Earlier this year, the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) doubled the total allowable catch (TAC) in the Northern cod fishery off Newfoundland and Labrador. This is the same fishery that infamously collapsed and was officially closed to all commercial fishing activity in 1992. The DFO’s decision has, unsurprisingly, been very controversial.
For this post, we spoke to several experts to understand the decision-making process that reopened this fishery and increased the TAC for the upcoming season. We learned that the assessment process has evolved during the moratorium, incorporating more ecosystem considerations, such as capelin, a major food source for Northern cod. Other environmental factors may have hindered cod’s recovery, however. Some stakeholders seriously challenge the appropriateness of the reference points used to assess the population. There is wide disagreement on what a successful Northern cod fishery should look like in 2025 and beyond.
History of Northern cod
Northern cod landings surged significantly in the 1960s after European factory trawlers were introduced, enhancing fishing efficiency and catch volume. Before 1976, Canada could not enforce a 200-mile exclusive economic zone like it does now, so the cod fishery was practically open access. In 1968, catch peaked at 810,000 metric tons – roughly three times higher than the average annual catch in the 1950s.
10 years later, by 1978, the annual catch had plummeted to 138,500 metric tons. A brief rebound in the mid-1980s was followed by a population crash in the early 1990s.
Dr. Jake Rice, DFO’s chief scientist for nearly three decades and now emeritus, began his career studying terrestrial food webs before joining DFO in 1982 to study Northern cod. He was promoted to director of peer review and science advice for all of Canada’s fisheries in 1997. He spoke with us about the years before the moratorium:
Rice:
The first warnings came in the 1985-1986 stock assessments. Trends seemed to be heading in a different direction than expected, but we couldn’t explain why. The offshore fishery was skyrocketing, while the inshore fishery was having some of the worst summers in a generation. It became political and controversial. A review team, chaired by the late Dr. Lee Alverson, was appointed for further evaluation.
By 1990, we were more certain of the downward trend but still struggling to account for why it was happening. Foreign overfishing was the first boogeyman, but that theory was debunked after effective patrols proved this couldn’t be the primary cause. Next, it was seal predation, then it was discarding and underreporting. Every possible cause was considered.
On July 2nd, 1992, the Canadian government imposed a complete moratorium on the Northern cod fishery, marking the largest industrial closure in the country’s history and putting about 30,000 people out of work. Unfortunately, the moratorium did not initiate a speedy recovery. Changing environmental conditions and low reproductive rates, exacerbated by years of overfishing, kept cod populations dangerously low for decades.
But around 2010, the spawning stock biomass (SSB) began to grow. Assessments showed a more stabilized cod population. This was encouraging, but the stock was still a considerable distance from the levels last observed in the 1980s.
Fast forward to 2024, and DFO reopened the fishery for the first time since 1992, setting a modest 18,000 metric ton TAC. One year later, DFO decided to double that quota to 38,000 metric tons.
A variety of regional and international stakeholders applauded the reopening and the increase in the 2025 quota. But not everyone agrees with DFO’s decision. Rebecca Schijns, a fisheries scientist for Oceana Canada, published an op-ed in June that criticized the decision, saying it undermined Northern cod rebuilding:
This wasn’t a science-based decision – it was a political choice made under pressure, not precaution. Canada has already paid the price for overfishing this fragile stock, and now DFO is at risk of repeating the mistake: ignoring science, exceeding stakeholder advice, and opening the door to increased fishing while cod remains weak and projected to decline. This was a clear opportunity to rebuild the fishery for the long term. Instead, the government traded it away for short-term gain that benefits only a few — putting ecosystems, livelihoods, and public trust at serious risk.
To better understand the status of this fishery and its sustainability outlook in 2025 and beyond, we spoke with three experts and summarized their main points in the quotes below:
What does the best available science say about the status of the Northern cod fishery in 2025?
Dr. Paul Regular is a research scientist for DFO, leading the scientific team for the stock assessment of Northern cod:
Regular:
For January 2025, the assessment model estimated biomass at approximately 524 kilotons. The stock has been stable since 2017, with annual biomass estimates between 300 to 600 kilotons. When it comes to status, the latest assessment also indicates the stock is out of the critical zone (the point at which the stock is under serious harm) with 99% probability. The stock is estimated at two times greater than the limit reference point (LRP).
Carey Bonnell is the vice president of sustainability and engagement for Ocean Choice International, a commercial fishing organization supporting Atlantic Canada’s fishing and seafood industry on sustainable development initiatives:
Bonnell:
There’s a point of debate on the growth of the stock. Some argue the growth has stalled. But the stock assessment data suggest it has actually been growing steadily since 2010. The 2025 biomass estimate is up almost 100,000 metric tons compared to the year prior. It is a significant rebound, very encouraging. Not back to historic levels, of course, but up to a level that can sustain a moderate commercial fishery.
Rice:
While I don’t believe we have enough data to position a new LRP with complete and total confidence, I am satisfied that we are well above this point of depensation. I am very confident that there is no particular management strategy of this stock that, under the current environmental conditions, could grow the biomass substantially larger than it is today.
But skeptics of Northern cod’s recovery can cite their concerns directly from DFO reports as recently as March 2024. Regular himself was quoted as saying, “The growth of the stock appears to have stalled.”
Then what changed in the last 18 months? What conditions were most responsible for this recovery, aside from the moratorium itself?
Bonnell:
These are complex ecosystems, but one important factor in cod’s recent recovery could be the increase in the capelin biomass. Capelin is an important food source for cod, and its biomass index was up over 90% last year, compared to the previous year. Furthermore, warming water temperatures in recent years, along with increased zooplankton biomass, are favorable for cod recovery.
Last year, Regular highlighted the significance of capelin, warning, “Without improvements to capelin, DFO’s projections show a poor prognosis for the future of cod.”
But not all ecosystem triggers had positive effects on Northern cod’s recovery, as Rice explained:
Rice:
By about 2015, it was clear that the Labrador Current, which is cold, fresher water, melting from the Arctic ice cap and glaciers on Greenland and Baffin Islands, had strengthened tremendously because of climate change. We always say climate change makes everything warmer, but in this case, it brought extremely cold, fresh, icy water into the system. This affected the productivity of everything. For cod, this may have hindered its recovery during the moratorium, rather than helped. There were a variety of oceanographic conditions that I believe limited the stock’s recovery.
But the most important factor for the stock’s recovery was keeping fishing mortality at near zero. The fact that recovery has plateaued well below the old population biomasses of over 1.1 million metric tons reflects the new, lower ceiling on the biomass growth potential, because of a higher overall mortality rate driven by natural mortality, not fishing mortality.
Ultimately, the information presented to the DFO minister led to the reopening of this fishery in 2024 and resulted in a doubling of the TAC the following year, in 2025.
What scientific advice is typically considered before making the quota decision, and how is that information collected and presented?
Regular:
Northern cod is typically assessed annually, which is more often than most commercial stocks in Canada. Each year, we discuss the latest catch data, age data, bottom trawl surveys from the fishing areas, inshore surveys, and tagging data. All this new information is fed into the latest assessment. If the models seem to be working correctly and all diagnostic tests perform as expected, we then discuss the projections. The projections display possible outlooks in different scenarios to identify when and how the stock could go below the critical zone. This process yields scientific advice. The Minister reviews this advice and considers it along with socioeconomic factors to make a final decision.
Bonnell:
The survey vessels operate in the fall, collecting data from north to south. A robust, multi-stakeholder scientific review takes place over the winter. Then, usually in April, the results are shared with a stakeholder groundfish advisory committee. We provide feedback and a recommendation for the minister to consider. The minister makes a final decision, usually in June.
Has the review process or key indicators changed over the years?
Regular:
In 2023, we updated the assessment framework, adding more data, including ecosystem variables like capelin. After they changed the framework, the old LRP was considered too high. It had been an LRP based on the average assessments from the 1980s.
The change in the LRP is critical to understanding Northern cod’s stock status in 2025. Using the old LRP, the stock wasn’t fully recovered. However, the old LRP couldn’t appropriately represent new oceanographic conditions and the status of a smaller, yet stable, SSB.
Regular continued:
Regular:
The new LRP was recalculated based on biomass at maximum sustainable yield (MSY), which indicated the LRP should be lower. This contributed greatly to the stock status adjustment. While the amount of cod in the water hasn’t changed, advances in the assessment methods have changed how we interpret current stock levels.
Another important change is the addition of new ecosystem variables, as Regular explained:
Regular:
Capelin population dynamics and its stock assessment are now formally considered in the Northern cod stock assessment process. Cod prey relationships were always seen as an important factor, but only recently has the capelin assessment been considered in the cod scientific advice process.
Are further changes necessary to improve the quality of the assessments or the understanding of this fishery?
Bonnell:
The survey timing is critical for this stock, and perhaps that timing can be adjusted for more accuracy in the future. The survey conducted in 2023 was done too efficiently, such that it concluded about one month earlier than expected. Northern cod have a very complicated migratory pattern, migrating inshore during the summer and back offshore as the weather gets colder. Perhaps due to the shifting marine environment, the migration has been delayed in recent years, and our survey timing must adapt. If you look at last year’s survey, which was conducted under the traditional time series, the biomass was significantly higher than in 2023. The exploitation rate is determined in part by these survey results, so they need to capture as much of the biomass as possible.
Rice:
There is still uncertainty about all the factors in cod total mortality. You can build models that suggest seal predation or limited capelin supply are major factors. The evidence is not strong enough to eliminate either of those hypotheses. But at the same time, the choice to make food web dynamics the basis for understanding this fishery may have diverted focus towards answering questions that are less than essential for ideal stock assessments and ideal management targets. The food web dynamic questions are important; we should seek to answer them better. But they may not be the most essential all the time. From the late 1980s to the early 2000s, physical oceanographers were key players – perhaps to a fault – in every stock assessment meeting for Northern cod. Now they are much less essential. Perhaps this was an overcorrection.
How would you respond to Oceana’s comment?
"Northern cod still has the potential to become a world-class example of recovery, supporting thousands of sustainable jobs and bringing long-term economic benefits to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador."
Bonnell:
I think some NGOs have a different view. Northern cod is iconic because of its historic collapse, and I think there’s a feeling out there in some communities that we need to protect ourselves from ourselves when it comes to Northern cod. We wouldn’t be having this debate for any other stock showing similar assessments and growth.
But this notion of returning to historical levels is misguided. Ecosystems and environments have changed so much in 32 years, and there needs to be a new normal standard. If we aim for a return to mid-20th-century biomass levels, we will probably never reach that goal. There is a modest sustainable fishery here right now that can benefit these communities while abiding by responsible scientific advice.
Regular:
From a scientific perspective, there is no question that the stock has made significant progress. The stock exceeds levels where productivity is seriously impaired. That said, it hasn’t shown much growth since 2017. Industry, NGOs, scientists, and managers need to keep working together to find the best way forward to protect this important stock and support the people of the province.
Rice:
There is no question that by the 2010s, we realized the productivity of the Northern cod stock, even unfished, had been reduced substantially by climate change and oceanographic conditions. But the reference points had not changed, and talking to fishery managers, everybody agreed that we were being bound by the fact that the rebuilding target was no longer attainable because of changed environmental conditions. There’s absolutely no scientific uncertainty about that, but the department was hesitant to reevaluate the reference points until recently.
Those still questioning the sustainability of the reopened Northern cod fishery disagree on risk tolerance. Doubling the TAC does increase the risk that the stock will move into the Critical Zone. However, those closest to the assessment process believe this risk is minuscule, with ample risk mitigation in place to protect against unexpected outcomes.
Bonnell:
The Northern cod stock is assessed annually. This science is robust, and the data is rich, compared to many other commercial stocks. Management can change course each year if next year’s survey returns something unexpected. There are many stop signs built into the management of this fishery to ensure we’re not repeating the mistakes of the past.
The table above shows that Northern cod has a large SSB, comparable to those of the Iceland and Barents Sea cod fisheries, yet only a tiny fraction of the fishing mortality. This demonstrates the precautionary approach DFO still takes with Northern cod.
Conclusion
Oceana’s concerns are justified if we only look at headlines and bullet points about Northern cod and Canada’s economic climate. The fishery collapsed 34 years ago after immense fishing mortality, and now Canada’s economy-focused government has decided to double the TAC for the upcoming season. This sounds like an alarming situation without further context.
But this fishery cannot be compared to that of the 20th century. Northern cod’s biomass may never return to levels of the 1960s – not because of fishing management mistakes, but because new oceanographic conditions have changed cod productivity and mortality. Those changes necessitated the establishment of new reference points to assess the fishery accurately. Managers have much more data today than they did 40 years ago, and they review it with a broader understanding of Northern cod’s ecosystem. Those data are delivered annually, with a spotlight and level of scrutiny unmatched in any other fishery, because of the infamous failures of the past. Just as the forecast changed between now and March of 2024, a similar shift next year will be met with nimble policy pivots to deter significant setbacks.
It is impossible to fully understand the entire landscape of stressors on the Northern cod stock; indeed, more research is needed on some of the new ecosystem considerations to continue accurate monitoring. However, to suggest that Northern cod is being recklessly managed is unfounded and unfair.
The Northern Cod Quota Increase – a risky decision or a precautionary approach?
Earlier this year, the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) doubled the total allowable catch (TAC) in the Northern cod fishery off Newfoundland and Labrador. This is the same fishery that infamously collapsed and was officially closed to all commercial fishing activity in 1992. The DFO’s decision has, unsurprisingly, been very controversial.
For this post, we spoke to several experts to understand the decision-making process that reopened this fishery and increased the TAC for the upcoming season. We learned that the assessment process has evolved during the moratorium, incorporating more ecosystem considerations, such as capelin, a major food source for Northern cod. Other environmental factors may have hindered cod’s recovery, however. Some stakeholders seriously challenge the appropriateness of the reference points used to assess the population. There is wide disagreement on what a successful Northern cod fishery should look like in 2025 and beyond.
History of Northern cod
Northern cod landings surged significantly in the 1960s after European factory trawlers were introduced, enhancing fishing efficiency and catch volume. Before 1976, Canada could not enforce a 200-mile exclusive economic zone like it does now, so the cod fishery was practically open access. In 1968, catch peaked at 810,000 metric tons – roughly three times higher than the average annual catch in the 1950s.
10 years later, by 1978, the annual catch had plummeted to 138,500 metric tons. A brief rebound in the mid-1980s was followed by a population crash in the early 1990s.
Dr. Jake Rice, DFO’s chief scientist for nearly three decades and now emeritus, began his career studying terrestrial food webs before joining DFO in 1982 to study Northern cod. He was promoted to director of peer review and science advice for all of Canada’s fisheries in 1997. He spoke with us about the years before the moratorium:
Rice:
The first warnings came in the 1985-1986 stock assessments. Trends seemed to be heading in a different direction than expected, but we couldn’t explain why. The offshore fishery was skyrocketing, while the inshore fishery was having some of the worst summers in a generation. It became political and controversial. A review team, chaired by the late Dr. Lee Alverson, was appointed for further evaluation.
By 1990, we were more certain of the downward trend but still struggling to account for why it was happening. Foreign overfishing was the first boogeyman, but that theory was debunked after effective patrols proved this couldn’t be the primary cause. Next, it was seal predation, then it was discarding and underreporting. Every possible cause was considered.
On July 2nd, 1992, the Canadian government imposed a complete moratorium on the Northern cod fishery, marking the largest industrial closure in the country’s history and putting about 30,000 people out of work. Unfortunately, the moratorium did not initiate a speedy recovery. Changing environmental conditions and low reproductive rates, exacerbated by years of overfishing, kept cod populations dangerously low for decades.
But around 2010, the spawning stock biomass (SSB) began to grow. Assessments showed a more stabilized cod population. This was encouraging, but the stock was still a considerable distance from the levels last observed in the 1980s.
Fast forward to 2024, and DFO reopened the fishery for the first time since 1992, setting a modest 18,000 metric ton TAC. One year later, DFO decided to double that quota to 38,000 metric tons.
A variety of regional and international stakeholders applauded the reopening and the increase in the 2025 quota. But not everyone agrees with DFO’s decision. Rebecca Schijns, a fisheries scientist for Oceana Canada, published an op-ed in June that criticized the decision, saying it undermined Northern cod rebuilding:
This wasn’t a science-based decision – it was a political choice made under pressure, not precaution. Canada has already paid the price for overfishing this fragile stock, and now DFO is at risk of repeating the mistake: ignoring science, exceeding stakeholder advice, and opening the door to increased fishing while cod remains weak and projected to decline. This was a clear opportunity to rebuild the fishery for the long term. Instead, the government traded it away for short-term gain that benefits only a few — putting ecosystems, livelihoods, and public trust at serious risk.
To better understand the status of this fishery and its sustainability outlook in 2025 and beyond, we spoke with three experts and summarized their main points in the quotes below:
What does the best available science say about the status of the Northern cod fishery in 2025?
Dr. Paul Regular is a research scientist for DFO, leading the scientific team for the stock assessment of Northern cod:
Regular:
For January 2025, the assessment model estimated biomass at approximately 524 kilotons. The stock has been stable since 2017, with annual biomass estimates between 300 to 600 kilotons. When it comes to status, the latest assessment also indicates the stock is out of the critical zone (the point at which the stock is under serious harm) with 99% probability. The stock is estimated at two times greater than the limit reference point (LRP).
Carey Bonnell is the vice president of sustainability and engagement for Ocean Choice International, a commercial fishing organization supporting Atlantic Canada’s fishing and seafood industry on sustainable development initiatives:
Bonnell:
There’s a point of debate on the growth of the stock. Some argue the growth has stalled. But the stock assessment data suggest it has actually been growing steadily since 2010. The 2025 biomass estimate is up almost 100,000 metric tons compared to the year prior. It is a significant rebound, very encouraging. Not back to historic levels, of course, but up to a level that can sustain a moderate commercial fishery.
Rice:
While I don’t believe we have enough data to position a new LRP with complete and total confidence, I am satisfied that we are well above this point of depensation. I am very confident that there is no particular management strategy of this stock that, under the current environmental conditions, could grow the biomass substantially larger than it is today.
But skeptics of Northern cod’s recovery can cite their concerns directly from DFO reports as recently as March 2024. Regular himself was quoted as saying, “The growth of the stock appears to have stalled.”
Then what changed in the last 18 months? What conditions were most responsible for this recovery, aside from the moratorium itself?
Bonnell:
These are complex ecosystems, but one important factor in cod’s recent recovery could be the increase in the capelin biomass. Capelin is an important food source for cod, and its biomass index was up over 90% last year, compared to the previous year. Furthermore, warming water temperatures in recent years, along with increased zooplankton biomass, are favorable for cod recovery.
Last year, Regular highlighted the significance of capelin, warning, “Without improvements to capelin, DFO’s projections show a poor prognosis for the future of cod.”
But not all ecosystem triggers had positive effects on Northern cod’s recovery, as Rice explained:
Rice:
By about 2015, it was clear that the Labrador Current, which is cold, fresher water, melting from the Arctic ice cap and glaciers on Greenland and Baffin Islands, had strengthened tremendously because of climate change. We always say climate change makes everything warmer, but in this case, it brought extremely cold, fresh, icy water into the system. This affected the productivity of everything. For cod, this may have hindered its recovery during the moratorium, rather than helped. There were a variety of oceanographic conditions that I believe limited the stock’s recovery.
But the most important factor for the stock’s recovery was keeping fishing mortality at near zero. The fact that recovery has plateaued well below the old population biomasses of over 1.1 million metric tons reflects the new, lower ceiling on the biomass growth potential, because of a higher overall mortality rate driven by natural mortality, not fishing mortality.
Ultimately, the information presented to the DFO minister led to the reopening of this fishery in 2024 and resulted in a doubling of the TAC the following year, in 2025.
What scientific advice is typically considered before making the quota decision, and how is that information collected and presented?
Regular:
Northern cod is typically assessed annually, which is more often than most commercial stocks in Canada. Each year, we discuss the latest catch data, age data, bottom trawl surveys from the fishing areas, inshore surveys, and tagging data. All this new information is fed into the latest assessment. If the models seem to be working correctly and all diagnostic tests perform as expected, we then discuss the projections. The projections display possible outlooks in different scenarios to identify when and how the stock could go below the critical zone. This process yields scientific advice. The Minister reviews this advice and considers it along with socioeconomic factors to make a final decision.
Bonnell:
The survey vessels operate in the fall, collecting data from north to south. A robust, multi-stakeholder scientific review takes place over the winter. Then, usually in April, the results are shared with a stakeholder groundfish advisory committee. We provide feedback and a recommendation for the minister to consider. The minister makes a final decision, usually in June.
Has the review process or key indicators changed over the years?
Regular:
In 2023, we updated the assessment framework, adding more data, including ecosystem variables like capelin. After they changed the framework, the old LRP was considered too high. It had been an LRP based on the average assessments from the 1980s.
The change in the LRP is critical to understanding Northern cod’s stock status in 2025. Using the old LRP, the stock wasn’t fully recovered. However, the old LRP couldn’t appropriately represent new oceanographic conditions and the status of a smaller, yet stable, SSB.
Regular continued:
Regular:
The new LRP was recalculated based on biomass at maximum sustainable yield (MSY), which indicated the LRP should be lower. This contributed greatly to the stock status adjustment. While the amount of cod in the water hasn’t changed, advances in the assessment methods have changed how we interpret current stock levels.
Another important change is the addition of new ecosystem variables, as Regular explained:
Regular:
Capelin population dynamics and its stock assessment are now formally considered in the Northern cod stock assessment process. Cod prey relationships were always seen as an important factor, but only recently has the capelin assessment been considered in the cod scientific advice process.
Are further changes necessary to improve the quality of the assessments or the understanding of this fishery?
Bonnell:
The survey timing is critical for this stock, and perhaps that timing can be adjusted for more accuracy in the future. The survey conducted in 2023 was done too efficiently, such that it concluded about one month earlier than expected. Northern cod have a very complicated migratory pattern, migrating inshore during the summer and back offshore as the weather gets colder. Perhaps due to the shifting marine environment, the migration has been delayed in recent years, and our survey timing must adapt. If you look at last year’s survey, which was conducted under the traditional time series, the biomass was significantly higher than in 2023. The exploitation rate is determined in part by these survey results, so they need to capture as much of the biomass as possible.
Rice:
There is still uncertainty about all the factors in cod total mortality. You can build models that suggest seal predation or limited capelin supply are major factors. The evidence is not strong enough to eliminate either of those hypotheses. But at the same time, the choice to make food web dynamics the basis for understanding this fishery may have diverted focus towards answering questions that are less than essential for ideal stock assessments and ideal management targets. The food web dynamic questions are important; we should seek to answer them better. But they may not be the most essential all the time. From the late 1980s to the early 2000s, physical oceanographers were key players – perhaps to a fault – in every stock assessment meeting for Northern cod. Now they are much less essential. Perhaps this was an overcorrection.
How would you respond to Oceana’s comment?
"Northern cod still has the potential to become a world-class example of recovery, supporting thousands of sustainable jobs and bringing long-term economic benefits to the province of Newfoundland and Labrador."
Bonnell:
I think some NGOs have a different view. Northern cod is iconic because of its historic collapse, and I think there’s a feeling out there in some communities that we need to protect ourselves from ourselves when it comes to Northern cod. We wouldn’t be having this debate for any other stock showing similar assessments and growth.
But this notion of returning to historical levels is misguided. Ecosystems and environments have changed so much in 32 years, and there needs to be a new normal standard. If we aim for a return to mid-20th-century biomass levels, we will probably never reach that goal. There is a modest sustainable fishery here right now that can benefit these communities while abiding by responsible scientific advice.
Regular:
From a scientific perspective, there is no question that the stock has made significant progress. The stock exceeds levels where productivity is seriously impaired. That said, it hasn’t shown much growth since 2017. Industry, NGOs, scientists, and managers need to keep working together to find the best way forward to protect this important stock and support the people of the province.
Rice:
There is no question that by the 2010s, we realized the productivity of the Northern cod stock, even unfished, had been reduced substantially by climate change and oceanographic conditions. But the reference points had not changed, and talking to fishery managers, everybody agreed that we were being bound by the fact that the rebuilding target was no longer attainable because of changed environmental conditions. There’s absolutely no scientific uncertainty about that, but the department was hesitant to reevaluate the reference points until recently.
Those still questioning the sustainability of the reopened Northern cod fishery disagree on risk tolerance. Doubling the TAC does increase the risk that the stock will move into the Critical Zone. However, those closest to the assessment process believe this risk is minuscule, with ample risk mitigation in place to protect against unexpected outcomes.
Bonnell:
The Northern cod stock is assessed annually. This science is robust, and the data is rich, compared to many other commercial stocks. Management can change course each year if next year’s survey returns something unexpected. There are many stop signs built into the management of this fishery to ensure we’re not repeating the mistakes of the past.
The table above shows that Northern cod has a large SSB, comparable to those of the Iceland and Barents Sea cod fisheries, yet only a tiny fraction of the fishing mortality. This demonstrates the precautionary approach DFO still takes with Northern cod.
Conclusion
Oceana’s concerns are justified if we only look at headlines and bullet points about Northern cod and Canada’s economic climate. The fishery collapsed 34 years ago after immense fishing mortality, and now Canada’s economy-focused government has decided to double the TAC for the upcoming season. This sounds like an alarming situation without further context.
But this fishery cannot be compared to that of the 20th century. Northern cod’s biomass may never return to levels of the 1960s – not because of fishing management mistakes, but because new oceanographic conditions have changed cod productivity and mortality. Those changes necessitated the establishment of new reference points to assess the fishery accurately. Managers have much more data today than they did 40 years ago, and they review it with a broader understanding of Northern cod’s ecosystem. Those data are delivered annually, with a spotlight and level of scrutiny unmatched in any other fishery, because of the infamous failures of the past. Just as the forecast changed between now and March of 2024, a similar shift next year will be met with nimble policy pivots to deter significant setbacks.
It is impossible to fully understand the entire landscape of stressors on the Northern cod stock; indeed, more research is needed on some of the new ecosystem considerations to continue accurate monitoring. However, to suggest that Northern cod is being recklessly managed is unfounded and unfair.
Jack Cheney
Jack has sourced, sold, cooked, and sustainably certified seafood over the past 15 years. In addition to his contributions to Sustainable Fisheries UW, he is working to increase traceability into supply chains and educate consumers, chefs and retailers on the value of environmentally sustainable seafood. He earned a Master's in Marine Affairs from the University of Washington in 2015.
Follow us:
Share this story:
Subscribe to our newsletter:
Read more:
Science shows sustainable seafood protects rainforests and biodiversity
Science shows sustainable seafood protects rainforests and biodiversity: if wild fish are replaced by livestock, land clearing and extinction risk rise.
An Overview of Tuna and its Sustainability in 2025
Tuna is one of the most popular seafoods in the world — but not all tuna is created equal. This post breaks down how to buy sustainable tuna in 2025.
Same Goal, Different Path: A Scientific Look at Ocean with David Attenborough
A marine scientist reviews Oceans with David Attenborough, examining the science behind MPAs, bottom trawling, and ocean sustainability.
What is going on in the Falkland Islands squid fishery?
The Falkland Islands government has canceled all fishing activities for Patagonian squid, also called Loligo for the rest of the year. What happened?
Science shows sustainable seafood protects rainforests and biodiversity
Science shows sustainable seafood protects rainforests and biodiversity: if wild fish are replaced by livestock, land clearing and extinction risk rise.
An Overview of Tuna and its Sustainability in 2025
Tuna is one of the most popular seafoods in the world — but not all tuna is created equal. This post breaks down how to buy sustainable tuna in 2025.
Same Goal, Different Path: A Scientific Look at Ocean with David Attenborough
A marine scientist reviews Oceans with David Attenborough, examining the science behind MPAs, bottom trawling, and ocean sustainability.
What is going on in the Falkland Islands squid fishery?
The Falkland Islands government has canceled all fishing activities for Patagonian squid, also called Loligo for the rest of the year. What happened?
Your thoughts?