Barents Sea Capelin

The Joint Russian-Norwegian Arctic Fisheries Working Group (JRN-AFWG) met digitally on 12–13 October 2026 to assess and give quota advice for the Barents Sea capelin stock.

Participants:

• Bjarte Bogstad (Norway, Chair of meeting)

• Anatoly Chetyrkin (Russia)

• Stine Karlson (Norway)

• Yury Kovalev (Russia)

• Dmitry Prozorkevich (Russia)

• Frøydis Rist (Norway)

• Georg Skaret (Norway)

• Sindre Vatnehol (Norway)

1.1 - Regulation of the Barents Sea Capelin Fishery

Since 1979, the Barents Sea capelin fishery has been regulated by a bilateral fishery management agreement between Russia (former USSR) and Norway. A TAC has been set separately for the winter fishery and for the autumn fishery. From 1999, no autumn fishery has taken place, except for a small Russian experimental fishery in some years and small by-catch in the northern shrimp fishery. A minimum landing size of 11 cm has been in force since 1979. Scientific advice is to carry out capelin fishery only on mature fish during the period from January to April.

1.2 - Catch Statistics (Table 10.1)

The Joint Norwegian-Russian Fishery Commission (JNRFC) set a TAC of 0 tonnes both for 2025 and 2026. For both years, the quotas were in accordance with the advice. The international historical catch by country and season in the years 1965–2026 is given in Table 10.1. The catch in 2026 was 5 tonnes (Russia 5 t), as by-catch in other fisheries.

A summary of the BESS capelin sampling included in the abundance estimation in 2026 is given below:

1.3 - Stock assessment

1.3.1 - Acoustic stock size estimates in 2026 (Table 10.2-10.4, Figures 10.1-10.3)

The geographical survey coverage of the Barents Sea capelin stock during the BESS in 2026 was close to complete and with very good coverage of the main distribution area. The only significant exception was the ‘Loophole’ which was not covered. The geographical distribution of capelin recordings in 2026 compared to 2025 is shown in Fig. 10.1.

The stock estimate (made in StoX v 4.2.1) from the area covered by the 2026 survey was 0.234 million tonnes (Table 10.2). About 26% (0.060 million tonnes) of the estimated stock biomass consisted of maturing fish (>14.0 cm). The total stock estimate is the lowest since 1995, while the estimate of maturing biomass is the lowest since 1987 and the second lowest in the time series. The mean weight at age from the 2025 to the 2026 survey increased for ages 1 and 2 and decreased for age 3 (Fig. 10.2). Estimates of stock in number by age group and total biomass for the historical period are shown in Table 10.3 and CVs for abundance at age for 2004 onwards in Table 10.4. Survey mortality for ages 1-2 and 2-3 is shown in Fig. 10.3.

The survey design and estimation software now allow for estimation of a direct CV by age group. CV estimates by age group for the years 2004–2021 and 2023–2026 are given in Table 10.4. It was found that age groups with very low abundance in the survey usually have very high CVs. That is expected since there are few observations in the survey for such age groups. Vice versa an abundant age group normally has much lower CV. WKCAPELIN recommended to use the average CV for each age group from the last five years with high-quality surveys in the stock projection. However, including age groups with very low abundance and accordingly high CV in the averaging is inappropriate.

Due to incomplete survey coverage in 2022, the CVs of that year were not included in the averaging. It was decided to use, for each age, the unweighted average for the recent 5 years with a CV (2021 and 2023–2026 for ages 1-3, 2020–2021 and 2023–2025 for age 4). The summary results are presented below:

A methodology for handling very small or very large CV values and abundance estimates of different orders of magnitude in the averaging should be explored, together with exploring using annual CVs. With a low CV there is a risk that sampling variance is not a good reflection of total uncertainty, since other sources of uncertainty could then dominate over sampling variance in the total uncertainty.

1.3.2 - Benchmark results

An ICES benchmark meeting joint for the Iceland East Greenland Jan Mayen capelin and Barents Sea capelin (WKCAPELIN) was held in Reykjavik 21-25 November 2022 (ICES, 2023). A summary of the changes to the assessment method following the benchmark is given in the 2023 capelin assessment report.

1.3.3 - Reference points

A B_lim (SSB_lim) management approach has been suggested for this stock (Gjøsæter et al., 2002). In 2002, the JNRFC agreed to adopt a management strategy based on the rule that, with 95% probability, at least 200 000 tonnes of capelin should be allowed to spawn. Consequently, 200 000 tonnes was used as a B_lim. Alternative harvest control rules of 80, 85 and 90% probability of SSB > B_lim were suggested by JNRFC and evaluated by ICES (ICES 2016). ICES considers these rules not to be precautionary. At its 2016 meeting, JNRFC decided not to change the adopted management strategy.

The B_lim used up until present is based on SSB in 1989 (estimated to 96 000 tons) with an uncertainty buffer added (SSB + uncertainty buffer assumed to add up to 200 000 tonnes). The SSB in 1989 is the lowest in the time series which resulted in good recruitment.

In WKCAPELIN it was considered that B_lim should not be based on years which are affected by the NSS-herring collapse in the Barents Sea, as was the case for the year 1989. Among the years included, 1990 had the lowest estimated SSB (68 000 tonnes) that still produced above average recruitment.

The procedure of including an uncertainty buffer to B_lim like it was done previously, was not accepted by WKCAPELIN. Separate terms for the biological reference point (B_lim) and the reference point used in the harvest control rule (B_escapement) were therefore introduced.

1.3.4 - Harvest control rule evaluation

Trochta et al. (2024) assessed harvest control rules for capelin in the Barents Sea using a management strategy evaluation (MSE), a modeling framework that simulates population and fishery responses to management actions. The form of the current escapement rule is retained and is defined by B_escapement, the biomass of fish that should be left to spawn after fishing is accounted for. The MSE specifically tested four different B_escapement values (100 000, 150 000, 200 000 and 400 000 tonnes) with and without three alternative fixed minimum quotas (25 000, 50 000 or 75 000 tonnes). When assuming historical capelin productivity, accurate survey estimates and correctly estimated survey precision, all four B_escapement values without fixed minimum quotas maintained a low risk (<5%) of spawning biomass falling below B_lim. However, a B_escapement equal to 100 000 tonnes showed notably higher risk (of SSB<B_lim) if either the survey estimate is biased high or estimated survey precision is biased low. High probabilities of fishery closures resulted from B_escapement = 400 000 tonnes. All the alternative rules using fixed minimum quotas showed very high risk of SSB falling below B_lim and the model framework projected reduced future recruitment to the extent of stock collapse over the long term. In general, average catch decreased and the number of years with closed fishery increased with higher B_escapement. There is also ongoing work exploring rules with minimum levels of quota (e.g. 25 000 or 50 000 tonnes) given that the projected spawning stock biomass is above B_escapement with zero catch.

When selecting a rule, managers should also consider the trade-offs with other consequences and potential impacts on the ecosystem given the critical role played by capelin as the key forage fish for various predators in the Barents Sea.

1.3.5 - Comparison of historical capelin advice using updated and original model configuration

As part of the 2022 capelin benchmark, the configuration of the forecast model for Barents Sea capelin, Bifrost, was reviewed and updated. Vatnehol and Skaret (2025) compared the quota advice for the advice years 2005-2023 based on forecasts with the updated and original model configurations, using the existing harvest control rule. The results show that the catch advice in general would have been higher with the updated configuration, but the years with no-fishery-advice were the same with the updated and original configuration. The comparison further showed that the changes in parameter settings of the cod consumption module in addition to the parameters set for natural capelin mortality in the autumn (1 October to 1 January) had the greatest impact on the advice. It must be noted that the model configuration is partly adapted to the current ecosystem state, so the comparison between configurations becomes less relevant the further back in time we go. Furthermore, some parameters including the natural capelin mortality in the autumn and the proportion of immature cod in the Svalbard area will be updated each year as part of the capelin assessment, so a direct comparison with historical advice will change each year.

1.3.6 - Stock assessment in 2026 (Figures 10.4-10.5)

All projections described below were based on a maturation and predation model as described in the 2023 WKCAPELIN Benchmark report (ICES, 2023), with parameters estimated by the model Bifrost and data on predicted cod number and weight at age in 2027 from the 2026 JRN-AFWG assessment (Howell et al. 2026). The methodology is described in the Benchmark report (ICES 2023).

With no catch, the estimated median spawning stock size on 1 April 2027 is 18 000 tonnes (90% confidence interval: 1 000–28 000 tonnes) (Fig 10.4), and the probabilities for the spawning stock to be above 150 000 and 200 000 tonnes are both 0%. Summary plots for catch, stock size and recruitment are given in Figure 10.5.

This year’s headline advice is thus based on a B_escapement value of 200 000 tonnes, as in previous years, but we also provide information about what the quota advice would be for a B_escapement value of 150 000 tonnes, as this value was also found to be precautionary during the HCR evaluation. The catch options are given in the text table below.

Barents Sea capelin (ICES subareas 1 and 2, excluding Division 2.a west of 5°W). Annual catch scenarios. P = probability. All weights are in tonnes. Median SSB is from the Bifrost model run, rounded to the nearest 1000 tonnes.

* TAC (2027) vs. TAC (2026).

** Advice (2027) vs. Advice (2026).

1.3.7 - Recruitment (Table 10.5, Figures 10.6-10.7)

The 1-group abundance in 2026 in the area covered by the survey was 24.1 billion which is much lower than the long-term average (Table 10.3).

0-group indices from re-estimates for 2004-2025 made in StoX (Skaret et al. 2026) and updated with indices for 2026 are given in Table 10.5 and Fig. 10.6. A regression between 0-group indices and age 1 acoustic estimate for the year classes 2004-2025 is shown in Fig. 10.7. The correlation is quite good (R²=0.83). The low 0-group index for 2026 indicates that this year class is weak. Inserting the 0-group estimate for 2026 into the regression equation gives a predicted abundance at age 1 in 2027 of 37.4 billion which is slightly above the age 1 estimates for 2025 and 2026 but still very low.

High abundance of young herring (mainly age groups 1 and 2) has been suggested to be an important but not a single factor causing recruitment failure in the capelin stock (Hjermann et al., 2010; Gjøsæter et al. 2016). WGWIDE (ICES, 2026) estimated the 2021, 2022 and 2024 year classes of herring to be strong, and the recent low recruitment of capelin is likely connected with the presence of these year classes in the Barents Sea. The recruitment to the capelin stock from the 2027 year class is predicted to be poor given the predicted very low capelin SSB in 2027 and that it is likely with a high herring abundance in the Barents Sea also in 2027 based on the acoustic recordings from the BESS 2026.

1.4 - References

Gjøsæter, H., B. Bogstad, and S. Tjelmeland. 2002. Assessment methodology for Barents Sea capelin, Mallotus villosus (Müller). ICES Journal of Marine Science 59:1086-1095.

Gjøsæter, H., Hallfredsson, E. H., Mikkelsen, N., Bogstad, B., and Pedersen, T. 2016. Predation on early life stages is decisive for year class strength in the Barents Sea capelin (Mallotus villosus) stock. ICES Journal of Marine Science 73(2):182-195. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsv177

Hjermann, D. Ø., B. Bogstad, G. E. Dingsør, H. Gjøsæter, G. Ottersen, A. M. Eikeset, and N. C. Stenseth. 2010. Trophic interactions affecting a key ecosystem component: a multi-stage analysis of the recruitment of the Barents Sea capelin. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 67:1363-1375.

Howell, D. et al. 2026. Report of the Joint Russian-Norwegian Working Group on Arctic Fisheries (JRN-AFWG) 2026. IMR-VNIRO Report Series 5-2026, 323 pp.

ICES. 2016. Report of the second Workshop on Management Plan Evaluation on Northeast Arctic cod and haddock and Barents Sea capelin, 25–28 January 2016, Kirkenes, Norway. ICES CM 2016/ACOM:47. 76 pp. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.5296.

ICES 2023. Benchmark workshop on capelin (WKCAPELIN). ICES Scientific Reports. 5:62. 282 pp. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.23260388

ICES. 2026. Working Group on Widely Distributed Stocks (WGWIDE). ICES Scientific Reports. 7:63. 1086 pp. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.33882730

Skaret, G., D. Prozorkevich, J. Diaz, L. Hellenbrecht, A. J. Holmin, E. Johnsen, S. Karlson, F. Rist, and E. Eriksen. 2026 (in press). Re-estimation of the Barents Sea zero-group abundance indices from 2004-2025. Rapport fra havforskningen 2026-8.

Tjelmeland, S. 2002. A model for the uncertainty around the yearly trawl-acoustic estimate of biomass of Barents Sea capelin, Mallotus villosus (Müller). ICES Journal of Marine Science 59:1072-1080.

Trochta, J., B. Bogstad, Y. Kovalev, D. Prozorkevich, G. Skaret, S. Vatnehol, and D. Howell. 2024. Report on evaluation of harvest rules for Barents Sea capelin in subareas 1 and 2 (Northeast Arctic), excluding Division 2.a west of 5°W - full report. IMR-PINRO Report Series 17-2024, 45 pp.

Vatnehol, S. and Skaret, G. 2025. Comparison of historical capelin quota advice using original and updated forecast model configuration. Report series: Rapport fra havforskningen 2025-5. https://hdl.handle.net/11250/3180911.

1.5 - Tables

*Not adjusted for incomplete area coverage

1.6 - Figures