Response to interpellation 2022/23:171 on measures to preserve the eel
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerned measures to preserve the eel. KD considers that Sweden has implemented extensive measures to reduce mortality 1 and wants to preserve the culture of eel fishing through limited fishing 2. KD opposes closing down hydropower plants and advocates for technology such as "trap-and-transport" 2, but argues that fishing is not the main problem as catches and the number of fishers have decreased drastically 3. MP considers that the eel's survival hangs by a thread and demands a total ban on all eel fishing as well as environmental adaptation of hydropower plants 4. MP argues that the eel is systematically slaughtered in hydropower plants 5. SD wants to protect both the eel and small-scale eel fishing 6 7. SD argues that a national ban does not save the eel but rather measures at the EU level 6. SD considers that increased control is needed as illegal fishing is as large as legal fishing 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Rebecka Le Moine has asked me what measures I will take to save the eel as a species, in line with what we have promised in the Montreal Agreement on biodiversity.
The eel's life cycle is complex, where every individual undergoes a number of different life stages and an extensive migration to and between different water areas from birth to growth, sexual maturity, and spawning. The European eel is found in inland waters, in coastal waters, and in the open ocean. It occurs in large parts of Europe, North Africa, and parts of Asia with drainage basins in the Mediterranean. All individuals migrate to and from the Sargasso Sea, which is the only area where the eel spawns. The amount of glass eels returning from the Sargasso Sea has decreased by over 95 percent since the 1970s.
The Government considers it important to implement measures to reduce the factors that affect mortality during all stages of the eel's life cycle. This includes measures to increase the migration of eel to its spawning grounds.
In accordance with Council Regulation (EC) 1100/2007 of 18 September 2007 on measures for the recovery of the European eel stock, Sweden has developed a national plan for the management of eel. Sweden had its plan approved by the European Commission in October 2009.
Mr. Speaker! Measures are being taken in line with the Swedish eel management plan and aim to accelerate the process of gradually rebuilding the European eel stock. Sweden has implemented and is implementing many measures within fisheries management that have resulted in reduced eel mortality. The Commission's evaluation of European eel management, which was reported in February 2020, confirms that Swedish eel mortality has decreased.
It is important that measures for the recovery of the European eel stock are implemented throughout the eel's entire distribution area and that the work to reduce mortality in the eel at all life stages continues. The Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management is responsible for eel management nationally as well as for the implementation of the EU eel regulation.
I want to emphasize the national work that continues to create better conditions for a long-term recovery of the eel stock. The Government has allocated funds for 2023 for the work of creating more passages and increasing the number of eels that reach the sea. At the same time, scientific follow-ups and an international evaluation of Swedish management of the European eel are being carried out. Improved knowledge of predation on eel is another important measure that is ongoing.
The Agriculture and Fisheries Council reached political agreements on 12 December 2022 on the establishment of a very large number of fishing opportunities in the Atlantic and the North Sea, as well as fishing opportunities in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. The agreement also covers adjustments to the prohibition period for eel fishing. It is the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management that has the government's mandate to implement the council's decision.
The Government considers that the measures in the national eel management plans could have a better effect if they were better coordinated. We therefore advocated that the EU's eel regulation as a whole should be reviewed to also include eel fishing in inland waters and other impacts on eel in order to collectively protect the eel stock. The Government considers that such a review should still provide the opportunity for a careful and sustainable Swedish eel fishery.
Rebecka Le Moine (MP)
Mr. Speaker! As we heard in the Minister's answer, the salmon population has decreased drastically. The salmon's survival now hangs by a very fragile thread. It could be enough with a new parasite, a disease, a warmer climate or, as it appears in this case, a new government. Therefore, we now need to apply the precautionary principle fully. We need to stop the poaching, stop all salmon fishing and environmentally adapt all hydroelectric power plants. We would need to gather to take measures to preserve the salmon.
From the Minister for Rural Affairs, it sounds as if we have all the time in the world to take measures; if we just continue to work according to established plans, everything will work itself out. We must realize that time is running out for the species. If we are to have a chance to preserve the salmon as a species, we must take all the measures we can - now.
Let us listen to the recommendations of science. It is very clear that a stop is needed for all seal fishing, in all habitats, in all life stages, and everywhere - now. It could hardly be any clearer than that, Mr. Speaker.
It means that there is no room for legal fishing or for poaching. There is also no room for the continued slaughter of eels by hydropower in the turbines. The eel stock is now at such low levels that we must take all measures to let the eel recover.
Mr. Speaker! It is not an opinion. It is directly quoted from science. Our role as politicians is to take this in and translate it into political action. But the government is conducting anti-eel policy, both in this parliament at the national level and in the EU's Council of Ministers at the European level. Before Christmas, the Swedish government tried to block the EU's proposal to extend the fishing ban for eel from three to six months. It is utterly embarrassing considering that we have signed a firm nature agreement at a global level where it is stated that we must now take all measures to stop species extinction and reverse the trend. Fortunately, Sweden did not succeed in blocking the initiative.
The government has also moved forward with the hydropower. They do not want to ensure that the hydropower turbines that slaughter the eels receive an environmental permit in accordance with today's legislation. They have said that the eel slaughter in our hydropower plants shall therefore continue.
The Minister highlights that Sweden has done a lot to reduce fishing. But that is not an argument for why we do not need to do more. It is highlighted that other countries need to take measures. That is also not an argument for why we do not need to do more. We need to be able to tell other countries: We are doing everything we can. Therefore, we want you to do the same.
In this situation, we also cannot select some measures to reduce the mortality of the eel and ignore others. We are in an emergency situation, to say the least, when it comes to the eel.
Since I myself have difficulty finding concrete measures from the government, my question to the Minister for Rural Affairs is: What plans and measures do you yourselves want to highlight and that you believe could contribute concretely to preserving the eel as a species?
Beatrice Timgren (SD)
Mr. Speaker! More and more voices are now being raised that absolutely all salmon fishing must be stopped. At the forefront of the line, as usual, stands Miljöpartiet. Is it not nuclear power, cars, aviation, forestry, or mines that should be stopped, but salmon fishing? Does Miljöpartiet want a society where one industry after another is strangled and sacrificed on the symbolic political altar? That is not what we want.
We can, however, state that the eel stock has been weakened. As the Minister says, it is important to take measures to protect the eel. This must be done in the eel's entire distribution area. A unilateral ban in Sweden does not solve the problem. It would not save the eel. It would not even have any effect on the eel stock. On the other hand, it would certainly eradicate the unique eel culture in southern Sweden. We want to protect both the eel and the small, cultural eel fishing in Sweden.
Swedish eel fishing is precisely small-scale. It is environmentally adapted, coastal, and artisanal fishing. It is conducted by small companies that use small boats and passive gear. It is a cultural heritage that contributes to tourism and benefits surrounding industries. This cultural heritage needs to be preserved. This, in turn, means that the eel stock must be protected.
Swedish Baltic Sea fishing of eel currently catches only 1 percent of the migrating silver eel. This means that Sweden's eel fishing is already low.
To truly protect the eel, regulations need to take place at the EU level. No total ban is needed in Sweden; instead, there must be measures at a supranational level.
We banned recreational fishing for eel as early as 2007, but eel fishing still continues in Europe, and only Denmark's recreational fishing is larger than the entire legal Swedish fishing. We view it positively that the new EU regulation will regulate eel fishing at a European level and thereby protect both the eel and small-scale eel fishing. But a national ban is not the right way to go.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to take up some parts that the government is working on and clarify what I said in my introduction. A broad work is underway to create better conditions for a long-term recovery of the eel stock in Sweden and in the entire distribution area. It is important to emphasize that Sweden's efforts alone cannot solve this problem.
Sweden has been positive towards taking measures to limit fishing, but at the same time, we have wanted a limited eel fishery to remain in order to preserve the culture and tradition of eel fishing. At the EU level, the government is working to ensure that the Commission promptly takes long-term measures through a review of the EU's existing eel regulation.
In the Commission's evaluation of the national eel plans, it is noted that Sweden has taken extensive measures. The work to create more passages for the eel is an important part. The lives of other disadvantaged species are also affected by the migration barriers.
It sounds as if the Green Party's solution to this is that we should shut down every hydroelectric power plant in Sweden. This government will not do that. Right now, we are in the middle of an energy crisis, and we need all the power we can get. On the other hand, we will utilize technology and measures with passengers. We use trap-and-transport, meaning that eels are captured, taken past the dangerous obstacles, and placed out again closer to the sea. Most recently, it was, I believe, closer to 20 tons of eel that were moved in that way.
It is a bit too strong to say that it is a slaughterhouse government that has now taken office. We can state that there is a broad majority in this chamber and in the EU Committee that stands behind the government's policy in these issues. It is a bit too many rhetorical points in such an important issue.
The government has this year allocated 300 million kronor in state support to local water conservation projects, which are used, among other things, for the restoration of aquatic environments. We have allocated 6 million kronor to a voluntary program for the purchase of eel fishing catches through transport and release aimed at reducing mortality.
These are just some of the measures being taken. I actually take offense at that type of political flippancy that one resorts to, suggesting that we would be one thing or the other. Direct that, if so, at practically everyone in this chamber except for just Miljöpartiet!
Rebecka Le Moine (MP)
Mr. Speaker! It is interesting that the Sweden Democrats are climate deniers, nature deniers, and environmental deniers in every way. It was impressive that one could nevertheless state that the population of eels has decreased. Yes, it has decreased by at least 95 percent.
It is also an impressive thought that one could protect the fishing of eel but not the eel itself. How can one preserve an eel fishery when there are no eels? The eel is the very basis for us to be able to keep this. We can absolutely have an eel fishery, but then we must start by preserving the eel as a species.
It is also nice that we get some inspiration here. I have never said "eel-slaughter government," but that was an inventive word. I do, however, think the government is conducting an active eel-depletion policy. I see nothing in the Minister for Rural Affairs' speech that speaks against it.
It is very nice that one invests in LOVA and LONA, but it is a bit like catching mosquitoes and slaughtering eels, if I may express myself so bluntly.
I can state that we have paused the hydropower review. It is precisely about eels and other fish being able to get past the turbines. Most of our hydropower plants do not have permits according to today's legislation, but they are based on water rights that can be more than 100 years old. At that time, we had a lot of fish. We had a completely different situation for the eel. The entire process is now about granting permits for the hydropower.
No, Miljöpartiet does not want to abolish hydropower. On the other hand, we want to have industries that comply with today's laws. I hope that the Christian Democrats and the government parties also agree that we should have industries that meet today's legal requirements. It is not much to ask.
Regarding the eel, there is a lot of talk about the measures where they transport eel fry here and release them somewhere. That can be fine. It is usually a type of environmental measure that the old hydropower decisions have specified. In order to continue with their power plant operations, they must transport eel fry here and release them.
The problem is that we do not know if they find their way to the Sargasso Sea. They have been transported here by boat and by truck, often confined in a small space. As soon as they then try to begin their migration, they are slaughtered in the water turbines, if not in the first power plant, then in one of the power plants that follow. The probability that they grow into eels that can reproduce is extremely small. This measure is heavily criticized even from a research perspective.
Given that ICES, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, requires a stop to all eel fishing, I now wonder if the Minister for Rural Affairs and the government are also prepared to stop this criticized measure. It is not a real measure to strengthen the species. We take fry in one place and release them somewhere else. They do not get the opportunity to reproduce. That means the species does not increase in number. The whole thing is just a type of greenwashing that persists because it is considered an environmental measure for hydropower.
If one had continued the process of granting permits for hydropower according to today's environmental legislation, we might also have dealt with this. But the question is: Is the government and the Minister for Rural Affairs also ready to ban the fishing of ålyngel?
Beatrice Timgren (SD)
Mr. Speaker! I want to be clear. We want to protect both the eel and small-scale eel fishing - with an emphasis on small-scale - because without eel, there will be no eel fishing either.
Eel is a single stock, and a total ban in Sweden would have a negligible effect. But it would wipe out the small-scale cultural eel fishing that we have in Sweden. Sweden has already taken many measures in comparison with many other countries; for example, we have introduced better controls. But unfortunately, the illegal eel fishing is approximately as large as the legal, which indicates that increased controls are important and needed.
The interpellator also mentions hydropower plants. It is a problem that eels die in hydropower turbines. The interpellator also mentions the pause and the reassessment as a problem. I want to remind the member that when the Riksdag in 2018 made the decision on the reassessment of hydropower plants that would benefit, among other things, fish and fish migration, we had a completely different situation regarding the electricity supply. But then something happened. What happened was that Miljöpartiet got its policy through. Nuclear reactors and thermal power plants were closed. Due to Miljöpartiet's policy, there is no room today to carry out the reassessment. A pause is therefore necessary until we have a clear picture of how the reassessment will affect the electricity system.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I just want to mention a few figures so that potential listeners do not completely fall for the interpellant's picture of what has been done during this time and under previous governments, both the Social Democratic government that sat just before we took office and the government that the Green Party sat in.
It may be worth reminding that I went down and negotiated this issue and the latest fishing quotas. The interpellor wants to pretend that we were not at all negotiable or had any discussion. Yes, we did, just as you and I had a discussion in the EU Committee before I was given the mandate to go down and negotiate. You know what the Swedish position was.
We noted that an extended fishing ban might not be the most important thing for us to achieve better conditions for the eel in all of Europe, but we also noted in the conversations that if it becomes so, we will try to place it in as good a way as possible so that we can preserve our small-scale fishing.
It is therefore during our time in government that we, together in the EU, have extended the ban on eel fishing. We had a different approach, clearly. We had different measures. But this is something Miljöpartiet did not succeed with during its years in government. It shows that you are quite alone in the rather extreme measures that you want to take. You aim and release large bombs without hitting the target.
Swedish fishing is not the main problem for the Swedish eel. We have controls. We have weighing. We do not take all too small eels, which is what is done in many other places, just as has been mentioned in the debate.
The total catches of fish have decreased by 87 percent. In the sea, it is a decrease from 825 tons to barely 52 tons - approximately a 94 percent decrease. The number of persons with permission to fish for eel in the sea has decreased by just over 76 percent since 2007. These are quite dramatic changes that have been made.
I am not saying that this is wrong. I am not saying that it is enough. We want to do more with the eel management plans. It is clear that we will continue to work to ensure that other human impacts besides fishing also minimize eel mortality. That is not a question of anything else. But the solution is not that we should not be able to fish for eel in a sustainable and limited way in Sweden. There are other measures that can provide more and better effect.
Rebecka Le Moine (MP)
Mr. Speaker! First, I want to be pleased that I have, at least during this debate, reached the Sweden Democrats, who finally acknowledge that without eels, there will be no eel fishing. That is at least positive.
However, people speak about the review of hydropower as if it would have resulted in all energy coming from hydropower being decommissioned. That is not the case. In that regard, I would like to refer to the fact that one can read a little about the issue. It is therefore not about all at all that we would face a shortage of energy from hydropower.
I return to the Minister for Rural Affairs' speech. Yes, one can say that Sweden is doing well, and for that reason, perhaps one does not want to do more. But 195 tons of eel were fished up in Sweden in 2020. An additional 93 tons of eel were killed in the hydroelectric power plants. That is 288 tons of eel. Those are completely incredible figures. If one does not rave about the eel, one can look at other examples. What would we have said if it were other endangered animals, for example tigers, that had been shot or slaughtered as systematically as we slaughter the eel? I believe the reactions would have been different then.
Yes, the extreme line that Sweden's government has pursued in the EU has absolutely been anchored. And we can agree with each other, Peter Kullgren, that Miljöpartiet is in the minority when it comes to standing up for all species and their survival.
We are talking a bit about illegal fishing, and I understand that the government and its representatives lack a PM. Therefore, I want to take the opportunity to hand over a eel-PM, which I hope will come in handy.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I shall summarize this. The Government wants to emphasize that a major national effort continues to create better conditions for a long-term recovery of the eel stock. At the same time, we are working within the EU for a long-term recovery of the stock there as well.
We need to manage all the factors that affect the stock. This needs to happen in all parts of the eel's life cycle, in all areas and in all countries. To achieve this, the measures need to be better coordinated. These tools exist within the EU's eel regulation, but it needs to be reviewed as a whole to also include eel fishing in inland waters and other impacts on the stock.
This is judged to be the most effective measure to accelerate the process of gradually rebuilding a European eel stock throughout the distribution area.
This is an important issue for the government, as we want to preserve a small-scale and careful eel fishery that can endure and contribute to living coastal and rural communities.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.