2 
Fishery Bulletin 99(1 ) 
Northeast Fisheries Science Center stratified random survey stations from where eastern 
and western Georges Bank haddock samples were collected in 1995 (open squares), 1996 
(open circles), and 1997 (closed circles) for stock identification based on internal otolith 
morphometries. 
1998). During 1935 to 1960, annual landings of haddock 
on Georges Bank averaged 46,000 metric tons (t), before 
increasing to 150,000 t in 1965 owing to exceptional re- 
cruitment from the 1962 and 1963 year classes and in- 
tense fishing resulting from the entrance of distant water 
fleets (Clark et al., 1982). However, following these record 
landings the resource collapsed, and annual landings de- 
clined to less than 5,000 t during the mid-1970s. The re- 
source temporarily increased during the late 1970s and 
early 1980s when annual landings increased to 27,000 t 
owing to the large 1975 and 1978 year classes, before de- 
clining to a record low level of 2,300 t in 1995 (Brown, 
1998). 
Currently, the haddock resource on Georges Bank is in 
a depleted condition and is the focus of rebuilding plans 
by both the U.S. and Canadian fishery management agen- 
cies (Brown, 1998; Gavaris and Van Eeckhaute, 1998). The 
fact that each nation conducts separate analytical assess- 
ments, using different stock definitions for the resource, 
is problematic. The United States assesses Georges Bank 
haddock as a single stock, encompassing historical spawn- 
ing components on the Northeast Peak (eastern Georges 
Bank) and the Great South Channel (western Georges 
Bank); whereas Canada assesses only the spawning com- 
ponent on the Northeast Peak (Brown, 1998; Gavaris and 
Van Eeckhaute, 1998) (Fig. 1). Since the mid-1980s, the 
majority of the haddock resource has been concentrated 
over eastern Georges Bank, where the majority of land- 
ings have been taken by the Canadian fishery (Brown, 
1998). The changing resource status of haddock on Georg- 
es Bank has probably been due to greater depletion of the 
western Georges Bank spawning component, which may 
now be contributing at a much lower level to the overall 
productivity of the resource (Van Eeckhaute et al., 1999). 
Stock rebuilding plans of both nations need to examine the 
identity versus the separateness, of spawning components 
on Georges Bank and develop uniform stock definitions for 
the resource. 
Haddock stocks on Georges Bank have been examined 
by using a variety of techniques, although the results 
in terms of identification have been far from conclusive. 
Differences in distribution, life history, and otolith shape 
characteristics have indicated the existence of separate 
eastern and western Georges Bank spawning components 
(Smith and Morse, 1985; Gavaris and Van Eeckhaute, 
1998; Begg et al., 1999; Begg and Brown, 2000). In con- 
trast, tag-recapture, ichthyoplankton surveys, and genet- 
ic analyses have indicated some interchange of haddock 
across the Bank that may reflect a single spawning com- 
ponent (Needier, 1930; Schroeder, 1942; Morse et al., 1987; 
Purcell et ah, 1996). Hence, there remains considerable 
uncertainty regarding the stock structure of haddock on 
Georges Bank. 
The limitations associated with traditional stock identi- 
fication techniques have been a major factor responsible 
for the remaining uncertainty regarding haddock stock 
structure on Georges Bank (Begg, 1998). Consequently, 
we used a new stock identification technique based on in- 
ternal otolith morphometries. We considered internal oto- 
lith morphometries as a generic term describing the oto- 
lith microstructure of individual growth zones as well as 
the linear and shape dimensions of transverse otolith sec- 
