NGOs to EU decision makers: Commit to a Genuine Baltic Sea Recovery Plan

CCB • May 28, 2025

Key Baltic fish populations are in crisis, warn environmental NGOs. New scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, ICES, confirms the poor condition of key Baltic fish populations, several of which remain collapsed (1). EU fisheries ministers must set 2026-catch limits well below ICES advice and prioritise long-term recovery over short-term economic gains.

Cod collapse requires continued zero catch


The alarming state of Baltic cod populations  persists. ICES maintains its zero-catch advice for Eastern Baltic cod in 2026 and 2027. Despite closure of the direct fishery since 2020, the stock shows no signs of recovery. 


For the first time, ICES also recommends zero catch for Western Baltic cod. The stock has suffered from weak recruitment since 2016. Despite the targeted direct fishery being closed since 2022, scientists now advise a full fishing halt for 2026 and 2027 (2). 


ICES also recommends actions to restore degraded marine ecosystems affected by pollution and the climate crisis. These measures, if implemented, are expected to have both direct and indirect effects on reducing mortality and improving the poor condition of both cod populations.


Higher catch advice, despite low herring biomass and sprat data uncertainty


Compared to last year, the ICES advice for Central Baltic herring  and sprat has increased, Central Baltic herring biomass is marginally above critical levels and risks genetic diversity loss, while the sprat advice increase relies on potentially unrepresentative recruitment data from a single Northeastern survey (3). NGOs warn that these apparent improvements mask significant concerns. 


“On paper these catch limit increases look encouraging, but a closer reading of the ICES advice shows we’re still walking a tightrope,” said Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer, Senior Fisheries Policy Advisor at FishSec. “These fish populations remain fragile, and the uncertainties in the underlying data should make decision-makers proceed with caution.”


Uncertainty also clouds Gulf of Bothnia herring (4). Gulf of Riga herring, the only Baltic herring population consistently fished in line with the Baltic Sea Multiannual Plan, yet shows a declining spawning stock biomass (5). The advice for Western Baltic herring remains zero catch for 2026.


“Herring and sprat are vital to the Baltic Sea’s ecosystem and economy, serving as both valuable catches and essential prey for larger fish, marine mammals and birds” said Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer. “Overfishing, pollution, habitat loss, and a warming, oxygen-starved sea now threaten these species. Setting cautious catch limits—alongside habitat restoration—is crucial to protect the Baltic’s entire ecosystem.”


ICES headline advice does not consider legal safeguards for two herring stocks


In addition, ICES headline advice does not take into account legal safeguards under the EU Baltic Multiannual Management Plan designed to prevent the collapse of fish stocks (6) When it comes to Total Allowable Catches (TACs) for 2026 this important provision applies to Central Baltic and Gulf of Bothnia herring  (7). Most concerningly warn NGOs, as the Fisheries Council has broken this legal rule twice already in relation to Baltic stocks. 


“We cannot once again ignore the fact that the advised catches would push both these herring stocks beyond the determined biological and legal risk limit. These are not just numbers”, said Aimi Hamberg, Marine Policy Officer at Coalition Clean Baltic, “they reflect real threats to the reproductive capacity of the stocks. Ignoring the legal safeguards in the Baltic Sea Multi Annual Plan once again could lead to long-term stock collapse and socioeconomic fallout.”


“ICES advice on fishing opportunities should always be used in conjunction with the existing binding law. We understand and expect that ICES advice for the Baltic Sea fish stocks will be used by the decision makers respecting the provisions of the Baltic Sea Multiannual Plan and considering its important safeguards. In practice this would mean much lower catch levels for Central Baltic herring and Gulf of Bothnia herring, compared to the headline advice.” said Justyna Zajchowska, Fisheries Lead in WWF Baltic Sea Programme.


Scientists flag poor flatfish condition and call for habitat restoration


ICES flag the poor flatfish conditions and call for habitat restoration. Over the last five years, Baltic plaice  — and other flatfish — have shown sharp declines in weight-at-age and overall condition, a clear sign of ecosystem stress (8).


“Fisheries management must account for the reality that our marine ecosystem has been damaged by human activities and climate change,” said Lioba Schwarzer, Lead of Marine Conservation at DUH. “ICES scientists are now recommending habitat restoration efforts, specifically improving oxygen levels on the seafloor, which will ultimately help improve the health of the plaice stock.“


Ecosystem failure and data gaps demand more precautionary limits



ICES’ latest advice exposes significant uncertainties and data gaps, such as misreported landings (especially for herring and sprat), missing Russian catch figures, and incomplete biological data, that undermine Baltic Sea stock assessments. 


“In light of the current biodiversity and climate crises, it is imperative to rebuild all fish populations well above sustainable and productive levels in order to enable them to cope with and mitigate mounting pressures”, said Rémi Cossetti, Marine Policy Officer at Seas At Risk, “policymakers must invest in the resilience of fish populations and ecosystems by adopting fishing limits well below the maximum catch level advised by ICES to ensure the long term sustainability and resilience of the fisheries sector and the coastal communities that depend on them.”


NGOs therefore urge EU decision-makers to urgently agree on a Baltic Sea Recovery Plan, that includes adopting precautionary limits that restore and maintain resilient fish populations amid the ecosystem and climate crisis.


__END


CONTACTS:

  • Aimi Hamberg, Marine Policy Officer, Coalition Clean Baltic, aimi.hamberg@ccb.se 
  • Cathrine Pedersen Schirmer, Senior Fisheries Policy Officer, FishSec, Cathrine@fishsec.org +45 21977905
  • Lioba Schwarzer, Team Lead Marine Conservation, Deutsche Umwelthilfe, schwarzer@duh.de, +49 171 9851538
  • Justyna Zajchowska, Fisheries Lead, WWF Baltic Sea Programme, jzajchowska@wwf.pl
  • Rémi Cossetti, Marine Policy Officer, Seas At Risk, rcossett@seas-at-risk.org
  • Magda Jentgena, Baltic Sea and Freshwater Programme Manager, Pasaules Dabas Fonds, mjentgena@pdf.lv, +371 28652770
  • Joonas Plaan,Board member, Marine and Climate program, Estonian Fund for Nature (ELF), joonas.plaan@elfond.ee, +372 5665 2979



NOTES


  1. Linkto ICES advice. 
  2. Western Baltic cod: Last year, ICES had advised no more than 24 tonnes catch for both recreational and commercial fishing. However, Ministers set a bycatch quota of 266 tonnes for 2025 to avoid limiting the flatfish fishery, which catches significant amounts of cod when using bottom trawls. As a result, commercial landings reached 155 tonnes in 2024, of which 123 tonnes are estimated to have been discarded—a practice that is illegal under the Common Fisheries Policy. ICES highlights that reducing cod bycatch in flatfish fisheries could enhance stock recovery.
  3. ICES advice for Central Baltic herring: a maximum of 154,542 tonnes for 2026 (taking account of the mixing between the Central Baltic herring and Gulf of Riga herring) vs 125,000 tonnes for 2025, sprat: a maximum of 230,518 tonnes vs 165,000 tonnes for 2025. Central Baltic herring biomass remains just above the critical conservation reference point, and with vulnerable sub-populations not being managed separately there is a risk that genetic diversity may be lost forever. ICES’s higher sprat advice is based on promising recruitment data from just one northeastern survey that may not reliably predict biomass increases across the entire Baltic stock area. 
  4. Gulf of Bothnia herring: ICES advises a decrease to a maximum of 62,684 tonnes for 2026 (down from 74,515 tonnes), noting fluctuating weight-at-age linked to changing prey availability. 
  5. Gulf of Riga herring: ICES limits 2026 catches to a maximum of 34,367 tonnes (down from 45,235 tonnes). Western Baltic spring-spawning herring (WBSS): ICES advises zero catch for 2026 and has done so since 2019. ICES highlights that without additional area and seasonal restrictions on the herring fishery in the North Sea in 2026, catches of WBSS herring in the North Sea will be unavoidable, delaying the recovery of the stock. 
  6. Art. 4.6 of the Baltic Sea Multiannual Plan requires fishing opportunities to be set in such a way that there is less than a 5% probability of the stock’s spawning biomass (SSB) falling below critical biomass levels (Blim).
  7. ICES headline advice for Central Baltic herring and Gulf of Bothnia herring does not take into account the safeguard under Art. 4.6 of the Baltic Sea Multiannual Plan, which requires fishing opportunities to be set in such a way that there is less than a 5% probability of the spawning stock biomass (SSB) falling below critical levels (Blim) – “the 5% rule”.  If fishing limits for Bothnian herring are set in line with the ICES headline advice of 55,869 to 62,684 tonnes, the probability of the spawning stock biomass falling below Blim in 2027 is 9-10%, well above the 5% legal limit. To comply with the law, the total catch in 2026 cannot exceed 25,560 tonnes. For Central Baltic herring, the probability of spawning biomass being below critical levels in 2027 after fishing the recommended 120,378 to 157,996 tonnes is 5.9-8.1%—also above the 5% rule. To comply, the total catch in 2026 must stay under 103,073 tonnes.
  8. ICES advises a maximum of 16,533 tonnes for the plaice quota in 2026. This is a decrease compared to the separate advice of 5,303 tonnes for subdivisions 24–32 and 20,062 tonnes for SD 21–23, given for 2025. 


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 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 Migratory Species (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 recruitment for “Elsewhere Europe” at 6.4 % and North Sea index 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 the Convention on the Conservation of Migration of Wild Animals (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 estimate 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.