Environmental organizations appeal to EU court to invalidate fishing quotas due to Baltic herring stocks collapse

CCB • August 21, 2024

The Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB) network has recently submitted an application to the General Court of the European Union (GCEU) to invalidate the EU fisheries ministers' decision on the 2024 fishing quotas for the Baltic herring. CCB considers that the EU Council of Ministers violated existing fishing regulations and that they ignored and directly undermined other environmental legislation in place. Moreover, the Ministers do not take into account the precautionary principle, whether regarding the ecosystem's status or a coastal fishery that can no longer catch Baltic herring for human consumption.

Uppsala, 21 August 2024 - As late as a few months before the decisions on fishing quotas for 2024 were made for the Baltic Sea, the EU and its Member States had actively supported decisions on the protection of our seas on an international level. It was indeed proclaimed that the world's oceans outside national borders must now be protected. But apparently not our own inland Baltic Sea when it comes to fishing quotas.


The EU Commission proposed, in the light of alarming facts but also based on the rules the EU jointly decided to protect collapsing fish stocks, to completely close the targeted Baltic herring fishery primarily caught by large trawlers. Data published by ICES (the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) indicated that even with zero fishing, stocks would not recover above the lowest reference level (see ICES advice on the Central Baltic herring stock, p3). In this particular scenario, there is a rule for how to act, which is of course to close the fishery. The ministers blatantly broke this rule when they instead decided that the permitted fishing in the Southern and Northern Baltic Sea should total over 100,000 tonnes, i.e. 100 million kilos!


During the winter, CCB requested the EU Council of Ministers to review its decision in the light of all applicable laws, i.e. not only the most obvious fisheries regulations but also the EU's and the countries' own environmental laws. When this request was rejected with the claim that nothing was incorrect in the Council’s decision, CCB decided to appeal it and ask the EU Court for an annulment of the Council's decision not to review the 2024 Baltic fish quota decision.


We expect the court to agree with our arguments and concur that the Ministers broke the law. Of course, this does not mean that we will suddenly get the fish back. The central thing here is rather to stop the crazy circus of playing with our ecosystem in this way”, says Nils Höglund, marine and fisheries expert at CCB.


It cannot be too much to ask that the Ministers act legally and take into account the needs of the ecosystem but also the needs of the small but important coastal fisheries. I think all citizens demand that the ministers live up to all the nice words they gleefully throw around at big conferences”, continues Nils Höglund.


If the court approves CCB´s request, it would affect how the Ministers can act in the future. It would set a precedent and clarify how the law should be interpreted in the light of setting fishing quotas not only in the Baltic Sea but across the EU. There is a big risk that the politicians aim to change the rules in order to soften the regulations, which has already partially started. However regardless of that, this court process is unfortunately necessary. Mikhail Durkin, Executive Secretary of the CCB concludes:


Being forced to go to court is absolutely not something we want to do. Environmental policy must be created and implemented by elected politicians with the support of the people. However, when the people have been promised responsible actions, but see only action that is the total opposite of responsible and even illegal, we simply have to call it quits.


CCB welcomes all and any support to see this Court process through. It will be a long journey, but we can't do it alone – and for this reason we have launched the campaign “Plea for the Sea - Advocate for a Fair Baltic Sea!”. Your donation can help to support the legal case and to pressure policy-makers to follow the law and protect the Baltic Sea marine life.


Donate to be a Herring Hero here: https://www.ccb.se/plea-for-the-sea-herring-heroes-advocate-for-a-fair-baltic-sea

-END


The Swedish version of this PR is available here.

Note to editors:

Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB) – Is a politically independent, non-profit association, which unites 27 NGOs, with over 1 500 000 members in all countries around the Baltic Sea. The main goal of CCB is to promote the protection and improvement of the Baltic Sea environment and its natural resources for present and future generations. More info at: www.ccb.se 


CCB original complaint and request for internal review contains most of the arguments now raised with the EU Court. That file and all annexes are not yet available publically.


 

Contact:

Nils Höglund, CCB Marine and Fisheries Policy Officer: nils.hoglund@ccb.se
Mikhail Durkin, CCB Executive Secretary:
mikhail.durkin@ccb.se

By CCB December 5, 2025
In Belém, in the heart of the Amazon, the 2025 UN Climate Change Conference COP30 immediately set the bar high. In his opening speech, Brazilian President Lula da Silva stressed that climate change is no longer a "threat to the future", but a tragedy that the world is already experiencing here and now, and called on countries to accelerate actions rather than limit themselves to promises. However, as is often the case in COP meetings, the political reality turned out to be more complicated than ambitions. Negotiations were difficult: the countries could not agree on a clear and binding plan to phase out fossil fuels. It is important to note that the Global Action Plan has provided a platform for discussing the development of a roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels, the main driver of climate change. At the same time, COP30 has brought tangible progress in other areas: the countries agreed to triple the amount of adaptation funding for developing countries by 2035, strengthened the forest and ocean agenda, and expanded the range of practical initiatives under the Action Agenda . COP30 consolidated the trend: from "water at the center of the climate crisis" to a holistic ocean agenda closely related to energy, food, biodiversity and sustainable coastal development. From the COP29 Water Declaration to the COP30 Enhanced Ocean Water Program At COP29 in Baku, the Declaration on Water for Climate Action was adopted , with the aim to applying comprehensive approaches to combating the causes and consequences of climate change for water basins, emphasizing also the need to integrate water-related mitigation and adaptation measures into national climate policies, including Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs). COP30 did not reverse this logic, but expanded it towards the ocean and coasts. Both processes "aquatic" and "oceanic" are moving in the same direction: integration of water, coasts and ocean into the climate plans of countries; development of nature-based solutions; strengthening transboundary management of water and marine systems; recognizing adaptation as an equal part of climate policy, rather than an "adjunct" to emissions reduction. Task Force on Oceans and the Blue NDC Challenge The international Task Force on Oceans , led by Brazil and France, was officially presented at the high-level ministerial meeting "From Ambition to Implementation: Delivering on Ocean Commitments" on 18 November, integrating oceans into a global mechanism to accelerate the incorporation of marine solutions into national climate plans. The Blue Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) Challenge encourages countries to set ocean protection targets when updating their NDCs. The goal is to transition the Blue NDC Challenge into an Implementation Task Force. Members of the Blue NDC Challenge, currently 17 countries, can adopt a broad set of actions aimed at the protection and sustainable use of the oceans.These measures include the sustainable management, conservation, and restoration of coastal and marine ecosystems, supported by tools such as marine spatial planning, integrated coastal zone management, and climate-aligned marine protected areas. Countries are also encouraged to support sustainable and climate-resilient fishing and aquaculture, ensuring ocean health and long-term food security. B razil has set a clear example: its updated NDC includes a separate chapter on the ocean and coastal zones. For the first time, the national climate plan (Plano Clima) until 2035 includes a thematic adaptation plan for these areas. Priorities include the completion of national Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) by 2030 and major programs for the conservation and restoration of mangroves and coral reefs (ProManguezal, ProCoral).
By CCB November 24, 2025
Leading scientists, consumer advocates and policymakers gathered on November, 18th in Brussels for the conference "From Evidence to Policy: Toward a Tox free Living Environment" . They warned that exposure to Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals in homes and consumer products represents a silent but severe public health and economic crisis. New findings presented to over 65 participants by the EU Baltic Sea Interreg project NonHazCity3 , LIFE ChemBee and the ToxFree LIFE for All projects as well as revealed widespread contamination of European households by complex chemical mixtures of hormone system disrupting substances (so called endocrine disrupters – EDCs) that contribute to chronic disease and impose enormous health costs. According to the key note speaker Dr. Aleksandra Rutkowska, the home environment is a significant source of exposure to EDCs through indoor air, dust and daily contact with common products. Current research links such exposure to a shocking amount of lifestyle diseases including 22 cancer outcomes, 18 metabolic disorder outcomes and 17 cardiovascular disease outcomes. Scientists also stressed that the crisis spans generations. EDCs trigger epigenetic changes that not only affect today’s population but also future children and even grandchildren. Other effects include reproduction disorders. Over the last decade, 150 million babies were born preterm, and evidence shows that reducing the use of plastics by half could cut the risk of preterm birth by half as well.