Try to have a conversation in a noisy bar – that‘s the situation a whale is constantly living in

CCB • June 30, 2022

Underwater noise – an issue that is more dangerous for marine animals that we might think

30 June 2022 - At the United Nations Ocean Conference 2022, Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB), altogether with Ocean Care and BUND – Friends of the Earth Germany organized the side event “Reduce Ocean Noise & Save Our Ocean”, which was the only event focused on such topic and brought a hall full of listeners. The event started by listening the recordings of the harbor porpoise sounds and the noise of only one bigger ship passing by – the audience could evaluate how loud it sounds and how it spreads under the water.

Marine animals “cannot shut the window”

The Representative from the German Environmental Agency and Former Chair of HELCOM, Lilian Busse, made the opening speech drawing the attention to the updated Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP), which has more than 200 actions set to achieve a ‘good environmental status’ in the Baltic Sea and 9 of them are meant to minimize the issue of underwater noise.


“This is the easy problem, because when you end noise pollution – it stops immediately. As you know, it is not the same with hazardous substances or plastic pollution”- stressed Lilian Busse.

Bettina Taylor, from the organization BUND - Friends of the Earth Germany, explained why we need to reduce underwater noise.


“We know very well, how noise affects us. We cannot concentrate or sleep when there is noise. Underwater noise comes either from shipping, or from big underwater explosions, seismic surveys that are made to explore ocean floor in the search of oil and gas - then it’s called impulsive noise. In the 1990s, a researcher did an experiment by putting a loud acoustic device in the Southern Indian Ocean: the sound spread around the world to the East coasts of South and North America so as to the coasts of Australia,” – said Bettina Taylor.


She noted that marine animals cannot shut the window when it is noisy – they simply cannot escape that. The noise can disturb an animal – but it also poses a risk of dying if or, for example, an animal is so stressed out that it stops hunting. Moreover, noise underwater accumulates, different sounds strengthens the effect of one another.


Bettina Taylor urged to act to reduce underwater noise, as there is already enough scientific data to prove that is a threat to marine animals. She proposed to ban seismic surveys completely because – “when we phase out coal, there is no need to explore for new deposits of gas and oil“.


150 species are affected by underwater noise

Afterwards, Sharon Livermore, Program Officer at IFAW (International Fund for Animal Welfare) talked about how dangerous for marine animals is noise caused by shipping.


The propeller of the ship and the water movement (air bubbles) usually causes noise. In recent years, global underwater noise has risen by 20 decibels. “The noise spreads easily, especially through cold water environments and at the moment it dominates the background noise” – said S. Livermore.


This noise is stronger and dominates the sounds that marine animals receive and spread by themselves: to locate, to find a mate, to hunt, to feed their calves. That is why underwater noise poses a threat not only to individual animals, but to entire populations.


“A study showed that between 1992 and 2012 the number of ships travelling across the oceans grew by 60%” – noted S. Livermore. – If we count only the Indian Ocean, it’s a 300 % increase in ship traffic. The reason why shipping has increased in this way, it’s the growth of international trade. But we must understand that with increased shipping traffic, air pollution, water pollution and noise pollution rise altogether.”


Approximately, 150 marine species are affected by underwater noise, causing increased stress and behavioural changes. The most acoustically sensitive species are whales, dolphins and porpoises. Underwater noise can affect feeding behaviour, as well as their movements and the level of stress in these animals.


„Remember trying to have a conversation in a noisy bar. We all know how difficult it is. We have to raise our voice to be heard and we can barely hear ourselves. This is the constant life of a whale. Sound is their primary sense – if they cannot detect a mate, it has a negative impact for the population“ – noted S. Livermore.


The easiest solution – to reduce the speed of large ships

Whales have the so called ‚acoustic bubble‘ around them. It‘s the area from which they can receive their sounds or be heard themselves. Some studies in the North Atlantic Ocean have shown that the acoustic bubble of the whales had shrunk exponentially after the industrialization of the Ocean.


Another example was the researches made after the 9/11 events in the United States of America, when all the shippings near the coast of New York coast stopped after the terrorist attack for security reasons. Marine scientists used this opportunity and found out that the amount of stress related to hormones in whales decreased sharply during this period.


„This cannot be explained by anything else: shipping causes biological response (stress hormones) in whales“ – noted S. Livermore. As underwater noise can spread long distances, an international law is needed to address this problem.


„There are immediate solutions that could be approved very quickly – such as reducing the speed of ships by 10%. If we can reduce the speed of the ships – we could reach a 40% reduction of their noise” – said S. Livermore. She added that this measure could also help to reduce ship collisions with whales and greenhouse gas emissions – so it’s three benefits for the environment from just one solution. More complex solutions can be changing the technical features and the design of the new ships to make them more silent.


First area where changes can be adopted – corridor for migration in the Mediterranean Sea

Another speaker at the event, the representative from the OceanCare organization, Carlos Bravo, talked about the area-based noise reduction measures, which were already implemented in one of the coasts in Spain, in the Medittereanean Sea.


“In recent years there were many oil and gas projects started in the Spanish Mediterranean waters. But after the opposition of the private sector, the civil society and non-governmental organizations, stressing the harm to the environment and the negative impact for climate change, the Spanish government banned the search of any new oil and gas fields” – said C. Bravo.


After this success, migration corridor, meant for penguins and other species, was created near the coast of Catalonia, called a cetacean migration corridor. The area covers 46 000 square kilometres.


Ocean Care communicates with government to limit the speed of ships in this area would no more than 10 knots. C. Bravo hopes that Italy, France, Monaco, and other countries that are situated around the corridor would also adopt this ship speed limitation. Although the threat of impulsive noise by search of oil and gas fields was removed, intense shipping continues, with 24 passenger ferries, travelling from Catalonia and Valencia to the Balearic Islands, plus a great number of cargo ships reaching big ports, such as Barcelona and Valencia.


“Shipping is an important way of transportation, but it absolutely rely on fossil fuels. The report issued by the European Maritime Safety Agency and the European Environmental Agency in September last year showed that underwater noise has doubled in the period from 2014 to 2019. It is an increasing problem. There are, of course, technical measures that can be implemented, but we are promoting the most cost-effective and immediate solution: speed reduction” – explained C. Bravo.   


What can be changed? The design of the ship, but not the propeller

The event included also a panel discussion, with  Frederik Haag, (IMO), Bev Mackenzie, (BIMCO), Mattias Rust (Swedish Ministry of Infrastructure) and Carlos Bravo (OceanCare).


Bev Mackenzie said that they try to measure the noise, because noise is a form of energy, and ships do not want to lose it. BIMCO is collaborating with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and is willing to implement the guidelines this organization will set. BIMCO is also looking forward to implement the new design of the newly built ships in order to reduce the noise they make. „But it‘s really hard to change propellers or other technical parts of the existing old ships, so I think we should search for a combination of design changes for new ships and operational measures for the old ones“ – said Bev Mackenzie.


Frederic Haag, representative of International Maritime organization (IMO), said that the measures for noise reduction are not yet implemented in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), but they could be implemented, when the stakeholders will agree and decide which of the measures would work best. „We rely on shipping to receive our medicines and goods, so we need a measure which is appropriate“ – added Frederic Haag.


Mattias Rust, from the Swedish Ministry of Infrastructure was honest: the underwater noise issue is on the agenda of HELCOM and the European Commission, but for the Ministers of EU countries it still has to reach a higher level of urgency, there is a need for more data provided, showing the severe harms for marine animals.


„Our members are willing to support such measures, applied internationally. National regulations are challenging for shipping: ships don‘t necessarily keep the same routes, don‘t always have the same crew. We unite 60% of the cargo ships, but if the rest of the ships will not follow the new rules because it’s cheaper, the problem will not be solved”, - said Bev Mackenzie from BIMCO.


Underwater noise – measures are almost ready, but we also need awareness raising

So why the measure of reduction of the speed cannot be approved immediately?


Frederic Hag explained that when they are trying to make a new rule globally, it takes longer than one could expect. But as IMO is now reviewing the guidelines for ships, it’s easy to take this “one step further”, although that it is beneficial both for environment and economically.


„Shipping industry is a commercial activity. And in my last meetings I‘ve learned that even when they want to adopt various green initiatives and they offer them for their clients, clients do not buy it. That‘s why I think we must invest more in awareness raising“ – added M. Rust.


***

Article written by Inga Labutytė-Atkočaitienė, Lithuanian Fund for Nature and CCB Communication Group Coordinator

NGOs urge stronger action as 2027 Baltic Sea fishing limits fall short of securing full recovery of fish populations

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 .

CCB's submission on sustainable fishing in the EU

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 .