Atlantic Cod (U.S. and Canada)

Atlantic Cod

Gadus morhua

Sometimes known as Codfish or Scrod.

This species is wild-caught.

Summary

Decades of overfishing have driven these cod populations to historic low levels. Even with heavy management, populations show no sign of rebuilding. Catch methods for Atlantic Cod - primarily bottom trawling - cause substantial degradation. Stronger management for Icelandic groundfish fisheries put Atlantic Cod in their waters in slightly better shape than populations off the U.S. and Canada.

Criterion	Points
Life History	1.75
Abundance	0.50
Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts	0.50
Management	1.75
Bycatch	1.75
Final Score (average of criteria)	1.25
Color

Final Score	Color
2.60 - 4.00
2.20 - 2.59
1.80 - 2.19
1.40 - 1.79
0.00 - 1.39

Last updated April 17, 2006.

Life History

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

If a value for intrinsic rate of increase (‘r’) is known, assign the score below based on this value. If no r-value is available, assign the score below for the correct age at 50% maturity for females if specified, or for the correct value of growth rate ('k'). If no estimates of r, age at 50% maturity, or k are available, assign the score below based on maximum age.

1.00	Intrinsic rate of increase <0.05; OR age at 50% maturity >10 years; OR growth rate <0.15; OR maximum age >30 years.
2.00	Intrinsic rate of increase = 0.05-0.15; OR age at 50% maturity = 5-10 years; OR a growth rate = 0.16–0.30; OR maximum age = 11-30 years. Intrinsic rate of increase varies with population. One study suggests that an estimated one-half of Atlantic Cod populations have an r value >.50, while the remaining half have an r-value that would put Atlantic Cod on the border between a high and medium score (Hutchings 2001). The United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that the r value is 0.14-0.35 (FAO 2001), which is also a borderline score. To determine the score, we looked next at age at maturity, which is 2 – 8 years (Mayo and O’Brien 2000; NMFS 1999b; DFO 2001a; DFO 2001b; DFO 2001c; DFO 2001d). Maximum age is over twenty years (DFO 2000).
3.00	Intrinsic rate of increase >0.16; OR age at 50% maturity = 1-5 years; OR growth rate >0.30; OR maximum age <11 years.

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25	Species has special behaviors that make it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., spawning aggregations; site fidelity; segregation by sex; migratory bottlenecks; unusual attraction to gear; etc.). Atlantic Cod form dense spawning and schooling aggregations (NMFS 1999b; PFMC 1998a), which make large catches possible with minimum effort.
-0.25	Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity >20 years; sequential hermaphrodites; extremely low fecundity).
-0.25	Species has a small or restricted range (e.g., endemism; numerous evolutionarily significant units; restricted to one coastline; e.g., American lobster; striped bass; endemic reef fishes).
-0.25	Species exhibits high natural population variability driven by broad–scale environmental change (e.g., El Nino; decadal oscillations). For the period 1600-1900 there is a correlation between water temperature and catches of Atlantic Cod in the Northwest Atlantic. The population structure of Atlantic Cod appears to have changed over cycles of 50-60 years (Mclean and Tysban).

+0.25	Species does not have special behaviors that increase ease or population consequences of capture OR has special behaviors that make it less vulnerable to fishing pressure (e.g., species is widely dispersed during spawning).
+0.25	Species has a strategy for sexual development that makes it especially resilient to fishing pressure (e.g., age at 50% maturity <1 year; extremely high fecundity). Atlantic Cod are highly fecund. Females of 80 cm can produce approximately 2 million eggs; and females of 130 cm can produce over 11 million (DFO 2000a).
+0.25	Species is distributed over a very wide range (e.g., throughout an entire hemisphere or ocean basin; e.g., swordfish; tuna; Patagonian toothfish). Atlantic Cod occur on both sides of the north Atlantic. In the northwest Atlantic, their geographic range extends from Greenland and southern Baffin Island, along the continental slope off Labrador, Newfoundland, the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the Grand Bank and Scotian Shelf, Bay of Fundy-Gulf of Maine, and southward to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. In the northeast Atlantic, Atlantic Cod populations are distributed from Iceland to the Norwegian Sea, to the Barents Sea and Spitsbergen, and southward to the Baltic Sea and the Bay of Biscay (AFP 2002). We consider this a medium-sized range.
+0.25	Species does not exhibit high natural population variability driven by broad-scale environmental change (e.g., El Nino; decadal oscillations).

1.75	Points for Life History

Abundance

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Compared to natural or un-fished level, the species population is:

1.00	Low: Abundance or biomass is <75% of BMSY or similar proxy (e.g., spawning potential ratio). Atlantic Cod are at low biomass levels throughout their range. The biomass of the Georges Bank and Gulf of Maine populations is less than half the target level set by fishery managers, called BMSY (i.e., biomass to maintain maximum sustainable yield; DFO 2001b; Mayo and O’Brien 2000). Consequently, in the U.S., the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank Atlantic Cod populations are the highest priority for reductions in fishing mortality (U.S. New England Fishery Management Council, 2003). There are no threshold biomass levels to formally classify Icelandic or Canadian populations as overfished or healthy; however, they are depleted and known to be at critically low levels of abundance.
2.00	Medium: Abundance or biomass is 75–125% of BMSY or similar proxy; OR population is approaching or recovering from an overfished condition; OR adequate information on abundance or biomass is not available.
3.00	High: Abundance or biomass is >125% of BMSY or similar proxy.

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25	The population is declining over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE).
-0.25	Age, size or sex distribution is skewed relative to the natural condition (e.g., truncated size/age structure or anomalous sex distribution). Size and age and maturity have declined in recent decades. Fish ages 2-5 comprise the majority of the catch, even though Atlantic Cod can live for over 20 years. (DFO 2000a; Mayo and O’Brien 2000)
-0.25	Species is listed as “overfished” OR species is listed as “depleted”, “endangered”, or “threatened” by recognized national or international bodies. The IUCN has classified Atlantic Cod as "vulnerable" (IUCN 2000), and the U.S. lists Atlantic Cod as overfished.
-0.25	Current levels of abundance are likely to jeopardize the availability of food for other species or cause substantial change in the structure of the associated food web.

+0.25	The population is increasing over a generational time scale (as indicated by biomass estimates or standardized CPUE). The spawning biomass is increasing for the Georges Bank population, but decreasing for the Gulf of Maine population. Due to inconsistent trends, we did not add or subtract points here.
+0.25	Age, size or sex distribution is functionally normal.
+0.25	Species is close to virgin biomass.
+0.25	Current levels of abundance provide adequate food for other predators or are not known to affect the structure of the associated food web.

0.50	Points for Abundance

Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Select the option that most accurately describes the effect of the fishing method upon the habitat that it affects.

1.00	The fishing method causes great damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., cyanide; blasting; bottom trawling; dredging). A substantial component of the Atlantic Cod catch is taken with otter trawls. The effects of otter trawling on seafloor habitat has been identified as potentially damaging (NRC 2002).
2.00	The fishing method does moderate damage to physical and biogenic habitats (e.g., bottom gillnets; traps and pots; bottom longlines).
3.00	The fishing method does little damage to physical or biogenic habitats (e.g., hand picking; hand raking; hook and line; pelagic long lines; mid-water trawl or gillnet; purse seines).

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25	Habitat for this species is so compromised from non-fishery impacts that the ability of the habitat to support this species is substantially reduced (e.g., dams; pollution; coastal development).
-0.25	Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are not protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc. In September 2000, a federal court ruling determined that habitat provisions required for U.S. fisheries were not being met for New England fisheries (World Catch 2001).
-0.25	No efforts are being made to minimize damage from existing gear types OR new or modified gear is increasing habitat damage (e.g., fitting trawls with roller rigs or rockhopping gear; more robust gear for deep-sea fisheries). Insufficient effort has been made to reduce habitat degradation from trawl gear. The US is proposing to amend their management framework for the New England groundfish fisheries to mitigate adverse impacts to habitat by reducing fishing effort, modifying areas closed to groundfish fishing, and expanding the types of fishing gears prohibited in closed areas to include clam dredges (US New England Fishery Management Council, 2003). But some conservation groups state that these proposed new measures are inadequate (Zeman, 2004).
-0.25	If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is very slow (e.g., deep water corals; rocky bottoms).

+0.25	Habitat for this species remains robust and viable and is capable of supporting this species.
+0.25	Critical habitat areas (e.g., spawning areas) for this species are protected by management using time/area closures, marine reserves, etc.
+0.25	Gear innovations are being implemented over a majority of the fishing area to minimize damage from gear types OR no innovations necessary because gear effects are minimal.
+0.25	If gear impacts are substantial, resilience of affected habitats is fast (e.g., mud or sandy bottoms) OR gear effects are minimal.

0.50	Points for Habitat Quality and Fishing Gear Impacts

Management

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Select the option that most accurately describes the current management of the fisheries of this species.

1.00

Regulations are ineffective (e.g., illegal fishing or overfishing is occurring) OR the fishery is unregulated (i.e., no control rules are in effect).

2.00

Management measures are in place over a major portion over the species’ range but implementation has not met conservation goals OR management measures are in place but have not been in place long enough to determine if they are likely to achieve conservation and sustainability goals.

U.S. Atlantic Cod stocks are managed together with other groundfish species under established fishery management plans consistent with the provisions of the Maguson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act and other applicable laws. New England fisheries are managed under the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan. Management measures include permits, time/area closures, gear restrictions, minimum size limits, and trip limits.

Canadian populations are also managed under integrated multispecies groundfish fishery management plans, consistent with national policies provided by the Oceans Act, the Fisheries Act, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Act and other applicable laws. The federal government is currently undertaking a major revision of its fishery policy. Management measures include limited entry, catch quotas, bycatch allowances, seasonal and area closures, minimum size restrictions, gear restrictions, and harvest moratoria.

Despite management measures throughout its range, Atlantic Cod biomass is at a very low level.

3.00

Substantial management measures are in place over a large portion of the species range and have demonstrated success in achieving conservation and sustainability goals.

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25	There is inadequate scientific monitoring of stock status, catch or fishing effort.
-0.25	Management does not explicitly address fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems. The new Amendment 13 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (May 2004) is supposed to address problems related to fishery adverse effects on habitat, but the proposed new measures are considered by some conservationists to be inadequate (Zeman, 2004).
-0.25	This species is overfished and no recovery plan or an ineffective recovery plan is in place. Measures for recovery of Atlantic Cod populations are inadequate, including those under the recently adopted Amendment 13 to the U.S. Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan. For the U.S. fishery, this is a worst case example of U.S. fisheries management because managers have been aware of the poor status of Atlantic Cod populations and yet have continued to allow excessive fishing mortality. In 1995 the New England groundfish fishery was declared a failure and has since received over $100 million in disaster relief assistance (FFITF 1999; Blough 2002). Management in Iceland and Canada has been much stronger in its efforts to rebuild populations (ICES 2000; DFO 2001c). Also, U.S. management has been sued for failing to meet bycatch reduction mandates (AP 2002).
-0.25	Management has failed to reduce excess capacity in this fishery or implements subsidies that result in excess capacity in this fishery.

+0.25	There is adequate scientific monitoring, analysis and interpretation of stock status, catch and fishing effort. The U.S. and Canadian Atlantic Cod populations are well monitored and monitoring of catch and fishing effort is adequate.
+0.25	Management explicitly and effectively addresses fishery effects on habitat, food webs, and ecosystems.
+0.25	This species is overfished and there is a recovery plan (including benchmarks, timetables and methods to evaluate success) in place that is showing signs of success OR recovery plan is not needed.
+0.25	Management has taken action to control excess capacity or reduce subsidies that result in excess capacity OR no measures are necessary because fishery is not overcapitalized.

1.75	Points for Management

Bycatch

Core Points (only one selection allowed)

Select the option that most accurately describes the current level of bycatch and the consequences that result from fishing this species.

The term, "bycatch” used in this document excludes incidental catch of a species for which an adequate management framework exists.

The terms, “endangered, threatened, or protected,” used in this document refer to species status that is determined by national legislation such as the U.S. Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (or another nation's equivalent), the IUCN Red List, or a credible scientific body such as the American Fisheries Society.

1.00	Bycatch in this fishery is high (>100% of targeted landings), OR regularly includes a “threatened, endangered or protected species.”
2.00	Bycatch in this fishery is moderate (10-99% of targeted landings) AND does not regularly include “threatened, endangered or protected species” OR level of bycatch is unknown. There are no quantitative estimates of bycatch for many directed fisheries, but discards are believed to be significant in New England where trip limits are used to manage fishing effort.
3.00	Bycatch in this fishery is low (<10% of targeted landings) and does not regularly include "threatened, endangered or protected species."

Points of Adjustment (multiple selections allowed)

-0.25	Bycatch in this fishery is a contributing factor to the decline of “threatened, endangered, or protected species" and no effective measures are being taken to reduce it. In the U.S. Atlantic fisheries, bycatch includes depleted species such as the Barndoor Skate (FFITF 1999).
-0.25	Bycatch of targeted or non-targeted species (e.g., undersize individuals) in this fishery is high and no measures are being taken to reduce it.
-0.25	Bycatch of this species (e.g., undersize individuals) in other fisheries is high OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, and no measures are being taken to reduce it.
-0.25	The continued removal of the bycatch species contributes to its decline.

+0.25	Measures taken over a major portion of the species range have been shown to reduce bycatch of “threatened, endangered, or protected species” or bycatch rates are no longer deemed to affect the abundance of the “protected” bycatch species OR no measures needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear).
+0.25	There is bycatch of targeted (e.g., undersize individuals) or non-targeted species in this fishery and measures (e.g., gear modifications) have been implemented that have been shown to reduce bycatch over a large portion of the species range OR no measures are needed because fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear).
+0.25	Bycatch of this species in other fisheries is low OR bycatch of this species in other fisheries inhibits its recovery, but effective measures are being taken to reduce it over a large portion of the range.
+0.25	The continued removal of the bycatch species in the targeted fishery has had or will likely have little or no impact on populations of the bycatch species OR there are no significant bycatch concerns because the fishery is highly selective (e.g., harpoon; spear).

1.75	Points for Bycatch

References

A/F Protein (AFP). 2002 (online). Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua. Available at http://www.afprotein.com.

Associated Press. 2002. Federal Court Rules on Fish Mandate. 4 January.

Blough, H. 2002. Subsidizing the Rise, Fall, and Recovery of the New England Groundfish Fishery: Lessons Learned (draft).

Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 2001a. Northern (2J+3KL) Cod. DFO Science Stock Status Report A2-01 (2001).

Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 2001b. Eastern Georges Bank Cod. DFO Science Stock Status Report A3-04 (2001).

Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 2001c. Subdivision 3Ps cod. DFO Science Stock Status Report A2-02 (2001).

Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 2001d. Cod in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence. DFO Science Stock Status Report A3-01 (2001).

Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 2000a (online). Underwater World: Atlantic Cod. Available at http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/zone/underwater_sous-marin/atlantic/acod_e.htm.

Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 2000b. Cod on the Southern Scotian Shelf and in the Bay of Fundy (Div. 4X/5Y). DFO Science Stock Status Report A3-05 (2000).

Center for Marine Conservation (CMC). 1999. Missing the Boat: An evaluation of fishery management council response to the Sustainable Fisheries Act. January.

Federal Fisheries Investment Task Force (FFITF). 1999 (online). Report to Congress, July. Available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/ITF.html.

Hutchings, J.A. 2001. Conservation biology of marine fishes: perceptions and caveats regarding assignment of extinction risk. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58: 108–121.

International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). 2000 (online). ACFM (Advisory Committee on Fishery Management) Report 2000. Icelandic cod (Division Va). Available online at: http://www.ices.dk/committe/acfm/comwork/report/2000/contents.html.

International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 2000 (online). The 2000 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Gadus morhua. Available online at: http://www.redlist.org/search/details.php?species=8784.

Mayo, R. and L. O’Brien. 2000. Atlantic Cod. In Status of the Fishery Resources of the Northeastern United States. Available online at: http://www.wh.whoi.edu/sos/spsyn/pg/cod/.

Mclean, R.F. and Alla Tsyban. Coastal Zones and Marine Ecosystems (Chapter 6) IN Houghton, J., Y, Ding, D. Griggs, M. Noguer, P. van der Linden, X. Dai, K. Maskell, C. Johnson, eds. Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Published for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, NY, USA, 881 pp.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1999b. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua, Life History and Habitat Characteristics. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-124. September.

National Research Council. 2002.

New England Fishery Management Council. 2003. Final Amendment 13 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan Including a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. Newburyport, MA, USA.

Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC). 1999a. Status of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery through 1999 and Recommended Acceptable Biological Catches for 2000: Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation, October.

U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2001 (online). Second Technical Consultation on the Suitability of the Cites Criteria for Listing Commercially-Exploited Aquatic Species: A Background Analysis and Framework for Evaluating the Status of Commercially-Exploited Aquatic Species in a Cites Context. Windhoek, Namibia, 22-25 October. Available online at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/003/Y1455E.htm.

World Catch. 2001. NMFS seeks to minimize impact of fishing gear on habitat. Environmentalists' lawsuit pushes agency to re-evaluate. 9 December 2001.

Zeman, C. 2004. 25 February letter to Pat Kurkul, Regional Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Region, and David Borden, Chair, New England Fishery Management Council from Oceana commenting on Amendment 13 to the New England Multispecies Fishery Management Plan.