Ling

Key signals

Total stock biomass observed in the spring survey declined steadily from 1985 to 2000, when it increased again and reached a high level in 2011-2012. Subsequently in decreased again, but since 2021 biomass has increased and is currently at one of the highest levels observed.
Abundance of small ling (<40 cm) in the spring survey peaked in 2007 and was high until 2010, when it decreased substantially to very low levels in 2012. Since 2020, the abundance has been increasing steadily. Length distributions from the spring survey show a similar pattern as survey indices, with the 2012-2018 peak in abundance observed as high proportions of fish in the range of 60–100 cm, that has slowly decreased as they have reached sizes 80–120 cm.
Biomass of large ling (>80 cm) in the spring survey was relatively stable from 1985 to 2001, but has since increased and is now at the highest level recorded.
Fishing mortality (F, ages 8–11) has generally declined since 1984 and in 2022 and 2023 was below F_MGT. In 2024 and 2025 it increased slightly and was above F_MGT, but remains below F_PA and F_lim.
Recruitment increased rapidly from 1999 until 2008, when it reached its highest level. Since then, recruitment decreased and is now at similar levels as before the increase.

General information

The common ling is one of the largest fish of the Gadiformes order reaching a maximum length of 200 cm, with a mean length of about 70-90 cm according to data from the annual Icelandic spring groundfish survey. It is a demersal fish that preys on fish and invertebrates and can be found at depths 10 and 1300 meters but is mainly caught at depths between 100 and 400 meters. It reaches sexual maturity at the age of 5-8 years and 60-80 cm total length. Ling spawns in May and June mostly along the edges of the south, southwest and west of the Icelandic continental shelf.

Fishery

Landings trends

In 1947 to 1971, landings of ling from Icelandic waters ranged between 8000 to more than 15000 tonnes. Landings decreased between 1972 and 2000 to as little as 3000 tonnes as a result of most foreign vessels being excluded from the Icelandic EEZ. In 2001-2010, catches increased constantly and reached 11 000 tonnes in 2010 and remained at that level for the most part until 2014, when the catches increased to 14 000 tonnes. Since 2014, ling catches have reduced, but increased again after 2021, and in 2025, 9791 tonnes were landed (Table 1 and Figure 1)

Figure 1: Ling. Nominal landings from Icelandic waters.

The fishery for ling in Icelandic waters has not changed substantially in recent years. Around 100-300 longliners annually report catches of ling, around 30-200 gillnetters and around 50-120 trawlers. Most of ling is caught on longlines (Figure 2, Table 1) which has increased since 2000 to around 67 % in 2025. At the same time the proportion caught by gillnets has decreased from 20–30% in 2000–2007 to approximately 2% in 2025. Catches in trawls have varied less and have been at around 20-30% of Icelandic catches (Figure 2). Most of the ling caught by Icelandic longliners is caught at depths less than 300 m, and by trawlers at less than 400 m (Figure 3). The main fishing grounds for ling as observed from logbooks are in the south, southwestern and western part of the Icelandic shelf (Figure 4). The main trend in the spatial distribution of catches according to logbook entries is the decreased proportion of catches in the southeast and increased catches on the western part of the shelf two decades ago. Around 50% of ling catches are caught on the southwestern part of the shelf (Figure 5). In recent years, the main fishing pressure has shifted towards shallower waters (Figure 3).

Table 1: Ling. Number of Icelandic boats and their catches (in tonnes) by fleet segment participating in the ling fishery, based on logbooks. Total catch is from both Icelandic and foreign vessels in Icelandic waters.

Year	Nr. Bottom Trawl	Nr. Gillnets	Nr. Long Line	Bottom Trawl	Gillnets	Long Line	Other	Total catch
2000	125	184	289	726	704	1 540	70	3 284
2001	108	232	254	493	1 061	1 101	481	3 362
2002	100	203	235	664	648	1 283	1 674	4 519
2003	96	172	244	583	454	2 215	680	4 270
2004	97	165	234	656	545	2 017	886	4 606
2005	99	127	260	989	501	2 046	896	5 198
2006	91	99	259	1 246	629	3 734	1 124	7 404
2007	91	86	251	1 395	633	4 042	1 030	7 591
2008	82	68	209	1 509	477	5 007	1 576	9 283
2009	77	78	208	1 540	723	6 232	1 184	10 773
2010	75	69	197	1 538	363	6 532	1 124	10 963
2011	67	61	201	1 676	222	5 595	857	9 626
2012	68	62	206	1 396	245	7 479	1 143	11 817
2013	71	62	209	1 610	345	6 836	1 334	11 581
2014	64	57	220	1 707	673	10 624	12	14 246
2015	64	55	207	1 911	650	9 249	6	13 035
2016	65	55	186	1 825	681	6 545	9	9 884
2017	67	48	171	1 527	556	5 975	5	8 766
2018	63	47	151	1 606	387	5 366	11	8 062
2019	61	33	148	1 666	115	5 964	2	8 269
2020	63	36	124	1 677	138	4 765	6	7 061
2021	64	39	119	1 836	126	4 829	3	7 128
2022	62	30	103	2 232	262	4 917	0	7 657
2023	58	32	88	2 518	176	5 652	0	8 560
2024	59	30	80	2 573	159	5 898	0	8 868
2025	53	30	84	2 722	216	6 534	0	9 791

Figure 2: Ling. Total catch (landings) by fishing gear since 1994, according to statistics from the Directorate of Fisheries.

Figure 3: Ling. Depth distribution of ling catches from longlines and trawls from Icelandic logbooks.

Figure 4: Ling. Geographical distribution (tonnes/square mile) of the Icelandic longline fishery since 2005 as reported in logbooks by the Icelandic fleet.

Figure 5: Ling. Catch distribution and proportions by area according to logbooks.

Landings and discards

Data on landings by Icelandic vessels are collected by the Icelandic Directorate of Fisheries. Landings of Norwegian and Faroese vessels are registered through the Icelandic Coast Guard. Discarding is banned by law in the Icelandic demersal fishery. Based on limited data, discard rates in the Icelandic longline fishery for ling are estimated very low (<1% in either numbers or weight) (WGDEEP, ICES 2011:WD02). Measures in the management system such as converting quota share from one species to another are used by the fleet to a large extent and this is thought to discourage discarding in mixed fisheries.

Data and sampling

In general sampling is considered good from commercial catches from the main gears and seems to cover the spatial distribution of catches (Figure 6). Similarly, sampling does seem to follow the temporal distribution of catches (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Ling. Spatial distribution of length samples (black dots) from commercial catches in Icelandic waters (upper) and numbers of samples taken per month by project (bars) and proportion of landings per month (black line) (lower).

Length compositions

Most length measurements of ling are from longlines and bottom trawls (Table 2). The number of available length measurements increased in recent years in line with increased landings but in 2020 they were fewer (due to the covid pandemic). Length distributions from the Icelandic longline and trawling fleet are presented in Figure 7. Sampling from commercial catches of ling is considered good; both in terms of spatial and temporal distribution of samples (Figure 6).

Table 2: Ling. Number of available length measurements from Icelandic commercial catches.

Year	Trawls	Demersal seine	Gillnets	Longlines	Other	Total
2000	377	0	566	1 624	6	2 573
2001	37	0	493	1 661	0	2 191
2002	221	0	366	1 504	0	2 091
2003	137	0	300	2 405	143	2 985
2004	141	46	348	2 640	0	3 175
2005	349	101	31	2 323	150	2 954
2006	1 157	0	645	3 354	401	5 557
2007	400	76	0	3 661	0	4 137
2008	819	15	357	5 847	150	7 188
2009	516	0	410	9 014	450	10 390
2010	1 146	0	57	7 322	1 199	9 724
2011	1 245	150	0	7 248	750	9 393
2012	1 411	150	85	11 356	1 337	14 339
2013	993	122	267	9 405	1 344	12 131
2014	2 089	120	1 286	6 448	2 964	12 907
2015	2 615	0	1 563	3 315	3 052	10 545
2016	2 460	0	2 039	2 483	1 212	8 194
2017	1 963	0	485	1 637	1 226	5 311
2018	1 603	0	559	1 424	712	4 298
2019	1 830	0	0	3 598	819	6 247
2020	1 718	0	124	1 099	498	3 439
2021	2 028	0	0	1 056	466	3 550
2022	1 805	0	370	563	1 534	4 272
2023	2 423	0	90	1 284	0	3 797
2024	1 434	134	0	1 660	0	3 228
2025	3 035	0	258	2 452	0	5 745

Figure 7: Ling. Length distribution from the Icelandic fleet from 2003-2025.

Age compositions

Aged data are available from 2000 onwards (Table 3). In previous years, most of the ling caught in the Icelandic spring survey were between age 5 and 8 but from longlines the age was between 6 and 9. The past several years have shown a much larger composition of older fish, common up to 12, from both sample sources (see Survey Data, next section).

Table 3: Ling. Number of aged otoliths from the commercial catches.

Year	Longlines	Gillnets	Demersal seine	Trawls	Other	Total
2000	650	200	0	150	0	1 000
2001	550	193	0	37	0	780
2002	519	166	0	150	0	835
2003	900	100	0	100	50	1 150
2004	750	100	46	100	0	996
2005	750	0	0	181	50	981
2006	1 137	288	0	450	100	1 975
2007	1 300	0	50	100	0	1 450
2008	1 950	150	0	315	50	2 465
2009	2 550	150	0	250	150	3 100
2010	2 498	50	0	450	400	3 398
2011	2 546	0	50	450	250	3 296
2012	3 521	50	50	541	400	4 562
2013	2 590	100	50	350	450	3 540
2014	665	225	20	399	514	1 823
2015	595	300	0	483	520	1 898
2016	440	345	0	460	220	1 465
2017	310	85	0	370	225	990
2018	245	100	0	310	120	775
2019	385	0	0	340	140	865
2020	225	40	0	355	102	722
2021	180	0	0	398	100	678
2022	183	80	0	400	318	981
2023	320	20	0	564	0	904
2024	340	0	40	359	0	739
2025	420	60	0	565	0	1 045

Figure 8: Ling. Catch at age from the commercial fishery in Iceland waters. Bar size is indicative of the catch in numbers and bars are coloured by cohort.

Figure 9: Ling. Catch at age from the commercial fishery in Iceland waters. Biomass caught by year and age; bars are coloured by cohort.

Weight at age in catch

Mean weight at age in the catch is shown in Figure 10. Catch weights of the older year classes (8-12 years) have been increasing in recent years and have mostly been above average since 2018. The opposite is seen in catch weights of younger age classes, where the mean weight has been below the average for the past years.

Figure 10: Ling. Mean weight at age in the catch from the commercial fishery in Icelandic waters. Bars are coloured by cohort.

Survey data

The CPUE estimates of ling from commercial fisheries in Icelandic waters have not been considered representative of stock abundance.

Survey data

The Icelandic spring groundfish survey, which has been conducted annually in March since 1985, covers the most important distribution area of the ling fishery. In addition, the autumn survey was commenced in 1996 and expanded in 2000, however a full autumn survey was not conducted in 2011 and therefore the results for 2011 are not presented.

Figure 11 shows distribution of ling in groundfish surveys in spring 2026 and autumn 2025. Figure 12 shows both a recruitment index and the trends in biomass from both surveys. Length distributions from the spring survey are shown in Figure 13 (abundance) and changes in spatial distribution in the spring survey are presented in (Figure 14).

Ling in both the spring and autumn surveys are mainly found in the deeper waters south and west off Iceland. Both the total biomass index and the index of the fishable biomass (>40 cm) gradually decreased in the spring survey until 1995 (Figure 12). In the years 1995-2003 these indices were half of the mean from 1985–1989. In 2003-2007, the recruitment indices increased and remained high until 2010. The index of the large ling (80 cm and larger) shows a similar trend as the total biomass index (Figure 12). The recruitment index of ling, defined here as ling smaller than 40 cm, showed a considerable increase in 2003-2007 and remained high until 2010. Then the juvenile index fell to a very low level in 2014 and remained low until 2021. Since then, the recruitment indices have been ascending, as well as the indices of larger fish as it reached the highest recorded value in the time series in 2024 (Figure 12).

Length distributions from the spring survey show a similar pattern as survey indices, with the 2012-2018 peak in abundance observed as high proportions of fish in the range of 60–100 cm, that has slowly decreased as they have reached sizes 80–120 cm (Figure 13). This pattern is likely to have caused the increase in ling sizes observed in the trawl samples (Figure 7).

Biomass indices in the autumn survey were low in 1996-2000 but have increased since then (Figure 12). There is consistency between the two surveys; the autumn survey biomass indices are however derived from substantially fewer ling caught. Also, there is an inconsistency in recruitment indices (<40 cm), where the autumn survey shows much lower recruitment, in absolute terms compared with the spring survey (Figure 12). This discrepancy is likely a result of much lower catchability of small ling (due to different gears) in the autumn survey, where ling less than 40 cm has rarely been caught.

Changes in spatial distribution as observed in surveys: According to the spring survey most of the increase during the 2012–2018 peak in ling abundance was in the western area, but an increase was seen in most areas. However, most of the index in terms of biomass comes from the southwestern area or around 40% compared to around 30% between 2003 and 2011. Since 2016, the amounts of biomass in the west and southwest have, however, reduced while the proportions in the southeast have increased, leading to a greater contribution of ling from the northwest and southeast to the total index. A similar pattern is observed in the autumn survey.

Figure 11: Ling. Location and abundance of ling in the spring survey (SMB) in 2026 and the autumn survey (SMH) in 2025.

Figure 12: Ling. Total biomass indices, biomass indices >40 cm, biomass indices >80 cm, and abundance indices <40 cm. The lines with shaded area show the spring survey index from 1985 and the points with the vertical lines show the autumn survey from 1996. The shaded areas and vertical lines indicate +/- standard error.

Figure 13: Ling. Survey biomass indices in the spring survey since 1985 and from the autumn survey since 1996 by year from different parts of the continental shelf (upper figure) and as proportions of the total (lower figure)

Figure 14: Ling. Length distribution from the spring survey since 1985 and from the autumn survey since 2000.

Figure 15: Ling. Age disaggregated indices in the autumn survey (left), gillnet survey (middle) and the spring survey (right). Fill colours indicate cohorts. Note different scales on y-axes.

Stock weight at age

Mean weight at age in the survey is shown in Figure 16. Stock weights are obtained from the groundfish survey in March and are also used as mean weight at age in the spawning stock.

Figure 16: Ling. Stock weights from the spring survey in Icelandic waters. Bars are coloured by cohort.

Stock maturity

Ling in Icelandic waters are mature at the age of 5-8 years and 60-80 cm total length. Maturity at age data is taken from the spring groundfish survey in March and prior to 1985 the proportion mature is assumed fixed at 1985 levels. Maturity-at-age five, six and seven has been decreasing for the past few years (Figure 17), and in 2026, the mean length at maturity was around 77 cm (Figure 18).

Figure 17: Ling. Maturity at age in the survey. Bars are coloured by cohort. The values are used to calculate the spawning stock.

Figure 18: Ling. Proportion mature at length from the spring survey. The black line is year 2026.

Stock assessment

In 2022, Ling in 5.a was reassessed as the previously benchmarked Gadget model had begun to show great instability in retrospective patterns in recent years. As a part of a Harvest Control Evaluation requested by Iceland (WKICEMSE, ICES 2022a), the stock was benchmarked (WKICEMSE, ICES 2022b) which resulted in changes in the assessment method and updated reference points. Model setup and settings are described in the Stock Annex (ICES 2023).

Model fit

Figure 19, Figure 20, Figure 21 and Figure 22 show the overall fit to the survey indices described in the stock annex. In general, the model appears to follow the stock trends historically. Furthermore, the terminal estimate is not seen to deviate substantially from the observed value for most length groups, with model overestimating the abundance in the two largest length group. Summed up over survey biomass the model overestimates the biomass in the terminal years. The overview of model parameter estimates are shown in Figure 26.

Figure 20: Ling. Model fit to the autumn survey indices. Black dots are observed values and the black line is the model fit.

Figure 21: Ling. Model fit to the gillnet survey indices. Black dots are observed values and the black line is the model fit.

Figure 22: Ling. Model fit to catch. Black dots are observed values and the black line is the model fit.

Results

Population dynamics of the ling estimated in this model show a clear trend of a high recruitment period from 2004-2010, corresponding with increased spawning stock biomass (SSB) and catches during the 2010-2019 period. Fishing mortality remained rather steady until 2015 but has declined since then with a moderate increase for the past two years (Figure 23).

Figure 24: Ling. Observation error residuals of the SAM model.

Figure 25: Ling. Process error residuals of the SAM model.

Figure 26: Ling. Illustration of estimated model parameters.

Figure 27: Ling. Comparsion of the modelled survey indices (solid lines) and survey indices (dots).

Retrospective analysis

Analytical retrospective analysis shows a revision of spawning stock biomass over the 5-year peel (Figure 28). Estimates of F and recruitment are decently stable except for the apparent peak in 2017-2018. As explained in reference to the survey indices, this is likely the influence of highly variable survey indices that, for the smallest sizes in the most recent years, have no repeated observations at larger sizes with which this influence can be tempered. Therefore, it is expected that these recruitment peaks may simply be the result of uncertainty in survey indices and are likely to disappear in the coming assessment years.

Mohn’s ρ was estimated to be -0.215 for SSB, 0.234 for F, and -0.128 for recruitment. Neither observation nor process residuals show obvious trends (Figure 24 and Figure 25).

Figure 28: Ling. Retrospective plots illustrating stability in model estimates over a 5-year “peel” in data. Results of spawning stock biomass, fishing mortality F, and recruitment (age 2) are shown as well as the mohn´s rho values

Reference points

As part of the WKICEMP 2022 HCR evaluations (ICES 2022b), the following reference points were defined.

Table 4: Ling. Reference points adopted from ICES WKICEMP 2022 (ICES 2022b).

Approach	Reference point	Value	Basis
MSY approach	FMSY	0.3	Leads to long-term MSY, based on stochastic simulations (EqSim).
	MSY Btrigger	11 100	Based on Bpa
Management plan	MGT Btrigger	11 100	From the management plan
	FMGT	0.3	From the management plan
Precautionary approach	Blim	9 000	Lowest SSB (2016) where large recruitment was observed
	Bpa	11 100	Blim x e1.645×0.2
	Flim	0.95	Fishing mortality that in stochastic equilibrium will result in median SSB at Blim
	Fpa	0.62	Fp05, maximum F at which the probability of SSB falling below Blim is < 5%

The harvest control rule (HCR) for the Icelandic Ling fishery, which sets a TAC for the fishing year y/y+1 (September 1 of year y to August 31 of year y+1) based on a fishing mortality F_MGT of 0.30 applied to ages 8 to 11 modified by the ratio SSB\(_{y}\)/MGT B\(_{\text{trigger}}\) when SSB\(_{y}\) < MGT B\(_{\text{trigger}}\), maintains a high yield while being precautionary as it results in lower than 5% probability of SSB < B\(_{\lim}\) in the medium and long term. WKICEMSE 2022 concluded that the HCR was precautionary and in conformity with the ICES MSY approach (ICES 2022a).

Management

The Icelandic Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries is responsible for management of the Icelandic fisheries and implementation of legislation. The Ministry issues regulations for commercial fishing for each fishing year (1 September–31 August), including an allocation of the TAC for each stock subject to such limitations. Ling in 5.a has been managed by TAC since the 2001/2002 fishing year.

Landings have exceeded both the advice given by MFRI and the set TAC from 2002/2003 to 2013/2014 but amounted to less than two thirds in 2015/2016 (Table 5). Overshoot in landings in relation to advice/TAC has been decreasing steadily since the 2009/2010 fishing year, with an overshoot of 53% to 35% in 2010/2011, 24% in 2011/2012 and 4% in 2012/2013. The reasons for the implementation errors are transfers of quota share between fishing years, conversion of TAC from one species to another (Figure 17) and catches by Norway and the Faroe Islands by bilateral agreement. The level of those catches is known in advance but has until recently not been taken into consideration by the Ministry when allocating TAC to Icelandic vessels. There is no minimum landing size for ling.

There are agreements between Iceland, Norway and the Faroe Islands relating to a fishery of vessels in restricted areas within the Icelandic EEZ. Faroese vessels are allowed to fish 5600 t of demersal fish species in Icelandic waters which includes maximum 1200 tonnes of cod and 40 t of Atlantic halibut. The rest of the Faroese demersal fishery in Icelandic waters is mainly directed at tusk, ling, and blue ling. A further description of the Icelandic fisheries management system can be found in the stock annex (ICES 2023).

Table 5: Ling. Recommended TAC, national TAC, and catches (tonnes). Landings of other nations before 2014 is by calender year

Fishing year	Recommended catch	National TAC	Catches Iceland	Catch other nations	Total catch
2010/2011	7500	7 500	9 327	837	9 327
2011/2012	8800	9 000	10 072	1 123	10 072
2012/2013	12000	12 000	11 125	1 368	11 140
2013/2014	14000	14 000	11 794	1 763	12 982
2014/2015	14300	14 300	11 684	1 974	13 658
2015/2016	16200	16 200	9 773	1 456	11 229
2016/2017	9343	9 343	7 291	1 135	8 426
2017/2018	8598	8 598	7 017	1 309	8 326
2018/2019	6255	6 255	6 927	1 101	8 028
2019/2020	6599	6 599	5 972	1 183	7 155
2020/2021	5700	5 700	6 201	1 012	7 213
2021/2022	4735	4 735	5 814	885	6 699
2022/2023	6098	6 098	7 537	926	8 463
2023/2024	6566	6 566	8 202	1 288	9 490
2024/2025	6479	6 479	8 162	1 040	9 202
2025/2026	6330	6 330	—	—	—
2026/2027	7657	—	—	—	—

Figure 29: Ling. Net transfer of quota to and from ling in the Icelandic ITQ system by fishing year. Between species (upper): Positive values indicate a transfer of other species to ling, but negative values indicate a transfer of ling quota to other species. Between years (lower): Transfer of quota from given quota year to the next quota year.

Management considerations

All the signs from commercial catch data and surveys indicate that ling is at present in a good state. This is confirmed in the SAM assessment. However, the drop in recruitment since 2010 will probably result in a rapid decrease in sustainable catches in the near future.

Currently the longline and trawl fishery represent 95% of the total fishery, while the remainder is assigned to gillnets. Should those proportions change dramatically, so will the exploratory patterns as the selectivity of the gillnet fleet is substantially different from other fleets.

Table 6: Ling. Catches in Icelandic waters by country (Source STATLANT).

Year	Germany	Iceland	Belgium	Faroe Islands	United Kingdom	Norway
1983	0	4 236	128	644	0	115
1984	0	3 306	103	450	0	21
1985	0	2 989	59	384	0	17
1986	0	2 948	88	556	0	4
1987	0	4 154	157	657	0	6
1988	0	5 083	134	619	0	10
1989	0	4 833	95	614	0	5
1990	0	5 119	42	399	0	0
1991	0	5 181	69	530	0	0
1992	0	4 526	34	526	0	0
1993	0	3 522	20	504	0	0
1994	0	3 561	3	551	0	0
1995	0	3 479	0	536	0	0
1996	1	3 703	0	395	0	20
1997	0	3 606	0	300	0	0
1998	0	3 659	0	735	0	0
1999	0	4 002	0	501	1	120
2000	1	3 209	0	3	5	67
2001	2	2 872	0	370	1	116
2002	0	2 843	0	1 631	0	45
2003	2	3 585	0	570	5	108
2004	1	3 727	0	739	0	139
2005	3	4 313	0	682	20	180
2006	1	6 283	0	962	0	158
2007	0	6 599	0	807	0	185
2008	0	7 738	0	1 366	0	179
2009	0	9 616	0	1 157	0	0
2010	1	9 868	0	1 095	0	0
2011	0	8 789	0	588	0	249
2012	0	10 695	0	875	0	248
2013	0	10 213	0	1 074	0	294
2014	0	12 483	0	1 605	0	158
2015	0	11 653	0	1 131	0	250
2016	0	8 702	0	952	0	230
2017	0	7 792	0	730	0	244
2018	0	6 866	0	993	0	203
2019	0	7 062	0	1 023	0	184
2020	0	5 853	0	971	0	237
2021	0	6 287	0	750	0	91
2022	0	6 856	0	669	0	132
2023	0	7 650	0	731	0	178
2024	0	7 596	0	1 149	0	123
2025	0	8 873	0	918	0	0

Figure 30: Ling. Comparison of the total allowable catch, adviced catch and total catch within the Icelandic EEZ.

References

ICES. 2011. “Report of the Working Group on the Biology and Assessment of Deep-Sea Fisheries Resources (WGDEEP), 2 March–8 March, 2011, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES Cm 2011/Acom:17.” International Council for the Exploration of the Seas; ICES publishing.

ICES. 2012. “Report of the Working Group on the Biology and Assessment of Deep-Sea Fisheries Resources (WGDEEP), 28 March–5 April, 2012, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES Cm 2012/Acom:17.” International Council for the Exploration of the Seas; ICES publishing.

ICES. 2017. “Report of the Workshop on Evaluation of the Adopted Harvest Control Rules for Icelandic Summer Spawning Herring, Ling and Tusk (WKICEMSE), 21–25 April 2017, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2017/ACOM:45.” International Council for the Exploration of the Seas; ICES publishing.

ICES. 2022a. Iceland request for evaluation of a harvest control rule for tusk in Icelandic waters. In Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2022. ICES Advice 2022, sr.2022.6d, https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.advice.19625823

ICES. 2022b. Workshop on the evaluation of assessments and management plans for ling, tusk, plaice and Atlantic wolffish in Icelandic waters (WKICEMP). ICES Scientific Reports. Report. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.19663971.v1

ICES. 2023. Stock annex: Ling (Molva molva) in Division 5.a (Iceland grounds). ICES Stock Annexes. Report. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.23599644.v1