Comparing the harvest rate of Northern Cod with that of Icelandic Cod is highly inappropriate and misleading. The natural mortality of the two stocks are drastically different:
- Assumed natural mortality of Icelandic Cod is 0.2. Natural mortality of Northern Cod is almost 4 times higher at 0.74 (as per DFO technical briefing, March 2018).
- As much less fish are dying from natural causes in Iceland, therefore it makes sense they are able to sustainably remove more through fishing.
- If Northern Cod had the same productivity regime as Icelandic Cod, it wouldn’t have seen a decline in 2018, let alone a 29% decline. It would be growing at an exponential rate. We know this is not the case.
- Icelandic Cod is in the Healthy Zone, while Northern Cod is still deep within its Critical Zone. The DFO diagram below demonstrates just how far apart the two realities are. Comparing the harvest rates makes no logical or scientific sense.
- Icelandic Cod and Northern Cod are different stocks in very different places
- Icelandic Cod food web conditions are very positive, allow for less natural mortality.
- There are many older fish in the Icelandic system. Larger, older fish produce more successful eggs.
- With drastic differences in the amount of natural mortality, it is only logical that there must be drastic differences in the amount of fisheries removals.
