The Cod Wars in Iceland

The Icelandic Coast Guard defended Iceland during the Cod Wars

How did the Cod Wars in Iceland begin? Who were the main belligerents, and who came out on top of the conflict? Read on to find out more about the Cod Wars. 

Iceland is one of the few nations on earth not to have its own military. Given the minuscule size of its population, the prospect of ever forming one has long seemed farcical and unnecessary. 

Even so, the country does possess a Coast Guard. Its steel grey vessels can often be seen sailing by Reykjavík’s Faxaflói Bay. For a nation surrounded by water, it is the Coast Guard who are called in terms of crisis. This might include a marine emergency or to apprehend suspicious seafarers. 

Without a military of its own, Iceland’s protection rests on a bilateral defence agreement between the United States and Iceland. Among local people, the pact has been controversial since it was first signed in 1951. This is on account that it allowed for the USA to form a permanent military presence in the country.

A map showing Iceland and the UK
Photo: Groubani. Wikimedia. CC

Has Iceland taken part in a war?

If one thing can be said about Icelanders, it is that they value peace, both at home and abroad. The notion of partaking in combat is foreign, unappealing, and something better left to more powerful, and, crucially,
distant neighbours. 

But even with this distaste for war, Iceland has still managed to stray into global conflict in the past. More surprising than their participation is the fact they have come out victorious each and every time.  

We talk, of course, about the Cod Wars

The Cod Wars were a historic series of clashes with the United Kingdom over fishing rights. 

Locally, Icelanders refer to this period of dispute as Þorskastríðin, “the cod strife,” or Landhelgisstríðin, “the wars for the territorial waters.” 

The events occurred in various chapters: 1958–1961, 1972–73 and 1975–76. 

What were the reasons behind the Cod Wars? 

Boats docked in a harbour in Iceland.
Golli. The Cod Wars involved Icelandic fishing rights.

The major cause of the Cod Wars was a dispute over fishing rights in the North Atlantic. It would remain the sole point of contention between the two island nations for decades to come. It is generally acknowledged that the first confrontation followed Iceland’s decision to expand its coastal territory. 

The small nation expanded from 3 to 4 nautical miles (7 km) in 1952 on the behest of the International Court of Justice. Many believe this was the first spark to ignite the conflict. 

Historical roots of the Cod Wars

iceland districts
Photo: Wikimedia. CC.

But actually, these resentments can be traced back further. As early as the 14th century, British fishing boats sailed around Iceland in search of a larger catch. 

For a country with a growing sense of identity and independence, this created tension within Iceland. After all, its people relied on fishing to survive. More importantly, it caused friction between the United Kingdom and Denmark, who ruled Iceland at the time. 

In 1414, King Eric of Denmark even went so far as to ban all trade with England. He also complained to King Henry V directly, citing the importance of Icelandic fish stock to the local population. Even so, the United Kingdom did little to curb its fishing efforts. Not even when the Icelandic government allowed British ships to fish there on seven-year licences. 

Pressures of a changing world

With the advent of steam technology, tension between Denmark and the UK only increased. In 1893, Denmark claimed that Iceland’s coastal waters were 50 nmi (93 km). The British refused to recognise it, and continued to fish wherever they desired. 

Boats in a museum
Photo: Golli. Museums are a great way to explore Icelandic history

More capable ships allowed for quicker journeys to farther-away destinations. The large-hauls from Iceland’s waters were too much of a temptation to resist. 

Soon enough, Danish gunships were routinely penalising British ships discovered skulking too close. These hefty fines became a point of contention in themselves. The British public soon found themselves asking the government; why not use the full might of the Royal Navy to intimidate the Danes? 

Militaristic scare tactics made sense from Britain’s perspective. At the end of the 19th century, Britain’s naval prowess was to be admired and feared in equal measure. After all, it was the reason why the United Kingdom ruled a global empire. 

And so, in a perfect display of gunboat diplomacy, Britain’s ships put on a show of force in both 1896 and 1897. The terrifying sight of Britain’s mighty warships was a clear warning to the Danes not to push their luck. 

The case of the Caspian 



Only two years later, a battle took place between Danish warships and the steam trawler, Caspian, which was illegally fishing in Iceland’s water. After firing on it with live ammunition, the Caspian was damaged enough to ensure its skipper, Charles Henry Johnson, was arrested. However, in one of the conflict’s stranger moments, a shipmate of Johnson’s managed to regain control of the Caspian and flee. As the Danes were unable to catch up, the Caspian returned to Grimsby harbour in a state of disrepair, its crew grateful to be free and alive.

As much can not be said for Charles Henry Johnson. Lashed to the mast, he was taken against his will to Torshavn, the capital of the then Denmark-ruled Faroe Islands. Once there, he was tried for illegal fishing and assault, then jailed for a full month. All in all, the sentencing was light, but it would not be the end of the conflict. 

In fact, it was only just beginning… 

When competition becomes conflict 

Former UK prime ministers (1945)
Photo: Levan Ramishvili. Flickr. CC. Public Domain – The UK Government in 1945.

After Iceland expanded its coastal waters in 1952, Britain retaliated by banning all Icelandic ships from docking at local ports. As always, the United Kingdom believed they had a right to fish closer to Iceland than they were being allowed to, and they were unwilling to simply roll over.

Circumstances further soured after a United Nations conference in 1958. The purpose of the meeting was to determine whether countries should be allowed to extend their territorial waters to 12 nautical miles (22 km). After much deliberation, no agreement was reached. Regardless of the deadlock, Iceland went ahead and expanded its waters to the maximum level, placing further pressure on the UK’s fishing industry.

The British saw it as a step too far. What we in modern parlance call a red line crossed. Conflict soon ensued. 

The First Cod War (1958–1961)

Photo: Golli. Small boat fishermen crowd the Arnarstapi harbour each summer for the coastal fishing season

The first chapter of the Cod Wars conflict began at midnight 1 September 1958. It coincided exactly with Iceland’s expansion from 4 to 12 nautical miles coming into effect. It is worth noting that all members of NATO but Iceland were against this unilateral extension. The British simply refused to recognise it. 

In fact, the United Kingdom would go to great expense to make sure fishing continued. Under the protection of four warships, twenty trawlers continued to fish off the Westfjords and the south east of Iceland. Infuriated with Britain’s reluctance to accept new territorial boundaries, many Icelanders came out in protest. 

Britain enflames the Cod Wars conflict


These protests were met with mockery. From the British Embassy in Iceland’s capital city, Reykjavik, the ambassador, Andrew Gilchrist, serenaded them by playing the bagpipes and blasting military music over his gramophone. 

While it might seem unprofessional today, the ambassador’s confidence was not unfounded. With merely seven patrolling vessels and only one PBY-6A Catalina flying boat under their jurisdiction, there was very little Iceland could do to resist the British from behaving as they wanted. 

Sun Voyager
Photo: Golli. The Sun Voyager sculpture in Reykjavik

In fact, one of Iceland’s ships was a whaling boat modified to be combat-ready. As the historian, Guðni Th Jóhannesson, wrote; “only the flagship Þór (Thor) could effectively arrest and, if necessary, tow a trawler to harbour.”

Still, this did not stop other Icelandic ships from attempting to do so. One of the most famous incidents in the first Cod War was when the ICGV Ægir attempted to apprehend a British trawler, only to be stopped by HMS Russell. Later, the V/s María Júlía shot at another trawler called the Kingston Emerald, forcing it to flee. Only a month later, V/s Þór chased down a ship called Hackness, but once again, HMS Russell came to its aid, forcing the Icelanders to retreat.

Iceland faces a superpower

Almost immediately, it was clear that Britain’s military might would be a difficult obstacle for the Icelandic nation to overcome. And so, they turned to diplomacy. First, Iceland threatened to leave NATO should its claim over its waters not be respected. Next, politicians promised to expel any US forces stationed in Iceland. There was no other choice but to use threats to achieve their aims. 

The United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea between 1960 and 1961 brought about a settlement that was befitting for both parties. Iceland would be allowed to maintain its territorial waters, so long as Britain was permitted to fish in certain parts, during certain seasons. The agreement also stipulated that any further conflict between Iceland and the United Kingdom regarding fishing rights would be handled by the International Court of Justice in the Hague.

For a time, there was peace between the islands. But it would not last. 

The Second Cod War (1972–73)

HMS Scylla and Óðinn collide
Photo: Issac Newton. Wikimedia. CC.

The second chapter in this conflict over fishing rights began September 1972. Once again, Iceland made a decision to extend their territorial waters, this time to 50 nmi. In doing so, they aimed to protect their fish stocks, and increase their share in any catches made around Iceland. 

Unsurprisingly, Britain had objections once again, as did members of the Warsaw Pact and all other Western European states. Actually, it was only the African nations who sided with Iceland’s expansion, claiming it was an effective means of negating Western imperialism. 

During the Second Cod War, Iceland changed its tactics. Instead of attempting to tow British trawlers, they opted to cut their fishing lines. Using net cutters – otherwise known as trawlwire cutters –  this strategy initially worked with great success. One example might be when the ICGV Ægir encountered an unmarked trawler off the coast of Hornbanki. The Icelanders asked for details of the trawler’s origins, but their request for information was met only by Rule Britannia being played over the radio. 

In response, the ICGV Ægir cut the trawlers lines, resulting in a heated exchange between both crews. Not only did the British sailors throw various objects aboard the 

The Third Cod War (1975–76)

HMS Mermaid collides with the Coast Guard ship, Thor
Photo: A.Davey. Flickr. CC.

Britain and Iceland would compete for a final time, this time beginning in 1975. It would prove to be the conflict’s most dramatic chapter given the violent collisions between opposing ships.

It is important to note that British fishing was already in decline by the mid-seventies. Because of this, this particular dispute with Iceland felt considerably more desperate than before.

In 1973, most countries within the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea agreed on a 100 nm limit on fishing. However, Iceland was unsatisfied, settling on a limit double that which had been stipulated. Once again, Britain refused to recognise Iceland’s decision.

The Cod Wars’ violent finale


One of the biggest events of the conflict took place in December 1975. The Icelandic Coast Guard vessel, V/s Þór, discovered three British trawlers sheltering from a fierce storm. When ordered to leave, the trawlers looked to comply. But after only a few miles, the ships began to deliberately veer into the Icelandic ship. The Icelanders responded by firing blanks, then live ammunition. Even so, the V/s Þór was forced to divert to Loðmundarfjörður for repairs. After this violent bout, the ship was dangerously close to sinking.

As to who was in the wrong depends on which opposing side one listens to. In response, the Royal Navy deployed 22 frigates and seven supply ships. But even in the face of such adversity, the Icelanders continued to fight. By the end of the war, a total of 55 ramming incidents were recorded.

In February 1976, Iceland made the decision to end diplomatic relations with the United Kingdom. Iceland’s government also heavily implied that it would withdraw from NATO should it fail to meet its aims. Ultimately, this threat would decide the outcome of the war. As the Americans put pressure on the British to end the conflict, it would be Iceland who, once again, came out victorious.

What were the consequences of the Cod Wars?

An Icelandic Coast Guard vessel
Guðmundur St. Valdimarsson, Icelandic Coast Guard/Facebook. New patrol ship Freyja

The Cod Wars had a great number of consequences for both Iceland and the United Kingdom.

Some of the larger northern fishing ports in England were heavily affected by Britain’s defeat. Once thriving harbours like those in Fleetwood, Hull, and Grimsby saw thousands of skilled fishermen out of work, and it is estimated that it cost over £1 million to repair damages to naval frigates.

In 2012, the UK government offered £1,000 compensation to 2,500 fishermen who lost their livelihood during the conflict. This deal was heavily criticised at the time for not only being far too late, but financially insulting.

Here in Iceland, their victories over Britain are considered a point of pride. Proof that even the world’s smallest nations can make a great impact on the global stage. Especially when bullied into a corner.

Today, the Cod Wars are still sometimes covered in the media, especially when Iceland and Britain find themselves opponents. For example, during the ICESAVE financial crisis in 2008, and in the lead up to the England – Iceland football match during the 2016 Euro tournament.


cod wars Coast Guard Vessel Óðinn
Coast Guard Vessel Óðinn was a vital part of Iceland’s defences during the Cod Wars. Today, it’s docked by the Reykjavík Maritime Museum as part of its exhibition.

Today, the United Kingdom and the Republic of Iceland remain close allies. Given their close proximity, many Icelanders choose to live and study in the UK. In turn, thousands of British tourists choose to explore Iceland each and every year. Some of them even call the country home. 

In 2017, the Icelandic ship ICGV Óðinn and the trawler, Arctic Corsair, exchanged bells as a sign of friendship between the town of Hull and the city of Reykjavík.

You can learn more about the Cod Wars at the Reykjavík Maritime Museum. Not only will you find plenty of informative display boards, but also countless artefacts from this fascinating chapter in Iceland’s history.

Coastal Fishermen Oppose Lumpfish Quotas


Coastal fishermen in Patreksfjörður, the Westfjords, oppose the introduction of quotas for lumpfish, RÚV reports. They say the current system can be improved without resorting to a quota system. Previous experience shows that quotas consolidate in the hands of few owners, the fishermen state.

Arguments for quota don’t hold water

Gunnar Ingvi Bjarnason stated that the current coastal fishing system is accessible to newcomers, with a licence costing just ISK 22,000 [$160, €147]. “If a quota system is set up, people will have to buy quota,” he stated. Einar Helgason of the coastal fishing association Krókur, based in Patreksfjörður, says that coastal fishermen are generally against quotas and that the arguments for setting a lumpfish quota are weak. According to Einar, lumpfish are not a species that is overfished, which is what quota systems are put in place to prevent.

Gunnar Ingvi adds that quota setting will not address the issue of bycatch, another concern expressed by authorities.

Read More: Taking Stock of Iceland’s Coastal Fishing Industry

The coastal fishing system was established 16 years ago with the goal of creating opportunities for smaller, independent fishers. It is not based around a quota system like open-sea fishing is in Iceland and has a relatively low cost of entry. Coastal fishing has a positive economic effect on many rural areas across Iceland.

Expanded MAST Capabilities for Aquaculture Monitoring

arnarlax fish farm iceland

MAST, the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority, is set to receive its own vessels and increased manpower to better oversee fish farming, RÚV reports.

Read more: Minister Booed During Fish Farming Protest 

The decision comes in the wake of recent escapes from aquaculture pens in the Westfjords, in which farmed fish were found to have made their way into Icelandic waterways. The recent incidents have led to increased public awareness of fish farming practices in Iceland, including the pollution of Icelandic fjords through fish waste, antibiotics, and pesticides, and also the danger posed to native fish stocks by farmed salmon. Because of the density in which farmed salmon are raised, they can carry infectious diseases that may harm native fish, in addition to competing with them for food.

Concerns such as these were expressed this Saturday,  October 7, at a rally on Austurvöllur Square. Among the speakers at the protest was Minister of Environment, Energy, and Climate Guðlaugur Þór Þórðarson. The minister faced vocal criticism for his perceived inaction, but stated to the assembled protestors: “People can criticise me as they wish. But if one looks at what I’ve said and done, perhaps there would be less of it. That’s beside the point, as I’m not the main focus here. That’s evident. Your message is clear, and I thank you for taking the initiative to organise this, for showing up and demonstrating solidarity with Icelandic nature. Actions will be taken based on this, and this meeting truly matters. I sincerely thank you for that.”

The recent decision to expand MAST’s regulatory capabilities took place against the background of widespread disapproval of aquacultural methods in Iceland. MAST stated that in addition to the increased capabilities represented by the new boats, the number of MAST employees assigned to monitoring fish farming will also be increased. Until now, there have only been the equivalent of 5.6 full-time workers to oversee fish farming in both the East- and Westfjords.

Read more: Björk Enlists Rosalía in Campaign Against Fish Farming

Karl Steinar Óskarson, department head at MAST, stated to RÚV that they will also see ISK 126 million [$914,000; €867,000] in increased funding.

MAST intends to use this funding to hire six new positions. Currently advertised are roles in digital monitoring and “special oversight” to prevent further escapes like the large-scale escapes that were recorded last year.

MAST additionally plans to acquire two boats, trailers, and monitoring equipment. Karl Steinar stated to RÚV: “We can use these to go out to the pens when we need to. We will not be dependent on the companies, which is crucial for us.”

Authorities have also made use of submarine drones to monitor aquaculture pens, but the new boats and manpower will significantly increase MAST’s capabilities. Karl Steinar continued: “For example, in the Westfjords alone, there are over 100 pens. We have underwater drones that we purchased this year and we can visit the cages we choose and inspect them from below. We can check if repairs have been made to nets, for example, without us being informed, and also continue to monitor the fish.”

Samherji Sells to Síldarvinnslan

Börkur ship fishing

Seafood company Síldarvinnslan has bought a 50% share in the seafood sales company Ice Fresh Seafood for ISK 4.7 billion from Samherji. Samherji’s CEO Þorsteinn Már Baldvinsson had to step down from the board of Síldarvinnslan when the purchase was decided. RÚV reported first.

Samherji has run the company Ice Fresh Seafood, which sells fish abroad through a sales network covering over 60 countries. As soon as Síldarvinnslan acquires half of the company, a certain reshuffling of the other foreign sales companies of Samherji Group and Síldarvinnslan will be carried out, transferring them partially or completely to Ice Fresh Seafood.

Purchase price considerably above book equity

Síldarvinnslan’s announcement of the purchase states that the purchase price in the transaction is considerably higher than the Ice Fresh Seafood’s equity. Síldarvinnslan is paying ISK 4.7 billion for half of Ice Fresh Seafood and the value of the company in the transaction is 76% higher than the company’s book value of equity at the end of last year. It states, however, that there are decades of knowledge and business relationships behind IFS in the main markets for Icelandic seafood. According to the CEO of Síldarvinnslan, investing in the sales company strengthens sales and marketing, allowing Síldarvinnslan to get further in the value chain.

Samherji owns over 30% of Síldarvinnslan and when its board decided to buy, Þorsteinn Már Baldvinsson, CEO of Samherji, had to step down from the board. It is stated in the announcement that he was not involved in decision-making regarding the purchase.

A pillar of Iceland’s economy

The Icelandic seafood industry is one of the country’s key industries, employing around 7,500 people or approximately 3.9% of the workforce. The seafood industry contributes around 8% directly to Iceland’s GDP, but its indirect contributions are much greater. Marine products account for 43% of the value of Iceland’s exported goods. Another large purchase in the Icelandic seafood industry was announced yesterday when Brim purchased 10.83% of Iceland Seafood International.

Just four companies hold around 60% of Iceland’s fishing quota: Samherji, Brim, KS, and Ísfélagið.

Brim buys 10.83% of Iceland Seafood International

Golli. A Brim ship in Akranes, West Iceland

Icelandic seafood company Brim has bought a 10.83% share in Iceland Seafood International (ISI), RÚV reports. The purchase entails the entire share of Bjarni Ármannsson’s company Sjávarsýn in ISI. Bjarni is also the CEO of Iceland Seafood but is resigning from the position.

Even prior to the sale, Brim was one of Iceland’s largest and most profitable seafood companies. With this purchase, the company intends to strengthen its sales network in Europe. The sale was announced to the stock exchange last night, as both Brim and Iceland Seafood are listed on Nasdaq Iceland’s main market. Brim paid over ISK 1.6 billion [$11.7 million, €11 million] for the shares.

Sold for one thousand pounds after losses

Iceland Seafood has faced difficulties in operations recently. The company sustained considerable losses in the operations of its subsidiary Iceland Seafood UK, which was eventually sold to the Danish company Espersen for the small sum of one thousand pounds. Iceland Seafood’s loss in the first half of the year amounted to ISK 2.2 billion [$16 million, €15.1 million].

The share price in Iceland Seafood last weekend stood at ISK 5.3 [$0.04, €0.04] per share and had never been lower since the company went public four years ago. The price rose by 4.72% at the opening of the market this morning in a transaction worth ISK 22 million [$160,000, €151,000].

Brim to strengthen sales network

Iceland Seafood is one of the main exporters of seafood in Iceland and operates offices in seven countries in Europe, North America, and South America. According to Brim’s CEO Guðmundur Kristjánsson, this is exactly what Brim is looking for with the purchase. The goal is to strengthen Brim’s sales network, especially with regard to markets in Europe.

Bjarni Ármannsson will step down as Iceland Seafood’s CEO and will be replaced by Ægir Páll Friðbertsson, managing director of Brim.

43% of Iceland’s exported goods

The Icelandic seafood industry is one of the country’s key industries, employing around 7,500 people or approximately 3.9% of the workforce. The seafood industry contributes around 8% directly to Iceland’s GDP, but its indirect contributions are much greater. Marine products account for 43% of the value of Iceland’s exported goods.

Consolidated wealth

Just four companies hold around 60% of Iceland’s fishing quota: Samherji, Brim, KS, and Ísfélagið. In 2021, Brim reported profits of ISK 11.3 billion [$88.8 million; €82.9 million].

In a column published in Morgunblaðið last year, Minister of Fisheries Svandís Svavarsdóttir stated that the nation viewed the consolidation of fishing quota in so few hands as deeply unjust and that it felt that this collective resource was not distributed fairly.

Opposition MP and former Social-Democratic Alliance Chairman Logi Einarsson pointed out that the wealth in the fishing industry was leading to accumulated assets in unrelated sectors, such as the media, real estate, transport, grocery stores, energy, and even insurance and banking.

Farmed Salmon Caught in Rivers Across Northwest Iceland

aquaculture farm iceland

Escaped farmed salmon may be swimming in at least eight salmon fishing rivers in Northwest Iceland and the Westfjords. Farmed salmon pose a threat to the survival of wild salmon in Iceland. Two holes were found on a salmon farm net in Patreksfjörður in the Westfjords earlier this month. Authorities are conducting DNA analysis to determine whether fish caught in the rivers came from the Patreksfjörður farm.

Risk of genetic mixing

“Just in the last few days the reports have been pouring in and we seem to have at least eight confirmed cases, in eight different fishing areas, and that is a serious matter. And it remains to be confirmed through samples and research if or where these farmed salmon are from, but these are experienced anglers and guides who have handled these fish and it seems quite clear that this is the case,” Gunnar Örn Petersen, the CEO of The Federation of Icelandic River Owners (Landssamband veiðifélaga) told RÚV.

Gunnar says the salmon that have been caught are similar in size to those that were in the salmon farm in Patreksfjörður, though they could be fry that escaped from the sea pen in Arnarfjörður in 2021. He called the situation the environmental disaster that the federation has warned of since open-net fish farms began operating in Iceland.

“Whether we are talking about the diseases or massive death [of fish in the farms] or salmon lice beyond all limits and now it seems to be happening right here in front of your eyes that genetic mixing is happening. And genetic mixing is irreversible damage that no countermeasures can prevent and that we can’t reverse. It is therefore clear that open-net sea farming will be the final blow for Icelandic salmon stocks if the government doesn’t take the reins.” As many as 3,500 salmon may have escaped from the Patreksfjörður farm, which is owned by company Arctic Sea Farm.

Escaped salmon not unexpected, says fisheries spokesperson

Heiðrún Lind Marteinsdóttir, CEO of Fisheries Iceland, stated that escaped salmon in Icelandic rivers were “not unexpected. The fact that salmon enter a salmon fishing river does not mean genetic mixing,” she argued. “The fact that salmon mixes with wild salmon in some cases does not mean that the wild population is endangered. This has to be a sustained significant situation not just for a year but for decades,” she stated in a Kastljós interview.

Heiðrún says that the risk assessment of genetic mix states that the percentage of farmed salmon in Icelandic rivers can go up to 4% without endangering the wild salmon populations. According to Heiðrún, the percentage across Iceland is currently 0.09%. Gunnar Örn argued that the percentage of farmed salmon in some smaller rivers has, however, reached 4%, “and of course, we believe that those salmon stocks are also important.”

Humpack Salmon Spreads in Iceland, Threatening Local Fish

Humpack salmon, also known as pink salmon, is spreading in Icelandic rivers and threatening local fish species. Anglers caught dozens of humpback salmon in Eyjafjarðará river yesterday, RÚV reports.

The species was first observed in Iceland in 1960. Since 2015, humpback salmon have been increasing in number. It’s believed that they arrived in Iceland from Russia and Norway.

A fisherman noticed a lot of humpback salmon in Eyjafjarðará yesterday and called up the river’s fishing association. “They called out anglers who know the river and they just went to the spot right away where they saw this school and caught nearly 30 fish from it,” he said.

Humpack salmon can be eaten if it is caught at sea but is not good to eat when caught in freshwater. Eyjafjarará is known for its arctic char, whose numbers have decreased in recent years. “If [the humpback salmon] spawns and the fry grow, they are of course competing for food supply with the arctic char fry and the sea bass fry in the river,” Sigmundur Einar Ófeigsson, a board member of the Eyjafjarðará Fishing Association, stated.

Anglers are asked to report to local fishing associations if they spot or catch humpback salmon in Icelandic rivers. Icelandic authorities have enacted a temporary provision that permits fishing associations to fish humpback salmon with seines (nets) until 2025.

Deep North Episode 33: Give a Man a Fish

coastal fishing boat

It’s just after six in the morning and Guðmundur Geirdal is pouring his first cup of coffee. It’s spring, so the sun has already been up for a couple of hours but a light veiling of clouds means that there’s a fresh snap to the air. Down by the Arnarstapi harbour, the squeaky cries of the seabirds are loud enough to drown out the murmured chatting of the other fishermen preparing their boats for the day.

We take a look at the life of small-boat coastal fishermen in Iceland. Read the story here.

More Cod, Haddock, and Herring in 2023-2024 Fishing Season

coastal fishing boat

Iceland’s Marine and Freshwater Research Institute (MFRI) has released advice on fishing opportunities for over 20 fish and invertebrate stocks in Icelandic waters for the 2023-2024 year. The recommendations include a 1% increase in the total allowable catch for cod, a 23% increase for haddock, and a 40% increase for herring, three key species for the Icelandic fishing industry. Fishing quotas issued by authorities are based on the MFRI’s recommendations.

More cod, haddock, and herring

The advised TAC (total allowable catch) for cod has been increased as there is a higher estimate of the reference biomass compared to the previous year. That mass is also expected to increase slightly in the next two or three years when the 2019 and 2020 cohorts of cod will be counted as adult fish. Those cohorts are estimated to be above average in terms of size. The 2023-2024 TAC for haddock will be 76,415 tonnes, a 23% increase from the previous year’s allowable catch, as the 2019-2021 cohorts are above average.

The stock size of the Icelandic summer spawning herring has increased following a period of constant decline between 2008 and 2019. Therefore, the advice for the 2023-2024 fishing year is 92,634 tonnes or a 40% increase from the previous fishing year’s TAC. Golden redfish advice represents a 62% increase from the previous year, but as recruitment in the species has been low, the advice is likely to decrease sharply in the coming years.

Less saithe and scallop and no beaked redfish

Recommendations for some fish and invertebrates have decreased compared to the previous fishing year, however. The advice for saithe, an important species for coastal fishermen, has been decreased by 7%. The total allowable catch for Iceland scallop has decreased by 19%, and the MFRI advises that no catch should be taken for demersal beaked redfish in the 2023-2024 year, as the stock is now estimated to be below the limit reference point for spawning stock biomass. It is not expect to recover in the near future.

The recommendations can be seen in full on the MFRI website.