|
| Marine Resource Fact Sheet |
| |
| Greater forkbeard - Northeast Atlantic, 2008 |
 | Greater forkbeard (Phycis blennoides) |
| | Data Ownership | | This document provided, maintained and owned by International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) , is part of ICES Advice data collection. |
|
| Related observations | Locate in inventory | | | | Species: | | FAO Names: en - Greater forkbeard, fr - Phycis de fond, es - Brótola de fango, ru - Налим нитеперый большеглазый |
|
|
| Geographic extent of Greater forkbeard - Northeast Atlantic
Map tips
- Click on
 to turn layers on and off
- Double-click to zoom in
- Drag to pan
- Hold down the shift key and drag to zoom to a particular region
| FAO Major Fishing Areas |
|---|
| 27 | Atlantic, Northeast |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| Main Descriptors | Considered a single stock: Yes
Spatial Scale: Sub-Regional
Management unit: Yes |
| Considered a single stock: A group of individuals in a species occupying a well defined spatial range independent of other stocks of the same species. It can be affected by random dispersal movements and directed migrations due to seasonal or reproductive activity. |
| Spatial Scale: Spatial scale contains a standard term such as Global, Regional (e.g. for the whole Atlantic), sub-regional (e.g. for a part of the Atlantic), national, local (for sub-national levels). |
| Considered a management unit: An aquatic resource or fishery is
declared as [Fishery] Management Unit if it is
effectively the focus for the application of selected
management methods and measures, within the broader
framework of a management system. According to the FAO
Glossary for Responsible Fishing, "a Fishery Management
Unit (FMU) is a fishery or a portion of a fishery
identified in a Fishery Management Plan (FMP) relevant
to the FMP's management objectives." FMU's may be
organised around fisheries biological, geographic,
economic, technical, social or ecological dimensions ,
and the makeup and attribute of a fishery management
unit depends mainly on the FMP's management
objectives. |
| Jurisdictional distribution: Jurisdictional qualifier (e.g.
"shared", "shared - highly migratory") of the aquatic
resource related with its spatial distribution. |
| Environmental group: Classification of the aquatic
resource according to the environmental group (e.g.
pelagic invertebrate, or demersal fish) to which the
species belong. |
| | | | | | Habitat and Biology Depth zone: Slope (200 m - 1000 m). Vertical distribution: Demersal/Benthic. Geographical Distribution Jurisdictional distribution: Straddling between High Seas and EEZ Water Area Overview Spatial Scale: Sub-Regional Geo References  | | Geographic extent of Greater forkbeard - Northeast Atlantic
| FAO Major Fishing Areas | 27: Atlantic, Northeast |
| | | | | | Intersecting Major FAO areas and LME areas |
The following area codes have been found as intersecting the distribution of Greater forkbeard - Northeast Atlantic | FAO Major Fishing Areas | 27:
Atlantic, Northeast | | Large Marine Ecosystem Areas (LME) | 19: East Greenland Shelf | | 20: Barents Sea | | 21: Norwegian Shelf | | 22: North Sea | | 23: Baltic Sea | | 24: Celtic-Biscay Shelf | | 25: Iberian Coastal | | 58: Kara Sea | | 59: East Greenland Shelf/Sea | | 60: Faroe Plateau | | 64: Arctic Ocean | | 65: Arctic Archipelago |
Resource Structure Considered a single stock: Yes Assessment Overall Assessment Results  | Figure 9.4.17.1. Greater forkbeard. International landings by ICES Subarea (tonnes, ICES estimates).  |
Table 9.4.17.1. Greater forkbeard landings and TACs (tonnes).
| |
ICES estimated landings |
TAC |
TAC |
TAC |
TAC |
| Year |
I+II |
III+IV |
Vb |
VI+VII |
VIII+IX |
X |
XII |
I, II, III, IV |
V, VI, VII |
VIII, IX |
X, XII |
| 1988 |
0 |
15 |
2 |
1898 |
81 |
29 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
| 1989 |
0 |
12 |
1 |
1815 |
145 |
42 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
| 1990 |
23 |
115 |
38 |
1921 |
234 |
50 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
| 1991 |
39 |
181 |
53 |
1574 |
130 |
68 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
| 1992 |
33 |
145 |
49 |
1640 |
179 |
91 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 1993 |
1 |
34 |
27 |
1462 |
395 |
115 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 1994 |
0 |
12 |
4 |
1571 |
320 |
136 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
| 1995 |
0 |
3 |
9 |
2138 |
384 |
71 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
| 1996 |
0 |
18 |
7 |
3590 |
456 |
45 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
| 1997 |
0 |
7 |
7 |
2335 |
361 |
30 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
| 1998 |
0 |
12 |
8 |
3040 |
664 |
38 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 1999 |
0 |
31 |
34 |
3458 |
376 |
41 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
| 2000 |
0 |
11 |
32 |
4972 |
412 |
91 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
| 2001 |
8 |
27 |
102 |
4408 |
496 |
83 |
8 |
|
|
|
|
| 2002 |
318 |
585 |
149 |
3417 |
493 |
57 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
| 2003 |
155 |
233 |
73 |
3287 |
427 |
45 |
11 |
|
|
|
|
| 2004 |
75 |
143 |
50 |
2607 |
498 |
37 |
43 |
|
|
|
|
| 2005 |
51 |
83 |
46 |
2252 |
383 |
22 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
| 2006 |
49 |
139 |
39 |
2082 |
321 |
15 |
0 |
36 |
2028 |
267 |
63 |
| 2007 |
47 |
238 |
55 |
1548 |
195 |
17 |
0 |
36 |
2028 |
267 |
63 |
Scientific Advice Single-stock exploitation boundariesThe only new information available for these species is landings information and it is not sufficient to change the advice from 2006. The advice for 2009 and 2010 is therefore the same as the advice given in 2006: “Fisheries on greater forkbeard should be accompanied by programmes to collect data. The fishery should not be allowed to expand unless it can be shown that it is sustainable.” Management Management unit: Yes Biological State and Trend Exploitation rate: Undefined
Abundance level: Undefined Source of information ICES. 2009. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2009. ICES Advice, 2009. |
|
| |
|
