A . Gulf of Maine Atlantic Cod ( Gadus Morhua ) Stock Assessment for 2011 , Updated through 2010

The Northern Demersal Working Group (NDWG) prepared the assessment. The working group (Appendix 1) held three different meetings over a three month period. The meeting dates and locations are listed below. Working group participation differed by meeting. A complete summary of working group participants by meeting and day are presented in Appendix 1. SAW 53 Terms of Reference A. Gulf of Maine Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) 1. Estimate catch from all sources including landings and discards. Characterize the uncertainty in these sources of data. Evaluate available information on discard mortality and, if appropriate, update mortality rates applied to discard components of the catch. 2. Present the survey data being used in the assessment (e.g., indices of abundance, recruitment, state surveys, age length data, etc.). Investigate the utility of commercial or recreational LPUE as a measure of relative abundance. Characterize the uncertainty and any bias in these sources of data. 3. Estimate annual fishing mortality, recruitment and stock biomass (both total and spawning stock) for the time series, and estimate their uncertainty. Include a historical retrospective analysis to allow a comparison with previous assessment results. Review the performance of historical projections with respect to stock size, catch recruitment and fishing mortality. 4. Perform a sensitivity analysis which examines the impact of allocation of catch to stock areas on model performance (TOR-3). 5. If time permits, consider the small-scale distribution of cod (e.g., spawning sites, resource distribution, fishing effort) in the Gulf of Maine and advise on its management implications. 15 53 rd SAW Assessment Report GOM Cod 6. State the existing stock status definitions for " overfished " and " overfishing ". Then update or redefine biological reference points (BRPs; point estimates or proxies for B MSY , B THRESHOLD , F MSY , and MSY) and provide estimates of their uncertainty. If analytic model-based estimates are unavailable, consider recommending alternative measurable proxies for BRPs. Comment on the appropriateness of existing BRPs and the " new " (i.e., updated, redefined, or alternative) BRPs. 7. Evaluate stock status with respect to the existing model (from the most recent accepted peer reviewed assessment) and with respect to a new model developed for this peer review. In both cases, evaluate whether the stock is rebuilt. a. When working with the existing model, update it with new data and evaluate stock status (overfished and overfishing) with respect to the existing BRP estimates. b. Then use …