ICES Dedicated Tiger Team Aims to Tackle Northern Shelf Cod Crisis

A project in Norway has examined pelagic/semi pelagic trawling for cod which could lead to lower fuel consumption for fishing vessels The Norwegian Directorate of Fisheries will take action after it uncovered incorrect location reporting in order to obtain MSC cod certification. Photo: istock - decline NAFO Annual Meeting 2024 NEA Cod Haddock 2026

ICES tiger team tackles Northern Shelf cod challenges as complex substock structure and critical biomass decline drive urgent scientific review

ICES Launches Emergency Scientific Review

ICES has established a dedicated tiger team to carry out a review-level benchmark of the Northern Shelf cod stock, acknowledging that existing assessment and management tools are struggling to cope with the biological and structural complexity of the stock.

The move follows growing concern within the scientific advisory system that Northern Shelf cod cannot be treated as a single, coherent stock. Recent scientific evidence confirms that the stock is in fact a combination of at least three biologically distinct substocks that overlap seasonally in northern shelf waters.

These are identified as the Southern substock, the Northwestern substock, and the Viking substock. While these components mix outside the spawning season, they retain distinct biological characteristics, complicating assessment and undermining confidence in current management advice.

Substock Structure Exposes Management Limits

Despite increasing scientific clarity on substock structure, ICES has acknowledged that separate management of these components is currently impossible. The key limitation is the lack of real-time genetic data that would allow catches to be attributed accurately to individual substocks as they mix across fishing grounds.

This constraint has practical consequences. Fishing activity cannot selectively avoid the most vulnerable components without information that does not yet exist at operational timescales.

The result is a management framework forced to operate at a coarse level, despite mounting evidence that risks and productivity differ sharply between substocks.

Southern Substock Below Critical Limits

The scientific urgency has intensified following confirmation that the southern substock has fallen below Blim, the critical biological limit below which reproductive capacity is considered at serious risk.

As a consequence, recent ICES advice has called for a zero catch for the Northern Shelf cod stock, explicitly to protect the southern component and allow rebuilding to begin.

This advice has immediate implications for fishermen operating across wide areas of the northern shelf, even where healthier substocks may dominate catches seasonally. ICES has made clear that, without a way to separate fishing mortality by substock, the most vulnerable component must drive overall advice.

Review-Level Benchmark Chosen Over Full Benchmark

In response, the ICES Advisory Committee has opted to establish a review-level benchmark rather than a full benchmark assessment.

The decision reflects both urgency and limitation. A full benchmark is a lengthy process, whereas the review-level approach allows for a focused, expert-led examination of assessment models, assumptions, and data integration within a shorter timeframe.

The stated objective is to explore alternative options for providing more robust stock assessments and to develop management advice that better reflects uncertainty, mixing behaviour, and biological complexity.

ICES has framed this as an attempt to improve realism, rather than to produce more optimistic outcomes.

Tiger Team Composition And Mandate

The tiger team consists of technical experts drawn from ICES member countries that fish Northern Shelf cod, alongside additional specialists to broaden expertise and geographic representation.

The group is chaired by Steven Cadrin of the United States and includes members from the Working Group for the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak. Selection was coordinated by ICES Advisory Committee Chair Colm Lordan in consultation with ACOM leadership and the ICES Secretariat.

Work formally began in September 2025 and is scheduled to conclude in August 2026.

Assessment First, Forecast Next

The team’s first task is to review all available data and the current assessment framework, including how substock mixing has been treated to date.

From there, it will prioritise improvements to assessment and forecasting methods, focusing on immediate weaknesses rather than long-term theoretical solutions.

The output of this short-term workplan is intended to be a revised assessment and forecast that will form the basis of draft ICES advice for 2027.

Alongside this, the team will develop a medium-term plan identifying data gaps and research priorities ahead of the next full benchmark process.

Transparency Promised, With Structural Limits

The tiger team operates as a technical subgroup under the Working Group on the Assessment of Demersal Stocks in the North Sea and Skagerrak and follows established ICES benchmark guidelines.

However, ICES observer rules do not currently allow stakeholder observers to participate directly in review-level benchmark processes. This has long been a point of frustration for parts of the fishing sector, particularly where advice carries immediate economic consequences.

ICES has said it remains committed to transparency and will provide regular updates both internally and to external requesters and stakeholders.

Scheduled update meetings are intended to provide opportunities for fishermen and other stakeholders to input at defined stages, rather than through continuous observation.

First Industry Update Imminent

The first stakeholder update meeting is scheduled for 14:00 CET on 18 December, with further meetings planned as the work progresses.

While these sessions will not give industry a role in model selection or technical deliberations, ICES has positioned them as a mechanism to test assumptions, explain emerging conclusions, and flag practical implications early.

Whether that proves sufficient to rebuild confidence in Northern Shelf cod advice remains an open question.

Science Under Pressure To Deliver

The creation of a tiger team is an implicit acknowledgment that existing assessment approaches are under strain, and that continuing to apply them unchanged carries real biological and socio-economic risks.

For fishermen, the immediate reality remains zero catch advice driven by the weakest substock. For managers, the challenge is to translate an increasingly complex biological picture into advice that is both credible and implementable.

The tiger team’s work will not solve the absence of real-time genetic tools, but ICES is betting that sharper assessment logic and clearer communication of uncertainty can deliver better-informed decisions in the meantime.