THIS REPORT NOT TO BE CITED WITHOUT PRIOR REFERENCE TO THE COUNCIL*

International Council for theExploration of the Sea

C.M. 1994/K:7

•

REPORT OF THE STUDY GROUP ON

THE LIFE HISTORY AND ASSESSMENT OF CEPHALOPODS

Cork, 29 September - 1 October 1993

This document is areport of a Study Group of the InternationalCouncil for the Exploration of the Sea and does not necessarilyrepresent the views of the Council. Therefore it should not bequoted without consultation with the General Secretary.

*General SecretaryICESPalregade 2-4DK-1261 Copenhagen KDENMARK

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Terms of Reference

The Council Resolution 1992/2:22 decided that the Study Group on Cephalopod Biology will berenarned the Study Group on the Life History and Assessment of Cephalopods and will meet inCork, Ireland from 29 September - 1 Oetober 1993 to:

a) use existing biological knowledge to classify cephalopods into groups according to theirlife history, population dynamics, and geographical seale;

b) make an inventory of relevant growth and assessment methods, evaluate their validity andapplieation to species representative of the above groups, and plan future applicationleading to the development ofharvesting strategies;

c) review available knowledge on reproduction, distribution, and oeeanography in relationto recruitment processes, and plan new research,

d) review present inadequacies in the eollection of eephalopod catch and fishery data in the eICES area, recommend necessary improvements, and explore alternative means ofestimating abundance (e.g., using predator data);

e) advise on the future orientation of ICES in respect to cephalopod studies.

1.2 Participation

The following nominated members(*) of the Study Group and other persons with interest incephalopod biology participated in the meeting and contributed to this report:

Pedro AndradeNick BaileyPeter Boyle*Gavin BurnellMartin Collins*Manuela Morais da Cunha*Maria deI Mar Fernandez-NufiezAngel GonzalezEmma Hatfield*ColmLordanBill MacyAna MorenoJanette NormanUwe Piatkowski (Chairman)*Graham PierceJean-Paul Robin*Paul Rodhouse*GeoffTingley*Michael Vecchione*

Faro, PortugalAberdeen, UKAberdeen, UKCork,lrelandCork, IrelandLisbon, PortugalSanta Cruz de Tenerife, SpainVigo, SpainCarnbridge, UKCork, IrelandNarragansett, USALisbon, PortugalAberdeen, UKKiel, GermanyAberdeen, UKCaen, FranceCambridge, UKLondon, UKWashington, D.C., USA

2

•

Most of the participants had also attended the 1993 Statutory Meeting in Dublin which took placejust before the Study Group meeting, and they had presented fifteen contributions in the ShellfishCommittee meetings (e.g. Pierce et al. 1993a; 1993b).

1.3 General Considerations

The present Study Group having met for two years, has now identified a new role involving anorientation which is more clearly expressed by the new title. The economic importance ofcephalopod fisheries has grown rapidly in Europe, and the considerable new research now inprogress in ICES member countries has featured prominently at recent ICES meetings, and in thework of the Study Group on Cephalopod Biology. The most important research is currently fundedby the European Community's Research Programmes in the Fisheries Sector (FAR; AIR) whichinvolves several ICES nations: Two international projects direct studies to elucidate the fisherypotential and the dynamics and interactions of Northeast Atlantic squid stocks (Anon. 1991). Thishas enhanced ICES and given it recognition in the world cephalopod community. The ShellfishCommittee endorses the view that the Study Group should now progress from a descriptive role toone of promoting serious thinking about assessment methods and the collection of fishery data inorder to lay the foundation for future discussion about harvesting strategies and management. Aninformal meeting of cephalopod biologists during the 1993 Statutory Meeting suggests that becauseof its fishery management background ICES can play an important role in setting the necessarystandards and criteria.

1.4 Opening of thc :Mccting

The meeting took place at the University College Cork. The Chairman welcomed the participants,and Dr Gavin Burnell from the Department of Zoology, University College Cork wished the StudyGroup an excellent atmosphere and a successful meeting. Local arrangements were perfectlyorganized and the Study Group appreciated the excellent and stimulating atmosphere in the College.

2. CLASSIFICATION OF CEPHALOPODS ACCORDING TO LIFE HISTORY,POPULATION DYNAl\IICS AND GEOGRAPHICAL SCALE

• 2.1 Classification of ccphalopods

According to currently available fishery data and information collected from fishermen and fisheryports cephalopod species ofcommercial interest within the ICES area are:

• Sepia officinalis*, Sepia elegans, Sepia orbignyana, (Family Sepiidae),

• Sepiola atlantica, Sepietta oweniana (Family Sepiolidae),

• Loligo vulgaris*, Loligo forbesi*, Alloteuthis subulata*, Alloteuthis media (Family Loligi­nidae),

• [Ilex coindetii*, Todaropsis eblanae*, Todarodes sagittatus, Ommastrephes bartramii(Family Ommastrephidae),

• Octopus vulgaris*, Eledone cirrllOsa*.(Family Octopodidae).

3

According to the life history, population dynamics and geographical scales these species can beclassified into the following categories:

,I) Local cephalopod, specialist, regionally adapted, relatively wide and continuous geogra­

phical distribution:

a) Benthic, sublitoral: Sepia oJficinalis, Sepia elegans and Oetopus vulgaris.b) Benthic, sublitoral-upper bathyal: Sepia orbignyana, Sepiola atlantka, Sepietta oweni­

ana and Eledone cirrlwsa.

c) Neritic and demersal or upper sublitoral: Loligo and Alloteuthis species.

mUniversal cephalopod, generalist, wide range of conditions, with broad and continuous (ornot) geographical distribution, pronounced migrations:

a) Epi-mesopelagic to demersal: Illex eoindetii, Todaropsis eblanae and occasionallyTodarodes sagittatus.

b) Always epi-mesopelagic: Ommastreplzes bartramii.

2.2 ßiological and flShcrics characteristics of commercially important cephalopods withinthe leES area

For those species which are potential candidates for a more developed fishery (above marked with an*) all important data on life history, environmental factors and fisheries are compiled in Tables 2 to 5It should also emphasized here that a number of excellent reviews on these species are available inthe current literature (e.g. Boyle 1983; 1987; Roper et al. 1984).

3. GRO\VTH, ASSESSMENT l\IETHODS AND HARVESTING STRATEGIES

3.1 Assessmcnt l\Icthods

An inventory of assessment methods was given in the report of the Study Group on CephalopodBiology submitted to the ICES Statutory Meeting in 1993 (Anon. 1993). Additionally to this a •review of assessment methods that could be applied to cephalopods has been prepared by Pierce andGuerra (1993). Table 1 (next page) shows a resume of the methods available and the data required,assumptions made and problems in application for each method.

3.2 Growth Patterns

A number of assessment methods do not require assumptions about the growth form of the stockunder investigation. For those methods that do require assumptions about the pattern of growth, it isimportant to be aware of the possible patterns and how sampling can influence the perceived pattern.

Growth can be expressed empirically, by, for example, using age-Iength relationships or progressionof length-frequencies through time. In these examples there are implicit assumptions that reasonablyaccurate ageing can be carried out (using skeletal parts such as statoliths), that growth rates aresimilar for a11 cohorts during the year and that there are no sampling biases. All of these assumptionsare open of lesser doubt for the majority of cephalopods.

4

•

Where a specific growth model needs to be applied, as in the case of yield per recruit models, it isvery important that the growth model should adequately describe the observed or known pattern ofgrowth. A number of growth models commonly applied in fisheries are not applicable to cephalopodsand care in choice of the model is required.

For most cephalopod species adequate data to elucidate growth pattern are lacking. Further,available information on growth patterns is contradictory, even within same and similar species (seereview by Pauly 1985) and growth patterns considerably differ between the various life phases.

Table 1. Assessment methods available for cephalopod stocks.

METHOD DATA REQUIRE~IENTS; ASSlThlPTIONS PROBLEMSPARAMETERS

Stock- Stock size, recruitment Fixed relationship Stochasticity of realrecruibnent situation

Recruitment Stock size, abundance indices for Empirical relationship between Variable timing ofindices recruits recruitment and subsequent recruitment

adult stock

Production Stock size or CPUE and catch Equilibrium exists, density Unrealistic assumptionmodels dependence

Cohort Analysis, Catch at age, natural mortality Age can be measured, distinct Age estimation difficult,Yield per Recruit (M), fishing mortality (F), growth cohorts, fixed rates of F & M overlapping cohorts, M&VPA pattern (for YPR) &Fvariable

Length-based Length frequencies, catch-at- Distinct cohorts, no seasonality Overlapping cohorts,length (growth model) in growth rates seasonal growth rates

Depletion models Total catches, representative Constant catchability, depletion Migration of cohorts,CPUE series linear, M unreported catches

Empirical models Environmental data, catches, Stock controlled by Tao much noise, dataCPUE, abundance environment not collected, density

dependenceMulti-species Detailed data on a11 species Numerous Tao many parameters,

data not available

3.3 Application of Asscssmcnt l\Icthods

The annuallife-cycle of the majority of the cephalopod species within the ICES area results in themajority of the assessment methods only being able to deliver post-hoc estimates of stock size sometime after fishing has occurred. This is only of limited use in stock management. The ideal approachof assessing stocks in real time within effort limited (rather than TAC limited) fisheries is currentlyunobtainable within ICES as both National and ICES catch data collection methods are relativelyslow and this is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.

Post-hoc assessments do, however, enable rigorous exploration of stock-recruitment relationshipsand lead to the establishment of target minima for stock sizes to be depleted to and maximum levelsof fishing effort compatible with the minimum stock size. The relevant catch and effort data to enablethis are, with one or two exceptions, not collected or unavailable within the leES area.

5

Comparison of methods appears not to have been done to any great extent. Some preliminarycomparative work has been carried out for some ofthe stocks in the Sothwest Atlantic Ocean.

3.4 Dcvcloprncnt of Han:csting Stratcgics

It is of irnportance that the short life-span of cephalopods be remembered in any discussions ofexploitation and management. There appears to be some scope to explore the use of more selectivegear for squid fishing (jigging rather than trawling). Given the existence of rather few directedcephalopod fisheries it is open to considerable doubt as to whether this would lead to any substantialincrease in cephalopod catches.With both highly variable recruitrnent and no overlap of generations cephalopods are extremelyprone to over-exploitation. Management of animals such as these are not weIl served by theapplication of total allowable catch (TAC) quotas as this does not take into account the variabilityand unpredictability in recruitment, effort limitation in fishing effort is a more appropriate too1. It is,however, possible to make use of TAC's but it is important to note that in order to preventoverfishing a TAC would have to be set at a very low level to take account of the expected years ofvery low recruitrnent. If this were not done, there is an increasing risk to the stock as higher levels ofTAC are considered. •

4. REPRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION AND OCEANOGRAPHY

The factors leading to recruitrnent success are likely to be most dependent on interactions betweenthe egg masses, hatched paralarvae and pre-recruit juveniles, with their physical and biologicalenvironment. Virtually nothing is known about the influences of hydrographie and water qualityvariables on the distribution and survival of these early life stages.

As far as possible the members of the Study Group are making use of existing eruise programmes,established for other purposes, to collect information on the planktonic and pre-recruit forms. Muchmore emphasis needs to be placed on these deficiencies in the data and the gap in the life cyc1e. It isc1ear that the expense and effort of directed cruise programmes is not justified since it would bedifficult to plan a productive programme. Instead, the requirement for cephalopod informationshould be emphasized and more use made of opportunities for retrieval of specimens and data fromcurrent cruise programmes.

Many studies have demonstrated the high growth rate potential of cephalopods. However, this is notalways fully developed as various abiotie factors can decrease this potential significantly. It iscommonly agreed that temperature and water currents have a major influence on the rcruitmentsuccess of cephalopods. Due to the lack of pre-recruit surveys spawning sites of most cephalopodspecies are not known. Hence, the recruitrnent processes are not documented and need to beinvestigated. "Larval surveys" are fundamental studies on distribution, identifying spawning areas andanalyzing population structure. However, virtually no sampling programmes of the early life stagesof cephalopod species exists within the ICES region at present. Further, there is a demand ofimproving sampling gear before routine sampling of "larval stages" for predicting recruitrnent can bedone. One the other hand, pre-recruitment surveys do not necessarily predict good estimations ofadult stocks as shown for the ommastrephid squid lllex illecebrosus in the Northwest Atlantic.There, sampling of "larval stages" in the Gulf Stream showed large fluctuations over aperiod ofyears when fishing was at a relatively constant level (see Anon. 1993).

6

•

5.

5.1

CEPHALOPOD CATCH AND FISHERY DATA

Inndcquncics in thc Dntn

------- ------------

General discussion of the fishery data available on cephalopods revealed that there have been fewimprovements since the last meeting of the Study Group. Official ICES landings statistics werepresented in the last report (Anon. 1993) but attention was, at that time, drawn to the uncertaintysurrounding many ofthose.

Difficulties remain in several aspects of data collection. Where cephalopod data are recorded there isfrequently uncertainty on the species composition. The extent of this problem varies betweencountries with some making no distinction, some distiguishing between major groups (cuttlefish,squid, octopus) and some providing details on individual species.

In addition to species composition problems, major shortfalls exist in the quantification of catches.Since cephalopods are not subject to TAC management there are no requirements to report landingsand since they are frequently taken as by-eatch in fisheries for other species, some countries regardthese species as unimportant. Consequently, under-reporting or total failure to report cephalopodlandings is not uncommon. Even when landings are reported it is not always clear where the catcheshave been made since information on statistical squares is mostly not collected or not presented.Particular problems in the collation of reliable statistics exist: (a) where artisanal or small boatfisheries sell their catches by means other than markets or principle dealers, (b) where larger vesselfleets operate considerable distances from their horne ports, and (c) where countries are currentlyplaying no active part in leES squid activities but are suspected or known to take squid fromNortheast Atlantic waters.

Similar problems to those desribed above exist in relation to the collection of effort data which areeven more sparse than landings statistics. Even where these data are available, the fact that the effortis mostly not directed at taking cephalopods makes interpretation difficult.

5.2 Cepl13lopod Lnndings in thc ICES Arcn

Official ICES Statistics

Tables 6 to 11 show annuallandings since 1987 as reported officially to ICES by various countriesfor each of the major cephalopod groups. The tables are organised into leES divisions and sub­areas. Data are partly inaccurate, because landings from Spain and France are not available since1988 and 1989, respectively, although these countries are the most important cephalopod fisherynations besides Portugal within the ICES region. German landings are estimated from by-eatch data.Data for 1993 are provisional.

Data Supplied by Study Group Members

Difficulties with interpretation of the ICES statistics presented above suggest that it would be worthconsidering data from other sources. It is common under similar circumstances in other ICESWorking and Study Groups for data to be supplied by members of the group. These data arefrequently more disaggregated and as such may more readily be used for describing species and stockdistributions. The methods of collection and collation of such data frequently involve "vetting"procedures prior to presentation, and as a consequence are often more reliable.

7

By way of an example, data for loliginid squid, Loligo forbesi, landed by UK vessels in Scotland in1991 and 1992 are available at the statistical square level per month. They have been aggregated,however, to the ICES division level in Tables 6 to 11. In the future a better understanding of stockdistributions may allow for aggregations more closely reflecting these.

The contour diagrams in Figures 1 and 2, based on statistical square data, illustrate the spatialdistribution of Loligo catches around the North of Scotland. Figure 1 gives total Loligo catches byUK-registered vessels landing in Scotland during 1991. The minimum contour is at 10 x 100 kg (Le.1 tonne), the contours interval is 20 x 100 kg (2 tonnes). Figure 2 illustrates total Loligo catches byUK-registered vessels landing in Scotland in December 1989. Here, the minimum contour is at 5 x100 Kg (Le. 0.5 tonnes) and the contours interval is also 5 x 100 kg. Plots like these and additionalplots incorporating the relative effort in different areas may, in the future, more usefully describe thedistribution of abundance. Plots of this type could prove useful in deciding on the likely extent ofdifferent stocks of squid and in setting up units for management. In addition, comparison of thesediagrams with those of other groups such as fish and cetaceans may be helpful in interpreting thelikely role of squid in terms of predator/prey relationships.

Similar data exist for landings in England and Wales and it is anticipated that France will be able tosupply such data at the next Study Group meeting. They are, however, lacking in Ireland, Portugal •and Spain.

5.3 Rccommcndations ror Impro\'cmcnts in Ccphalopod Fishcry Data

The following list attempts to summarise the basie data requirements which should be presented foras many species as possible, and offers some suggestions as to how the current shortfalls in thesedata could be improved. Some of these suggestions are appropriate for both fishery managementconsiderations and for cephalopod abundance estimation in the wider ecological context.

• Landings data should be supplied by species!

Where species are not dealt with separately by marketing or reporting procedure, then "targetsampling" by scientists may be required to ascertain species composition. It is important to maintaincontinuity and consisteney in approach. The geographie distributions of some species imply thatlandings by some countries are of mostly one species.

• Where possible catch rather than landings data should be obtained! •• Where discarding of some squid is suspected, then some onboard sampling may be required!

• Landings data should be collected at the ICES statistical square level!

• Fishing effort data should be cOllected at the statistical square level!

It was suggested that individual Study Group scientists should be more actively involved in pursuingcephalopod data and that these data could be more reliable than ICES official statistics. Wherestatistical square data are lacking then, to begin with, attempts should be made to report atsubdivision level. Efforts should first be directed to identifying where the larger, mobile vessels weremaking catches since smalI, artisanal vessels tend to operate close to the ports of landing anyway. Itwas suggested that leES might consider approaching countries not participating in the Study Groupand those with major reporting problems, to see if improvements could be made.

8

•

• Where total effort data are available, catch rate data should be collected!

The use of "selected vessels" to provide CPUE index might be possible even if total effort is notavailable.

• Data should be disaggregated to as short a time interval as possible!

• Data should be made available as soon as possible after collection!

In the event of the need for management of these stocks and the implementation of real time systemsthen a relatively short unit of time is implied. Data are presently presented, at best, on a monthlyscale, this would probably need to be shortened in the future.

• For as many species as possible there is a need periodically to collate data from all countriesfor each square, only then will a more realistic picture of cephalopod distribution inNortheast Atlantic waters emerge. It is recommended that the Study Group continues tocollate and improve the database for these species.

5.4 Alternative l\lcans of Estimating Abundance

Diet studies of cephalopod predators should be considered for abundance estimations of cephalopodspecies within the ICES area. Diet studies over several decades have demonstrated the enormousimportance of the cephalopod resources, especially in the Southern Gcean, to higher trophic levels,the mammals, birds and fish.

In the Northeast Atlantic Ocean (FAO area 27), provisional estimates show that approximately100,000 tonnes of cephalopods (mostly ommastrephids) are consumed annually by seabirds, and anunknown quantity is taken by marine mammals. Many large fish species of commercial importancealso take a significant proportion of cephalopods in their diet.

Cephalopods themselves are entirely predatory, early studies of diet composition suggest thatapproximately half of their food is of crustacean or fish origin, respectively. Among the fish preyidentified are many ofcommercial importance.

The role of cephalopods in the ecosystem, as predators and as prey, is probably a more importantreason for understanding their population biology and quantifying biomass, than their potential roleas purely commercial fisheries.

The Study Group on Sea Mammals and Seabird-Fish Interactions should be approached to exchangeinformation.

9

6. RECOl\IMENDATIONS AND ADVICE ON THE FUTURE ORIENTATION OFICES IN RESPECT TO CEPHALOPOD STUDIES

• strengthen the need for better data assembly (see 5.3)

• retain a review of the 'improvement in and continuing inadequacies of cephalopod catch andeffort data within the ICES area'

• It has to be emphasized that cephalopod sampling techniques have to be greatly improved,distribution areas have to be better localized and a fine-scale sampling is necessary to allowany conclusions about possible spawning sites. This again means a considerable increase inthe sampling effort which of course is not feasible if target species are of minor importancecompared to fish.

• emphasize the enormous role of cephalopods in the marine ecosystem, their importance aspredators on commercially substantial fish species, and their significance as prey of sea birdsand sea mammaIs (see 5.4).

• The Study Group has worked by correspondence in 1994 (lCES C. Res. 1993/2:46) tocontinue the collection of data on the life history and exploitation of relevant cephalopodstocks in the North East Atlantic (Tables 2 - 5), to evaluate existing assessment methods(Table 1), to develop biological reference points for the management of cephalopod stocks(Chapter 3), and to describe trophic interactions between cephalopods and fish populations(Chapter 5.4). The work on these terms has been included in the present report as weIl as anupdate of currently available landing statistics (Tables 6 - 11). Work on these topics shouldbe continued and a next meeting ofthe Study Group would be most desirable and should bescheduled for April 1995.

10

•

•

•

7. References

ANON., 1991. Fishery potential ofNorth Eastern Atlantie squid stocks. ICES, C.M. 1991/K:13.

ANON., 1993 Report of the Study Group on Cephalopod Biology, Kiel, 21 - 22 September 1992.ICES, C.M. 1993/K:66

Boyle, P.R. (ed.), 1983. Cephalopod life eycles. Volume I. Species aecounts. Academie Press,London, 475pp.

Boyle, P.R. (ed.), 1987. Cephalopod life eycles. Volume 11. Comparative reviews. Academie Press,London, 441pp.

Pauly, n., 1985. Population dynamics of short-lived species, with emphasis on squids. NAFO Sei.Coun. Studies 9:143-154.

Pierce, GJ. & Guerra, A., 1993. A review of stock assessment methods used for eephalopodfisheries. ICES, C.M. 1993/K:33.

Pierce, GJ., Boyle, P.R., Hastie, L.C. & Key, L., 1993a. Population ecology of Loligo forbesi(Cephalopoda: Loliginidae) in Scottish waters. ICES, C.M. 1993/K:30.

Pierce, GJ., Thorpe, R.S., Hastie, L.C., Brierley, A.S., Guerra, A., Boyle, P.R., Avila, P., Jamieson,R. & Key, L., 1993b. Geographie variation in Loligo forbesi in the Northeast Atlantie.ICES, C.M. 1993/K:31.

Roper, C.F.E., Sweeney, MJ. and Nauen, C.E. 1984. FAO species catalogue, Vol. 3. Cephalopodsofthe world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of species of interest to fisheries. FAOFish. Synop. 125(3):1-277.

11

Table 2. Sepia officinalis and Alloteuthis subulata. Comparison of important data on life history, environmentalfaetors and fisheries.

Sepia oflicinalis Alloteuthis subulata

LIFE HISTORYEggs:

Egg principal axis (mm) 20- 30 1.2 - 1.8Potential fecunditv 5,000 unknownNo. of ellllS spawned per female 500 - 5,000 400 - 1,500No. of spawning episodes several (1 - 5) severalßenthie or pelagic benthie benthie, attached to substrateDuration of embryological development 80 - 90 days (l5°C); not investigated

40 - 45 days (20°C)Paralarvae:

Size at hatching (mantle lenAAth in mm) 6-9 2Temperature dependence weak - medium weak - mediumLoeation in water column benthie rarely found; pelagie?Duration of paralarval stage variable; stops at 20 mm ML unknownDuration in plankton no planktonie phase 15·30 days

Reproductive eyc1e:Duration of sperm storage bv females poorlV known; ea. 3 months unknownSpawning season mainly spring to summer spring to autumnSpawning loeation shallow waters shallow watersSpawning depth 2-50m 8 - 200mPreferred substrate sandy and muddy bottoms sandyand hard bottomsNo.ofeohortsperyear at least 2 2 (or 3)

Growth:Mantle length at full maturitv; male (mm) 60 - 210 60 - 200Mantle length at full maturity; female (mm) 80 - 250 60 - 120WeiAAt range at full maturitv; male (g) 33 - 957 4 - 10Weight range at full maturitv; female (g) 72 - 1,560 5 - 16Lifespan 18 - 24 months 10 - 12 monthsAge at maturity 14 - 18 months variable; at ea. 10 monthsForm ofgrowth sigmoid variable; exponential?Population recruitment: how variable unknown unknownNatural mortalitv rates unknown high during earlv stages

Distibution:Geographie North East Atlantie (25-57°N) North East Atlantie (20-60°N)

and Mediterranean shelf waters and Mediterranean shelf watersßathymetric surfaee - 150 m surface - 200 m; max. 2,000 mMigration pattern (e.g. inshore-offshore) offshore - inshore inshore - offshoreMi~ation seale (e.g. m; km; ete.) 30 - 50 km unknown

eontinued

12

•

•

•

•

Table 2. Continued.

Sepia officinalis Allotewhis subulata

ENVIRONMEr-..iAL FACTORSHabitat:

Depth ran~e of paralarvae (m) - epipelaj;ticDepth range ofiuvenilesladults (m) surface - 150 < 200 m (over sandv bottom)Temperature ranj;te ofparalarvae (0C) - unknownTemperature ran.l:(e ofiuveniles/adults eC) 10 - 30 2 - 25Salinitv ranj;te ofparalarvae (S %0) - unknownSalinity range of iuvenilesladults (S %0) 18 - 36 unknownOxv~enran~e of paralarvae - unknownOxy~enran~e ofiuvenilesladults hij;th tolerance unknownEffects on survival, development, jUowth not as important as in SQuid probablv verv strong

FISHERIESDirected or bv-catch both bv-eatchSeasonality of fishery aU vear; mostlv JAN - JUL no seasonGeographie location of fishery, main fishery English Channel to Portugal; throughout range ofnations France, Portulo!aI. Soain, UK distributionlnshore or offshore inshore inshoreFishing methods traps and gillnets, trawling

artisanal fishervEstimated catch data:

Quality poor, data not fully reported (e.g. not available and mixed withFrance, Spain) other lolij;tinid sauids

Landin~s in ICES re~ion (= FAO 27) ca. 15,000 t (1991) unknownLandin~s in Mediterranean Sea (= FAO 37) ca. 20,000 t (1991) unknownRange oflandings over past 10 years in 5,000 - 27,000 t unknownICESregion

Availability of CPUE data not available not availableMantle len~ ranj;te of exploited population 40 - 350mm 100-2oommWei~tran~e ofexploited population 15 - 2,800 SI: 5 - 25 SI:

Exploitation level hij;th unknownStock recruitment relationshio unknown unknownTimin~ of recruitment 10 fisherv JAN -JUL earlv summerVariabilitv of recruitment into fisherv unknown unknownEnvironmentalinfiuencesoncakh new moon, storms currents, hvdrolo!faphyAssessment:

Stock biomass or abundance unknown unknownNo. of stocks identified loeal stocks identified unknownMethod applied no assessment no assessment

Research activities in ICES area:Country France,Portu2al,Soain PortuSl:alRe~ion lCES divisions VII - IX ICES division IX

13

Table 3. Loligoforbesi and Loligo vulgaris. Comparison of important data on life history, environmental factors andfisheries.

Loligo/orbesi Loligo vulgaris

LIFE HISTORYEggs:Eg~ principal axis (mm) 3-5 2 - 3.5Potential fecunditv 5,000 - 32,000 3,000 - 20,000No. of eIoU~S spawned per female ca. 2,000 ca. 3,000 • 5,000No. of spawnin~episodes several (2 - 3?) several (l • 2?)Benthic or pelagic benthic, attached to substrate benthic, attached to substrateDuration of embryological development 1 - 3 months 40·45 days (l3°C);

26 days (22°C)Paralarvae:

Size at hatching (mantle lenghth in mm) 3 - 4.9 2-3Temperature dependence strong stron~

Loeation in water eolumn rarelv found, planktonie? rarelv found, planktonic?Duration of paralarval stage 1 - 2 months ca. 2 monthsDuration in plankton 1 - 3 months ca. 2 months

Reproduetive eyde:Duration of sperm storage by females ~ 2 months? several weeksSpawning season DEC - MAY; extended 311 year, mainly in winter;

extendedSpawninglocation eoastal shaHow waters eoastal shallow watersSpawnin~ depth 10 - 250 m 20 - 195 mPreferred substrate hard substrate hard substrateNo. ofcohorts per year ~ 2; multiple mierocohorts ~ 4; multiple eohorts?

Growth:Mantle lenltth at full maturitv; male (mm) 120 - 700; (240 - 937)* 75 - 500Mantle len~ at full maturity; fe male (mm) 150 - 400; (200 - 462)* 75 - 400Wei~t range at fuH maturity; male (g) 77 - 4,000 22 - 1,690Weight range at fuH maturi1Y; female (g) 111 - 1,800 23 - 1,272Lifespan 12 - 24 months 12 - 24 months, maybe moreAge at maturity 11 - 14 months; variable 11 - 13 months; variableForm of growth probablyexponential probablyexponentialPopulation reeruitment: how variable very variable high in JulvNatural mortality rates high; mostlv in earlv stages high; mostlv in early stages

Distibution:Geographie North East Atlantie (l0-65°N) North East Atlantie (35-60°N)

and Mediterranean shelf waters; and Mediterranean shelf watersAzores

Bathymetrie shelf & shelf edge; 10 - 500 m shelf & shelf edge; mainly in10 - 60 m; max. 550 m

Migration pattern (e.g. inshore-offshore) inshore - offshore inshore - offshoreMigration scale (e.g. m; km; ete.) 200- 500 km 5-lOkm

* in Azores region

continued

14

•

•

•

•

Table 3. Continued.

Lolif(oforbesi Lolif(o vU[f(aris

ENVIRONl\IENTAL FACTORSHabitat:

Depth range ofparalarvae (m) epipelagic, 10 - 50 m epipelagie, 10 - 50 mDepth range of iuvenilesladults (m) demersal, 10 - 500 m demersal, 10 - 500 mTemperature range ofparalarvae (0C) 10·19 10 - 20Temperature range ofjuvenilesladults (0C) 8·24 10 - 25Salinity range ofparalarvae (S %0) 30 - 36 30 - 36Salinity range of juvenilesladults (S %c) 30 - 36 30 - 36Oxvgen range of paralarvae unknown unknownOXyj;!en range ofiuvenilesladults unknown unknownEffeets on survival, development, growth veryhigh veryhigh

FISIIERIESDirected or by-eatch both bothSeasonality of fisherv all year; with variable peaks all year; with variable peaksGeographie loeation of fishery, main fishery throughout southern range of distribution;nations Behdum, France, Portuj;!al, Spain, UKlnshore or offshore mainly inshore eoastal eontinental shelfFishing methods trawling; hand-jigging in mostly trawling

Portuj;!al (esp. Azores)Estimated catch data:

Quality poor; data not fullv reported and not separated bv speciesLandings in ICES region (= FAO 27) 9,000 t (1991)Landings in Mediterranean Sea (= FAO 37) 8,000 t (1991)Range of landings over past 10 years in 5,000 - 10,000 tICESregion

Availability of CPUE data not available not availableMantle length range of exploited population 80-940mm 70 - 500 mmWeililit range ofexploited population 20 - 4,000 g 20 - 1,700 gExploitation level locally hilÜl hij;!hStock reeruitment relationship weak; likely variable weakTiming of recruitment 10 fisherv winter to summer (April) all year; max. in springVariability of recruitment into fishery high highEnvironmental influenees on eateh roulÜl weather rough weatherAssessment:

Stock biomass or abundanee unknown unknownNo. of stocks identified 2 (European shelfand Azores); 1 (European shelt)

separated by morphometriesand protein analysis

Method applied no assessment no assessmentResearch activities in ICES area:

Country Franee, Portugal, Spain, UK Franee, Portugal, Spain, UKRegion throulÜlout ICES regions throughout ICES regions

15

Table 4. Illex coindetii and Todaropsis eblanae. Comparison ofimportant data on life history, environmental factorsand fisheries.

lllex coindetii Todaropsis eblanae

LIFE HISTORYEg~s:

Egg principal axis (mm) 0.7 - 1.2 1.2 - 1.7Potential fecunditv 6,500 - 285,000 35,000 - 100,400No. of eg~s spawned per female 4,000 - 120,000 2,400 - 37,000No. of spawnin~episodes several severalBenthie or pela~ie pela~ie pelagie?Duration ofembryological development unknown unknown

Paralarvae:Size at hatching (mantle len.s:thth in mm) 0.8 - 1.0 unknownTemperature dependence stron.l!: probablv stron~

Location in water column planktonic planktonicDuration of paralarval sta.l!:e unknown unknownDuration in plankton unknown unknown

Reproductive cvcle:Duration of sperm storage by females unknown unknownSpawning season all vear, peaks in spring-autumn all year, peaks in spring-autumnSpawning location unknown unknown8pawning depth unknown unknownPreferred substrate associated with muddy bottom associated with muddv bottomNo. of cohorts per year unknown unknown

Growth:Mantle length at full maturitv; male (mm) 110 - 360 98 - 170Mantle lenltt1l at full maturity; female (mm) 110·380 140 - 220Weight range at full maturity; male (g) 38 - 1,549 94 - 250Wei.s:tht ran~e at full maturity; female (g) 32-1,159 180 -720Lifespan 12 - 14 months unknownAge at maturity UnknOWn, probably variable unknownForm of .'ttowth linear unknownPopulation recruitment: how variable hi.lthly variable highly variableNatural mortalitv rates verv hi.l!:h in earlv stages verv high in early stages

Distibution:Geographie Eastern Atlantie Ocean: 15°8 to Eastern Atlantic Ocean: 36°8 to

600 N; Mediterranean and Black 600 N; Mediterranean Sea;8eas; Caribbean 8ea Australia

Bathvmetrie 30 - 1,000 m 20-750mMigration pattern (e.g. inshore-offshore) unknown seasonal migrationsMigration scale (e.g. m; km; etc.) unknown >50km

continued

16

•

•

•

•

Table 4. Continued.

Illex coindetii Todaropsis eblanae

ENVIRONME1'I"TAL FACTORSHabitat:

Depth range ofparalarvae (m) probably epipela~ie probably epipelal:!:ieDepth range ofiuvenilesladults (m) 30 - 1,000 20 -700Temperature range ofparalarvae COC) unknown unknownTemperature ranl:!:e ofjuveniles/adults (0C) 9 - 18 9 - 18Salinity range ofparalarvae (S %0) unknown unknownSalinity range of iuvenilesladults (S %0) unknown unknownOxygen range of paralarvae unknown unknownOxygen range of juvenilesladults unknown unknownEffeets on survival, development, growth very streng very streng

FISHERIESDirected or by-eatch by-eatch by-catchSeasonality of fishery all year all yearGeographie location of fishery, main fishery continental shelf; continental shelf;nations Portugal, Spain Portugal, Spainlnshore or offshore ofTshore ofTshoreFishing methods trawling trawling

Estimated catch data:Quality poor; data not fully reported, species not separated

and mixed with other short-fin squidsLandings in ICES region (= FAO 27) ca. 3,500 t (1991)Landinl:!:s in Mediterranean Sea (= FAO 37) ca. 600 t (1991)Range of landings over past 10 years in 3,000 - 6,000 tICESregion

Availabilitv ofCPUE data not available not availableMantle length range of exploited population 55 - 380 42·220Weight range of exploited pOpulation 4 - 1,500 6-720Exploitation level low lowStock recruitment relationship unknown unknownTiming of recruitment 10 fisherv all year; peaks in APR • JUL all vear; peaks in APR - JULVariability cf recruitment into fishery high highEnvironmental influences on cateh moon light, hydrography moon light, hydrographyAssessment:

Stock biomass or abundance unknown unknownNo. of stocks identified 1 in Galician waters by 1 in Galician waters by

morphometrics and enzymes morphometries and enzymesMethod applied no assessment no assessment

Research activities in ICES area:Countrv Russia (ageing studies), Spain SpainRegion ICES divisions VIII - IX ICES divisions VIII - IX

17

Table 5. Oetopus vulgaris and Eledone cirrhosa. Comparison of important data on life history, environmentalfactors and fisheries.

Oetopus vulf(aris Eledone cirrhosa

LIFE HISTORYEggs:EjZ~ principal axis (mm) 2.0 - 3.0 6.7 -7.5Potential fecundity 500,000 2,000 - 5,400No. of ejZjZs spawned per female 100,000 - 500,000 800 - 2,000No. of spawnin~episodes 1 (within 1 - 2 months) 1 (extended over 3 - 4 weeks)Benthic or pelagic benthic benthicDuration ofembryological development 125 days (13°C); 30 - 60 days 3 - 4 months

(15-20°C); 25 days (25°C)Paralarvae:

Size at hatching (mantle lenmtth in mm) 1.4 - 2.0 ca. 3Temperature dependence strong strODj~

Location in water column planktonic planktonicDmationofp~al~valstage 5 - 12 weeks fewdaysDuration in plankton 5 - 12 weeks fewdays

Reproductive cycle:Duration of sperm storage by females < 10 months >6weeksSpawning season FEB-Ocr APR-OcrSpawning location shallow waters, inshore shallow waters, inshoreSpawning depth < 100m <200mPreferred substrate rockv bottom, caves rocky bottomNo. ofcohorts per ye~ 20rmore probably 1

Growth:Mantle lengili at fuH maturity; male (mm) 55 - 250 50 - 180Mantle len~ at fuH maturity; female (nun) 80 - 260 120 - 400Weight range at fuH maturitv; male (g) 75 - 6,100 ·400 - 500Weimtt range at fuH maturity; female (jZ) 200 - 4,300 1,200 - 1,400Lifespan 18 - 24 months 18 - 24 monthsAge at maturity 12 - 18 months, variable ca. 12 months, variableForm of growth . exPOnential exponentialPopulation recruitment: how variable highly variable highly variable (MAR-JUL)Natural mortality rates 90 - 95 % from hatching to unknown; probably very high in

settling ~lystages

Distibution:Geographie cosmopolitan; in North East North East Atlantic coastal and

Atlantic: coastal waters from shelf waters from Norway toDenmark to Portugal; Portugal, Iceland; eastemMediterranean Sea, Mediterranean Sea

ßathymetrie benthic; 2-200 m; max. 400 m benthic; 60-150 m; max. 170mMigration pattern (e.g. inshore-offshore) inshore for spawning inshore for spawningMigration scale (e.g. m; km; ete.) <50km unknown (few km?)

continued

18

•

•

•

•

Table 5. Continued.

Octopus ....ul~aris Eledone cirrhosa

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORSHabitat:

Depth range of paralarvae (m) surface - 500 10 - 500Depth range ofjuvenilesladults (m) surface - 200 50 - 300Temperature range of paralarvae (0C) 10 - 25 unknownTemperature range ofiuveniles/adults (OC) 10 - 30 unknownSalinity range of paralarvae (S %~) not documented unknownSalinity range of iuvenilesladults (S %0) 32 - 40% unknownOxygen range of paralarvae unknown unknownOxygen range ofiuvenilesladults unknown unknownEffects on survival, development, growth strong strong

FISIIERIESDirected or by-catch both bothSeasonalitv of fishery all vear MAR-JULGeographie loeation of fishery, main fishery whole range ofdistribution; whole range of distributionnations Portugal, Spain in 10 - 12 m; Portugal, Spainlnshore or offshore inshore mostly inshoreFishing methods traps and pots; trawling bottom trawls; seines; pots

Estimated catch data:QuaIity poor; data not fully reported and not separated by speciesLandings in ICES region (.. FAO 27) ca. 15,000 t (1991)Landings in Mediterranean Sea (= FAO 37) ca. 7,000 t (1991)Range of landings over past 10 years in 7,000 - 18,000 tICESregion

Availabilitv ofCPUE data not available not availableMantle length range of exploited population 40-260mm unknownWeight range of exploited population 100 - 6,100 g < 1,600 gExploitation level locally very high locally highStock recruitment relationship weak: unknownTimin~ of recruitment 10 fishery aIlyear unknownVariability of recruitment into fisherv variable; mostly high unknownEnvironmental influences on catch wind; hydrography unknown

Assessment:Stock biomass or abundance unknown unknownNo. of stocks identified unknown unknownMethod applied no assessment no assessment

Research activities in ICES area:Country Portugal, Spain ScotlandRegion ICES divisions VIII - X Scottish waters

19

Table 6. Landings (in tonnes) ofCommon Cuttlefish (Sepia ojJicina/is).

Country 1997 1999 1999 1990 1991 1992 1993P

ICBS piyi.igp I'lb (Ceptral North Soal

Belgium 2 12 6

Bngland lc Wale. 1 1

Total 1 2 12 7

ICBS piviaion :rYc (Southern North SOll I

Belgium 9 13 25

Bngland " Wale. 1 7 10 2 15 26 21

France 17 39 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 19 46 10 2 24 39 46

ICBS piyi.iop yla (IDf SOA.t of Sgotl.pd oad Ngrth IrplAnd) •Bngland lc Wale. 1

France 1 3 1 ? ? ? ?

Spain 14 ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total 15 3 2 ? ? ? ?

ICBS piviaion yIb (Rogkalll

Spain 35 ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total 35 ? ? ? ? ? ?

ICBS piyiaion yIIa IIri.h Soal

Belgium 1 4 1

Bngland " Wale. 1 3 6 5 46 11

Total 1 3 6 6 50 12

ICBS piyi,iop. VI1b . c (Wost of Irpland ond Porcupin. Bank)

Bngland lc Wale. 2 •Spain 16 ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total 16 2 ? ? ? ? ?

ICBS piviaion. yIId,e (Pipglish Channell

Belgium 15 20 24

Channel I.land. 7 20 1 4

Bngland " Wale. 215 592 1,292 3,000 649 999 1,772

France 2,235 4,399 ? ? ? ? ?

Scotland 1 12 1

Total 2,450 4,971 1,300 3,032 666 922 1,796

...continued

20

21

Table 7. Landings (in tonnes) of Common Squid (includes Loligo forbesi, Loligo vulgaris andAlloteuthis subulata).

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 199~ 1993P

ICBS Division IIIa (Skogerrak ond Kottogatl

Denmark ~ 1 14 19 13 37 ~

Scotland 2

Sweden 1 1 3 1

Total ~ 1 14 ~O 14 40 4

ICBS Diyisign IyA (Horthorn North Seal

Denmark 1 5 7 7 1

Bngland .. Wales 6 1 11 11 6 4 1

France 5 9 ? ? 1 1 1

Germany + + + + 1 3 1

Scotland 98 446 599 94~ 546 554 B6 •Total 109 456 611 958 560 568 239

ICES Diyision Iyb (Central North Seal

Belgium 14 37 ~4 38 4 6 22

Denmark 3 9 ~ 10 2

Bngland .. Wales 5 5 68 69 15 3 ~2

Germany + + + + 1 ~ 1

Northern Ireland 1

Scotland 11 ~~ 87 151 6~ 93 3~

Total 30 64 18~ ~68 84 114 80

ICBS Piyisign Iyc (Southorn North Seal

Belgium 62 50 68 142 19 3S 84

Denmark 1

England .. Wales 3 3 6 4 3 + 3

France 126 42 1 1 1 1 1

Germany + + + + 1 ~ ~ •Total 191 96 74 146 ~3 37 89

ICBS Diyision yb (forao Groundsl

Faroe Islands + + + + + + +

France ~ ? 1 ? 1 1

Scotland 2 5 +

Total + 2 + ~ + 5 +

...continued

22

Table 7. continued.

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993P

ICIS Diyisiop yIA (HW CPAlt of Scotland Agd North Irplond)

Be11lium

Bng1and _ Wales 5

France 102

Ireland 99

Northern Ireland

Scot1and 124

Spain 2

31

375

97

1

329

6

1

25

1

206

2

560

1

13

1

30

11

253

1

6

1

15

5

243

1

13

1

30

21

308

1

3

1

1

7

176

1

Total 332 839 794 307 269 372 186

•ICBS Pivision vIb (Rockall)

Bngland _ Wales 40

France 2

Ireland

6 110

1

13

1

10

4

1

26

4

1

50

1

1

1

Northern Ireland

Scotland

Spain

419

7

24

27

4

593

1

64

1

18

1

61

1

9

1

Total 468 57 707 87 48 115 10

ICES Pivision vlla (Irish Seal

Belllium 24

Bnllland _ Wales 49

France 28

Ireland 37

Isl. of Man

Northern Ireland 22

Scotland 9

11

76

55

66

6

81

12

32

89

1

175

21

109

10

36

37

1

5

12

74

7

1

~3

1

4

7

33

5

6

1

1

5

15

86

8

112

1

1

1

62

10

(West of IrelApd .pd Porcupine Bonk)

6 13 ~ 4

95 125 1 1

5 1 11 10

2 1

8 10 1 1

•Total

ICES Divisions VIlb.c

England _ Wales

Franc.

Ireland

Scotland

Spain

169 307 436 171 73

5

1

~4

1

1

120

+

1

40

4

1

184

+

1

1

+

1

Total 114 149 15 15 30 44

ICIS piyi.igps v11d.Q (Epglish Chonnel)

70

865

1

86

1

1

1

45

428

1

1

213

2

566

1

8

142

3

720

1

6

492

2.013

323

1.902

Be1gium 43 101

Channe1 Is1andsBnll1and _ Wales

France

Scot1and

Total ~.~68 ~.606 871 789 474 87 935

...continued

23

Table 7. continued.

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 199~ 1993P

ICBS Division YIIf (Bristol Chonnell

Belgium ~O 18 56 H 10 2 +

Bnglond " Woles 34 39 69 57 35 ? 135

Fronce 145 267 ? ? ? ? ?

Scotlond 1 ~

Totol 199 324 D6 8~ 45 ~ 135

ICBS Divisions VI:rg-k (Coltig SeA opd SW of Irolopdl

Be1gium 19 ~5 46 54 4 3 ~

Bnglond " Woles 41 74 52 6~ 52 ? 28

France 336 8~3 ? ? ? ? ?

Irelond 26 32 39 11~ 80 135 ?

Scotlond 2 9 8 + •Spoin 22 16 ? ? ? ? ?

Totol 444 970 137 HO 145 146 30

ICBS Sub-arpa yIII (Boy of Biscoy)

Belgium 4 23 23 40 6 34 36

Bnglond " Wo1es 102 63 22 17 84 ? ?

Fronce 1,044 1,512 ? ? ? ? ?

Portugol 3 7 2 7 1 1 ?

Spoin 420 311 ? ? ? ? ?

Totol 1,573 1. 916 47 64 91 35 36

ICBS Sub-OroO IX (Portuguos" Woten)

Portugol 1,321 1. 080 1.191 1,319 1,869 1,569 ?

Spoin 390 193 ? ? ? ? ?

Toto1 1,711 1,~73 1,191 1,319 1,869 1,569 ? •ICES Sub-neo X tAlares Groupds)

Portugol+ 280 362 441 348 260 76 ?

Totol 280 362 441 348 260 76 ?

Grond Totol 7,890 9,422 5,647 4,806 3,985 3,330 1. 930

+Landings consist exclusively of Loligo forbesi.

24

Table 8. Landings (in tonnes) of Shortfin Squid (Illex coindetii and Todaropsis eblanae).

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993P

IeBS Diyision VIb (Rogkal1)

Spain 3 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 3 ? ? ? ? ?

IeBS Division vIIa IIrish Seal

Northern Ireland 1

I,le ot Man 2

Scotland 1

Total 1 3

IeBS Piyisions V11b.g (West of Inland opd Porgupino Bankl

France 1 ? ? ? ? ?• Spain 3 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 1 3 ? ? ? ? ?

ICES Divisions v IId . e IEnqlish Channell

Bngland li Wales 1 2 1 7

France 8 7 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 9 9 1 7 ? ? ?

I CIS Diyisions vIIq-k (Celtic Sea and SW of Inland)

Bng1and " Wales 2

France 36 36 ? ? ? ? ?

Spain 57 49 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 93 87 ? ? ? ? ?

I CES Sub .. arel vIII (Bay of Biscay)

Bng1and " Wale, 14 5• France 246 333 ? ? ? ? ?

Portugal 2 3 3 11 ?

Spain 2,650 1,358 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 2,896 1,705 7 3 3 11 ?

ICBS Sub· Areo IX (Pgrtuguolo WAter,)

Portugal 920 419 351 320 509 766 ?

Spain 2,611 1,621 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 3,531 2,040 351 320 509 766 ?

Grand Total 6,530 3,847 359 331 515 777 ?

*PAO Statistics identify Illex illecebrosus as Shortfin Squid in Area 27. This is wrong. IlLex illecebrosusdoes not occur in leES Divisions VI to IX. Instead, landings of Shortfin Squid consist of IlLex coindetiiand Todaropsis eblanae.

25

Table 9. Landings (in tonnes) of the European Flying Squid (Todarodes sagittatus).

Country 1997 1999 1999 1990 1991 199:2 1993P

ICES Sub-AroAI I + U (Borant, Sn ond Norwogion SOo)

Norwoy 3,90:2 1,193 5

Total 3,90:2 1,193 5

ICIS Division IVo (Northern North Seal

Norwoy 35

Total 35

ICES Division Vb (pargo Graunds>

Foroe I.lands 11

Total 11 •ICES Diyisign ylb (Roeko11)

Spoin ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

ICIS Divisions yUb.e (West of Inland ond porgupip. Bank)

Spain ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

ICHS Divisions YUg-k (Celtie SeA opd SW of Iro10n4)

Spoin ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

ICHS Sub-oroa VIU (Boy of Biscoy)

Spoin ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total ? ? ? ? ? ? ? •ICHS Sub-ore; IX (Portuquose WatersI

Spoin ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Grand Total 3,949 1,193 5

26

Table 10. Landings (in tonnes) ofOctopuses (Eledone cirrhosa and Octopus vulgaris).

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993P

ICES Diyisign Iyo (Nortborn Ngrtb SOo)

Enl11and " Wales 1 1

Scot1and 59 110 86 31 10

Total 60 111 86 31 10

ICES Piyisign 1'lb <Contral North Soa l

Be111ium 43 24 10

Enl11and " Wales 1 1 7 16 8 1

Scotland 1 1 1 2

Total 1 1 8 60 33 13

• ICES Division IYc ISouthern North Soa l

Bell1ium 1 1

Total 1 1

ICES Diyision vIa (NW SOAlt of Scotll!lpd ond Ngrth 1rolond')

Enl1land " Wales 1

Scot1and B 11 1 3 1

Total B 12 1 3 1

ICES pivision VIb IRockalll

Spain 29 30 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 29 30 ? ? ? ? ?

ICES Diyision VIIa (Tri,h Soa l

Bell1ium 1 14 8

Enl11and " Wales 1 1 3 2 4

• Ireland 1

Total 1 1 4 2 1 14 12

ICES piyision, vIIb . c (Wagt of Ireland APd Pgrcupino Bankl

Ireland 3

Spain 39 41 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 39 41 ? ? ? ? 3

ICU Piyiliop' vIId . e (Rpglish Chopnel)

Be l l1 ium 1 2

Channel Islands 1

Enl1l a nd " Wales 35 61 47 9 21

France 2 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 35 63 48 9 ? 1 23

...continued

27

Table 10. continued.

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 199:1 1993P

ICHS Diyision yIIf (Bristol Channell

Belgium 1 2 4

Hngland " Wales 9 3 4 1 13

Total 9 3 4 1 1 2 17

ICHS Divisions YIIg-k (Celtic Sea and SW of Irelond)

Belgium 1 2 6

Hngland " Wales :18 35 14 3 4 :I 57

France 3 5 1 1 1 1 1

Ireland 1 1

Spain 89 76 1 1 1 1 1

Total 1:10 116 14 3 5 5 64 •ICHS Sub-Are; yIII (Boy of Biscay)

Belgium 7

Hngland " Wales 37 35 18 :12 15

France 98 lU 1 1 1 1 1

Portugal 24 49 57 17 82 144 1

Spain 4.274 2.841 1 1 1 1 1

Total 4.433 3.037 75 17 104 159 7

ICHS Sub- aroA IX (Portuquolo Waten)

Portugal 9,044 8.:112 10.334 6.978 7.440 9,476 1

Spain 4,092 3.558 1 ? ? ? ?

Total 13,136 11.770 10.334 6,978 7,440 9.476 7

ICHS Sub-oroo X (Azare. Grounds)

Portugal+ 7 4 5 33 1 1 1

Total 7 4 5 33 7 7 7 •Grand Total 17,809 15,066 10,553 7,174 7.699 9.724 151

+Landings consist exclusively of Octopus vulgaris.

28

Tab. 11. Total offieial eephalopod landings (in tonnes) in ICES area. (a) Common Cuttlefish(Sepia officinalis) , (b) Common Squid (Loligo forbesi, L. vulgaris, Alloteuthis subulata), (e)Shortfin Squid (Illex coindetii, Todaropsis eblanae), (d) European Flying Squid (Todarodessagittatus), (e) Oetopuses (Eledone cirrhosa, Octopus vulgaris), (f) all species. Data compiled foreaeh eountry from 1987-1993 aeeording ICES statisties and information of Study Group members.

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993P

(a) Common Cutt1efish. Sepia officinalis.

Be1gium

Channe1 Is1ands

Bng1and " Wales

France

Portugal

Scot1and

Spain

Total

:158

4.99:1

1.460

543

7.255

648

10.684

1.905

?

13.:139

7

1, 394

?

1.579

1

?

:1.999

20

3.541

?

1.6:11

17

?

5.239

34

1

769

?

1. :108

1

?

:1.035

65

4

1.141

?

1,:134

?

:1.444

84

1.996

?

?

?

:1.080

(b) Common Squid. Loligo forbesi. Loligo vulgaris. Alloteuthis subulata.

•

Be1gium

Channe1 I.1ands

Denmark

Bng1and " Wales

Faroe Is1ands

France

Germany

Ireland

Is1e of Man

Northern Ireland

Portugal

Scot1and

Spain

Sweden

Total

186

2

614

+

3.785

+

167

1,604

661

849

7.890

:165

2

803

+

5,:1:13

+

196

6

82

1.449

833

563

9.4:1:1

39:1

3

18

1.174

+

?

+

431

:11

115

1, 634

1,858

?

5,646

546

:I

33

853

+

?

+

167

12

85

1.674

1,432

?

1

4,805

89

22

661

+

?

3

149

7

38

:1,130

885

?

1

3.985

17:1

1

54

:14

+

?

7

260

15

107

1.646

1.041

?

3

3,330

:114

5

1.170

+

?

4

?

?

69

?

465

?

?

1.9:17

(c) Shortfin Squid. Illex coindetii. Todaropsis eblanae.

Bng1and " Wales

France

Is1e of Man

Northern Ireland

Portugal

Scot1and

Spain

Total

1

:191

9:10

5,318

6,530

18

376

419

3.034

3.847

6

?

353

?

359

29

7

?

3:13

1

?

331

?

:I

1

51:1

?

515

?

777

?

777

?

?

?

?

...continued

Table 11. continued.

Country 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 199:l 1993P

(d) European Flying Squid. Todarodes sagittatus.

Faroe Islands 11

Norway 3,937 1.183 5

Spain ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Total 3,948 1,183 5 ? ? ? ?

(e) Octopuses. Bledone cirrbosa, Octopus vulgaris.

Belgium 46 43 38

Channel Islands 1

England " Wales 110 136 88 :l4 4:l :l5 96

France 101 119 ? ? ? ? ?

Ireland 1 1 4

Portugal 9,055 8,:l65 10,396 7,O:l8 7,5:l:l 9,620 ?

Scotland 67 1:l:l 88 35 13

Spain 8,5:l3 6,546 ? ? ? ? ?

Total 17,789 15,066 10,553 7,184 7,698 9,7:l4 151

(f) Cephalopods, all apeciea

Belllium 186 :l65 39:l 546 169 :l80 336

Channel Islands 11 :l:l 1 5

Denmark :l :l 18 33 :l:l 54 5

Enllland " Wales 983 1,605 :l,66:l 4,4:l5 l,47:l 1,190 3,:l6:l

Faroe Islands + + + + + + +

France 9,169 16,402 ? ? ? ? ?

Germany + + + + 3 7 4

Ireland 167 196 43:l 167 149 :l61 ?

Isle of Man 6 :ll 1:l 9 15 ?

Northern Ireland :l:l 8:l 115 85 39 107 69

Norway 3,937 1,183 5

Portugal 13,039 1:l,038 13,96:l 10,646 ll,37:l 13,:l77 ?

Scotland 661 833 l,9:l6 l,57:l 974 1,076 478

Spain 15,:l33 10,143 ? ? ? ? ?

Sweden 1 1 3 ?

Total 43,410 4:l,800 19,539 17,509 14,:l11 16,:l75 4,154

30

..

Squ td londtngs ln Sc 0 t Ion d 1990

-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 1064 64

63 63

62 (Q

61 61

60 60

59 59

58 68

67 67

66 66

(])66 55"U:J54 64~

...J 63 63~.

062 52-'

61 51

60 - 50

49 "'19

48 48

47 - 47

46 -46

45 45

44 4"'l

43 Ll 43-20 -18 ·16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 B 10

Longlt.ude

Fig. 1. Contour map of loliginid squid catches by UK.-registered vessels landing inScotland in 1990. The minimum contour is at 10 x 100 kg (Le. 1 tonne), thecontours interval is 20 x 100 kg (2 tonnes).

31

-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 (:I 2 4 6 8 1064 64

63 63

62 62

61 61

60 60

59 59(J)

""058 58:J

-o-J 57 57o-J

-o-J

0 56 56

-' 55 55

54 54

53 53

-52 52

51 51

50 50-20 -18 -16 -14-12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 (:I 2 4 6 8 10

La n 9 t t.u d e

Fig. 2. Contour map of loIiginid squid catches by UK-registered vesseIs landing inScotIand during December 1989. The minimum contour is at 5 x 100 kg (Le.0.5 tonnes), the contours interval is also 5 x 100 kg (0.5 tonnes).

32