Baltic are given in Tables 1.1.1-1.1.5. These are the catches officially reported
to ICES by national statistical offices for publication in the ICES Fishery Statistics.
In the assessments, the working groups try to estimate discards and slipped fish, landings which are not officially
reported, and the composition of by-catches. These amounts are included in the estimates of total catch for each
stock and are used in the assessments; thus, they appear in the tables and figures produced by working groups.
These estimates vary considerably between different stocks and fisheries, being negligible in some cases and
constituting important parts of the total removals from other stocks. Further, the catches· used by the working
groups are broken down into sub-divisions, whereas the officially-reported figures are reported by the larger
Divisions IIIb,c, and d.

This Cooperative Research Report (Parts 1 and 2) contains the Report of the Advisory Committee on
Fishery Management (ACFM) prepared and issued in 1994. The Report was prepared in the form of
separate reports to the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), the International Baltic Sea
Fishery Commission (IBSFC), the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization (NASCO) and the
European Commission (EC).
Shortly after the May meeting of ACFM, ICES issued the Report to the IBSFC, the first part of the
Report to NEAFC, the Report to NASCO and a Report to the EC on the "North Sea Plaice Box". Shortly
after the October-November ACFM meeting, the second part of the Report to NEAFC was issued.
In this publication the separate reports to NEAFC referred to above have been edited into a single report
with the stocks in sequence and including all advice on each stock together. Part 1 contains an
introductory section and sections 1-3 of the report to NEAFC. Part 2 contains sections 4-6 of the report to
NEAFC, and the reports to the EC, IBSFC and NASCO.
The requests for advice from each of the Commissions named above are given in the introductory section
to the report.
In 1994 ACFM adopted a new format for its report. A short description of the format is also given in the
introduction.

This Cooperative Research Report (Parts 1 and 2) contains the Report of the Advisory Committee on
Fishery Management (ACFM) prepared and issued in 1995. The Report was prepared in response to
requests from the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), the International Baltic Sea
Fishery Commission (IBSFC), the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization (NASCO) and the
European Commission (EC).
Shortly after the May meeting of ACFM, ICES issued extracts of the Report to the IBSFC, NEAFC,
NASCO and the EC. Shortly after the October-November ACFM meeting, the remaining extracts were
issued to NEAFC and the Ee.
In this publication the extracts referred to above have, with the exception of the report to NASCO which is
placed at the end of Part 2, been edited into a single report in two volumes.
The requests for advice from each of the Commissions named above are given in the introductory section
to the report.
In 1994 ACFM adopted a new format for its report. A revised description of the format is also given in
the introduction.

This Cooperative Research Report (Parts 1 and 2) contains the Report of the Advisory Committee on
Fishery Management (ACFM) prepared and issued in 1996. The Report was prepared in response to
requests from the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), the International Baltic Sea
Fishery Commission (IBSFC), the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization (NASCO) the
European Commission (EC) and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). In
addition, a number of requests were received from ICES Member Governments.
Shortly after the May meeting of ACFM, ICES issued extracts of the Report to the IBSFC, NEAFC,
NASCO and the EC. Shortly after the October-November ACFM meeting, the remaining extracts were
issued to NEAFC and the EC. Responses to the requests from ICES Member Governments were issued
either as separate extracts, or embodied within the extracts prepared for the Commissions.
In this publication the extracts referred to above have, with the exception of the reports to NASCO and
NAMMCO, which are placed at the end of Part 2, been edited into a single report in two volumes.
The requests for advice from each of the Commissions named above are given in the introductory section
to the report.
In 1995 ACFM adopted a new format for its report. A revised description of the format is given in the
introduction.

This Cooperative Research Report (Parts 1 and 2) contains the Report of the Advisory Committee on
Fishery Management (ACFM) prepared and issued in 1997. The Report was prepared in response to
requests from the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), the International Baltic Sea Fishery
Commission (IBSFC), the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization (NASCO), the European
Commission (EC) and the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). In addition, a number
of requests were received from ICES Member Governments.
Shortly after the May meeting of ACFM, ICES issued extracts of the Report to the IBSFC, NEAFC,
NASCO and the EC. Shortly after the October-November ACFM meeting, the remaining extracts were
issued to NEAFC and the EC. Responses to the requests from ICES Member Governments were issued
either as separate extracts, or embodied within the extracts prepared for the Commissions.
In this publication the extracts referred to above have, with the exception of the reports to NASCO and
NAMMCO, which are placed at the end of Part 2, been edited into a single report in two volumes. Due to a
change in the standard format of the extracts implemented at the October-November ACFM meeting, some
sections appear somewhat heterogeneous in layout.
The requests for advice from each of the Commissions named above are given in the introductory section to
the report.

The ICES Advisory Committee for Fishery Management met twice in 1998, 13-22 May and 20-29 October
1998. Both meetings were held at the ICES Headquarters, Palregade 2 4 , Copenhagen. Attendance is listed
on the following pages.
ACFM in its advice includes a proposal for how the Precautionary Approach can be interpreted. This
proposal was developed between the May and October meetings and the format of the report therefore
changed between these two meetings. The proposal on the Precautionary Approach is described in the
introductions to the meeting reports.
The reports are in response to requests from Management Commissions (EC, IBSFC, NEAFC, and NASCO)
and from member countries. These requests are summarised in Sections 1 and 2. The management advice is
presented stock by stock in Section 3 where also the answers to special requests are given

Recording the flora and fauna of habitats has long been practised. In more recent times much attention has been and is being paid to both the deliberate introduction by man of species exotic to marine areas and to the inadvertent appearance of such alien species by factors involving man and other agents. In the marine environment of the ICES area it is inevitable that almost all observations are confined to coastal zones in the ‘open’ marine habitat of the North Atlantic. For ‘semi-enclosed’ areas such as the Mediterranean, Baltic and North Seas and ‘enclosed’ areas such as the Great Lakes a greater degree of observation over the whole is possible. Part of this recording of new introductions and transfers of exotic species which are part of an established trade are observations of the impact of the exotic either because it is successful in establishing reproducing populations or because of its presence.
The First (1980) Status Report on Introductions of Non-Indigenous Marine Species to North Atlantic Waters was prepared by the ICES Working Group on Introductions and Transfers on Marine Organisms (WGITMO) (Anon 1982). This second report, also prepared by WGITMO, covers the decade 1981–1991. It includes summaries of the national reports to the working group from member countries of ICES of introductions and transfers of fish and invertebrates. Because there has been a limited response on plant introductions both in the previous and current decade a comprehensive review of plant introductions with an additional section on the threat from the green algae Caulerpa taxifolia has been included.

The ICES Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment (ACME) met from 8-13 June 1998 at ICES Headquarters in
Copenhagen. As part of its work during this period, the ACME prepared responses to the requests made to ICES by the
OSPAR Commission and the Helsinki Commission. This report contains these responses. In addition to responses to direct
requests, this report summarizes the deliberations of ACME on topics for which advice was not diuectly requested but for
which the ACME felt that there was information that would be of potential interest to the Commissions, ICES Member
Countries, and other readers of this report

This report has been produced as a result of discussions in
the Fisheries Acoustics Science and Technology (FAST)
Working Group of thelnternational Council of the Exploration
of the Sea (ICES). Following discussions in the FAST
Working Group, it was proposed that a study group on
Target Strength Methodology be formed, which was
recommended by the Fish Capture Committee. This
resulted in ICES Resolution C Res 1992 2:ll: "A Study
group onTarget strengthMethodology is established under
the Chairship of E. Ona (Norway) and will meet in
Gothenburg, Sweden on 19 April 1993 to prepare a report,
with a view to publication in the ICES Cooperative Report
Series on the methodology for Target Strength measurements
with special reference to in situ techniques for fish
and micro- nekton"

The roundfish fisheries in the Irish Sea are conducted
primarily by vessels from the bordering countries (UK
and Ireland). The majority of vessels are otter-trawlers
fishing for cod, whiting and plaice, with by-catches of
haddock, anglerfh, hake and sole. The mesh size is
80mm and 8Omm square mesh panels have been
mandatory for UK otter-trawlers since 1993, and for
Iriih trawlers since 1994. The number of Irish vessels
operating in this region has declined in recent years.
Fishing effort in the England and Wales fleet of vessels
longer than 12.2 m declined rapidly after 1989. and over
199211995 was about 40% of the effort reported in the
1980s, although it has increased again in recent years.
Since the early 1980s there has been a development of
semi-pelagic trawling for cod and whiting,
predominantly by vessels from Northern Ireland. Some
of these vessels switch between pelagic trawling and
twin-trawl fishing for Nephrops depending on fishing
opportnnities and market demands

The standard use of fisheries acoustics is to estimate fish
or plankton abundance in the context of a stock assessment
survey. It is also used to map the abundance distribution
of these resources. However, it is generally agreed
that there is a great deal more information available from
the acoustic data collected during such surveys than a
simple integration of target species biomass. This report
describes the state-of-the-art in the extraction of such information.
This can be defined as Echo Trace Classification
(ETC).
The study of Echo Trace Classification (ETC) is the
characterisation of objects or features seen in an
echogram and relating these together to understand more
about the behaviour and biology of the organisms
involved.

This report contains the proceedings and abstracts of papers and posters presented at the Young Scientists Conference
on Marine Ecosystem Perspectives held in Gilleleje, Denmark 20–24 November 1999.
Sponsors
The Conference was organised by The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea in cooperation with The
Danish Academy of Technical Sciences and The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters. It was sponsored by
The Danish Ministry of Education, The Danish Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fishery, The Danish Research
Council, Knud Højgaards Foundation, and the European Commission DG XII.

The ICES Advisory Committee for Fishery Management met twice in 2000, 25 May- 1 June and 24 October - 2
November 2000. Both meetings were held at the ICES Headquarters, Palzgade 1! 4, Copenhagen. Attendance is listed
on the following pages.
ACFM in its advice includes a proposal for how the Precautionary Approach can be interpreted. This proposal is
described in the Introduction.
The reports are in response to requests from Management Commissions (EC, IBSFC, NEAFC, and NASCO) and from
member countries. The management advice is presented stock by stock in Sections 3 to 6 where also the answers to
special requests are given.
The requests from Management Commissions are now divided into two parts: recurrent advice that is specified by
Memorandum of Understanding between the Management Commissions and ICES and Special Requests. Recurrent
advice includes assessment of stock status and manasement advice for the more important stocks in the Northeast
Atlantic. This advice is provided in the same form as used by ICES Advisory Committee for Fishery Management in
recent years.

State of the stocklfishery: There is evidence from the
trends in catches and CPUE series (Figure 3.12.6.a.1)
that the stock of blue ling in Divisions Va and Vb and in
Sub-areas VI and VII is outside safe biological limits.
The proportion of large fish in the landings from
Division Vb and Sub-areas VI and VII has decreased in
the most recent years.

The Fourth ICES/GLOBEC Backward-Facing Workshop was held in Aberdeen, UK during 11–13 March 1999. The
Workshop was commissioned by the ICES Working Group on Cod and Climate Change, with terms of reference set out
in ICES Council Resolution 2.22 (C.Res.1998/2.22) (Appendix 1).
The objective of the Workshop was to examine the causes of the increases in abundance of gadoid fishes in the North
Sea which occurred during the 1960s and early 1970s, an event which has been referred to as the ‘gadoid outburst’. The
Workshop followed the pattern established by previous Backward-Facing Workshops by using a combination of
retrospective analysis, new process studies and modelling in order to interpret the causes of past population events.
Previous workshops have investigated the tilefish kill during 1881/82 in the Northwest Atlantic (Backward-Facing I;
ICES CM 1995/A:7), the changes brought about by a cold period in the Barents Sea and Baltic (Backward-Facing II;
ICES CM 1996/A:9), and the gadoid outburst in the Northwest Atlantic (Backward-Facing III; ICES CM 1998/C:9 and
ICES Cooperative Research Report 234).
The Workshop reported to the Working Group on Cod and Climate Change (WGCCC), to the Oceanography,
Resources Management, and Living Resources Committees at the 1999 Annual Science Conference, and to the
Advisory Committee on Fisheries Management (ACFM) at its May 1999 meeting

The marine aggregate extraction industry is well established and continues to grow in a number of ICES Member Countries, contributing up to 15 % of some nation’s demand for sand and gravel. Demand for construction has remained relatively stable, with most major increases in extraction being associated with land reclamation for major projects, or for beach replenishment. Some major projects being considered would substantially increase annual demand in the years of their construction.
Since 1992 further reserves of sand and gravel have been reported in both the Baltic Sea and the North Sea. Reserves are not evenly distributed and the reserves of coarse marine aggregates must be considered finite, as should sand reserves in the Baltic. Fine sands are abundant in the North Sea and adjacent areas.
There are no realistic alternatives to the use of marine aggregate material for most beach replenishment and major coastal reclamation schemes. Strategic planning is essential for the future supply of materials, particularly for major construction projects. Most countries have reported concerns about the extraction of aggregates from both the land and sea, and the sustainable use of finite reserves is seen as a key issue for the future. Many countries are encouraging better use of alternative waste materials where they are appropriate in construction and landfill contexts.

Growth rate varies widely among cod stocks. Large changes in growth rate have also been observed within many cod stocks and have important consequences for the productivity of these stocks. Variation in growth rate may reflect effects of temperature change, density dependence (i.e., changes in per capita prey availability due to variation in prey or cod abundance), changes in maturation schedules, changes in size-selective fishing mortality, changes in activity of the fish or adaptive (genetic) change. An understanding of the causes of variation in growth rate among and within cod stocks may lead to improved forecasts of stock biomass and productivity, and is required to assess the likely impacts of climate change on cod populations. The ICES/GLOBEC Working Group on Cod and Climate Change held a Workshop on the Dynamics of Growth in Cod in May 2000, with the aim of exploring the causes of growth variability and developing a single growth model for cod that will allow interpretation of information from all parts the geographic range of cod.
As a follow-up to the Workshop, a Theme Session was held at the ICES Annual Science Conference in Oslo in September 2001 on Growth and Condition in Gadoid Stocks and Implications for Sustainable Management. Thirty papers were presented and are included in this Cooperative Research Report as a CD-Rom containing abstracts, extended abstracts or full papers.

The ICES Advisory Committee on Ecosystems (ACE) met from 7 to 11 June 2002. During this meeting, ACE prepared responses to requests from the European Commission Directorate General for Fisheries on the by-catch of small cetaceans in fisheries and on the occurrence of cold-water corals that may be impacted by fisheries; ACE also provided some preliminary material on issues of concern to the EC in relation to the impacts of fishing on the ecosystem. Furthermore, ACE provided a preliminary response to the Helsinki Commission with regard to a request on marine habitat classification, and, at the request of the OSPAR Commission, reviewed the evidence for the justification for the proposed OSPAR Priority List of Threatened and Declining Species and Habitats

In November 2000, ICES indicated that a number of cod stocks and the stock of northern hake were at serious risk of collapse. Following this, various emergency measures covering these stocks were enacted in 2001 by Norway and the EU. This was in addition to measures adopted by the EU to aid recovery of Irish Sea cod in the previous year. Proposals for longer-term recovery plans for these stocks were also made by the EU. These proposals include multi-annual recovery plans for northern hake and for cod in the North Sea, to the west of Scotland, in the Kattegat, and in the Irish Sea.
The proposed recovery plans aim to increase spawning stock biomass, SSB, to above the adopted biological reference point, Bpa, of each stock. The necessary tools proposed to achieve recovery are TACs set to ensure a high probability that SSB will increase annually by 30% for the cod stocks and 15% for the hake stocks. Within the recovery period there is a proposed maximum annual variation of TACs of no more than 50% from year to year. The tolerance for year-to-year changes in TACs is symmetric, and has higher priority than ensuring the target increase in SSB if the two rules are in conflict. The rule with highest priority is that fishing mortality should not be permitted to exceed Fpa in any year. To achieve the necessary decreases in fishing mortality, fishing effort limitations are also an integral part of the proposal in addition to measures to temporarily close fishing areas and to increase monitoring and control of fishing vessels.

The ICES Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment (ACME) met from 3 to 7 June 2002. As part of its work during this period, the ACME prepared responses to the requests made to ICES by the OSPAR Commission and the Helsinki Commission. This report contains these responses. In addition to responses to direct requests, this report summarizes the deliberations of ACME on topics for which advice was not directly requested but for which the ACME felt that there was information that would be of interest to the Commissions, ICES Member Countries, and other readers of this report.
As a result of the creation of the Advisory Committee on Ecosystems (ACE), several topics previously handled by ACME have been moved to the remit of ACE and scientific information and advice on these topics can be found in the ACE report for 2002. The topics covered include ecosystem effects of fishing, ecological quality objectives, ecosystem modelling and assessment, marine mammals issues, biodiversity issues, and marine habitat classification and mapping.

This is the third ICES Cooperative Research Report produced by the Working Group on Seabird Ecology, following on from Reports on seabird/fish interactions (ICES Cooperative Research Report No. 216) and the diets of seabirds and the consequences of changes in food supply (ICES Cooperative Research Report No. 232). This ICES Cooperative Research Report focuses on the use that might be made of seabirds as monitors of the marine environment.
Section 2 examines the possibilities of using seabirds to monitor marine pollution, and recommends that they be used in monitoring a variety of substances. These recommendations are further developed in Section 5. Subsequent to this work, several of these recommendations have been developed for possible use as Ecological Quality Objectives (EcoQOs) under OSPAR and the North Sea Conference process. Ministers from around the North Sea adopted an objective in relation to the proportion of oiled common guillemots found dead or dying on beaches that “the proportion of such birds should be 10% or less of the total found dead or dying, in all areas of the North Sea (Bergen Declaration). In addition, Ministers requested that work continue towards defining EcoQOs in relation to mercury concentrations in seabird eggs and feathers, organochlorine concentrations in seabird eggs and plastic particles in the stomachs of seabirds. These decisions demonstrate the usefulness of seabirds in this area

The ICES Advisory Committee for Fishery Management met twice in 2003, 27 May–5 June and 8–16 October 2002.
Both meetings were held at ICES Headquarters, Palægade 2–4, Copenhagen. Attendance is listed on the following pages.
The report includes a description on how the Precautionary Approach has been interpreted in the ICES advice (see
Form of Advice in the Introductory Chapter). The Form of Advice has been changed since last year with respect to the
mixed fisheries on demersal stocks in Division IIIa and Subareas IV, VI, VII, VIII, and IX and is now built on an explicit consideration of fisheries impact on the fish stock complex (mixed fisheries). This consideration has previously been presented in connection with the target stock. The evaluation of the individual stock status is unchanged, however; the management advice for mixed fisheries is presented under the Area Overviews (sections 3.5.1, 3.7.1, 3.8.1, 3.9.1,
and 3.10.1) and not in the sections dealing with individual stocks.
The reports are in response to requests from Management Commissions (EC, IBSFC, JNRFC, NEAFC, and NASCO)
and from member countries. The requests from Management Commissions fall into two categories: recurrent advice
that is specified by Memoranda of Understanding between the Management Commissions and ICES, and Special
Requests. Recurrent advice includes assessment of stock status and management advice for the more important stocks in the Northeast Atlantic. This advice is provided in the form used by ICES Advisory Committee for Fishery Management in recent years

The Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment (ACME) is the Council’s official body for the provision of scientific advice and information on the status and outlook for the marine environment, including contaminants, as well as a range of other environmental issues, as may be requested by ICES Member Countries, other bodies within ICES, relevant regulatory Commissions, and other organizations.
In handling the requests, the ACME draws on the expertise of its own members and on the work of various expert ICES Working Groups and Study Groups. The ACME considers the reports of these groups and requests them to carry out specific activities or to provide information on specific topics.
The ACME report is structured in terms of the topics covered at the ACME meeting on which it has prepared scientific information and advice.
The topics include both those for which information or advice has been requested by the Commissions or other bodies and those identified by the ACME to enhance the understanding of the marine environment.

In 1291 Philip IV the Fair, King of France, forbade “de
pescher avec engins de file de quoy la maille (n ait) la
moule d’un gros tournois d’argent” or, to fish with nets
with meshes smaller than the size of a silver coin of that
time (Hovart, 1985). This silver coin can be seen as a
predecessor of the present-day wedge gauge used to
check whether the meshes of fishing nets comply with
modern technical regulations.
A mesh gauge developed by C. J. W. Westhoff under
the auspices of the ICES Comparative Fishing Committee
became the standard gauge for research activities in
ICES countries in 1962 (ICES, 1962a) and became
known as the ICES gauge (Figure 1). To make a measurement
the ICES gauge exerts a fixed longitudinal
measuring force on the mesh. The recommended measuring
force is 4 kilogramforce (kgf). When the ICES gauge
is correctly used, the measurements are free of human influence.
Since its introduction the ICES gauge has been
generally used in selectivity experiments, to provide scientific
advice on minimum regulated mesh sizes. However,
since 1962 a wide range of new twines and netting
types have been adopted in the fishing industry. These
modern twines vary significantly in thickness and stiffness,
characteristics which affect both mesh size and selectivity.

Since 1990, when the First Assessment Report (FAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC, 1990) was published, literature on climate change has
grown exponentially. Nowadays, climate change is a challenging scientific issue that
has developed a body of observations, models, and hypotheses that is being used to
assess possible consequences for critical processes involved in the functioning of the
Earth. This progression has strongly influenced other disciplines, modifying
approaches to topics such as risk analysis, socio‐economics, ethics, politics, energy,
natural resource management, geo‐engineering, and even evolution. The scientific
debate has moved rapidly from observations to impacts to discussions of potential
mechanisms that may be used to mitigate and adapt to this new reality; a
development that reflects an urgent need to minimize the impacts of global warming
by taking action based on robust scientific knowledge.
In a succession of assessment reports, from the first to the fourth (FAR, SAR, TAR,
AR4; IPCC 1990, 1996, 2001, 2007a, respectively), the IPCC has played an essential
role in organizing data and synthesizing results published in a vast scientific
literature. Development of a comprehensive understanding of the ramifications and
implications of climate change for human society, and for the ecology and
sustainability of the entire planet, is only possible by adopting such an international,
integrated approach. However, the information published in the scientific literature is
often incomplete, local, and fragmented, and up to the most recent report (AR4) had
given only modest coverage to the oceans (Richardson and Poloczanska, 2008).

This report begins with a brief review of the optical properties of the ocean, which
determine what is possible with optical systems. These properties can vary
considerably from familiar acoustical properties. For example, in the clearest waters,
66 % of the light is scattered and absorbed over distances of tens of metres, whereas
sound can travel much farther, depending on wavelength. However, the transmission
of optical energy through the air – sea interface is ca. 98 % at near‐normal incidence,
whereas the corresponding transmission for acoustic energy is ca. 0.1 %, and all
acoustic systems in use are operated in contact with the ocean. This review is
followed by a description of available optical technologies, some of the issues that
must be considered in their use, and practical applications.
Several commonly used optical techniques have not been included in order to
concentrate on more recent technology. Visual observations, often aided by
binoculars, from aircraft and surface vessels have long been used, especially for
counts of seabirds and marine mammals. Similarly, visual observations by divers
have been important in, for example, coral reef monitoring (Samoilys and Carlos,
2000). The use of microscopes in plankton studies is considered to be a welldeveloped
technology and beyond the scope of this report. Underwater cameras and
video have been used extensively by divers, and by manned and unmanned
submersibles, to collect images without quantitative analysis. We will only discuss
applications where images have been used for quantitative analyses.

The spatial organization of fish populations is expected to play a key role in population
dynamics and its response to environmental forcing. It has been argued (Sinclair, 1988) that
the size of populations and the spatial organization of their life cycles match key
oceanographic physical features in space and time. The characterization of a functional
linkage between key physical features and fish habitats was recognized as a first and
important step towards understanding the variability of spatial patterns and population
dynamics. Therefore, the 2004 – 2006 reports of the ICES Study Group on Regional Scale
Ecology of Small Pelagic Fish (SGRESP; ICES, 2004a, 2005, 2006a) attempted to characterize
patterns in the life‐cycle organization of fish stocks in the Northeast Atlantic and cross‐map
these with physical features. Results were consistent with previous findings.
In Sinclair’s (1988) perspective, physical retention explained maintenance of the life‐cycle
pattern, and vagrancy out of the pattern corresponded to losses to the population.
However, in this case, the maintenance of these patterns is explained by biological
behavioural processes and population substructure. This led to the recognition that habitats
are not necessarily occupied, even if they are potentially suitable, because of the history of
the population.
In this report, we document life‐cycle patterns and how they match physical features for
small pelagic fish stocks in the Northeast Atlantic. Species considered include herring
(Clupea harengus), sardine (Sardina pilchardus), sprat (Sprattus sprattus), anchovy (Engraulis
encrasicolus), mackerel (Scomber scombrus), and blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou). For
each case study of a stock, a similar template was followed, and the knowledge compiled of
the stock’s biology, life‐cycle pattern, and past history, served as an “identity card” for the
populations. The template documents life history traits; habitats for all life stages
(spawning, feeding, wintering, and nurseries); migration patterns, including larvae drift;
long‐term trends in the population; potential environmental influences; and observed
changes (e.g. spawning, migration, and behaviour) in relation to climate or ecosystem
change (e.g. Baltic Sea). The proposed schematic representation of life‐cycle patterns
allowed the differentiation of the roles of different migratory components in structuring
life‐cycle patterns. It can also serve as a knowledge basis for spatial management.
Perspectives on continuing the work relate to habitat modelling, bioenergetics, behaviour,
and operational oceanography.

This report discusses the underlying processes of sediment dynamics in the North
Sea, the Baltic Sea, and several estuaries in order to indicate the broad range of
conditions that exist within the ICES Area. It is important to be aware of these
processes when designing monitoring programmes in order to ensure that the data
collected can be the foundation of a more meaningful interpretation. This
introductory section does not seek to define which monitoring strategies should be
used, but demonstrates that it is necessary to consider the sediment dynamics present
in the area being studied when designing a monitoring programme.
Time‐trends in contaminant, nutrient, and carbon concentrations in sediments are
usually inferred from sediment cores or from surface sediments taken during
repeated sampling exercises. Physical, chemical, and biological processes, all
components of sediment dynamics, can affect the concentration of contaminants.
Physical processes include erosion, transport, deposition, and resuspension. These
processes are driven by various different forces, such as isostatic movement, tidal and
wind‐driven currents, and density currents. For example, in the Baltic Sea, increased
eutrophication may lead to deep‐water oxygen deficiency that subsequently causes
the creation of laminated sediments, and these apparently allow a strong down‐core
time‐control on contaminant input. However, these down‐core trends may be
distorted by several processes, including the increased input of clean sediment
resulting from increased wind‐driven erosion of glacial clays that are subject to
isostatic uplift. In the North Sea, the upper 10 cm of sediment in a sandy area may
reflect contaminant input during the most recent months, or even days, because of
the constant reworking of the sediment and potentially large bulk‐sediment
movement, while the upper 10 cm of sediment in a muddy depositional area with a
slow deposition rate may represent accumulation over the last 25 – 50 years or more.

Evidence is accumulating that the increase in CO2 is affecting the global climate, with
far‐reaching implications for biological processes and ecosystem services (IPCC,
2001). Marine capture fisheries yield ca. 85 million tonnes year −1 and provide an
economic basis for many communities, with a total value of US $50 billion. The
sustainability of the fisheries is being jeopardized by overfishing (Pauly et al., 1998;
Jackson et al., 2001; Jørgensen et al., 2007), but climate change may also affect the
productivity of fishery resources (Brander, 2005; Harley et al., 2006; Lehodey et al.,
2006).
The general concern about global warming and its effects has triggered a rapidly
increasing body of scientific literature, in which ecological time‐series are correlated
with environmental indicators (Drinkwater, 2005; Weijerman et al., 2005; Brunel and
Boucher, 2007). Recent studies suggest that there is evidence for a northward shift in
the distributional range of fish species (Quéro et al., 1998; Hiscock et al., 2001; Beare et
al., 2004; Perry et al., 2005) and changes in the productivity of commercially exploited
stocks (O’Brien et al., 2000; Brander, 2005), but the mechanisms underlying these
changes remain uncertain. Hence, it is largely unknown whether the observed
distributional shifts are caused by a relocation of the spawning and feeding grounds,
a change in the local survival of fish, or immigration into new habitats.

Over the past two decades, cephalopod molluscs have attracted increased attention
from marine biologists and fishery scientists. Several species are important for
European fisheries, as targets of small‐scale coastal fisheries and/or as bycatch in
multispecies fisheries for demersal fish. The present report draws on a series of
reviews prepared in 2005 for the CEPHSTOCK project (see Section 1). The taxonomy
of the main resource species is reviewed (Section 2), and brief descriptions of each
species are provided, along with information from studies of population genetics,
habitat requirements of paralarvae and adults, and health and ecotoxicology (Section
3). The main fisheries are described, including illustration of gears used in specialized
small‐scale fisheries and a discussion of the socio‐economic importance of the
fisheries. The current status of cephalopod aquaculture is reviewed, highlighting
notable advances in commercial culture of octopus and cuttlefish (Section 4). Current
fishery data collection and fishery management are described, noting that there is no
setting of landings quotas and no routine assessment of stock status. Options for
stock assessment are discussed, drawing on one‐off assessments made during specific
projects and current practice elsewhere in the world. The “live fast, die young” lifehistory
strategies of cephalopods present particular challenges, but parallels can be
drawn with short‐lived fish (Section 5). Finally, the report looks to the future,
reviewing possible effects of climate change on cephalopods. It discusses the future
development of aquaculture and fisheries for cephalopods, including prospects for
fishery forecasting and fishery management – especially in relation to the small‐scale
directed fisheries. Various knowledge gaps are identified, and ideas for research to
fill these gaps are presented.

The primary purpose of this document is to report the recommendations resulting
from the ICES WORKSHOP ON THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGING OCEAN CO2 AND PH IN
ICES SHELF SEA ECOSYSTEMS held between 2 and 4 May 2007 in London. Some excellent
reports have already been published in this field, first by the Scientific Committee
on Oceanic Research (SCOR; Arvidson, 2005), then by the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration/National Science Foundation/US Geological Survey
(NOAA/NSF/USGS; Kleypas et al., 2006), the Royal Society (The Royal Society, 2005),
the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU; WBGU, 2006), and most
recently by the OSPAR Commission (OSPAR, 2006) and the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC; Metz et al., 2005). Cognizant of these recent efforts, the
ICES Workshop set out with a slightly different aim to investigate the links between
potential changes in pH and its effects on marine ecosystem components, such as
plankton, fish and shellfish, and cold‐water corals. To this end, the Workshop covered
ground already considered by others, to provide a sound base for the prediction
of likely impacts. The present report will outline those relevant issues, but the reader
is advised to refer to other reports for greater detail. The novel focus of this report is
the potential effects on ecosystem functions with links to fisheries, with a recommendation
for work to be done to better understand the impact of this problem on the
entire ecosystem, and specifically on fisheries. Most of the material used was presented
at the Workshop, with Annex 1 being the most significant exception.

Each year across the ICES Area, approximately 53 million m 3 of sand and gravel are
extracted from licensed areas of the seabed as a source of aggregate for the construction
industry, either to supplement land‐based sources or as a source of material for
beach nourishment. Because planning constraints and resource exhaustion are tending
to restrict the extraction of sand and gravel (aggregate) from terrestrial sources,
attention is increasingly being focused on the importance of seabed resources to satisfy
part of the demand for aggregates. The seabed is also recognized as the only viable
source of material for beach recharge in coastal defence schemes. In recognition
of this, the exploitation of marine resources is supported in most ICES Member Countries
by national and international minerals policies, subject to environmental safeguards.
The use of marine resources reduces the pressure to work land of agricultural
importance or of environmental and hydrological value and, where materials can be
landed close to the point of use, an additional benefit is that long‐distance overland
transport is avoided. However, the benefits of using marine sand and gravel must be
balanced with the potentially significant environmental impacts.
The scale of marine aggregate extraction has increased in recent years. This rise reflects
the increasing constraints on land‐based extraction and the recognition that
controlled dredging is sustainable in the foreseeable future. Interest by the general
public in the effects of marine sand and gravel extraction on the environment and
fisheries has grown in line with this expansion of effort. Issues such as the potential
for conflict of interest between stakeholders in the resource and the efficacy of remedial
measures during and after extraction are analogous to those arising from landbased
activities. However, in the marine environment, their resolution is rendered
more difficult because of the relative inaccessibility of sites, the general paucity of
site‐specific data on the structure and functional role of the habitat and biota associated
with sand and gravel deposits, and problems in quantifying the performance of
local fisheries. Further core drivers for understanding the impacts of marine aggregate
extraction exist at the international level. In particular, there is an increasing focus
on the conservation of marine biodiversity, following the Rio Earth Summit, and
on the protection of marine habitats (under the EU Habitats Directive) of whole sea
areas through international management initiatives under OSPAR, HELCOM, and
the EU Marine Strategy Directive. OSPAR, HELCOM, and ICES are also promoting
transnational cooperation in developing the ecosystem approach to marine management.
Of particular relevance is the increasing emphasis in national and international
fora on the development of more holistic (ecosystem‐level) approaches to marine environmental
management, including evaluations of the scope for “cumulative” or
“in‐combination” effects.

The objectives of this manual of recommended practices (MRP) are to summarize
appropriate methods for modelling physical – biological interactions during the early
life of fish, to recommend modelling techniques in the context of specific applications,
and to identify gaps in knowledge. This manual is intended to provide a reference
for early‐career modellers who are interested in applying numerical models to
fish early life and who would benefit from a summary of recommended practices for
coupled biological – physical models that incorporate predictions from threedimensional
circulation models to determine the transit of fish eggs, larvae, and juveniles
from spawning to nursery areas. For current practitioners of numerical modelling
in fish early life, the manual provides updates on latest techniques and areas in
need of further research. Although the manual focuses on finfish, many of the summarized
modelling techniques and recommended practices apply to modelling
planktonic organisms, including zooplankton and other meroplankton (e.g. molluscs
and crustaceans).
It is important to recognize that “best” modelling practices depend upon the objective
of the modelling exercise. In other words, no single model is appropriate to all applications.
Instead, model formulations are situation‐specific. Because methodologies
depend upon the goal of the endeavour, this manual includes an overview of basic
components of fish early life models and presents recommendations in the context of
three specific applications: adaptive sampling, connectivity, and recruitment prediction.
The first three sections (Section 1 – Hydrodynamic models, Section 2 – Particle tracking,
and Section 3 – Biological processes) summarize methodologies that are important
components of three‐dimensional models of the early life of fish. The next three
sections (Section 4 – Application 1: adaptive sampling, Section 5 – Application 2: connectivity,
and Section 6 – Application 3: recruitment prediction) discuss the application
of selected methodologies to specific issues that are commonly addressed with
these models. The final section summarizes the information gaps and research needs
identified throughout the manual.
This MRP grew out of participant discussions at the “Workshop on Advancements in
Modelling Physical – Biological Interactions in Fish Early Life History: Recommended
Practices and Future Directions” (WKAMF) held on 3 – 5 April 2006 in Nantes, France.
This manual does not contain an exhaustive review of all approaches to modelling
the early life of fish. Instead, it is intended to be a general reference for fish early life
modelling that includes citations that will direct readers to in‐depth treatments of
specific topics. In addition, it should be noted that this document does not represent
the consensus recommendations of all authors. Each section was written separately.
In some cases, differences in recommendations and perspectives exist. These apparent
contradictions may stem from dissimilarity in the time or space scale of the models
used by the authors or the ecosystem in which the authors are most experienced
(e.g. temperate vs. tropical). The issues on which recommendations or perspective
diverge are those that remain an active area of research. This manual is a “living”
document: future revisions and updates are expected as our understanding and
methods evolve.

Standardization of data-exchange formats is a natural and necessary development of the increasing need for cooperation and integration of fisheries data between insti-tutes. However, the existence of several standards to report the same data is time consuming, threatens the quality of the information, and is frustrating for those in charge of reporting the data. In spite of such problems, data-exchange formats have proliferated in recent decades, driven by the need to fulfil specific tasks associated with research projects and/or expert groups.
The format described in this report became a de facto standard that emerged from a long development period and is now recognized informally by large parts of the fish-ery scientific community. On several occasions, it has proven to be efficient at ad-dressing different usages, particularly automated data exchange in distributed sys-tems and data warehousing.
This report will describe in detail the exchange format, providing information about its usage in distinct environments. Given the lack of formal methods for setting standards, publication by ICES in this series will make this available to the fishery com-munity. In Section 1.2, we elaborate on the principles that were adopted to de-velop a format that would meet the needs and compromises in the best and most en-during way possible.

Acoustic data from fishing vessels provide a valuable source of information for fishery
management. To maximize the utility of fishing vessel acoustic data, objectives must be
clearly defined in the context of the potential impact on the management of the fishery and the
overall input to the ecosystem approach to fishery management. This can be achieved through
a qualitative or quantitative evaluation of all monitoring needs within the fishery, through a
monitoring strategy within a harvest strategy to explore the sampling needs, and necessary
accuracy and precision to meet management objectives.

A key recommendation of the meeting of scientific experts, which accompanied the Fifth International Conference on the Protection of the North Sea, 20-21 March 2002, Bergen, Norway, was that there should be regular monitoring of the spawning grounds of important commercial fish species. Up to this point there had never been a comprehensive survey of spawning grounds covering the whole North Sea. The problem was seen as particularly pressing in relation to cod, where a lack of up-to-date information hampered the design of suitable protection measures. In response, ICES set up a planning group (PGEGGS) to review whether a complete North Sea survey targeting eggs and larvae would be feasible. Planning took several years owing to the complex international nature of the problem, but in late 2003 and early 2004, ichthyoplankton surveys covering the whole North Sea were conducted to comprehensively assess the spawning areas of cod and plaice. The survey itself was titled PLACES (Plaice and Cod Egg Survey) to distinguish it from the work of the planning group (PGEGGS). A group of international research institutes took part from England, the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, and Norway. Subsamples of eggs that were “cod-like” in appearance were presorted from samples at sea and preserved in ethanol for analysis using species-specific genetic probes. The remainder of each sample was preserved in formalin, and the ichthyoplankton were identified later, using traditional visual methods. A full account of the material and methods used, plus initial results of the distributions of cod and plaice spawning, can be found in Fox et al. (2005a). Details of the molecular methods used to identify cod-like eggs are reported in Taylor et al. (2002). For the cod-like eggs, proportions were assigned, based on the genetic results at each station, but these results are not presented here. This report presents the distributions and abundances of eggs and larvae of the other species identified from the survey series.

Since the early 2000s, the Japanese kelp, Undaria pinnatifida, native to the northwest Pacific,
occurs on all continents except – so far – Africa and Antarctica, and it has become one of the
main target species for biosecurity. In an analysis ranking species traits of 113 introduced
seaweeds in Europe, it was the third most invasive seaweed. There are several reasons for its
success as an invader, especially its great ability to colonize artificial substrates and disturbed
areas rapidly, as well as shells of oysters and mussels, and it can grow very fast, reaching
lengths of up to 2–3 metres. Other reasons are its high tolerance for adverse conditions, such
as high turbidity and eutrophication, and the nearly invisible gametophytes’ ability to survive
being out of water for more than a month and act as a “seed bank”. The reproductive output is
large, and zoospores may be released all year-round, which contributes to its colonization
potential. Further, Undaria often develops into a fouling problem. This not only affects ships
and boats, but also structures used in aquaculture and molluscs growing on the seabed. On the
other hand, it has economic value as a source of food (“wakame”), which has been the
motivation for intentional introductions to some areas for farming.
In the early 1970s, it made its first appearance on another continent as an unintentional
introduction with oysters that were brought from Japan to the French Mediterranean coast. In
the early 1980s, it was intentionally introduced from the Mediterranean Sea for farming in
Brittany, northwestern France, from where it later dispersed to other northern European
countries. In the late 1980s, it was recorded both in New Zealand and Australia, having been
brought by shipping from Asia, which also was the vector for its spread to Argentina in the
early 1990s. Thus, the main vectors for unintentional introductions have been ships or small
boats as well as oyster movements in aquaculture (including illegal ones).

The large Asian gastropod mollusc Rapana venosa Valenciennes 1846 (Neogastropoda, Muricidae) is native to the Sea of Japan, Yellow Sea, Bohai Sea, and the East China Sea to Taiwan. This species has been introduced to the Black Sea with subsequent range expansion to the Adriatic Sea and Aegean Sea, the Chesapeake Bay on the East Coast of the United States, and the Rio de la Plata between Uruguay and Argentina. Reproductive populations are or appear to be present in all three receptor regions.
In addition, there are a limited number of reports of the species from the Brittany coastline of France, Washington State (USA), and two collections from the North Sea and New Zealand. The life history of this species makes it a viable candidate for continuing range expansion and new invasions facilitated by ballast water vectors. This review describes the current status of knowledge of the species in its home range and introduced populations.

The first part of the Section (Sections 2.2–2.3) summa-rizes the DEPM surveys that have been performed for sardine and anchovy in European waters. Emphasis is given to applications in Atlantic waters (where DEPM estimates are used routinely in stock assessment), but a brief description of known applications in the Mediterra-nean are also provided. The second part of the chapter (Sections 2.4 and 2.5) describes the most recent surveys in Atlantic waters (2002) in more detail, in order to demonstrate the survey and estimation methodology applied. Estimates are based on the traditional methods (Lasker, 1985; Hunter and Lo, 1997), which continues to provide the standard estimates of spawning-stock biomass for the purposes of stock assessment. However, results for 2002 should be compared to those obtained by the application of GAMs (Sections 3.3 and 3.4 for sardine and anchovy respectively), although GAM estimates of adult parameters and SSB are necessarily provisional (given that they were applied for the first time during the course of the most recent SGSBSA meeting). In the case of sardine, estimates based on mean survey values are compared to post-stratified and GAM-based estimates to clarify whether inappropriate sampling design under spatial structure in abundance and adult parameters can lead to biased biomass estimates (Stratoudakis and Fryer, 2000; ICES, 2002).

This document is intended to review the current state of knowledge concerning vectors of species introduc-tions, provide a brief overview of the potential risks associated with each broad category of vectors, and identify significant knowledge gaps. It has evolved from discussions of the ICES WGITMO and SGBOSV. Reports can be found at:
http://www.ices.dk/iceswork/wgdetailacme.asp?wg=WGITMO
http://www.ices.dk/iceswork/wgdetailacme.asp?wg=SGBOSV).
Although our understanding of the vectors is reasona-bly good, assigning vector strengths can be difficult and largely dependent on local or regional trading ac-tivities, and political and socio-economic circum-stances. Not all vectors continue to operate, and some become more powerful at specific times (e.g., Camp-bell and Hewitt, 1999). In this account, we attempt to outline the principal vectors that are likely to result in further non-indigenous species spread, including both introductions and transfers. Some vectors may trans-port fundamentally different sets of organisms (e.g. mussels attached to a ship’s hull, juvenile creatures within the mussel clumps, species encrusting on the mussels, species burrowing into the mussel shells, and pathogens or microalgae inside the mussels). Con-versely, some species may be spread by several differ-ent vectors (e.g., larval mussels may be transported in the plankton in ballast water; adult mussels may be transported as hull foulers, as intentional aquaculture species, or as associated species accidentally intro-duced with stock for culture).

This report is an input to the development of the European Marine Strategy (EMS). It was written by a core group established jointly by ICES and the European Commission and has been subject to wide stakeholder consultation in one of the working groups set up to support the development of the EMS process – the Working Group on Ecosystem Approach to human activities (EAM).
The report is directed at the Governments of countries participating in the Marine Strategy, including Member States as well as non-EU countries bordering the regional seas shared with the Community. The audience is also the European Commission and the Marine Conventions responsible for conservation and protection of the marine environment, and the scientific community. The core group worked during 2003–2004 with the following members:
Jake Rice (Canada)
Valentin Trujillo (Spain)
Simon Jennings (UK)
Ketil Hylland (Norway)
Olle Hagström (DG ENV)
Armando Astudillo (DG FISH)
Jørgen Nørrevang Jensen (ICES Secretariat)

This is the fifth summary on zooplankton monitoring results in the ICES area. Phytoplankton and tem-perature data for some locations corresponding to the zooplankton sampling sites are also included in this report. The final goal will be the production, in the near future, of a Plankton Status Report with environ-mental variables.
In addition we have improved this year’s report with several new series on the Barents and Baltic Seas, the presentation of annual means of zooplankton abundance in terms of anomalies, and the inclusion of a general overview of SST, phytoplankton colour index, and copepod abundance for the entire North Atlan-tic provided by SAHFOS, which serves to discuss the regional description of the time-series results from the monitoring programmes and also places the data in a basin scale context

The HAC standard format for the exchange of fisheries acoustics raw and edited data was
adopted by the ICES-Fisheries Acoustics Science and Technology Working Group
(WGFAST) in 1999. Since 2000, the ICES HAC Planning Group (PGHAC) has overseen
modifications and additions to the format so that it would evolve to meet the needs of the
international fisheries acoustics community. The present report is based on the original
adopted version and consolidates into one document the various additions, modification,
corrections and clarifications which have been vetted and accepted by the PGHAC in the
intervening years and published in the ICES Annual Reports of the Planning Group on the
HAC data exchange format. Through the work of the PGHAC, many improvements have been
made to the format, including the correction of errors and imprecisions in previously described
tuples, the clarification of rules and definitions for tuple syntax, for allocating tuple numbers
and for software compliance and compatibility, the addition of new tuples containing
information for a new generation of echosounders, for additional auxiliary sensors and for the
complete series of generic tuples for data exchange. The work of the PGHAC and the
evolution of the HAC standard format will continue after the publication of this document and
future modifications will continue to be published in the HAC Planning Group Annual
Reports.

The Advisory Committee on Ecosystems (ACE) was created in 2000 as the Council’s official body for the provision of scientific information and advice on the status and outlook for marine ecosystems, and on exploitation of living marine resources in an ecosystem context. ACE will provide a focus for advice that integrates consideration of the marine environment and fisheries in an ecosystem context, such as ecosystem effects of fishing. ACE will be at the forefront of the development of advice on ecosystem management.
ACE provides advice as may be requested by ICES Member Countries, other bodies within ICES, relevant regulatory Commissions, and other organizations.
In handling the requests, ACE draws on the expertise of its own members and on the work of various expert ICES Working Groups and Study Groups. ACE considers the reports of these groups and may request them to carry out specific activities or to provide information on specific topics.

Management of any environmental issue requires the application of management measures designed to eliminate, control, mitigate, or compensate for pressures related to the drivers of human activities to avoid potential environmental effects. Management strategies are typically implemented in the form of regulations, policies, programmes, best management practices, standard operating procedures, management targets, and even stewardship and education, to name a few. In practice, environmental management measures target driver-specific pressures to reduce the risk of environmental effects and subsequent impacts on vulnerable ecosystems and environmental services. Particularly in the marine environment, the coastal zone is influenced by many drivers occurring within a very dynamic ecosystem, integrating land-based and marine influences. Already managed by a complex jurisdictional framework, each of these pressures can cause environmental effects individually or in combination with pressures from other drivers. From a simple management perspective, the challenge lies in identifying environmental management priorities that consider the most significant pressures and ecosystem vulnerabilities.
Risk analysis and management are widely used in various management constructs from civil and mechanical engineering to food safety and human health. The World Trade Organization (WTO) has embedded risk analysis in the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, which considers the protection of human, animal, and plant health in products traded internationally. Among the types of risk analysis and management approaches studied, some are based on probabilistic models and others are more qualitative in nature.
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) also published a standard on risk management and risk assessment techniques. In this standard, the management of risks is based on identifying clearly the sources of these risks, analysing their consequences, and evaluating management options. Under the lead of a competent authority, the process includes communication and consultation with affected stakeholders as well as review and monitoring. In environmental management, the application of such risk management approaches provides assurance that management measures adequately protect the sustainability of the most vulnerable ecosystems and environmental services. Such a process not only assesses ecosystem risks, but aims to implement management measures and deploy resources to priorities of the highest ecosystem, social, cultural, economic, and policy risks. A key benefit of risk management frameworks and processes is also the identification and implementation of the most effective and efficient management measures based on existing scientific knowledge, legislation, and technologies.
In this handbook, the ISO 31000 standard for risk management and risk assessment techniques is used as the basis for an ecosystem-based, risk management approach. Considered as “events”, environmental effects are at the centre of this process, where the consequences can alter, disrupt, or even degrade ecosystems.

It is estimated that oceans absorb approximately a quarter of the total anthropogenic
releases of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each year. This is leading to acidification
of the oceans, which has already been observed through direct measurements. These
changes in the ocean carbon system are a cause for concern for the future health of
marine ecosystems. A coordinated ocean acidification (OA) monitoring programme is
needed that integrates physical, biogeochemical, and biological measurements to
concurrently observe the variability and trends in ocean carbon chemistry and evaluate
species and ecosystems response to these changes. This report arises from an
OSPAR request to ICES for advice on this matter. It considers the approach and tools
available to achieve coordinated monitoring of changes in the carbon system in the
ICES marine area, i.e. the Northeast Atlantic and Baltic Sea.
An objective is to measure long-term changes in pH, carbonate parameters, and saturation
states (Ωaragonite and Ωcalcite) in support of assessment of risks to and impacts
on marine ecosystems. Painstaking and sensitive methods are necessary to
measure changes in the ocean carbonate system over a long period of time (decades)
against a background of high natural variability. Information on this variability is
detailed in this report. Monitoring needs to start with a research phase, which assesses
the scale of short-term variability in different regions. Measurements need to cover
a range of waters from estuaries and coastal waters, shelf seas and ocean-mode waters,
and abyssal waters where sensitive ecosystems may be present. Emphasis
should be placed on key areas at risk, for example high latitudes where ocean acidification
will be most rapid, and areas identified as containing ecosystems and habitats
that may be vulnerable, e.g. cold-water corals. In nearshore environments, increased
production resulting from eutrophication has probably driven larger changes in acidity
than CO2 uptake. Although the cause is different, data are equally required from
these regions to assess potential ecosystem impact.
Analytical methods to support coordinated monitoring are in place. Monitoring of at
least two of the four carbonate system parameters (dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC),
total alkalinity (TA), pCO2, and pH) alongside other parameters is sufficient to describe
the carbon system. There are technological limitations to direct measurement
of pH at present, which is likely to change in the next five years. DIC and TA are the
most widely measured parameters in discrete samples. The parameter pCO2 is the
most common measurement made underway. Widely accepted procedures are available,
although further development of quality assurance tools (e.g. proficiency testing)
is required.
Monitoring is foreseen as a combination of low-frequency, repeat, ship-based surveys
enabling collection of extended high quality datasets on horizontal and vertical
scales, and high-frequency autonomous measurements for more limited parameter
sets using instrumentation deployed on ships of opportunity and moorings. Monitoring
of ocean acidification can build on existing activities summarized in this report,
e.g. OSPAR eutrophication monitoring. This would be a cost-effective approach to
monitoring, although a commitment to sustained funding is required.

The North American bivalve mollusc Ensis directus (Conrad, 1843) (Bivalvia, Pharidae)
is native to the Northwest Atlantic coasts from southern Labrador to northern Florida
(Bousfield, 1960; Theroux and Wigley, 1983; Swennen et al., 1985; Abbott and Morris,
2001; Turgeon et al., 2009; Vierna et al., 2013). This species has been introduced outside
its native range, with the first confirmed record from the German Bight in 1979 (Cosel
et al., 1982). Thereafter, a subsequent secondary range expansion took place, and the
species is presently known to occur from Spain to Norway, including the UK (e.g. Mühlenhardt-
Siegel et al., 1983; Essink, 1985, 1986; Kerckhof and Dumoulin; 1987, Luczak
et al., 1993; Rasmussen, 1996; Brattegard and Holthe, 1997; Eno et al., 1997; Severijns,
2000, 2002, 2004; Wolff, 2005; Dauvin et al., 2007; Houziaux et al., 2011; Arias and
Anadon, 2012; Dannheim and Rumohr, 2012; Witbaard et al., 2013) and in the western
Baltic (Gürs et al., 1993). The most recent expansion was to the Bay of Biscay (Arias and
Anadon, 2012) from where it may be expected to spread further.
E. directus has all the characteristics of a successful “r” strategist invader, including
high reproductive capacity, short generation time, and rapid growth. Its expansion is
principally due to natural dispersal. It usually occurs in clusters and has wide environmental
tolerances (Dannheim and Rumohr, 2012). Moreover, its native predators (e.g.
the snail Polinices heros and the nemertean Cerebratulus lacteus) are absent in Europe
(Cosel, 2009). Although E. directus is common in its native range, it is more abundant
in its introduced range. Further, its exceptional colonization success in Europe is likely
related to its use of underutilized tidal habitats that are characterized by exposure to
physical disturbance as a consequence of wave action and strong tidal currents. It appears
that E. directus is one of the few larger benthic invertebrates able to tolerate the
unstable sands in the tidal zone (Dekker and Beukema, 2012).

This report summarizes current knowledge on the identification, geographical distribution,
nomenclature, taxonomy, life history, ecology, and exploitation of cephalopod
species of interest to fisheries in European waters. The 17 species range from those
currently of significant fishery importance and targeted in at least part of their range
(Octopus vulgaris, Sepia officinalis, Loligo vulgaris, Loligo forbesii), through those regularly
landed as bycatch (Todaropsis eblanae, Illex coindetii, Eledone cirrhosa, Eledone moschata,
Todarodes sagittatus), to those of minor and/or local importance (Alloteuthis subulata, Alloteuthis
media, Sepia orbignyana, Sepia elegans, Sepietta oweniana, Sepiola atlantica, Ommastrephes
bartramii, Gonatus fabricii). The species reviews aim to provide a concise yet
comprehensive account of each, while remaining distinctive from previous and recent
accounts

When I took on the task of assembling
the history of the ICES Advisory
Committee on Fishery
Management (ACFM), I had the rather naïve perception that it would be easy, with
the help of the other former ACFM Chairs, to describe the development of ICES advice
from the last year of the Liaison Committee (1977) to the arrival of the Advisory
Committee (ACOM) in 2008.
Having studied material provided by other former Chairs and Secretaries of ACFM,
together with other internal material from ICES, it became apparent that instead of
giving a year-by-year description of what happened at ACFM, it would be more important
to make use of the experiences gained during the 30 years that ACFM was
responsible for advice on fisheries. This would contribute to the ever-ongoing discussions
on the role of scientific advice in fishery management. These discussions are
particularly vibrant at the present time. These 30 years cover a time wherein there
were major developments in international law and instruments1, and biodiversity
protection came to the fore after the Rio Summit of 1992.

This manual represents a review of the potential sources and methods to be applied
when providing prior information to Bayesian stock assessments and marine risk analysis.
The manual is compiled as a product of the EC Framework 7 ECOKNOWS project
(www.ecoknows.eu).
The manual begins by introducing the basic concepts of Bayesian inference and the role
of prior information in the inference. Bayesian analysis is a mathematical formalization
of a sequential learning process in a probabilistic rationale. Prior information (also
called ”prior knowledge”, ”prior belief”, or simply a ”prior”) refers to any existing relevant
knowledge available before the analysis of the newest observations (data) and
the information included in them. Prior information is input to a Bayesian statistical
analysis in the form of a probability distribution (a prior distribution) that summarizes
beliefs about the parameter concerned in terms of relative support for different values.
Apart from specifying probable parameter values, prior information also defines how
the data are related to the phenomenon being studied, i.e. the model structure. Prior
information should reflect the different degrees of knowledge about different parameters
and the interrelationships among them.
Different sources of prior information are described as well as the particularities important
for their successful utilization. The sources of prior information are classified
into four main categories: (i) primary data, (ii) literature, (iii) online databases, and (iv)
experts. This categorization is somewhat synthetic, but is useful for structuring the process
of deriving a prior and for acknowledging different aspects of it.

Each year across the ICES Area, approximately 100 million m³ of sand and gravel are
extracted from licensed areas of the seabed (as described in Chapter 2) as a source of
aggregate for the construction industry, either to supplement land‐based sources or as
a source of material for coastal beach nourishment. As land-use constraints and resource
exhaustion are tending to restrict the extraction of aggregate from terrestrial
sources, attention continues to be focused on the importance of seabed resources to
satisfy part of the demand for aggregates. The seabed is also recognized as the only
viable source of material for beach renourishment in the face of coastal erosion. However,
the benefits of using marine sand and gravel must be balanced with the potentially
significant environmental impacts. In recognition of this, the exploitation of marine
resources is regulated in most ICES Member Countries by national and international
mineral policies, subject to environmental safeguards.
Between 1998 and 2002 (ICES WGEXT annual reports), the amount of marine aggregate
extraction was approximately 53 million m³ year–1 in ICES Member Countries, but this
amount has nearly doubled in recent years. This rise reflects the increasing constraints
on land‐based extraction. Public attention to the effects of marine sand and gravel extraction
both on the environment and on fisheries has grown in line with this expansion
of effort. However, the resolution of issues related to these effects is more difficult in
the marine environment than on land because of the relative inaccessibility of sites, the
general paucity of site‐specific data on the structure and functional role of the habitat
and biota associated with sand and gravel deposits, and problems in quantifying the
performance of local fisheries. Additional drivers emphasize the impacts of marine aggregate
extraction at the international level. In particular, there is an increasing focus
on the conservation of marine biodiversity, following the Rio Earth Summit, and on
the comprehensive protection of marine habitats (under the EU Habitats Directive)
through international management initiatives under OSPAR, HELCOM, and the EU
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The MSFD sets out 11 high-level descriptors
with which to describe ”good environmental status”. Of particular relevance
to the ICES Working Group on the Effects of Extraction of Marine Sediments on the
Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT) are descriptors 6 (seafloor integrity) and 11 (introduction
of energy, including underwater noise); however, descriptors 1 (biodiversity), 4 (foodwebs),
and 7 (hydrographical conditions) also require consideration. OSPAR, HELCOM,
and ICES are promoting transnational cooperation in developing the ecosystembased
marine management. National and international emphasis has been directed toward
the development of ecosystem-based management, including evaluations of the
scope for “cumulative” or “in‐combination” impacts.