Environmental NGO (Coalition Clean Baltic and World Wide Fund for Nature) Statement for HELCOM Ministerial Meeting on the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan, Krakow, 15 November 2007

CCB • November 15, 2007

ENVIRONMENTAL NGO (COALITION CLEAN BALTIC AND WORLD WIDE FUND FOR NATURE) STATEMENT FOR HELCOM MINISTERIAL MEETING ON THE 
HELCOM BALTIC SEA ACTION PLAN
KRAKOW, POLAND 
15 NOVEMBER 2007

On behalf of the environmental NGOs, Coalition Clean Baltic and WWF, who serve as observers to HELCOM, we appreciate the opportunity to share our position on the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP).  We welcomed HELCOM’s initiative to launch the BSAP process nearly two years ago.  The ambitions of the BSAP to deliver wide-scale and decisive actions necessary to achieve a good ecological status for the Baltic Sea was seen by CCB and WWF as fulfilling a critical need to achieve ecosystem based management in the Baltic Sea region.

Originally, the proposed text of the plan did indeed include many of the strong actions and tough decisions that so urgently needed.  Over time, however, the plan has been successively narrowed in scope and weakened due to political and economic disagreements between CPs and economic sectors like agriculture and fisheries – so much so that the plan you now seek to adopt is but a shadow of its former self. 
Instead, the BSAP is now high on rhetoric but missing many of the very ambitious actions and commitments which were the reason the BSAP was originally conceived.  In fact, the plan rarely steps beyond actions which have already been agreed on and negotiated in other fora.  This is important, but does little to demonstrate the added value of the BSAP and indeed HELCOM itself. As a result, the plan you are now set to endorse will unfortunately not reach its ambitious aims or objectives. 
Two of the biggest threats to the ecosystem of the Baltic Sea are eutrophication and the overfishing of cod.  The adopted HELCOM BSAP 
-   takes a positive first step towards addressing Eutrophication, e.g. with country-wise quotas for nutrient reduction, but this will not solve the total problem
-   unfortunately takes no actions to address the obvious risk for collapse of the Baltic cod stocks which could dramatically deteriorate the Baltic Sea ecosystem.  

Further, the plan is lacking:
-   Strong actions to shift CAP-subsidies in Baltic Sea into agri-environmental programmes which are needed to contribute to a substantial reduction of the nutrient run-off from agriculture. 
-   Strong actions to safeguard the Baltic Harbour Porpoise, which are at risk of collapse. 
-   Actions to address the threat of climate change, which is expected to significantly increase the effects of eutrophication on the Baltic Sea are absent.
-   Strong actions to stem the threat posed to the Baltic ecosystem by the introduction of alien species into the Baltic Sea via ships ballast water.
-   Strong actions to control nutrient run-off from agriculture, e.g. the designation of the whole Baltic catchment as a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone.

Additionally, since little attention has been given to how this plan will be implemented, coordinated, funded and evaluated - there is no clear understanding regarding how HELCOM and the CPs will even be able to manage and monitor this plan. Finally, even the few actions that have been identified are recommendatory and non-binding.  This means that there is no guarantee that contracting parties will even take these actions.  

We do appreciate, however, actions such as:
-   The country-wise nutrient reduction requirements which have been agreed by CPs.
-   The actions identified to ensure better environmental control for Industrial Animal Farms (Intensive rearing livestock farms) in Annex III of Helsinki Convention.
-   The establishment of a list of Hot Spots, identifying Industrial animal farms, not fulfilling IPPC directive
-   The active conservation of at least 10 threatened wild salmon river populations in Baltic Sea.

Overall, we are concerned with the very low ambitions for protection of the Baltic Sea environment from many Baltic Sea region countries and believe the true failure of this plan can be directly traced to the lack of political will and leadership on behalf of CPs.  Looking around the room – it is disheartening to see that this ‘Ministerial’ meeting does not even include Environmental Ministers from Denmark, Germany and Latvia, which may indicate the low importance of this process for these CPs.  
Furthermore, as the original intention of the BSAP was to take a holistic and integrated approach to tackling the many challenges in the region – it was a flawed intention from the start to only seek to include the agreement of environmental ministers.  In order to be successful, this plan requires strong support from the highest level of government of each CP, and commitment that the BSAP will be implemented in a coordinated and integrated way across ALL relevant ministries and departments.    
Clearly, your colleagues in the Ministries of Agriculture, Fisheries and Economy seem to have low ambitions for Baltic Sea Protection and would rather keep to business as usual.  Their influence has been quite evident during the negotiations and subsequent weakening of the text.  This is why it is so important that you strengthen your own expertise in these areas in order to achieve sustainable agriculture and fisheries for Baltic Sea protection.  

Despite the weaknesses of this plan, the original intention of the BSAP remains valid – the Baltic Sea still needs urgent and concerted action to protect and restore it to ‘good ecological status’.   We therefore urge each of you to seek the support of your Prime Ministers/Presidents and take responsibility for:
1.   Implementing the BSAP but acknowledge that the implementation of the plan will not be enough to reach the goals and objectives of the BSAP and to therefore:
2.   Take responsibility for its weaknesses and failures by developing a process to address the still urgent need to take dramatic and integrated action to save the Baltic Sea – ensuring that this action is taken at the highest level of each CP (where Agriculture and Fisheries sectors must take their full responsibility)– ideally in the form of a summit meeting in order to secure the health of the Baltic and therefore the continued economic success and quality of life of  our region.
The Baltic Sea, and indeed the people around the Baltic Sea region, deserves more than declarations. Only real action and accountable leadership can achieve this – we therefore acknowledge you, Baltic Ministers of Environment and EC DG Env, as our most important partners to save the Baltic Sea environment and urge you to act and learn from the failings of this process. Thank you for your attention!  

By CCB • October 27, 2026
27 October 2026 , Luxembourg - EU fisheries ministers increased central Baltic and Bothnian herring catch limits beyond the European Commission’s proposals and significantly increased the sprat catch limit, falling short of the precaution needed to protect the role of herring and sprat in the Baltic Sea food web. The Council also rejected proposed cuts to accidental catches of severely depleted cod and western Baltic herring populations. NGOs warn that fishing limits remain too high and urge EU ministers to follow the agreement with concrete plans to rebuild depleted fish populations. Herring: further measures needed to safeguard fragile recovery and protect vulnerable populations EU fisheries ministers increased the catch limit for central Baltic herring to 165 228 tonnes, a 71% increase compared with 2026. The population has shown signs of improvement after years of depletion. However, the central Baltic herring population remains vulnerable, and rebuilding must restore healthy age and size structures as well as overall abundance. Although below the scientific headline catch advice, the Council’s decision exceeds the Commission’s proposal, which was more precautionary and recovery-oriented and should have been followed by the ministers. “Ministers have recognised the need for caution, but still allowed more herring to be caught than the Commission proposed. These vulnerable populations need a stronger chance of lasting recovery, with clear rebuilding targets, a timetable for reaching them and measures that are implemented and enforced ,” said Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer, Senior Fisheries Policy Advisor at Coalition Clean Baltic. For Bothnian herring , ministers retained the three-month spawning closure but increased the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) by 12% , despite the population remaining below healthy levels. The Commission’s proposed TAC for this fish population was already a compromise between population rebuilding and maintaining fishing opportunities. The agreed higher TAC poses a risk to the recovery of the Bothnian herring population and creates increasing uncertainty for the industry. “ Fisheries decisions must also account for the risks to fish population recovery. Even catch limits within the ICES advice range can leave stocks at risk of remaining below the biomass levels that should trigger recovery measures. Fishing opportunities must give depleted populations a real chance to recover to healthy level s,” said Beatrice Rindevall, Chairperson of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation. The Gulf of Riga herring TAC was also set above NGOs’ recommendations, with an increase of 11% compared with 2026, despite the recent decline in its spawning biomass and its importance to the Baltic food web. Lower limits for this fish population would have better supported population health and long-term resilience. Sprat: recovery must extend to the Baltic Sea food web The sprat agreement remains a significant concern. The Council’s decision, in line with the Commission’s proposal, to increase the sprat catch limit by 44% to 291 590 tonnes exceeds the level NGOs recommended. Although the population has increased, the agreed limit does not sufficiently account for sprat’s importance as prey for cod, salmon, seabirds and other marine wildlife, persistent catch misreporting or the risk of catching vulnerable herring alongside sprat. “ Herring and sprat are vital to the Baltic Sea ecosystem. When setting fishing opportunities, decision makers must leave enough prey in the water to support predators like cod and salmon, to rebuild ecosystem health and align with the EU’s nature restoration ambitions ,” said Justyna Zajchowska, Fisheries Lead for WWF Baltic Sea Programme. Salmon: no increase in catch limits, but stronger protection needed NGOs welcome the decision not to increase salmon fishing opportunities. However, fishing should be restricted to compensatory hatchery-released salmon or salmon from rivers where populations are at full reproductive capacity. Fishing on vulnerable wild populations must be avoided and, if returning salmon numbers are insufficient, additional adaptive management measures should be deployed immediately, considering the impact of recent poor spawning runs. “ Good returns to some large rivers are encouraging, but they do not demonstrate recovery across the Baltic region. Many smaller river populations remain in serious difficulty. We need fishing restrictions that protect those vulnerable salmon throughout their migration and allow enough fish to reach their spawning grounds ,” said Thomas Johansson, Chairman of Östersjölaxälvar i Samverkan and Secretary General of the Baltic Salmon Fund. Cod, western Baltic herring and plaice: Council misses opportunity to curb bycatch Both Baltic cod populations and western Baltic herring remain severely depleted. Targeted cod fisheries remain closed, while ministers retained the small-scale fisheries exemption for western Baltic herring. Yet ministers agreed bycatch quotas well above the Commission’s proposals for 2027 and at the same level as 2026, falling short of the protection sought by NGOs. For all three populations, the agreed bycatch quotas permit continued catches despite ICES advice for zero catch. The Council’s decision to increase the plaice TAC to 11,237 tonnes , well above the level NGOs recommended, missed an opportunity to secure a reduction in accidental cod catches. The decision also does not reflect the very low reported landings of this species. Declining weight and condition of plaice also warrant greater caution. The TAC must be combined with effective enforcement of mandatory selective gear to reduce cod bycatch and the implementation of the landing obligation. Annual fishing limits must support lasting recovery The Council’s decisions on Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2027 are not ambitious enough to secure restoration of all Baltic Sea fish populations. These decisions should be seen in the context of last year’s joint commitment by the European Commission and Baltic Sea Member States to seek dedicated scientific advice from ICES on rebuilding pathways for fish populations. In the absence of such rebuilding-oriented advice, and whilst we are waiting for it, decisions should be more cautious and based on the available recovery-focused catch options provided by the scientists in their traditional advice. Fisheries management must also support EU marine restoration objectives and the achievement of good environmental status in the Baltic Sea. Restoring fish populations and food webs is essential to the recovery of the sea itself and to the long-term future of Baltic fisheries and the coastal communities that depend on them. ENDS *** Further information: Link to Council decision Link to Commission’s proposal Link to Joint NGO recommendations on Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2027 Media contact: Beatrice Rindevall, Chairperson, Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, ordforande@naturskyddsforeningen.se Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer , Senior Fisheries Policy Advisor, Coalition Clean Baltic, Cathrine@ccb.se Justyna Zajchowska , Fisheries Lead, WWF Baltic Sea Programme, jzajchowska@wwf.pl Dr. Katja Hockun, Senior Expert Meeresschutz, Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V., hockun@duh.de Konrad Stralka , Executive Director, BalticWaters, konrad.stralka@balticwaters.org Magda Jentgena , Baltic Sea and Freshwater Programme Manager, Pasaules Dabas Fonds, mjentgena@pdf.lv Regan McEnroe , Chairperson, Nature and Youth Sweden, ordforande@faltbiologerna.se Tapani Veistola, Executive Director, Suomen luonnonsuojeluliitto (Finnish Association for Nature Conservation), tapani.veistola@sll.fi Thomas Johansson , Chairman, Östersjölaxälvar i Samverkan, and Secretary General, Baltic Salmon Fund, thomas@balticsalmonfund.com .
By CCB • August 31, 2026
Uppsala, 31 August 2026 - Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB) welcomes the Commission’s recognition that declining fishing pressure has not consistently delivered higher biomass, that recruitment and biomass are deteriorating for a number of stocks, and that Baltic fisheries urgently need rebuilding trajectories. These findings must now shape the Council’s decision on the 2027 fishing opportunities and the Commission’s position during the Council negotiations. The poor status and decline of many Baltic Sea fish populations have been documented over several decades and show that the ecosystem is in severe distress. Cumulative human pressures have contributed to major ecosystem shifts, and at the same time climate change is making the shallow, semi-enclosed Baltic Sea warmer and less saline. These combined pressures affect not only fish biomass but also recruitment, population age and size structures, species interactions and the functioning of the wider food web. The Baltic crisis reflects the persistent failure to fully implement the CFP and the Baltic MAP, including their precautionary safeguards and the legal obligation to apply ecosystem-based fisheries management. Fishing opportunities for 2027 must therefore mark the first concrete step towards ambitious, timebound rebuilding trajectories that reduce fishing pressure and enable depleted populations to recover to healthy levels. These trajectories must include implementation of an ecosystem based approach by accounting for species interactions, food-web needs, habitat conditions, environmental and climatic change and scientific uncertainty, while reinforcing, not replacing the CFP’s objectives and the Baltic MAP’s existing safeguards in Art. 4.6. The Commission’s 2027 proposal is now before the Council. The October Council must turn the commitment to rebuild Baltic fish populations into measurable action by adopting fishing opportunities that deliver rapid and sustained recovery. Under no circumstances should the TACs adopted be higher than levels proposed by the European Commission. Fishing opportunities aligned with scientific evidence, legal safeguards and ecosystem needs are the basis for both a recovering Baltic Sea and viable fisheries in the long term. Read the full CCB's submission and recommendations here .