Cod, Cod, Cod!

If you’re the kind of person who reads fish news with the same passion you scroll through Reels, you’ve probably seen the headlines about ICES recommending a zero quota on cod in the North Sea and Skagerrak.

If not — here’s your crash course.

ICES (the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea), which we’ve talked about many times before, advises national governments on how much fish can be caught sustainably. Their advice forms the basis for the national quotas that are later negotiated between countries — a giant puzzle balancing economics, jobs, national food cultures, and fisheries.

So even though ICES recommends a zero quota, it’s very unlikely that cod fishing in the North Sea and Skagerrak will actually stop.

Supporters of sustainable harvest

At Fiskerikajen, we’re strong supporters of sustainable use of our shared seas — but we often disagree with ICES. That’s simply because ICES gives advice species by species, not based on ecosystems. For instance, ICES says 164,129 tonnes of plaice can be caught in the North Sea and Skagerrak — but doesn’t care how it’s caught. That part, they don’t advise on.

In our view, we need a completely different approach to secure sustainable use of the ocean. In our June Update, we dug into what an ecosystem-based model might look like in practice.

A big part of that is Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) — and, of course, a total phase-out of bottom-trawling. When large connected areas are protected and only low-impact, selective fishing is allowed around them, ecosystems recover — and fast.

Quota management, on the other hand, still doesn’t work — and the biologists at ICES will tell you the same. If it did, we wouldn’t be in this situation. But when policymakers are too afraid to make real changes, ICES has little choice but to issue ever-harsher advice.

The real issue in the North Sea and Skagerrak is that the southern cod stock is critically endangered. There are three main cod stocks in the North Sea — one southern and two northern (east and west). The southern stock has struggled since the 1980s, following decades of heavy fishing in the 20th century. Since the 1990s, there hasn’t been direct fishing on the southern stock — the pressure now comes from non-selective bottom-trawl fisheries targeting other species.

If you want to see where that happens, take a trip to Urk in the Netherlands or Zeebrugge and Oostende in Belgium — bottom-trawl central. Adding to that, some of Europe’s most polluted rivers flow into the southern North Sea — full of industrial waste, chemicals, and metals. And since 2000, sea temperatures there have risen by more than two degrees. That part of the North Sea is now too warm for cod, which prefers cold water. The result: the species’ viable range is shrinking in a warming world.

So despite ICES having recommended a zero quota for the southern North Sea for over a decade, things have only gone one way — down. When ICES now recommends a zero quota for all North Sea cod, it’s because the southern stock mixes seasonally with the northern ones. You can’t catch northern cod without catching some southern fish.

Is protection the answer?

Given all these factors, it makes little sense to “save” southern cod by banning all cod fishing.

First:

As long as non-selective bottom-trawling is allowed, tons of cod — including juveniles — will be caught anyway.

Inspection reports from random trawlers show it clearly: many undersized cod, haddock, and whiting end up in the nets. These so-called “last haul” inspections are only done when observers are onboard — and, conveniently, that’s when the small fish suddenly appear.

Because when fishers catch too many juveniles, the area gets closed temporarily — which means no fishing, no income, and a costly trip to another area.

You can hardly blame them for not reporting everything they haul up in that system.

Second:

A zero quota hits the selective, low-impact fishers the hardest — the ones using gillnets and longlines.

By turning cod into a mere bycatch quota, we’re once again favoring the destructive bottom-trawl fisheries that caused this mess in the first place.

Third:

Quotas simply don’t work — but large protected areas do.

When we close big, connected zones to all fishing and only allow selective, low-impact gear around them, ecosystems bounce back. (We covered that in detail in the June Update.)

So — cod on the menu?

If you’re still unsure whether to put cod on your menu, our answer is clear: YES, absolutely!

We stand by the selective and sustainable cod fisheries.

Cod is the one fish we can reliably source from gentle, low-impact methods all winter long — whether it’s from Denmark, Norway, or Iceland.

And when wild cod isn’t available from such fisheries, we supplement with responsibly farmed cod.

Cod is the cornerstone fish of the North — so yes, keep it on the menu all winter.

Get cooking!