Baltic Sea Brief: Increased fishing quotas for 2027 - despite the need for recovery

There are those who believe that Swedish governments fail to impress at the EU negotiating table. Former EU Commissioner Ylva Johansson even goes so far as to say that Sweden’s influence in the EU is terrible. This also seems to apply to fisheries policy. When the 2024 quotas were being negotiated, Finland reportedly convinced a passive Sweden to go against the initial recommendation. According to information provided to BalticWaters, Sweden tried to push for lower quotas before the Council of Ministers meeting but then relented when the decision was made. Perhaps that’s how it went this year as well, because the outcome of the negotiations is not impressive.

Uncertainties call for lower quotas

The quota decision means that herring fishing in the central Baltic Sea will be allowed to increase by 71 percent in 2027, compared to this year. In the Gulf of Bothnia, herring fishing will increase by 12 percent. Sprat fishing will increase by 44 percent, while bycatch limits for salmon and cod will remain at 2026 levels. This is worrying news. At the very least, quotas higher than those proposed by the European Commission should not have been acccepted. Particularly sad are the bycatch quotas for the two cod stocks. The European Commission had proposed significant reductions, which unfortunately did not materialize.

The Swedish government reports that the quotas for herring indicate a recovery of 13.5 percent in the central Baltic Sea and over 1 percent in the Gulf of Bothnia. However, the government overlooks the fact that the stocks remain at unsustainable levels and that there are significant uncertainties—such as the impact of climate change—that make the growth projections unreliable. With lower quotas, the potential for recovery would have been greater.

Table. Fishing quotas in the Baltic Sea.

Scientific advice should take into account the need for rebuilding

The quota decision looks particularly bad in light of last year’s statement by the Council of Ministers—including Sweden—to rebuild fish stocks using new advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). ICES already has a framework for providing advice on rebuilding; the only thing needed to put it into practice is a clear request from the European Commission. So far, nothing significant appears to have been achieved on this issue since rebuilding advice is still lacking. Here, the Swedish government should listen to a unanimous Riksdag, which considers current advice to be insufficient, and take the lead in pushing for ambitious rebuilding targets.

The rules of the game need to change

Minister of Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren (KD) argues that Sweden once again took the most restrictive stance of all countries and that the quotas would have been significantly higher if Sweden had not been active throughout the entire negotiation. In other words: If Sweden had rejected the quota decision, the quotas would have been even higher. It is difficult to know exactly how accurate this claim is. Regardless, the Swedish government has failed to protect the Baltic Sea and to respond to Swedish public opinion. Furthermore, it has chosen to abandon last year’s courageous stance of saying no to the quota decision.

To make matters worse, the Council of Ministers—including Sweden—has agreed to maintain ineffective spawning closures (fishing bans during the spawning season) for herring during the summer. To have any chance at all of protecting the stocks, these closures need instead to be implemented during the winter/earlier in the year, when the fish gather off the coast in advance of spawning.

The Minister for Rural Affairs is correct in stating that Sweden does not decide on fishing quotas in the Baltic Sea on its own. But that should not prevent him and the government from pushing for policies that fundamentally changes the rules of the game. Because that is precisely what is needed if we want a healthy and vibrant sea. Perhaps it would also be a feather in the government’s cap to strengthen Sweden’s influence in the EU.   

Here is what the Swedish government needs to do now:

• Push for ICES’s advice to include recommendations for the rebuilding of fish stocks.
  
• Urge the EU and the Council of Ministers to enforce effective fishing bans that take effect earlier in the year, when herring congregate in advance of spawning.
  
• Instruct the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management to allocate the Swedish quota responsibly, in line with The Marine Bill and the The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
  
• Develop closer cooperation with Finland and other Baltic Sea countries to ensure more long-term management.

The brief in short

The 2027 fishing quotas for the Baltic Sea have been set. Fishing is allowed to increase for several stocks even though they need to recover. In light of last year’s statement from the Council of Ministers, in which Sweden and several other countries called for rebuilding advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), the quota decision rings particularly bad. Sweden should push for a policies that fundamentally changes the rules of the game and strengthens Sweden’s influence in EU fisheries policy.

What do environmental organizations say about the fishing quotas?

Read the joint statement