EU Must Respond to Baltic Sea Ecosystem and Fisheries Crash With Urgent, Radical Measures

CCB • May 28, 2021

 

Brussels, 28 May 2021: – Responding to today’s publication of annual scientific advice for 2022 EU fishing limits for the Baltic Sea by ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) [1], a group of non-governmental organizations is demanding that the European Commission follow the scientific advice and calls for an immediate transition to ecosystem-based, climate-smart, low-impact fishing. This would require, for example, closing the fisheries for eastern Baltic cod and western herring and effectively protecting cod spawning grounds from all fishing.

 

The scientific advice shows that the Baltic Sea is going through an ecosystem shift, with western herring and eastern cod stocks depleted to such low levels that ICES advises that they can not support any commercial fishing at all in 2022, and that the herring fishery in the central Baltic must be greatly reduced. ICES will not deliver advice on two key fish stocks, the western Baltic cod and the salmon populations; both release dates are postponed to September. 

“ The trend is clear: because we are losing the ability to manage our Baltic fish populations with fishing quotas, we must transition to an ecosystem based management system with low impact fishing only. Considering the overall ecosystem health, we really must also consider the option not to fish at all on a larger scale, on any fish stock in the Baltic Sea, ” said Nils Höglund, Fisheries Policy Officer, Coalition Clean Baltic.

“ Fisheries management in the fragile Baltic Sea ecosystem requires more caution. We call on theEuropean Commission to not only propose Baltic fishing limits for 2022 that do not exceed scientific advice, but also to implement an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in line with Common Fisheries Policy objective, and consider setting Baltic Total Allowable Catches at lower levels ”, said Ottilia Thoreson, Director, WWF Baltic Ecoregion Programme.

“ The latest scientific advice clearly confirms the failure in the management of Baltic fish populations. Consistently exceeding scientific advice has depleted fish populations such as eastern Baltic cod or western Baltic herring to the extent that scientists recommend the closure of these fisheries”, said Javier López, Campaign Director for Sustainable Fisheries at Oceana in Europe. “There is an urgent need to recover these fish populations and incorporate wider ecosystem considerations into their management. Only in this way can fishing activity be part of the solution to the environmental crisis in the Baltic Sea ”. 

“ The collapse of eastern Baltic cod shows that when too many vessels chase too few fish, overfishing, illegal discards and damage to the ecosystem occur ”, said Jan Isakson, Director at FishSec. “ To reverse the negative trends for Baltic Sea fish populations the EU Commission and coastal state governments must implement all aspects of EU fisheries and environmental law, including reducing the number of fishers and vessels operating there, and giving preferential access to quota and fishing areas for low impact passive gear fishers. Fishers should be supported to transition into new jobs with retraining, paid for by the EU fisheries fund ”.

“ The Baltic Sea is going into cardiac arrest – after years of fisheries ministers approving continued overfishing, allowing illegal discarding and turning a blind eye to misreporting of catches, scientists are now recommending radical halts to fishing due to population crashes. The European Commission must introduce full ecosystem and climate impact assessments for all fishing fleets through the EU Biodiversity Strategy’s Action Plan, and Baltic Member States must only allow access to low-impact fishing ”, said Rebecca Hubbard, Program Director with Our Fish. 

SUMMARY OF ICES ADVICE FOR SELECTED FISH POPULATIONS

The status of the eastern Baltic cod population remains very poor, with declining reproduction and growth. The current biomass (population) is among the lowest in 70 years. This all points to a population in distress and ICES again notes that the population will not recover in the medium term even with no fishing. All fishing in area 24 must be limited to help manage the risk of the Eastern Baltic cod, as the most vulnerable fish population. The ICES advice for eastern Baltic cod catches in 2022 is zero tonnes, for the third year in a row. 

The western Baltic spring spawning herring is in very bad shape. The biomass is crashing and recruitment and catches are very low. The stock is divided into three different management areas (Division 4a., SD 20-21 and SD 22-24), which means that reduced fishing pressure needs to be applied in all areas in order to allow the stock to recover. The Brexit agreement has added additional uncertainties to the population projections, as catches of western Baltic herring also occur in the eastern part of the North Sea. ICES advises a fishing limit of zero tonnes in 2022, for the fourth year in a row. This advice has been ignored every year.

Atlantic salmon in the Baltic Sea (in subdivisions 22–32, excluding the Gulf of Finland)

Catches of salmon have declined since the 1990s but the commercial landings have been rather stable in recent years. ICES is not releasing any advice on salmon at this stage and note that this as well as advice on western Baltic cod is postponed to September.

Western Baltic Cod (subdivisions 22-24)

The advice for the western Baltic cod will be postponed until September due to high uncertainty in the assessment. However, the stock is not in a good condition and significantly reduced catches will probably be needed, according to interim information. 

NOTE: NGOs will produce our recommendations for fishing limits for all Baltic fish stocks for 2022 in the coming weeks.

END

Contacts: 

Nils Höglund, Fisheries Policy Officer, Coalition Clean Baltic, nils.hoglund@ccb.se , +46 708 679249

Dave Walsh, Communications Advisor, Our Fish, dave@our.fish , +34 691 826 764

Emily Fairless, Communications Officer Oceana, efairless@oceana.org

Jan Isakson, Director, FishSec, jan.isakson@fishsec.org , +46 70 608 74 83 

Ottilia Thoreson, Director, WWF Baltic Ecoregion Programme, ottilia.thoreson@wwf.se , +46 8 624 74 15

Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer, Senior Marine Policy Officer, The Danish Society for Nature Conservation, Cathrine@dn.dk , +45 31 19 32 26

Tampering with EU Fisheries Policy would ‘open Pandora’s Box’, NGOs warn

By CCB • March 30, 2026
Brussels, 30 March 2026 - Today, Fisheries Ministers from EU Member States meet with the European Commission for the AGRIFISH Council. On this occasion, Oceana, BLOOM, ClientEarth, Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB), Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), Seas At Risk and WWF EU, handed a symbolic ''Pandora’s Box'' to the EU Commissioner Costas Kadis, sending a clear message as the European Commission prepares its 2026 evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The box represents the risks of revising EU’s main fishery policy framework: once opened, competing demands from Member States, industry, small-scale fishers, and coastal communities could quickly spiral into division, regulatory delays and uncertainties. This would put at risk the hard-won progress made in restoring Europe’s fish populations and improving the profitability of the fishing sector. NGOs urge decision makers to build on the progress made to date and to prioritise the full and timely implementation of the existing rules. Reopening the CFP and its related provisions would undermine ocean health and the long-term future of Europe’s fishing communities. '' Europe's fisheries policy is facing a credibility test. The law is already there. The tools to rebuild our seas already exist. What's missing is the political will to deliver. Overfishing should have ended by 2020 at the latest. Reopening the CFP would signal that missed deadlines carry no consequences, erode trust, revert the progress made, and put the future of our fisheries and coastal communities at stake ’’, said the NGO coalition. *** Oceana: Vera Coelho, Executive Director and Vice President in Europe BLOOM: Claire Nouvian, Founder and General Director ClientEarth: John Condon, Lead of Marine Ecosystems Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB): Ida Carlén, Co-Chair Environmental Justice Foundation: Steve Trent, CEO/Founder Seas At Risk: Dr Monica Verbeek, Executive Director WWF EU: Ester Asin, Director

CCB´s submission to the EU Call for Evidence on the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)

By CCB • March 10, 2026
Uppsala, March 2026 - CCB has closely worked with the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) ever since its adoption and welcomed the opportunity to give feedback to this crucial directive for marine biodiversity and ocean health through the EU Call of Evidence . Evaluations conducted by the EU Commission previously found many positive effects for EU marine waters stemming from the directive, but also that the directive has some shortcomings. CCB however, maintains that the largest obstacle to fully implementing the directive and achieving Good Environmental Status (GES) is the lack of political will among Member States to do so. This forthcoming revision must therefore result in a framework directive that is more easily enforceable, measurable and implementable, accompanied by sufficient funding to carry out the measures. Furthermore, in order to achieve GES as fast as possible other key pieces of EU legislation must also support reaching it and focus on achieving the goals of the MSFD in their objectives. Seeing that European seas generally are in poor condition and under mounting pressure from human activities and that in the Baltic Sea the situation is especially dire there is an urgent need for truly ecosystem-based management of our seas and for reaching GES. The revised MSFD can help us achieve this, but only if it includes the points outlined below and the directive is fully and swiftly implemented: *** [Short version]*** Operationalise the overarching GES goal: EU sea areas were supposed to reach GES already in 2020, but due to low political ambition, sadly did not do so. Member States should therefore strive to reach GES as fast as possible now. Setting a new overall deadline for when to reach GES is not the answer on how to achieve this goal most efficiently, instead tools that address pressures and measure progress and ensure actual, timely implementation of ambitious measures must be included in the revised directive in order to operationalise achieving the overall GES goal. CCB therefore recommends making the existing and forthcoming threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria legally binding and part of the main directive. Improving regional coordination and implementation: To improve the coherence, coordination and effectiveness of MSFD implementation, assessment of GES, monitoring and the national PoMs the role of the Regional Seas Conventions (RSCs) must be clarified. CCB would welcome collating all the national PoMs into one regional PoM for the Baltic Sea, which should be aligned with, in addition to reaching the goals of the MSFD, with achieving the goals of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP). Land-sea interface: For the Baltic Sea to achieve GES it is key that land-based pressures, primarily nutrient runoff from agriculture causing severe eutrophication, is also addressed and that implementation of the MSFD goes hand in hand with the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The goals of the MSFD and achieving GES should also be included when implementing and shaping the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), as well as any synergies with implementing the EU Zero Pollution Action Plan which are also important to identify and utilise. The Baltic Sea also has a too high prevalence and level of other pollutants and hazardous substances affecting marine life. Fisheries and aquaculture: As one of the main pressure factors on the marine environment in general, as well as in the Baltic Sea, fisheries and aquaculture and the effects they have on the marine ecosystem and its biodiversity must be addressed in order to achieve GES. This is especially crucial when considering the MSFD descriptor for Biodiversity (D1), Fish and Shellfish (D3), Food webs (D4) and the one for Seabed integrity (D6). Climate change: Climate change is also affecting the Baltic Sea faster than other marine regions and must be factored in when managing the sea area and its resources to ensure EBM and the full implementation of the MSFD and achieving GES. The effects of the climate crisis should be accounted for when setting pressure reduction targets and threshold values for the descriptors and their criteria, in a way that when an effect cannot be measured nor predicted the precautionary principle must be used. Revising Art. 14 of the MSFD: Article 14 in the MSFD outlines the acceptable exceptions when reaching GES is not possible. The article needs to be revised in the forthcoming revision, since it contains too many and too broad in scope possibilities for exemptions (e.g. in Art. 14(4)), which jeopardise the implementation and fulfilment of the directive as a whole. A possible way of modifying it would be to introduce an obligation for Member States to demonstrate that they have taken all measures within their control nationally and that they have tried to address the problem and advance solving it on a regional level through cooperating with other Member States, before they can apply for a possible exemption. Make the Programme of Measures contain ambitious & concrete measures: One of the cornerstones of the MSFD is the national PoMs that are published every six years and are precluded by an assessment of GES in national waters and a monitoring programme. Unfortunately, the current approach to PoMs where Member States freely can choose measures has led to an overall too low level of ambition in the PoMs, and to large differences within regions and between neighboring countries in terms of which measures are included. In order to fully implement the directive and to achieve GES it is of paramount importance that the national PoMs have a high level of ambition and contain concrete, implementable measures and that there is regional coordination. Easing the reporting burden: One of the results from the evaluation of the MSFD was that the current reporting burden is considered to be too high and a possible way to address this is to align the reporting obligations of the MSFD to more reassemble those of the WFD, that has a more simplified 6-year cycle compared to the MSFD. The implementation cycle however should not be revised or at least not in a way that delays reaching GES. Improve coherence with other legislation: To ensure that the revised MSFD is fully implemented it is essential that coherence with other relevant legislation is improved. The MSPD (foundation for the forthcoming Ocean Act) is also currently being revised and to reach the goals for both the directives achieving GES needs to be a cornerstone of the Ocean Act. This is the only way to deliver truly ecosystem-based management of our seas, and the revision of both directives should therefore be coordinated and focused on achieving GES. CCB looks forward to continuing to provide input to the revision process of the MSFD as well as working with the implementation of the MSFD, especially in the Baltic Sea. CCB expects that the revision will result in a more enforceable directive that leads to the fast implementation of ambitious measures to improve the state of the Baltic and European Sea areas and to the achievement of GES. The full text of the submission is available here . *** Links to supplemental documents supporting our positions: CCB’s submission to the Call for Evidence for the Ocean Act Guiding Recommendations for Source-to-Sea Restoration in Riverine, Coastal, and Marine Ecosystems (Coalition Clean Baltic, 2025) Position Paper on Marine Protected Areas (Coalition Clean Baltic 2024) Don’t sink the Common Fisheries Policy – fulfil its potential (joint NGO Briefing 2025) Blue Manifesto (joint NGO paper)