The fishpopulations in the Baltic Sea are not doing well. In the central Baltic Sea, herring stocks continue to decline and in the Gulf of Bothnia, fishing needs to be reduced by 80 per cent for decades to bring back the large herring. The sprat is also showing signs of problems with the lowest recruitment ever. If the poor reproduction is allowed to continue, there is a great risk that the sprat in the Baltic Sea will develop as weakly as the herring. For the unique Baltic cod, there are no signs of recovery.
Five years ago, the Council of Ministers decided to authorise continued cod fishing, a decision that was reversed a few months later when the stock collapsed. Now it looks like we are about to make the same mistake again – this time with herring. However, there are measures that can be put in place to reverse the negative trend. But it has to happen quickly. 2024 will be an important year for fish in the Baltic Sea, and we will continue to remind decision-makers of this.
What went wrong 2023?
The legal framework
Under the European Parliament and Council of Ministers’ multi-annual management plan for the Baltic Sea, there are clear guidelines to prevent overexploitation of fish stocks and avoid collapse. The European Commission’s proposal for the 2024 fisheries was in line with both the basic regulation (the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)) and the multi-annual management plan. Despite the Commission’s proposal for a ban on targeted fishing of herring, the Council of Ministers decided to continue fishing in the Baltic Sea, a decision that is not supported by the current legal framework.
Fish recruitment refers to the process by which young fish reach a size and maturity that allows them to reproduce. Fish recruitment is an important factor in understanding, maintaining and regulating fish stocks, and it directly affects the survival and future of the stock. In fisheries management, the concept is used to assess how effective reproduction is and how it is affected by various factors, including fishing pressure and environmental changes.
When politicians realise that they may have broken the law, or that the law simply does not suit their own purposes, laws and clauses designed to prevent overexploitation of fish and ecosystems – among other things – are changed or deleted!
Only a few months after the ministerial decision, the European Commission, which previously proposed a ban on herring fishing in the Baltic Sea, announced that it wants to remove Article 4.6, which was the basis for the ban on herring fishing. The removal is in line with the Council of Ministers’ decision, but raises questions.
The European Commission’s draft legislative amendment states that the fishing industry and member states are concerned that the current legislation is not compatible with other rules and could lead to serious socio-economic consequences for fisheries. It is clear that the focus is on the economics of industrial feed fisheries, not the marine environment or collapsing fish stocks.
The quota process
Every year, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), which consists of around 4000 scientists from 20 member countries, produces scientific data on fish stocks and fishing in the Baltic Sea and elsewhere. This information forms the basis for the European Commission’s advice on fishing quotas for the coming year. The EU ministers responsible for fisheries policy then meet in Brussels in October each year and make decisions on quotas, based on the Commission’s advice.
The handling of the issue is also alarming. It shows that nature and the environment are far down the list of what politicians consider important. Narrow economic interests take precedence.
The quota process
Challenges arose right at the start of the quota process, when the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) established the advice for the coming year’s fishing, and the process was not without its challenges. When ICES assesses how much fishing the stocks can withstand, it relies, among other things, on fishery landing reports. If the landing reports are inaccurate, which they often are, this means that the science is wrong – for example, the availability of a species may be overestimated, which in turn leads to overfishing.
Although ICES advice represents the best available science, the advice is presented in a so-called “headline advice”. There, ICES answers the question: Within what range can we set the quotas for next year? That this particular range is at the top of the Council’s agenda is in line with the agreement between the Commission and ICES. But the range gives a narrow picture of the situation of the stocks. A full reading of the scientific documents reveals data that could potentially lead to completely different decisions on next year’s fishing.
Fisheries management is difficult, but decisions must be made on the basis of complete knowledge, not fragments of it. Responsible politicians must be given the opportunity to utilise the whole picture, so the format of headline advice must change. This year, ministers are likely to have missed out on important data that actually indicates that the fishery should be closed.
How to reverse the trend – measures that need to be taken in 2024
Reversing the negative trend for the Baltic Sea requires action now, while continuing long-term efforts. Below we have listed measures that are important for the Baltic Sea’s fish stocks in the short term and need to be implemented over the next year:
Move out the trawl boundary
As early as December 2021, a virtually unanimous parliament decided to move the trawl limit along the east coast. Since then, not much has happened, but perhaps there is light in the darkness. The Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management (HaV) is working on the issue and at the same time giving fewer large vessels a licence to fish in areas within the proposed limit. But until we see concrete action, it is still words on paper. If you want to read a memo on the trawl limit, you can do so here.
Fisheries control
We at BalticWaters have many times highlighted the major shortcomings that surround the control of fishing in the Baltic Sea. HaV is working to improve fisheries control, which is good, but even here, words must become action! Tougher rules are coming from the EU, and we expect Sweden to introduce these as soon as possible. If you want to read a memo on fisheries control, you can do so here.
Quota allocation
The government says it wants to favour small-scale coastal fishing for human consumption, but the current way of allocating quotas shows the opposite. If gentle and small-scale fishing for human consumption is to continue, we must ensure that there exists fish to be fished! Read more in the PM on quota allocation here.
There is hope for next year’s quota process, but everything is clouded by politicians writing about laws that do not fit, laws that in this case have been created to protect the fish. We at BalticWaters will continue to follow developments with in-depth reviews of the law and politics, and work to ensure that politicians read the entire scientific advice in the future, not just the preamble.
