Eastern Baltic cod stock has collapsed – NGOs call to immediately close fishing of Eastern Baltic cod

CCB • April 11, 2019

Responding to  the release of an alarming new report by international fisheries scientists that Eastern Baltic Cod is at a critically low level, NGOs – Coalition Clean Baltic, Deutsche Umwelthilfe, Oceana, Our Fish, and WWF – are calling on the fisheries ministers of all EU Baltic member states to immediately close the fishery.

Scientists and researchers have warned about the risk to the health of the eastern Baltic cod population for years – with specific concerns about the low stock numbers, small size at reproduction, and starvation [2] – but the alarm was raised during a regional Baltic meeting of fisheries stakeholders in January this year when scientists presented data from 2018 Baltic International Trawl surveys that found a record number of empty trawls [3].

Environmental NGOs Coalition Clean Baltic, Deutsche Umwelthilfe, Oceana, Our Fish, and WWF:

“This new ICES report, along with the data made available from last year’s Baltic international trawl surveys, provides a shocking image of how the population of Eastern Baltic cod has plunged to devastatingly low levels. Immediate emergency measures must be taken by Baltic fisheries ministers and the European Commission, including closing the fishery – or else face a legacy of having been responsible for the commercial extinction of this cod.”

The normal process for setting Baltic fishing levels for the following year begins with advice from ICES for all commercially exploited Baltic stocks on 29 May, and concludes in October when decisions from EU fisheries ministers on allowed catch levels and other measures are made at the AGRIFISH Council meeting.

“If we wait for the usual political process to run its course, it will mean goodbye to Eastern Baltic cod. In the meantime, fishing vessels will continue trawling up the last few fish that can reproduce during this spawning season starting in May. In addition, smaller sized cod risk to be thrown overboard”

The EU Common Fishery Policy (CFP) provides the solutions – it includes provisions for dealing with this form of serious threat to the marine environment. Articles 12 and 13 [4] of the CFP empower the Commission and Members States to take emergency measures. Baltic and European NGOs  have today written an open letter to all Baltic state fisheries ministers calling on them to implement national emergency measures.

CONTACTS

  • Dave Walsh, Communications Advisor, Our Fish, dave@our.fish, +34691826764 (EU)
  • Nils Hoglund, Fishery Policy Officer Coalition Clean Baltic, nils.hoglund@ccb.se, +46 708 679 249 (Sweden)
  • Andrzej Białaś, Policy Advisor, Oceana, abialas@oceana.org, +48 501588833 (Poland)
  • Katja Hockun, Project Manager Marine Conservation, Deutsche Umwelthilfe, +49 302400867-895, hockun@duh.de (Germany)
  • Ottilia Thoreson, Director, WWF Baltic Ecoregion Programme,  ottilia.thoreson@wwf.se, +46 8 6247415

NOTES
 

  1. ICES 2019, Report from Benchmark Workshop on Baltic Cod Stocks (WKBALTCOD2) p.77. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2019/WKBALTCOD2/WKBALTCOD2%202019.pdf
  2. ICES 2018 advice for Eastern Baltic cod
  3. https://our.fish/press/more-garbage-caught-than-cod-ngos-call-for-emergency-measures-to-protect-eastern-baltic-cod/
  4. Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. Articles 12, 13

Extracts from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) eastern Baltic cod benchmark report published on 5th March 2019 (ICES. 2019. Benchmark Workshop on Baltic Cod Stocks (WKBALTCOD2). ICES Scientific Reports. 1:9. 310 pp.  http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20 Reports/Expert%20Group%20Report/acom/2019/WKBALTCOD2/WKBALTCOD2%202019.pdf)

  • The benchmark uses a new stock assessment model to allow an analytical assessment for the stock, which has been lacking since 2014. Moreover, reference points taking into account changes in productivity of the stock were also estimated, and procedures to conduct short-term forecasts were agreed. “…the quality of the assessment was found reasonable and the assessment appropriate to be used as the basis for advice for the eastern Baltic cod.”

Regarding the defining of appropriate new reference points the ICES benchmark report states: “The latest relatively strong year-class was formed in 2012 from an SSB of 98 000 t (Fig. 4.34). Therefore, Blim was set to this level, i.e. 98 000 t”. “Due to the presently very dynamic biological situation for the eastern Baltic cod, the current Blim at 98 000 t is considered to be applicable only in short term. The reproductive capacity of the stock needs to be closely monitored in coming years, and when new information becomes available, the Blim value needs to be re-evaluated.”

Furthermore, the report concludes regarding establishing an FMSY value:

“… analyses showed that even with FMSY at 0 the SSB would not be kept above Blim (98 000 t) in the long term, with 95% probability. (…) Even when applying a substantially lower value for Blim (53000 t), the result in terms of the stock being below Blim with more than 5% probability even at FMSY = 0 remained unchanged. In other words, following the ICES MSY framework for this stock, the estimated FMSY is equal to 0. For this reason, no F reference points were defined for this stock.”· Regarding the procedures to conduct short-term forecasts: “As there is no F reference point for this stock, probabilistic forecast with MCMC was proposed to be used instead. In this approach, catch and SSB levels corresponding to different F factors are calculated as in typical deterministic short term forecast but using MCMC to make it possible to also include the associated probability/risk of the SSB to be below Blim and Btrigger for each year of forecast. At the benchmark, this approach was approved to be used, and the actual forecast will be performed in the next WGBFAS.”

  • Regarding stock status, reproductive capacity and recruitment: “The year classes from 2015 and 2016 are estimated to be among the lowest since the 1990s (Fig. 4.34). Preliminary information from the BITS Q4 2018 survey indicates a weak year-class also for 2017. Moreover, preliminary information from the 2018 ichthyoplankton surveys shows very low larval abundances throughout the spawning season, suggesting a poor year-class also for 2018. This sequence of poor year-classes raises concerns about the current reproductive capacity of the stock, the recruitment possibly being impaired by the quality of the spawning stock. Therefore, the size of spawning stock (SSB) in tons alone is not considered representative for reproductive capacity for the stock at present, as the quality of the SSB needs to be considered as well”.
  • For further information and latest correspondence and documents concerning Eastern Baltic cod please visit: https://www.fishsec.org/2019/04/02/update-on-eastern-baltic-cod
By CCB • November 6, 2026
Widespread exploitation of the critically endangered European eel population continues against scientific advice, despite no signs of recovery. Today, the International Council for Exploration of the Sea, ICES, published its scientific advice on fishing opportunities and conservation for European eel for 2027. As in previous years, ICES advises zero catch for all life stages, all uses and in all habitats. Despite very clear advice, over 1,500 tonnes were landed commercially in the EU in 2025 with an additional > 300 tonnes taken in recreational fisheries. The scientific advice on European eel requested by the EU, the UK and Norway makes very clear that no catches can be considered sustainable and that the “zero catch” also applies to glass eel landings used for restocking and aquaculture. Given the state of the eel population, ICES advises that all other anthropogenic impacts, such as pumping stations, hydropower and pollution, should also be zero. The European eel (Anguilla anguilla) has been listed as Critically Endangered by IUCN since 2008, and is on the European Red List for freshwater fish. It is also included in Appendix II of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) and listed in Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) since 2007. Despite the need for protection and efforts to aid its recovery, European eel continues to be fished across most of its natural range. In the past decade, total reported commercial landings of yellow and silver eel have remained above 2 000 tonnes per year; with several countries reporting annual landings of over 100 tonnes. In 2025, reported commercial glass eel landings were 57.1 tonnes. Where available, estimates of national recreational landings of yellow and silver eels show that they can be of the same order of magnitude as those of commercial fisheries. All in contradiction with the scientific advice. Only Ireland, Slovenia, Malta and Norway have closed all fishing for the species. In the EU, the Council Regulation (EC) No 1100/2007 establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel was adopted in 2007 – almost 20 years ago. Since then, there has been some fluctuations in the very low levels of recruitment and yellow eel index, but no recovery. For 2026, levels are extremely low again with the recruitment index for “Elsewhere Europe” at 6.4 % and North Sea at 1.2 % of the 1960–1979 reference level, respectively. – One has to wonder when European eel will be considered critically endangered enough for this exploitation to stop, says Niki Sporrong, Senior Policy Advisor for Migratory Fish at Coalition Clean Baltic. When will the obligation to protect and restore the population set out both in EU law and international agreements be prioritised? Measures to aid eel recovery have been agreed and implemented across and beyond the EU. Mediterranean long-term management measures for European eel were agreed in 2024 under the General Fisheries Committee for the Mediterranean (GFCM). Eel fishing closures, together with a complete ban of recreational fishing, intended to protect eel migration and recruitment have been adopted in EU marine waters, but their application has had insufficient effects on fishing mortality so far. Trade in European eel is regulated under CITES, and only earlier this year a Single Species Action Plan for the full range of the population was adopted by CMS. But without properly addressing key threats such as fishing, migration barriers and habitat loss it is hard to see how even the resilient eel will be able to survive combined pressures further exacerbated by climate change. – Exploitation of European eel continues against scientific advice, says Niki Sporrong. Agreed EU objectives for the rebuilding of fish stocks and biodiversity are simply not applied to this remarkable species. Urgent measures to minimise eel mortality must be implemented now, in both national, EU and international waters. —END— Notes to editors: [1] The European eel (Anguilla anguilla) population has been declining for a long time and is classified as Critically Endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2018). [2] The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) data on recruitment shows a dramatic decline since the assessment baseline (1960-1979), and no significant recovery. Glass eel recruitment continues to be very low. This year, the preliminary recruitment index for the North Sea area is 1.2 % of the baseline average and for “elsewhere Europe” 6.4 %. Yellow eel recruitment in 2024 was estimated to 16.4 %. [3] Assessment of European eel is complex due to the great geographical range of the population, including a number of countries outside of the ICES areas. This makes it impossible for ICES to use fishing mortality, Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) and other standard reference points for eel. As data on eel fisheries and other anthropogenic impacts remain incomplete, the assessment is based on time series for glass eel and yellow eel recruitment. Even without defined biological limit reference points, it is ICES’s assessment that the European eel population remains well below any potential reference points, such as Blim. [4] ICES has advised that all anthropogenic mortality should be kept as close to zero as possible since 2003 (ICES, 2020). Since 2021, the advice has changed to zero for all anthropogenic mortalities, including all fishing. [5] A Council Regulation (1100/2007) establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel was agreed in 2007. Since then, almost 20 years after its adoption, no notable recovery has been observed in the European eel population. [6] Only three EU countries – Ireland, Malta and Slovenia – have prohibited all fishing for the European eel , despite the fact that it is also on the European Red List of Freshwater Fishes. Six EU countries still landed over 100 tonnes in 2025 : the Netherlands (428 t), France (361 t), Germany [extrapolated from latest reported landings of >200 t], Denmark (126 t), Poland (120 t) and Sweden (114 t). Outside of the EU, Turkey (267 t) also reported landings over 100 tonnes. Egypt, which has a substantial fishery for European eel and mainly targets yellow and silver eel, does not report any data to ICES and is not included in the overall estimates. [7] Trends in landings – reported commercial landings of yellow and silver eel continue to fall overall. In 2024, landings were 2,074 tonnes and in 2025, landings were around 1,922 tonnes, if we assume that Germany landed >200 tonnes based on landings from recent years. However, France and Denmark stand out in 2025 for increasing reported commercial landings compared to the previous year, and the Netherlands for significantly increasing landings since the EU eel regulation was adopted. [8] EU glass eel landings – in 2026, reported commercial landings of glass eel, a fishery completely dominated by France, were at 53 tonnes. In France, landings have been increasing since 2011 with a peak at 54.5 tonnes in 2022. This year, France reported landings of 48.3 tonnes (prel. figures) – 91% of the EU catch. After Brexit, UK landings have fallen dramatically, from more than 3 tonnes to 0.6 tonnes in 2025. Spain is the only country still fishing for glass eel in the Mediterranean, and the Mediterranean landings almost doubled in 2026. [9] Recreational landings of yellow and silver eel are completely dominated by Germany. Total r eported recreational landings for 2022 – the last year with complete figures – was 550 tonnes. In Germany, recreational landings remain very high , higher than reported commercial landings, with 275 tonnes reported for 2022. This is over half of all reported recreational landings in the EU (52%). [10] Restocking involves catching wild glass eels in one place and letting them go in another, often spreading viruses and disease in the process. It has been used for decades in many countries – not as a conservation measure but in order to sustain fisheries for eel. Despite the prolonged practice, no net benefit to eel reproduction has been proven. In its advice for 2026, ICES notes that “restocking is reliant on a glass eel catch, which is in contradiction with the current advice”. [11] Eels have a complex life cycle , going through several different life stages and generally live for 10–20 years. The very small, translucent eels arriving at European coastlines every year are called glass eels . When they reach brackish or fresh waters, they transform into less transparent elvers , and then grow into yellow eels , which live along our coasts, in rivers and lakes for up to 25 years. When mature, they transform again into silver eels , which will undertake the long journey to the Sargasso Sea to spawn.
By CCB • November 5, 2026
Brussels, 4 November 2026: Environmental NGOs welcome the European Commission’s decision to not include a revision of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) in its 2027 Workplan, announced today, and call on the Commission to maintain this course. To improve ocean health and biodiversity, BirdLife, BLOOM, Coalition Clean Baltic, ClientEarth, Environmental Justice Foundation, Oceana, and Seas At Risk urge the Commission to prioritise full implementation and enforcement of the existing CFP to rebuild fish populations, protect marine ecosystems, and secure a sustainable future for fishers and coastal communities. “The Commission has rightly chosen to follow the findings of its own CFP evaluation , published in April this year, and to focus on holding Member States accountable for implementing the law”, said the NGOs. “Reopening a policy that has not yet reached its full potential would halt timely implementation, waste valuable time and delay the meaningful action that European fishers and marine ecosystems urgently need.” A competitive and resilient fisheries sector can only be built on: healthy fish populations; a system that gives a fair share of space and resources to fishers that have a low impact on the marine ecosystem; and a fleet that is enabled to make a just transition to lower environmental impact, reducing dependence on subsidised fossil fuels, and responding properly to the climate crisis. The CFP outlines a precautionary pathway forward, centering fisheries management on scientific advice and ecosystem protection, minimising the impact of fishing on the marine environment while aiming to provide a sustainably sourced food source for people throughout Europe. “The European Commission must now demonstrate its political ambition by delivering on the CFP, which will allow fish populations to recover, will help achieve food security, along with the wellbeing of European fishers and coastal communities, and protect ocean health”, said the NGOs. “With imminent annual fisheries negotiations between the Commission, Member States and third countries, including the UK and Norway, this will be a key opportunity to finally close a major CFP implementation gap by setting fishing limits that are geared towards rebuilding struggling fish populations and fisheries.” The environmental NGOs call on member states to cooperate with the European Commission on stronger implementation measures to fulfil the objectives of the CFP, and put European citizens and environment at the heart of their position going forward.