Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

AddedBF. whereas Russia unilaterally decides on quotas, disregarding scientific advice and consistently setting quotas exceeding MSY, potentially risking the recovery of Baltic Sea fish stocks;

AddedBG. whereas the activity of Russia’s so-called shadow fleet has increased since Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; whereas this fleet operates obsolete vessels that fail to meet safety standards and are used to transport crude oil and petroleum products across the Baltic Sea, with minimal regard for safety, environmental and regulatory standards, poses a serious risk to the marine environment and regional fisheries due to the ageing and poorly maintained condition of its vessels, and also raises concerns with regards to fisheries in the context of the necessary recovery of the Baltic Sea fish stocks and the overall security of the Baltic Sea, with the potential for catastrophic consequences in the event of an oil spill that could affect all countries in the region;

Urgent actions

Change 3

Changed1. Calls on the Commission and the Council to use all available legal tools to stop any further deterioration that would risk a total collapse ofensure the Baltic Sea fish stocks, including by using delegatedeffective acts,use jointof recommendationsall andexisting Articlesavailable 5legal and 8 of the Baltic MAP Regulation, themanagement provisionstools, underincluding Articletargeted 12measures, ofusing thea CFPscience-based andapproach Memberas Statewell initiativesas througheffective Articlesstakeholder 8,consultation, 11,to 13,prevent 17any andfurther 20decline ofin the CFP, either unilaterally or via regionalisationBaltic throughSea Articlefish 18;stocks;

Change 4

Removed2. Urges the Commission to halt the business-as-usual approach to continued fishing in the Baltic Sea and instead move to a recovery and rebuilding phase;

Added2. Calls on the Commission together with the Member States to assess how the distribution of quotas among fleet segments in the Baltic Sea has evolved and to determine whether a causal link between the pressure on the resources and the national distribution policy of fishing opportunities exists;

Removed3. Calls for the urgent implementation of precautionary buffers as a response to recent, repeated and structural overestimation of stock size and productivity of most Baltic fish stocks that have led to years of undetected overfishing; urges the Council to set TACs at least 50 % below FMSY on all stocks falling below trigger levels noted in the Baltic MAP Regulation;

Added3. Urges the Commission and the Member States when implementing the Baltic MAP Regulation to move to a recovery and rebuilding phase for fish stocks, taking measures and actions based on the best available scientific advice, as well as taking other potential interlinked actions related to other EU or national legislation to address all stressors on fish stocks; calls on the Commission and the Member States, when implementing the above-mentionned recovery and rebuilding phase, to consider remedial measures based on the best available science such as suspending targeted fisheries for some stocks in the Baltic Sea as provided for in the MAP, avoiding measures that could undermine the socio-economic stability of coastal communities so as to ensure that fishing activities for human consumption remain sustainable;

Removed4. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to consider launching emergency measures in accordance with Articles 12 and 13 of the CFP and to swiftly prepare action by analysing the costs and benefits of closing the majority of the fisheries, noting lost revenues, livelihoods, food security and the future cost of inaction;

Added4. Calls for the mobilisation of social and financial support, including support for affected communities, local investment, temporary compensation and bridging aid for fishers in line with EU rules to prevent undue hardship and preserve cultural heritage; notes that while temporary measures address immediate ecological concerns, permanent cessation tools are designed to adjust fishing capacity with fishing opportunities in the long-term; calls therefore for a clear separation between temporary and permanent cessation in support schemes;

Removed5. Calls on the Commission to prepare a list of further remedial measures, as noted in Article 5 of the Baltic MAP Regulation, that can be applied based on provisions in existing legislation to achieve a recovery of stocks currently at critical levels in the Baltic Sea;

Added5. Stresses that any measures concerning stock recovery must take into account the unique and basin-specific hydrological and chemical conditions of the Baltic Sea, as a semi-enclosed brackish sea characterised by limited water exchange, anoxic zones and persistent sediment contamination that are specific to this basin and not comparable to those of other EU sea basins;

Removed6. Highlights that such remedial measures must include the creation of fish stock recovery areas and closures focusing on winter and pre-spawning aggregation areas, as well as spawning and nursery areas, aligned with provisions in the nature restoration law;

Added6. Calls on the Council to adopt TACs that are fully aligned with the precautionary approach, taking into account the vulnerability of the Baltic Sea ecosystem, socio-economic factors, and the slow recovery rates of stocks as well as the scientific uncertainty of advice; calls on the Commission to carefully consider socio-economic aspects when evaluating the current MAP; underlines the need for a balanced approach between environmental and socio-economic factors, as set out in Article 2 of the CFP Regulation;

Removed7. Reminds the Commission to of the necessity of safeguarding human consumption fisheries with limited landings, allowing such fisheries to operate during rebuilding phases, thereby supporting a just transition to a low-carbon, low-impact fishing fleet;

Added7. Stresses that setting multiannual quotas based on the best-available science could give marine ecosystems in the Baltic Sea time to recover and provide businesses with the stability they need to plan investments, maintain employment and maintain port infrastructure; stresses that the development of such management measures should include effective, timely and systematic stakeholder consultation;

RemovedChanging the scientific advice

Added8. Calls on the Member States and the Commission, taking into account the shortcomings of the Baltic MAP Regulation in terms of reaching its ecological and socio-economic objectives, to consider launching measures in accordance with Articles 12 and 13 of the CFP whenever best available scientific advice indicates the need for such measures, and to prepare action by analysing the costs and benefits of closing relevant fisheries, including for recreational fisheries, noting lost revenues, livelihoods, food security and the future cost of inaction;

Removed8. Urges the Commission to immediately ask ICES to develop an ecosystem based, multi-species advice, informed by environmental change, with ecosystem-based reference points and ecosystem-adjusted fishing mortality, as well as for complementary indicators aligning the Baltic MAP Regulation with MSFD requirements, for example to include large fish indicators;

Added9. Calls for the prevention of irreversible ecological damage to herring and sprat populations in the Baltic Sea in order to secure the long-term viability of coastal and small-scale fisheries targeting those species and safeguarding marine food webs; believes that, based on scientific advice, recovery pauses for the respective stocks must be urgently considered, until scientific evidence demonstrates a clear and sustained recovery of the stocks;

Removed9. Calls on the Commission to ask ICES for precautionary buffers in the scientific advice and abolish any use of ranges above MSY, and for advice on setting ‘ecosystem caps’ limiting the total biomass that can be removed from an ecosystem;

Added10. Highlights in this regard that to be as effective as possible, remedial measures require appropriate stakeholder involvement and must be based on the best available science in order to achieve their objectives; highlights furthermore the option of creating science-based fish-stock-recovery areas and temporary fishing closures in the Baltic Sea, focusing on winter and pre-spawning aggregation areas with a view to maintaining stable recruitment and a healthy age structure, as well as passive and active restoration measures including in spawning and nursery areas, aligned with provisions in relevant EU environmental legislation; highlights the importance of accompanying such measures with appropriate and timely compensation in line with relevant EU provisions;

Removed10. Calls on the Commission to require that all stock assessments use the BMSY biomass reference points, as reflected in the objectives of the Baltic MAP Regulation and the CFP;

Added11. Recalls the EU’s commitments and targets in terms of area coverage and effectiveness of MPAs; encourages the proper implementation of effective management measures in current MPAs in the Baltic Sea, as well as the designation of additional MPAs in line with EU commitments; highlights that this designation should be based on scientific assessments showing critical habitats or spawning grounds; points out the need for effective management measures combined with pilot projects for selective and low-impact fishing gear inspired by successful initiatives in the North Sea and the Skagerrak;

Removed11. Calls on the Commission to request scientific advice that clearly highlights the risks related to the current state of the environment and the increased uncertainty due to climate change;

Added12. Highlights the importance of maintaining viable small-scale fisheries with limited landings in the region, allowing them to operate during rebuilding phases; recalls relevant provisions of the revised Fisheries Control Regulation and their full and effective implementation; stresses that these fisheries are crucial for livelihoods, resilience of traditional supply chains and preserving jobs in coastal fishing communities and that they have particular social and cultural value; points out that strengthening these fisheries can garner greater added value for local economies; highlights the importance of the 3 pillars of sustainable development in line with Article 2 of the CFP;

Removed12. Calls on the Commission to ask for a revision of the current harvest control rules, acknowledging that this is an internal ICES process insofar as it is dependent on new legislative rules or a changed interpretation of existing rules;

Added13. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to give priority to improving the socio-economic situation of small-scale coastal fishers; highlights the importance of fishing opportunities and fishing zones in coastal areas for small operators; highlights that Member States can achieve these improvements through their national quota allocations in line with Article 17 CFP, as well as through investments in selective and low-impact gear;

Change 5

Changed13.14. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to requestfurther ICESstrengthen the implementation of the landing obligation to developtackle aillegal guidancediscarding notein forthe MemberBaltic StatesSea, andrecognising the Commissionneed onfor howworkable tomeasures, interpretto scientificsupport adviceselectivity soand asreduce tounwanted becatches, inand lineto withimplement the ecosystemrelevant andprovisions precautionaryon approaches,this whilematter rebuildingin line with the resilienceCFP ofand the BalticFisheries Sea;Control Regulation;

Change 6

Removed14. Calls on the Commission to consider developing clear and transparent rules for TAC-setting, closely aligned with the objectives of the Baltic MAP Regulation and according to a new ecosystem-based multi-species advice; asks the Council to publish annual reports explaining and justifying TAC decisions and other measures, so as to make the TAC-setting procedure and BALTFISH discussions open and transparent to the general public and to make Member States accountable for their decisions;

Added15. Highlights the role of the European Ocean Pact in fostering a holistic approach and a regenerative and sustainable blue economy in the Baltic Sea, with targeted actions to restore fish stocks and reduce environmental pressures; notes that the implementation of the objectives of the Ocean Pact and the Competitiveness Compass requires adequate financial support for the development of a resilient maritime economy that is viable over the long term, as well as to foster innovation, modernisation, decarbonisation and digitalisation;

Change 7

Changed15.16. Calls on the Member StatesCommission and the CommissionMember States to basereduce anythe approachadministrative toburden naturaland predationensure onbetter science,coordination prioritisingacross preventive,policies non-lethalto andstrengthen locallythe targetedresilience, measures,competitiveness and tolong-term ensuresustainability adequateof monitoring,the fundingBaltic andSea stakeholderregion cooperationin tothe implementface effectiveof mitigationecological practices;and market challenges;

Change 8

Added17. Calls on the Commission as the guardian of the Treaties, to act in accordance with the Treaties in cases where the Council and the Member States are in breach of EU rules such as the rules of the Baltic MAP;

Added18. Calls on the Member States to ensure the full and effective implementation of the EU fisheries control regulation, including provisions addressing misreporting of catches and strengthening the accuracy and reliability of catch reporting in the region;

AddedImproving the scientific advice

Added19. Underlines the importance of basing fisheries management on the best available scientific advice and the pivotal role of ICES in ensuring scientific coherence, as well as the importance of fishers’ knowledge; highlights the importance of the independence of ICES; calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure that updated and necessary scientific fishing data are available for ICES in order to continue improving its advice and ensure the timely availability of high-quality scientific assessments; calls on the Commission to make all its requests for scientific advice from ICES publicly available to also allow for an open dialogue;

Added20. Urges the Commission to immediately request that ICES, in its deliberations on the memorandum of understanding, further develop ecosystem-based, multi-species advice as well as advice on stock recovery, recognising environmental variability and food web interactions, to explore the use of ecosystem-based reference points and ecosystem-adjusted fishing mortality data tailored for the Baltic and specific species interactions, and to also include complementary indicators based on other relevant EU rules such as the MSFD, for example to include large fish indicators as well as age and size distribution indicators; highlights that any such advice should remain transparent and predictable for the sector and avoid overestimation subsequently leading to undue catch limits and business uncertainty;

Added21. Calls on the Commission, in the case of the Baltic Sea, to request from ICES advice for precautionary buffers related to the uncertainty of the scientific advice, as well as the uncertainty of recruitment and biomass trajectory, as well as advice on the effects of not using ranges above MSY and all relevant consequences, avoiding rigid or automatic reductions that disregard socio-economic realities; stresses that MSY remains an important tool for adaptive and responsible management; calls furthermore on the Commission to request from STECF relevant socio-economic analyses for the Baltic Sea;

Added22. Calls on the Commission to base all stock assessments used for implementing EU law on BMSY biomass reference points, as reflected in the objectives of Article 3(1) of the Baltic MAP Regulation and Article 2(2) of the CFP;

Added23. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the management of Baltic Sea fish stocks includes targets for the restoration of natural size and age distributions within populations in line with Article 2(5)(j) of the CFP that refers to Article 1(1) of the MSFD, recognising that healthy population structures contribute to reproductive capacity, stock resilience and ecosystem stability; encourages the development of monitoring indicators and more selective fishing practices developed in cooperation with the sector that can reduce the systematic removal of larger and older fish and better protect the recruitment potential of the stock;

Added24. Calls on the Commission, for the purpose of implementing EU law including the Baltic MAP Regulation, to request scientific advice from ICES that considers relevant environmental and ecosystem stressors in the Baltic Sea; considers that this advice should clearly highlight and reflect, among other factors, risks related to the current state of the environment, land-sea interaction, the increased uncertainty due to climate change and the impact of species interactions including relevant predator populations; emphasises that any advice should also clearly communicate the respective level of uncertainty;

Added25. Calls on the Commission to consult with ICES within the framework of the existing memorandum of understanding to encourage the regular update of their technical guidelines for harvest control rules and the further refinement of stock assessment methods based on independent scientific criteria; notes that it is important that ICES – when delivering advice to the Commission or the Member States – use the most up-to-date approaches for the Baltic Sea, and that they remain scientifically sound and consistent with the EU fisheries legal framework; acknowledges that this is an internal ICES process;

Added26. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to initiate a comprehensive genetic population mapping in the Baltic Sea of certain commercially exploited species, including herring and sprat, as well as other commercially exploited species, based on the best available scientific knowledge, and to supplement evidence-based advice for better informed decisions on fishing opportunities and on technical measures; stresses that such genetic data must be fully validated by ICES and integrated into long-term stock assessment models before being used for management purposes;

Added27. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to enhance the availability and quality of data regarding age and size criteria for the stocks concerned in preparation of fisheries management decisions for the region; highlights that improved data collection on these parameters should support the integration of MSFD Descriptor 3 Criterion 3 (D3C3) as required by Article 3(3) of the Baltic MAP;

Added28. Calls on the Commission to request that ICES produce a detailed scientific analysis of the current EU approach to utilising scientific advice for the Baltic Sea; calls furthermore on the Commission to ensure that requested advice on catch levels fully reflects all relevant legal requirements and policy objectives including the objectives of the CFP as set out in Article 2; points out the importance for the Commission of addressing possible shortcomings and outlining concrete actions on how the currently available advice on fishing opportunities can be used in a sufficiently precautionary way to meet all relevant legal requirements and objectives;

Added29. Encourages the Commission and the Council to ensure that TAC-setting is transparent and grounded in the best available scientific advice and knowledge according to the objectives of the Baltic MAP Regulation and the CFP, and according to ecosystem-based multi-species advice, and takes into account interactions between fisheries and the long-term socio-economic stability of coastal communities;

Added30. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take into consideration relevant international work and definitions, including that of UNEP, when further developing the understanding of ecosystem-based management within the existing EU legal framework such as on functioning ecosystems as noted in Article 5(5)(a) MSFD;

AddedOther factors impacting Baltic Sea fisheries

Added31. Requests that the Commission develop a science-based, coordinated and cross-sectoral plan that addresses key stressors affecting the Baltic Sea while ensuring inclusive governance and maritime spatial planning, engaging and cooperating with all relevant stakeholders;

Added32. Calls on the Commission to utilise the opportunity to support improved policy coordination and coherent implementation of marine and water-related policies through the upcoming legislative proposal for an Ocean Act;

Added33. Calls for effective climate change mitigation and adaptation measures to address climate-related risks in a timely manner and avoid the escalating risks and costs of delayed action in the region;

Added34. Calls for the continued and effective implementation of EU environmental legislation while recognising the need for balanced and workable solutions for all affected sectors to address environmental pressures in the Baltic Sea and other EU waters, including nutrient pollution from multiple sources;

Added35. Calls for a significant increase in investment in modern sewage treatment plants and pollution retention and filtration systems, both in the Baltic Sea countries and in all river basins discharging water into the Baltic Sea; stresses that without the comprehensive modernisation of water and sewage infrastructure, all efforts to improve the quality of the Baltic Sea’s waters will remain merely declarative and ineffective;

Added36. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to base any approach to natural predation on science and stakeholder consultations, including preventive, locally anchored and targeted management measures for great cormorants and grey seals, ensuring that any measures adopted are effective, fulfil all legal obligations, and include adequate monitoring, dedicated and adequate funding and strengthened stakeholder cooperation, to ensure the effectiveness of the implemented measures, including mitigation practices such as deterrents or physical exclusion;

Added37. Reiterates its call on the Commission to propose an EU great cormorant management plan for Baltic Sea fisheries and aquaculture, based on the best available scientific advice and Member State practices, taking into consideration the plan recently proposed by the Food and Agriculture Organization’s European Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Advisory Commission (EIFAAC as well as previous EU-funded research projects such as ‘INTERCAFE’; stresses the need for preventive measures, compensation for losses, and funding from EU and national sources;

Added38. Reiterates the grave environmental and safety risks posed by unexploded ordnance (UXO) dumped in the Baltic Sea; recalls its resolution of 27 April 2021 on chemical residues in the Baltic Sea and the successful CHEMSEA, DAIMON and DAIMON 3 projects; urges the Commission and the Member States to take further coordinated and practical measures to systematically locate, assess and monitor these hazardous materials to prioritise areas for remediation;

Added39. Calls for joint efforts by Member States and the Commission to support the development of scientific research and exchange best practices on safe and cost-effective ways to identify and remove munitions and unexploded ordnance (UXO) from the seafloor with a view to enabling coordinated large-scale remediation actions;

Added40. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to launch a coordinated, long-term, adequately funded EU programme aimed at identifying, neutralising and removing Baltic Sea UXO;

Added41. Condemns Russia’s irresponsible, unsustainable and unscientific exploitation of Baltic Sea fish stocks;

Added42. Calls on the Council and the Commission to consider the unilateral actions of Russia when setting quotas for the Baltic Sea; further calls on the Commission to consider actions aimed at pressuring Russia to bring quotas in line with scientific advice;