DOCSLIB.ORG

Cod Behaves in Mysterious Ways:Shifting Distribution in the North Sea During the Last Century. ICES CM 2011/D:06

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cod Behaves in Mysterious Ways:Shifting Distribution in the North Sea During the Last Century. ICES CM 2011/D:06 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ICES CM 2011/D:06 Theme Session D Linking the History to the Present: Understanding the History of Fish, Fisheries and Management Cod behaves in mysterious ways: shifting distribution in the North Sea during the last century Georg H. Engelhard*, David A. Righton, Tina K. Kerby, and John K. Pinnegar Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft NR33 0HT, UK * Author for correspondence ([email protected]) Summary The distribution of cod within the North Sea has shown major shifts over the course of the last century. This has become evident from an analysis of almost one-hundred years of British commercial fisheries data, digitised from Cefas archives. Combined with contemporary fisheries data, these span the period 1913–2010 (excepting both World Wars), at the spatially detailed level of ICES rectangle (0.5° Latitude, 1° Longitude). New analysis of old data reveals that during most of the Twentieth Century, North Sea cod distribution was very different from that in the most recent period (2000– 2010). Whereas historically, densities of cod catches were especially concentrated in the central and north-western North Sea, they are presently concentrated in the northern- and north-easternmost part of the North Sea. We attempt to reveal the extent to which climate, fishing, or both have contributed to the recent shift in distribution. Keywords: cod, distribution shift, climate, North Sea 1 INTRODUCTION Historically, cod Gadus morhua has arguably been the most important of commercial fish species, and its fishery has played a prominent role in the economical and political development of Europe as well as North America over the past centuries (e.g. Kurlansky 1997). More recently, disputes over cod fishing grounds have led to such well-known conflicts as the British-Icelandic ‘Cod Wars’ of 1950s– 1970s (Gilchrist 1978; Jónsson 1982), which ultimately contributed to the international establishment of 200-miles Exclusive Economic Zones. Currently, cod remains one of the world’s most important fish stocks, and in 2004 ranked 12th among all fish species in terms of global landings (and even higher in terms of value of landings; FAO 2007). This is in spite of significant declines in landings of most cod stocks during recent decades (review: Engelhard et al. 2010a) and a collapse of populations off eastern Canada and the U.S. (Kurlansky 1997). The North Sea cod stock has shown a particularly marked decline since the 1980s, even more noteworthy since it followed a period of very high productivity known as the ‘gadoid outburst’ (late 1960s to mid-1980s: Daan 1978; Hislop 1996). During the gadoid outburst, not only cod but also haddock Melanogrammus aeglefinus, whiting Merlangius merlangus, saithe Pollachius virens and Norway pout Trisopterus esmarki produced some of the largest year-classes on record (Holden 1978; Jones & Hislop 1978). Whilst landings of cod had remained fairly stable throughout the period 1900– 1950, they rose enormously during the 1960s and remained very high until the mid-1980s, when the recent marked decline began. Survey indices and stock assessment have indicated that the high landings were not only due to substantially increased fishing effort but also to a considerable extent, to very high recruitment and biomass levels (Pope & Macer 1996). Unfortunately, the recruitment of North Sea cod has remained low since the late 1990s, and the spawning stock biomass has been at historically low levels for almost two decades now (ICES 2010). The past three decades have also seen a shift in the mean distribution of cod within the North Sea, to more northerly and on average deeper waters; this was reported by studies based on research survey data (International Bottom Trawl Surveys, IBTS; see Hedger et al. 2004; Perry et al. 2005; Rindorf & Lewy 2006; Dulvy et al. 2008). As this shift coincided with the population decline it is important to understand its causes, not only because of predicted links between distribution and abundance (e.g., Blanchard et al. 2005) but also because changes in fish distributions may have knock-on effects upon fisheries (Pinnegar et al. 2010). Two main hypotheses have been put forward (Engelhard et al. 2010b). Firstly, climate change is expected to result in contractions, expansions, or shifts in fish distribution (review: Rijnsdorp et al. 2009). In the North Sea, a warming trend has happened over the past 30 years; this has coincided with a northward shift in many, but not all, North Sea fish species (Beare et al. 2004; Perry et al. 2005), and an average, deepening shift of around –3.6 m per decade since the 1980s (Dulvy et al. 2008). Secondly, fishing pressure has over the same period been consistently higher in the southern compared to northern North Sea (Jennings et al. 1999); with a greater rate of fishery-induced depletion in the south, a northward shift in mean population distribution is to be expected. However, the rather short time-span of fishery-independent survey data (past three decades) makes it very hard to disentangle these two hypotheses (which are not mutually exclusive). This has motivated the current study based on a unique dataset of British commercial catch per unit effort 2 (cpue) records spanning a far longer timespan—approaching one century—covering both warming and cooling periods, and including periods of contrasting levels of fishing effort. The aims of the present paper are to: 1. Describe long-term distribution shifts of cod within the North Sea over the period 1913–2010; 2. Compare the current (2000–2010) distribution with that throughout the Twentieth Century; 3. Examine to what extent distribution shifts can be explained by variables related to climate change, fishing pressure, and/or stock abundance. METHODS Data and modelling of cod distributions In broad lines the methodology follows that of our companion paper describing the long-term distribution shifts of sole Solea solea and plaice Pleuronectes platessa in the North Sea (Engelhard et al. 2011). For the period 1913–1980, cod data were obtained from historical fisheries ‘statistical charts’ (catalogued in Engelhard 2005) that were produced by the UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF; now the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [Defra]). These show fishing effort (hours fished) and fish landings by British otter trawlers (either steam- or motor-driven) for each ICES rectangle (0.5° Latitude, by 1° Longitude) in the North Sea. These data record all fish that were landed by the otter trawl fleet into England and Wales (1913, 1968–1980) or into England, Scotland and Wales (1920–1967). For the period 1968–2010, data on otter trawler landings into Scotland were obtained from the Fisheries Management Database (FMD) of Marine Scotland (cf. Greenstreet et al. 1999). For 1982–2010, data on otter trawl landings into England and Wales were obtained from the Fisheries Activity Database (FAD) of Defra/Cefas. Over the time-span examined, important improvements have occurred in the cod fishing power, or technical efficiency, of otter trawlers (Robinson 2000; Engelhard 2008). Our aim is not to analyse temporal changes in absolute cpue values as proxies for the abundance of cod, but rather to look at trends in spatial distribution of catches. We therefore normalised the cpue values in any given year (divided by the annual mean cpue for the entire area), to overcome the confusing effect of an increase in fishing power of trawlers. We are assuming that relative cpue by the commercial fleet gives an appropriate indication of the spatial distribution of the species. We acknowledge that potential bias might arise from uneven spatial distribution of effort by more or less powerful vessels within the North Sea. By decade, we calculated cpue values by rectangle for a large area encompassing the majority of the North Sea (shaded in Figure 2). As an approach to quantify shifts in population distribution, we calculated the ‘centres of gravity’ of the latitudinal, longitudinal, and depth distributions of North Sea cod, using methods akin to those developed and applied by Heino et al. (2008). This analysis was based on a slightly less extensive area within the North Sea that included only those rectangles with cpue data for the majority of years in our time-series (see polygon line in Figure 2). Within this polygon, the latitudinal (or longitudinal) centre of gravity of distribution in a given year was calculated as the average of the 3 latitudes (or longitudes) of all rectangle centres, weighted by the cpue value in each rectangle. Weighted standard deviations and standard errors of the weighted mean longitudes were calculated (Bevington 1969). The centres of gravity of depth distributions were calculated analogously and, given that cod generally live close to the seafloor, based on the mean sea depth in any given rectangle. Modelling distribution shifts in relation to climate, abundance and fishing pressure We examined cod distribution in relation to: (1) climatic variables and (2) cod fishing pressure and abundance. As a broad-scale climate indicator, the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) winter index (December of the previous year to March of the focal year) for 1913–2007 was taken from Jones et al. (1997), with updated values provided online by the Climatic Research Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK (www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timo/projpages/nao_update.htm; see Figure 1a). The NAO is associated with speed and direction of westerly winds across the North Atlantic, and is particularly important in winter when it exerts a strong influence on European weather patterns, and on Atlantic water inflow into the North Sea; a positive NAO is generally linked with strong wind circulation and higher atmospheric and sea temperatures in western Europe (Hurrell 1995; Jones et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Iceland's Contested European Policy
    An evolving EU engaging a changing Mediterranean region Jean Monnet Occasional Paper 01/2013 Iceland’s contested European Policy: The Footprint of the Past - A Small and Insular Society by Baldur Thorhallsson Copyright © 2013, Baldur Thorhallsson, University of Malta ISSN 2307-3950 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without any prior written permission from the Institute for European Studies, University of Malta. Publisher: Institute for European Studies, Msida, Malta. The Institute for European Studies The Institute for European Studies is a multi-disciplinary teaching and research Institute at the University of Malta, offering courses in European Studies which fully conform to the Bologna guidelines, including an evening diploma, a bachelor’s degree, a masters and a Ph.D. The Institute also operates a number of Erasmus agreements for staff and student exchanges. Founded in 1992 as the European Documentation and Research Centre (EDRC), the Institute was granted the status of a Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence in 2004. The Institute is engaged in various research and publication activities in European Integration Studies and is a member of the Trans-European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA), the LISBOAN network, EPERN, EADI, and the two Euro-Mediterranean networks, EuroMeSCo and FEMISE. The Institute is also a member of the Council for European Studies (hosted at Columbia University). The research interests of its staff include comparative politics and history of the European Union (EU); EU institutions; EU external relations and enlargement; small states in the EU; Malta in the EU; Euro-Mediterranean relations; Stability and Growth Pact; economic governance of the euro area; Europe 2020; EU development policies, climate change, international economics, economic causes and consequences of globalisation and EU trade and cohesion policy.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of International Fisheries Management Regimes
    Cefas contract report C7372 A review of international fisheries management regimes Authors: Stuart A. Reeves, James B. Bell, Giulia Cambiè, Sarah L. Davie, Paul Dolder, Kieran Hyder, Hugo Pontalier, Zachary Radford & Duncan Vaughan Issue date: 02/08/2018 Cefas Document Control Title: A Review of International Fisheries Management Submitted to: Georgina Karlsson/Charlotte Wicker Date submitted: 02/08/18 Project Manager: Stuart A. Reeves Report compiled by: SAR Quality control by: Defra various & Kieran Hyder Approved by & Kieran Hyder, 8/1/2018 date: Version: 3.5a Version Control History Author Date Comment Version SAR et al. 20/06/17 Compiled from individual 2 chapters SAR et al. 19/07/17 Working version for comment 2.1 SAR et al. 1/09/17 Complete draft for comment 2.2 SAR et al. 21/11/17 Revised to take account of 3.1 comments SAR et al. 12/12/2017 Further revisions in response to 3.2 comments SAR et al. 12/12/2017 Revised structure inc. MRF 3.3 chapter SAR et al. 24/1/2018 Further corrections & enhanced 3.4 exec summary. SAR et al. 26/2/2018 Minor corrections 3.4a SAR et al. 27/7/18 Pre-publication corrections & 3.5 formatting SAR et al. 02/08/18 Fixing minor typos & formatting 3.5a A review of international fisheries management regimes Page i A review of international fisheries management regimes Page ii An international review of fisheries management regimes Authors: Stuart A. Reeves, James B. Bell, Giulia Cambiè, Sarah L. Davie, Paul Dolder, Kieran Hyder, Hugo Pontalier, Zachary Radford and Duncan Vaughan1 Issue date: 02/08/2018 Head office Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, UK Tel +44 (0) 1502 56 2244 Fax +44 (0) 1502 51 3865 www.cefas.defra.gov.uk Cefas is an executive agency of Defra 1 Contact Address: c/o Natural England, Suite D, Unex House, Bourges Boulevard, Peterborough, PE1 1NG.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishing for Common Ground: Broadening the Definition of ‘Rights-Based’ Fisheries Management in Iceland’S Westfjords
    Master‘s Thesis Fishing For Common Ground: Broadening the Definition of ‘Rights-based’ Fisheries Management in Iceland’s Westfjords Katie Auth Advisor: Níels Einarsson, Ph.D. University of Akureyri Faculty of Business and Science University Centre of the Westfjords Master of Resource Management: Coastal and Marine Management Ísafjörður, May 2012 2 Supervisory Committee Advisor: Níels Einarsson, Ph.D., Director of the Stefansson Arctic Institute Reader: Gísli Pálsson, Ph. D., Professor of Anthropology at the University of Iceland Program Director: Dagný Arnarsdóttir, MSc. Katie Auth Fishing For Common Ground: Broadening the Definition of ‘Rights-based’ Fisheries Management in Iceland’s Westfjords 45 ECTS thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of a Master of Resource Management degree in Coastal and Marine Management at the University Centre of the Westfjords, Suðurgata 12, 400 Ísafjörður, Iceland Degree accredited by the University of Akureyri, Faculty of Business and Science, Borgir, 600 Akureyri, Iceland Copyright © 2012 Katie Auth All rights reserved Printing: Háskólaprent, Reykjavík, June 2012 3 Declaration I hereby confirm that I am the sole author of this thesis and it is a product of my own academic research. __________________________________________ Student‘s name 4 Abstract Since the 1980s, so-called “rights-based” fisheries management regimes – specifically those designed to apply market forces to problems of inefficiency and overfishing by divvying up fixed, tradable proportions of a total allowable catch among individuals or cooperatives – have become both one of the most widely advocated and most contentious aspects of marine resource management. Iceland, promoted by some as a successful international model of this approach, has been the site – for nearly thirty years – of fierce debate and controversy regarding the system’s effects on regional development, social justice and wealth disparity.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Ice and Cod: the U.S.-Icelandic Alliance Throughout the Cold War
    ABSTRACT HOUSE OF ICE AND COD: THE U.S.-ICELANDIC ALLIANCE THROUGHOUT THE COLD WAR From 1946 to 2006, the Icelandic government made sure to protect their people, their elves, and their cod from foreign powers. However, in a Cold War world, the need for spheres of influence on the part of the United States complicated Iceland’s security. The U.S. foreign policy makers intended to use economic and military coercion to create an alliance with Iceland. Iceland joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and offered an airbase in Keflavík to help the United States’ goal of collective security. The Icelanders and the British fought in three cod wars dragging the United States in to mediate between allies. The question of stationing military personnel and weapons further complicated their relationship. This work uses the range from 1946 to 2006 to show the ways in which two countries dealt with situations involving economics, the military, and the issues of alliance. Also, by showing these situations, one can view how the Cold War was truly a global war where nations large and small were affected in some way. Jeffrey Allen Moosios May 2015 HOUSE OF ICE AND COD: THE US-ICELANDIC ALLIANCE THROUGHOUT THE COLD WAR by Jeffrey Allen Moosios A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History in the College of Social Sciences California State University, Fresno May 2015 APPROVED For the Department of History: We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student's graduate degree program for the awarding of the master's degree.
    [Show full text]
  • Iceland's Search for Shelter
    n Fræðigreinar STJÓRNMÁL & STJÓRNSÝSLA A small state in world politics: Iceland’s search for shelter Baldur Thorhallsson, Professor in political science, University of Iceland Abstract The aim of this paper is to determine Iceland’s foreign policy options in relation to shelter theory. Iceland has been seeking political and economic shelter ever since the United States deserted it in 2006, by closing its military base, and in 2008, by refusing to provide it with assistance following its economic collapse. Iceland has made several new security and defence arrangements with its neighbouring states, applied for membership of the European Union and was the first European country to make a free-trade agreement with China. Moreover, the president of Iceland pressed for closer political and economic ties with Russia. Prominent Icelandic politicians frequently claim that Brexit will create a number of opportunities for Iceland and lead to closer cooperation with Britain. However, Iceland has not yet secured shelter of an extent comparable to what it had enjoyed from the United States. In this paper, we will answer questions such as: What does shelter theory tell us about Iceland’s overseas relations with the US, NATO, the EU, Britain, Russia, China, and the Nordic states? Will Iceland receive more reliable shelter provided by multilateral organizations than by a single shelter provider? Keywords: Foreign policy; small states; shelter theory; Iceland. Introduction Iceland has been searching for shelter ever since the US closed its military base in the country in 2006 and refused to provide it with a rescue package following the 2008 economic crash.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fisheries Dimension
    From Membership to Partnership, the EU and its Relations with the UK after Brexit: the Fisheries Dimension Dr Thomas Appleby Associate Professor in Property Law, University of the West of England, Bristol Abstract Fishing in European waters has been a contentious issue since the sixteenth century and was a key factor in the development of the international law of the sea itself. At the time the UK joined the EU and shared its waters with Member State vessels it also lost access to its traditional fishing grounds off Iceland. The Common Fisheries Policy developed a centralised approached based around historic fleet size rather than productivity of Member States’ waters. Controls were centered around technical measures, reduction in capacity and quota. These worked: the collapse of fish stocks was halted and started to recover a little. However many stocks are still potentially illegally allocated beyond scientific levels, and fishing continues unmanaged in the EU’s suite of offshore marine protected areas. The management institutions need greater transparency and stronger adherence to the law. There is scope to build a future relationship between the EU and the UK: the UK and some of its overseas territories needs the EU market, many stocks are shared, and the parties will need to agree on scientific approaches. However, It is likely that the UK is due a greater allocation of stocks than the current system. As we approach the endgame of the Brexit negotiations it is important that both sides reflect that fishing represents less that 0.1% of their economies and over-politicisation of a small sector will not help either party in the context of the larger negotiations.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Did the Cod Wars Occur and Why Did Iceland Win Them? a Test of Four Theories
    Why Did the Cod Wars Occur and Why Did Iceland Win Them? A Test of Four Theories Sverrir Steinsson MA Thesis in International Affairs School of Social Sciences June 2015 Why Did the Cod Wars Occur and Why Did Iceland Win Them? A Test of Four Theories Sverrir Steinsson MA Thesis in International Affairs Advisors: Silja Bára Ómarsdóttir and Guðni Th. Jóhannesson Faculty of Political Science School of Social Sciences University of Iceland June 2015 This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in International Affairs at the University of Iceland. This thesis cannot be reproduced without the author’s consent. © Sverrir Steinsson 2015 090390-3689 Reykjavík, Iceland 2015 Abstract Few attempts have been made to provide theoretical explanations for the occurrence and outcomes of the Cod Wars. In this thesis, I test hypotheses derived from four IR theories and perspectives on the Cod Wars: the Rationalist Explanations for War perspective, which sees information problems, commitment problems and issue indivisibility as drivers of conflict; Liberal IR theory, which expects democracy, commercial ties, and institutions as pacifying influences; Structural Realism, which expects states to pursue their security interests; and Neoclassical Realism, which expects statesmen’s pursuit of security interests to be distorted by domestic pressures. I find that Liberal and Structuralist Realist expectations were not met, that rational miscalculation and misinformation contributed to the occurrence of the disputes, and Neoclassical Realist expectations were fully met in all of the disputes. Following these tests, I provide a new, structurally informed explanation of the Cod Wars.
    [Show full text]
  • EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee Brexit: Fisheries Written and Oral Evidence Contents
    EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee Brexit: Fisheries Written and Oral Evidence Contents Angling Trust — Written Evidence (FBR0013) .................................................................................... 3 Thomas Appleby — Written Evidence (FBR0012) ............................................................................. 9 Bertie Armstrong, Marcus Coleman, Hazel Curtis and Barrie Deas — Oral Evidence (QQ 12 – 21) ............................................................................................................................................................ 21 John Ashworth — Written Evidence (FBR0004).............................................................................. 43 Professor Richard Barnes, Professor Robin Churchill and Dr Bryce Stewart — Oral Evidence (QQ 1 – 11) .............................................................................................................................................. 44 Professor Robin Churchill, Professor Richard Barnes and Dr Bryce Stewart — Oral Evidence (QQ 1 – 11) .............................................................................................................................................. 64 Marcus Coleman, Bertie Armstrong, Hazel Curtis and Barrie Deas — Oral Evidence (QQ 12 – 21) ............................................................................................................................................................ 65 Hazel Curtis, Bertie Armstrong, Marcus Coleman, and Barrie Deas — Oral Evidence (QQ 12 – 21)
    [Show full text]
  • Icelandic Fisheries: a Review
    DRAFTPRE-RELEASE! ! DRAFT ! DRAFT PRE-RELEASE! ! DRAFT ! DRAFT Directorate-GeneralPRE-RELEASE! !Fo r DRAFTinternal Policies POLICY DEPARTMENT Directorate-General For internal Policies STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES B POLICY DEPARTMENT AgricultureAgriculture and Rural and Development Rural Development STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES B CultureCulture and Education and Education Role The Policy Departments are research units that provide specialised advice Fisheries to committees, inter-parliamentary delegations and other parliamentary bodies. Fisheries RegionalRegional Development Development Policy Areas TransportTransport and andTourism Tourism Agriculture and Rural Development Culture and Education Fisheries Regional Development Transport and Tourism Documents Visit the European Parliament website: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies PHOTO CREDIT: iStock International Inc., Photodisk, Phovoir DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT B: STRUCTURAL AND COHESION POLICIES FISHERIES ICELANDIC FISHERIES: A REVIEW NOTE This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Fisheries. AUTHORS Irina POPESCU, Katrin POULSEN Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies European Parliament E-mail: [email protected] EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE Virginija KELMELYTE LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Translations: ES, FR, IT, PT. ABOUT THE EDITOR To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its monthly newsletter please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in March 2012. Brussels, © European Parliament, 2012. This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Cod Wars” by David Manley
    ”There’s Something Wrong With Our Bloody Fish Today” Wargaming the “Cod Wars” By David Manley Mention the phrase “Cod War+“ in a British chippie these days and you’ll probably be met with blank stares, but in the mid 1970s everyone who enjoyed a bit of Cod wrapped in newspaper and served up with a pile of greasy chips was glued to events in the North Atlantic. In 1976 Britain went to “war” for the third time against Iceland over the issue of fishing rights and economic control of the sea. Night after night viewers of the BBC and ITV news programmes saw footage of RN frigates battling it out with the small, stocky and well built gunboats of the Icelandic Coast Guard. Eventually, as in the previous two “wars” a diplomatic solution was found which suited some parties on both sides and upset a few others (mostly in Britain and the rest of Europe). However, this is jumping the gun a little, so let’s begin with an overview of the Cod Wars. The First Cod War The first "war" occurred in mid to late 1958. At this time a nation’s territorial waters extended a mere 4 miles. British trawlers routinely fished up to the 4 mile limit. In 1958 Iceland unilaterally extended their limit to 12 miles. Iceland depends on its fishing industry more than just about any other country in the world. Iceland has few natural resources, no timber, no fuel, little agricultural potential, and no mineral deposits. As a result her economy is uniquely dependent on fishing for survival and for exports to fund the imports needed for the other parts of the economy, accounting for about 90% of Iceland's total exports in each year between 1881 and 1976.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Britain's Role in North Sea Demersal Fisheriesa Long-Term Perspective Over the Past Century. ICES CM 2011/D:16
    ICES CM 2011/D:16 Great Britain’s role in North Sea demersal fisheries A long-term perspective over the past century Tina K. Kerby1,2, William W.L. Cheung1,2, Georg H. Engelhard2 1 School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, UK 2 Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), UK Introduction - For accurate interpretation of fisheries data and revealing trends in fisheries, the historical contexts of influencing drivers have to be understood - Landing trends may not only be influenced by natural fluctuations or fishing pressure, but also by changing drivers affecting the fishing industry - In the 19th and first half of the 20th century, in particular England dominated North Sea demersal fisheries in Europe but lost this lead in the second half of the 20th century - Favourable terms of political, technological and economical drivers brought about this vast rise, but as well influenced the decline North Sea demersal fisheries Gadoid outburst 1500 Other nations Russian Fed. & Un. Sov. Soc. Rep. Germany (incl. GDR) Development of large 1200 Netherlands scale modern fisheries Norway ) European countries 3 expanding their fisheries Denmark Scotland 900 England & Wales England takes 50% Scotland leading of total North Sea landings TACs and quotas 600 North Sea fishery WW I WW II 300 Landings (tonnes x 10 (tonnes Landings 0 1903 1908 1913 1918 1923 1928 1933 1938 1943 1948 1953 1958 1963 1968 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 English demersal fisheries (incl. Wales) 800 Anglo-Icelandic cod wars All Seas ) 3 Shift of North Sea fleet to prolific distant water grounds (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Scandinavian Journal of History the COD and the COLD
    This article was downloaded by: [ University of Iceland ] On: 17 July 2015, At: 04:03 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG Scandinavian Journal of History Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/shis20 THE COD AND THE COLD WAR GuÐmundur J. GuÐmundsson Published online: 22 Aug 2006. To cite this article: GuÐmundur J. GuÐmundsson (2006) THE COD AND THE COLD WAR, Scandinavian Journal of History, 31:2, 97-118, DOI: 10.1080/03468750600604184 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03468750600604184 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
    [Show full text]