General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean - GFCM

Working Group on Stock Assessment of Demersal Species (WGSAD) Benchmark session for the assessment of European hake in GSAs 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 22, 23 and 26

Mon, Dec, 2019, 1am - Sat, Dec, 2019, 1am

Download the report (available only in English): PDF


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Working Group on Stock Assessment of Demersal Species (WGSAD) benchmark session for the assessment of European hake in geographical subareas (GSAs) 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 22, 23 was held at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) in Rome, Italy, 2–7 December 2019, and was attended by 41 experts from across the Mediterranean and beyond, including three external reviewers and technical staff from the FAO regional projects and the GFCM Secretariat. The session addressed various aspects of the assessment of European hake across the Mediterranean, focusing in particular on: i) issues related to the assessment units used, in particular in Western Mediterranean; ii) issues related to the input data and assumptions, in particular on biological parameters including growth, mortality, length-weight relationship and maturity; and iii) issues related to the assessment model used in the different units. Whenever possible, the session agreed on a benchmark assessment, or else provided the best possible advice based on the information available and the analysis carried out. A total of three benchmarks were agreed (assessment units GSAs 8-11, GSAs 12-16 and GSA 19); the basis for the advice on GSAs 1, 5, 6, 7 was also agreed, and precautionary advice was provided for five additional assessment units (GSAs 4, 20, 22, 23 and 26). Advice was also provided on the status of European hake in GSAs 1 and 3 combined, as the only way to have advice on GSA 3 and a way to provide complementary advice on GSA 1. Complementary advice was also provided in GSA 5. Among all the assessment units assessed, the status in three of the units was considered uncertain (GSAs 20, 22 and 23), while all other units assessed were considered to be in overexploitation. When possible, in addition to fishing mortality reference points, biomass reference points were also estimated, or else the relative biomass levels in relation to the observed time series were assessed.