European hake

Stock Status Score: 0.25

Northern hake is fully fished and not subject to overfishing.

Stock assessments are carried out by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). The most recent assessment was published in 2026 using data up to 2026. The next assessment is expected in 2027.

The stock assessment defines reference points for fishing pressure (F) and biomass (B). For fishing pressure, there is a target to keep F at or below Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). For biomass, there is no target. However, there is a trigger point (MSY Btrigger). Below this level, F should be reduced to allow the stock to increase. Because BMSY is not defined, the Good Fish Guide applies its own definition of 1.4 x MSY Btrigger. 

The stock assessment was benchmarked in 2022. Estimates of spawning stock biomass (SSB) now only include females, whereas previously they included males as well.

The spawning-stock biomass (SSB) has increased substantially from being below biologically safe levels (Blim) in 2006 (around 45,000 tonnes) to peak at around 293,000t in 2015. It has since declined to 98,611 t in 2026. This is still above MSY Btrigger (78,405t) but has dropped below the GFG proxy for BMSY (109,767t). The stock is therefore not in an overfished state.

Fishing mortality (F) decreased significantly between 2005 and 2012, and has been fluctuating at or below levels associated with Maximum Sustainable Yield (FMSY, 0.24) since 2009. In 2025 it was 0.24, equal to FMSY. The stock is therefore not subject to overfishing.

ICES advises that when the MSY approach is applied, catches in 2027 should be no more than 46,824 tonnes. This is a 15% decrease on the previous year's advice, because of the decreasing trend in stock size.

There is some uncertainty in this stock assessment. The biomass surveys don't cover the entire stock distribution area, and changes in distribution are known to increase uncertainty in the assessment. Analyses show that the new assessment tends to revise historical SSB downwards and F upwards when a new year’s data is added. If this pattern continues, this may result in an inflated advised catch.

Management of the Target Stock Score: 0.5

Alignment with Scientific Advice Score: 0.25

Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Score: 0.25

Emergency management of this stock in 2001 has recovered it to very good levels. Ongoing management measures appear to be controlling the fishery, but discarding can be an issue in some areas and catch limits do not cover all of the countries accessing the stock.

Northern hake is a shared stock between the UK, EU, and Norway. There is no joint management plan, although one is being considered. The main management measure is to set catch limits (Total Allowable Catches, TACs).

ICES recommends catch limits for the northern hake stock as a whole. However, TACs apply only to the UK and EU member states and waters, so there is potential for overfishing if other states are accessing the stock (e.g. Norway). The agreed TACs were set in line with scientific advice for some of the last 5 years (2022 – 2026) However, in 2022 and 2025, the TACs exceeded the advice by 5% and 6% respectively. In both cases, ICES had recommended a greater than 20% decrease in catch, but hake TACs can't change by more than 20% in one year, so TACs remained above the advice.

Between 2021 and 2025, actual catches remained below the scientific advice. This could be an indication that the stock biomass has been overestimated. Caution is needed because hake are fast growing with a high natural mortality rate, so if the biomass starts to decline it could drop rapidly. A Harvest Control Rule would help to mitigate this, as it would reduce exploitation rates when certain biological reference points are approached.

Overall, currently, catch limits appear to be set in line with scientific advice and actual catches are within these limits.

Other measures include:

• Minimum conservation reference size: hake can legally be caught and sold at 27cm (30cm in Skagerrak and Kattegat). Below this size, hake have to be landed but can't be sold for human consumption and so have a lower value. Hake mature at around 35-45cm, so this doesn't prevent juveniles from being caught.
• Landing obligation: it is illegal to discard unwanted (e.g. below-minimum-size, BMS) hake at sea. Overall, around 6% of the catch has been discarded in the last three years, and discarding rates have decreased since 2015. However, discarding of juvenile hake (both above and below MCRS) can be substantial in some areas and fleets, particularly gillnetting. Recently, discarding of large individuals increased because of quota restrictions in certain fleets. Continued monitoring is required.

An Emergency Plan was brought in in 2001 to recover the stock, involving a TAC reduction and minimum mesh size of 100mm (depending on vessel size, location and proportion of hake in the total catch). It included targets for increasing stock size and reducing fishing mortality, and limited changes in TAC from year to year. The stock is now in a very good state, and fishing pressure is at sustainable levels, although this has been strongly influenced by good spawning years in 2008 and 2012.

The EU and UK both have fishery management measures, which can include catch limits, population targets, and gear restrictions. However, compliance in the EU and UK has been inconsistent, with ongoing challenges in implementing some regulations. The goal of reaching Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) by 2020 was missed, with less than half of UK TACs in 2024 following ICES advice. In 2024, the EU and UK reaffirmed their commitment to sustainable fisheries by aligning management with scientific advice to gradually approach MSY. However, no new target date has been set for achieving MSY across all fisheries. The Landing Obligation (LO), an EU law retained by the UK post-Brexit, requires all quota fish to be landed, even if unwanted (over-quota or below minimum size). It aims to encourage more selective fishing methods, reduce bycatch, and improve catch reporting. However, compliance is poor, and accurate discard levels are hard to quantify with current monitoring programmes. The UK is in the process of replacing the LO with country-specific Catching Policies.   

The Marine Conservation Society views Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) with cameras is one of the most cost-effective tools for providing reliable fisheries data and aiding informed management decisions. Fully monitored fisheries enhance collaboration, data accuracy, stock recovery, and reduce impacts on marine wildlife and habitats. However, the full potential of REM may only be achieved when it tracks fishing location and documents catch and bycatch, particularly where vulnerable species and habitats are at risk. As of January 2024, the EU is introducing a Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) mandate for EU vessels, including CCTV cameras on vessels 18m or more that pose a potential risk of non-compliance, within the next 4 years. Across the UK, different approaches to REM are being taken and legislation is expected to be in place across all 4 countries within the next few years. 

The Fisheries Act (2020) requires the development of Fisheries Management Plans (FMPs) (replacing EU Multi-Annual Plans) in the UK. 43 FMPs have been proposed and are at various stages of development and implementation, these should all be published by the end of 2028. FMPs have the potential to be very important tools for managing UK fisheries, although data limitations may delay them for some stocks. It is also essential the UK governments define and adopt a standardised approach or model across the four nations to a universally defined FMP design, to ensure the consistence, quality and coherence of all the proposal FMPs. 

The Marine Conservation Society is keen to see publicly available Fishery Management Plans for all commercially exploited stocks, especially where stocks are depleted, that include: 

• An overview of the fishery including current stock status, spatial coverage, current fishing methods and impacts 

• Targets for fishing pressure and biomass, and additional management when those targets are not being met, based on the best scientific evidence 

• Timeframes for stock recovery 

• Improved data collection, transparency, and accountability, supported by technologies such as Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) 

• Consideration of wider environmental impacts of the fishery, including habitat impacts and minimising bycatch 

• Stakeholder engagement 

Capture Method Score: 0.5

Habitat Impacts: 0.5

Bycatch Impacts: 0.5

Vulnerable and ETP Species: 0.5

Ecosystems and Trophic Webs: 0.25

Some hake catches are by otter trawls, which are likely to cause some damage to the seabed. Bycatch is moderate and may include vulnerable species such as North Sea cod and blue and flapper skate.

Most Hake catches are by otter trawl, around 50%, 25% is captured by otter trawl, and 17% by longline.

Demersal otter trawls have the potential to take relatively high quantities of bycatch. In the Northeast Atlantic there are reported catches of demersal elasmobranchs and endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species (e.g. sharks, rays and marine mammals). Bycatch data is limited in many UK and EU fisheries as they are generally not well monitored. However, a proportion of the hake trawl fishery is certified and records bycatch. It is assumed that these records would also represent bycatch concerns in the uncertified components. Bycatch in the certified fishery includes the vulnerable North Sea cod, which is below safe reproductive levels. Endangered, threatened or protected species included the Critically Endangered common skate complex (blue skate and flapper skate), porbeagle, and other skates and rays.

Some mitigation measures are in place in some areas. There is a UK North Sea cod avoidance plan, requiring vessels in some areas to take extra measures to reduce cod bycatch. In Sweden, vessels have increased bycatch avoidance measures by using larger-meshed panels in their nets, which allow juvenile cod to escape. For blue and flapper skate, mitigation measures include a prohibition on landing either species, and some protection for nursery areas. It is not clear if this fishery is having an impact at population level for any of these species. Given that bycatch is ongoing, therefore, it possible that the bycatch level is contributing to population decline and/or preventing recovery.

Demersal trawls have contact with the seabed resulting in penetration and abrasion of habitat features. The impact of trawling on the seabed depends on the location and scale in which trawling occurs. For example, areas that are used to natural disturbance through tides and waves, are less sensitive to habitat impacts. Areas not used by mobile towed gears are typically more sensitive to trawling. Trawl gears are known to have some of the greatest impacts on Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs).

Most of the hake fishery operates in the Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay (ICES areas 7 and 8abd), but the specific footprint of the hake trawl fishery is not known. An estimated 45% of the Celtic Sea region and 19% of the Bay of Biscay was trawled in 2018. Fishing effort in both areas has been decreasing since the early 2000s. This has reduced the spatial fishing footprint and the average number of times the seabed is trawled per year. Most habitats are mud and sand, which are less vulnerable to trawling. However, in the Celtic Seas, 95% of areas where VMEs such as cold-water corals and sponges occur or are likely were found to have been fished between 2009 and 2011.

Mitigation measures include a ban on bottom trawling below 800m, and restrictions from 400-600m – the areas where most VMEs are found. There remains some uncertainty about the location of some sensitive seabed habitats, so these remain at risk.

There are Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in this area, some of which are designated to protect seabed features from damaging activities. This fishery overlaps with parts of these MPAs, but the proportion of the catch coming from these areas is expected to be relatively low in relation to the unit of assessment (i.e. less than 20% of the catch or effort), and so these impacts have not been assessed within the scale of this rating. Given the important role that MPAs have in recovering the health and function of our seas, MCS encourages the supply chain to identify if their specific sources are being caught from within MPAs. If sources are suspected of coming from within designated and managed MPAs, MCS advises businesses to establish if the fishing activity is operating legally inside a designated and managed MPA, and request evidence from the fishery or managing authority to demonstrate that the activity is not damaging to protected features or a threat to the conservation objectives of the site(s).

To improve monitoring and reporting of fishing activity, the Marine Conservation Society would like to see remote electronic monitoring (REM) with cameras implemented, used and enforced. ​To reduce the impacts of fishing on the marine environment we would like to see a just transition to the complete removal of bottom towed gear from offshore Marine Protected Areas designated to protect the seabed. We also want to see reduction and mitigation of environmental impacts including emissions and blue carbon habitat damage.