Baltic Sea Fish Stocks Remain in Crisis – NGOs Call for Closures of Herring and Cod stocks

CCB • May 29, 2020

Brussels, 29 May 2020 :- Responding to today’s publication of annual scientific advice for EU fishing limits for 2021 in the Baltic Sea by ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea), which finds important Baltic fish populations remain in a state of crisis, and the entire Baltic Sea ecosystem in very poor health [1], a group of non-governmental organisations are demanding that the European Commission and national fisheries ministers adhere to ICES expert scientific recommendations for zero fishing of western Baltic herring and eastern Baltic cod for 2021, to end overfishing of all other species, and commit to increased focus on ecosystem and climate considerations . 

Coalition Clean Baltic, Oceana, Our Fish, Seas At Risk, and WWF call on the European Commission – which is responsible for proposing EU fishing limits – and on member state fisheries ministers – who make the final decisions, to not exceed the scientific advice provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and to respect the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) requirements when setting all fishing limits in the Baltic Sea for 2021.

“ The poor condition of the Baltic Sea is a reflection of the global state of our seas and oceans. Overfishing, in addition to pollution, habitat loss and climate change, is narrowing the opportunity to change the dire state of Baltic fish stocks ”, said Ottilia Thoreson, Director, WWF Baltic Ecoregion Programme. “ EU ministers must intensify the implementation and enforcement of the Common Fisheries Policy in the Baltic region, by setting sustainable fishing limits, securing appropriate implementation and tightening control of the landing obligation. All of these measures are necessary to allow for the recovery of fish stocks and ensure food security well into the future. ”

“ Last year’s decision by the EU Council to close targeted fishery on eastern Baltic cod was a step in the right direction but insufficient, as the cod are starving [2]. A cod recovery plan with a multi-species approach must be initiated ,” said Nils Höglund, Fisheries and Marine Policy Officer, Coalition Clean Baltic. “ As the eastern Baltic cod stock has collapsed, we cannot continue fishing their crucial food, sprat and herring without considering the need to maximise food availability ”, he continued, referring to ICES advice to move the sprat fishery [3]. Reducing or at least moving the sprat fishery is not a matter of debate, it’s a no brainer !”

“ Scientific assessments for some iconic fish stocks, like the eastern Baltic cod or the western Baltic herring, raise the alarm about their dire conservation status. The collapse of these populations is the result of several factors, including continuous overfishing, what contradicts the objectives of the EU fisheries and environmental policies ,“ explained Javier López, fisheries campaign director for Oceana in Europe. “ Decision makers must redress this situation by setting catch limits in line with scientific advice, alongside with additional measures related with spawning closures, bycatch minimization and/or recreational catches. Management decisions in line with the scientific advice are the only way to recover fish stocks and to ensure a sustainable future for the Baltic fisheries. ” 

“ With the European Green Deal and EU Biodiversity Strategy, the European Commission doubled down on its commitment to end overfishing, restore the health of our seas, and support a transition to more sustainable fishing methods – now EU governments must respond and act on that commitment ”, said Rebecca Hubbard, Programme Director, Our Fish. “ Anything less than a full stop to overfishing in the Baltic will undermine the European Green Deal and worsen the impacts of the biodiversity and climate crisis ”, she added.

The EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) requires sustainable exploitation of EU fish stocks by 2020 in order to rebuild their populations [4]. One Baltic fish stock shows how respecting this important provision can work successfully with benefits for fishers and the ecosystem. The Total Allowable Catch (TAC) for Gulf of Riga herring has been set in accordance with scientific advice and CFP requirements for years, delivering the expected, good results: fishing pressure is at sustainable levels, the population is healthy, and ICES is able to again recommend a TAC increase for 2021. This was the only Baltic stock that benefitted from a proposed increase in the TAC for 2020 in line with scientific advice. This success story should guide fisheries ministers to set all Baltic TACs for 2021 following scientific advice for sustainable catches.

Western (Baltic) Spring Spawning Herring

Western Baltic herring is in crisis: scientific advice from ICES to stop fishing in 2019, and previously in 2018 was ignored, and the population is at dangerously low levels [5]. Even with a closed fishery, the stock will not recover in 2022. The herring is a highly migratory fish, migrating between their feeding grounds in the North Sea and Kattegat to their coastal spawning grounds located in bays, estuaries and lagoons along the coastal Western Baltic Sea. ICES scientific advice recommends an immediate halt on fishing in the Western Baltic as well as fishing reductions in the North Sea. Furthermore, ICES suggests that additional management measures, such as closed areas of temporal closing periods on the herring fishery in the North Sea are necessary for the western herring population to recover. For the year 2021, ICES still advises a fishing limit of zero tonnes.

Eastern Baltic Cod

According to ICES, the eastern Baltic cod population is still in a state of distress, with reproduction of the population at the lowest on record since 1946 [6]. Growth, condition (weight at length) and size at maturation has substantially declined during the last decades, and yet EU governments have repeatedly set fishing limits for eastern Baltic cod above scientific advice [6]. Unreported, illegal discarding of eastern Baltic cod is also believed to be rife and increasing, as a result of poor monitoring and control [7]. ICES advice for eastern Baltic cod catches fishing limit in 2021 is zero tonnes. 

Western Baltic Cod

Western Baltic cod is still in a precarious state with estimates of the population revised down by 30% for 2020 (following on from a 60% reduction for 2019) [8]. ICES warns that the number of young fish that entered the fishery in 2018 and 2019 were the lowest on record, and reports that if this doesn’t change in the coming years, there will be a rapid decline in the population. In 2019, ICES estimated that 91.8% of Western Baltic cod caught (88% by weight) came from a single year class (2016). This shows that the population is extremely unbalanced. ICES estimates that fishing Western Baltic cod at Fmsy (fishing mortality at maximum sustainable yield – MSY [9]) across the management area (subdivisions 22-24) would lead to 1,532 tonnes of Eastern Baltic cod caught in subdivision 24 (Baltic Sea west of Bornholm), so in order to comply with the zero catch advised for eastern Baltic cod (where there is mixing of eastern and western Baltic cod), ICES advice zero fishing in subdivision 24, and a commercial fishing limit of between 2,960 and 4,635 tonnes of western Baltic cod for subdivisions 22-23.

ENDS

Read and download the Joint NGO recommendations on Baltic Sea fishing opportunities for 2021 here.

Contacts:

Notes:

Fmsy: The point at which the largest catch can be taken from a fish stock over an indefinite period without harming it.

Spawning Stock Biomass is below Blim. 

ICES (2018) advice – that there should be zero catch – was ignored.

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)