Response to interpellation 2024/25:69 on the fight against quagga mussels in Mälaren
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the control of the invasive species quagga mussel in Mälaren and other watercourses. L informs that the government has proposed 10 million kronor annually to combat invasive species 1. L emphasizes the importance of covering the stocks to shade the plants, as mechanical methods risk spreading the species 1. L wants to improve the strategic work and cooperation between authorities and municipalities 2. S argues that 30 million kronor are needed to eradicate the quagga mussel in Mälaren and Arbogaån and that it is urgent that the quagga mussel is included in the national list by spring 2025 at the latest 3. S believes that it is now the ideal time for interventions as a disease recently reduced the stocks by 30 percent 3. S criticizes the government's climate policy for increasing emissions. L rejects this and argues that emissions decreased during 2022 and 2023 and that they are expected to decrease until 2030 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! Åsa Eriksson has asked me what I intend to do to facilitate the financing of the fight against quagga mussels in Mälaren and other watercourses.
In the government's budget bill for 2025, there is a proposal for additional investments of 10 million kronor per year during the period 2025-2027 to effectively combat and prevent the spread of invasive alien species in aquatic environments in Sweden.
In order to understand how great a challenge the extinction of the sea trout is for the authorities, I would like to begin by informing the Chamber a little about the species' ecology and occurrence in the country, as well as something about what measures are being taken today.
Sjögull is one of several invasive alien species that have spread in our lakes and watercourses with human help. It thrives in calm waters and is found today in parts of Götaland as well as Svealand with, among other things, about twenty populations in western Mälaren. When it gets opportunities to establish itself in a new growing site, it quickly covers large water surfaces and then competes with naturally occurring species.
The methods for combating seaweed involve trying to cover the stocks so that the plants are shaded and eventually die from lack of light. The method is cumbersome, but the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management, together with the county administrative boards, which perform the practical work, have stated that it is safer than using mechanical methods. There is a high risk that the situation will worsen if the plants are removed mechanically because seaweed spreads easily with small plant parts. The covering methods that exist today do not work, however, in running water, where the water level varies over time. The efforts there are primarily about preventing further spread. The movement of both pleasure boats and shipping also increases the risk of spread, and attempts have been made to redirect boat traffic around existing stocks.
The work with invasive alien species is important for preserving biodiversity. In the Government Offices, proposals from the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management regarding a national list of invasive alien species are currently being prepared, where the list also covers which regulations shall apply to each species. Sea buckthorn is included among these proposals, which have been referred to approximately 150 authorities.
In the current situation, I cannot anticipate the preparatory process and therefore do not want to speculate on which species could be included in such a national list and what regulations may come to apply to these. We already see, however, that the regulations governing the species on the EU's list of invasive alien species are an important tool for preventing the introduction and spread of the species concerned.
We must also remember that information campaigns aimed at the general public regarding the risks of moving boats in existing stocks with sea buckthorn can be very cost-effective and result in reduced spread, which in turn reduces the need for costly eradication efforts.
Åsa Eriksson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the Environment for the answer.
I hardly believed when I became politically active that I would stand in Sweden's Riksdag and debate sea gold. One learns a lot when one is a politician. It is very interesting.
Those living along the western Mälaren and along the Arboga River are very concerned about the spread of the invasive species waterelodea. It can look pleasant – some think it looks roughly like yellow water lilies – but appearances are deceiving because it, just as the Minister said, takes over the plant life in the water and kills the species that naturally exist in lakes and watercourses.
Kungsör and the other municipalities located along the Arbogaån have tried various control methods for waterweeds. The trials have been conducted with financial support from both the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management and the Mälaren Water Care Association, and through so-called LONA grants. Just as the Minister says, the most effective way is to cover large areas of water with tarpaulins stretched over floating frames. It is, of course, very time-consuming and costly. It may not be very pretty, but it is the most effective and therefore what we need to do.
Madam Speaker! To manage the fight against the pike perch only in Mälaren and Arbogaån, it is estimated that approximately 30 million kronor are needed, and those funds are not available today in these budgets. Last year, 2023, the pike perch stock was affected by some kind of disease, which led to a large part of the stocks being weakened or dying off completely. The result of this year's inventory shows that pike perch still remain in Mälaren but that the distribution has decreased by approximately 30 percent. It is therefore now the golden opportunity to make efforts to truly eradicate the pike perch. The disease has taken out 30 percent. Now, money is required to take care of the other 70 percent.
There are EU funds to apply for, just as the Minister said. Quagga mussel is also included on the EU's list of species for which one can apply for control measures. But it is not included in the Swedish list of invasive species. Just as the Minister says, this list is to be updated. I mean that this is urgent. I have been in contact with Mälaren's Water Management Association, which believes that quagga mussel must be included in the list during the spring of 2025 in order to have time to apply for EU funds and be able to combat this invasive species.
It would be strange for me to urge the Minister to interfere in the authorities' work. I nevertheless want to convey to the Minister that it is very important that the sea buckthorn ends up in this list by the end of the spring, so that the relevant authorities can apply for funds, lay out more traps and once and for all get rid of the invasive species sea buckthorn.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! It is very educational to take part in information on how our various Swedish habitats are affected by many factors, such as climate change and warming but also invasive alien species. I too have taken part in Mälaren Water Care Association's various information, not least about that together with the county administrative boards, the assessment has been made that it would take seven years to, with 30 million kronor, succeed in eradicating all quagga mussels in Mälaren and Arbogaån. I am glad that we have both taken part in that information, so that we all have more information on how the situation looks. It is not least such things that have been missing.
Another thing that can also be reviewed and improved is the strategic work surrounding these issues. The need to have strategic work across different administrative boundaries to succeed in the fight against invasive alien species is something that is frequently highlighted, and the government contributes to this, not least by the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management and the County Administrative Boards working together with the municipalities to address these problems.
Today, eleven regions affected by the occurrence of sea buckthorn share their experiences and other knowledge together in a national network. This cooperation also includes various coordinating efforts in cases where it may be appropriate. Other regions, which today do not have problems with the occurrence of sea buckthorn but risk getting it as sea buckthorn spreads to them, also have the opportunity to join the network.
We have a problem here that needs to be addressed. In the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management's proposal to the government regarding which rules should apply for sea buckthorn, the agency emphasizes a very effective management of the species as well as various possibilities to introduce special exemptions from individual property owners' responsibility to eradicate invasive species when it comes to aquatic plants in open water systems, i.e., lakes and watercourses. That this is simply shifted to the county administrative board's jurisdiction could mean an improvement.
The work to prevent the spread is very important, as are the direct eradication efforts that the member mentions. We know that there is a risk that sea buckthorn establishes itself further north in the country. We really want to address this problem as soon as possible.
It is good that the member mentions that I do not have the opportunity to take a position on the authorities' decisions before they have expressed themselves. That is how it should be. But we can state that the proposal for a national list of species, which is currently being prepared and has been referred, also includes the sea buckthorn. It may be worth mentioning.
Åsa Eriksson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for an unusually full and detailed answer. It pleases me. I had intended to ask the Minister in this round whether there are other things that the government can do. But the Minister has actually already said that there are, so I cannot ask that question.
I could also say that when, for example, climate change is a driving cause for these invasive species spreading further, it is a bit strange that the government nevertheless pursues a policy that increases emissions instead of reducing them, but that feels like a slightly different debate.
I am content to thank you for this debate. It feels good that the Minister is well aware of the problems that exist for those in Västmanland and others who live along Mälaren and Arbogaån, that more resources are needed so that we can combat the quagga mussel, and that it is urgent. With that, I thank you for the debate and abstain from the upcoming contributions.
Statsrådet Romina Pourmokhtari (L)
Madam Speaker! I can also thank the member for an opportunity to discuss these important issues, which the entire government and especially my party, Liberalerna, truly care about. We have an environmental policy that is not only ambitious and has high means in investments but also has an efficiency perspective on which measures make a real difference, which ones work, and how we can work less in silos in different parts of the country and instead cooperate more to truly address the problems.
Finally, I need to comment on the member's statement that the government is pursuing a policy that increases emissions. This is a claim that is being cemented by the debate and the media image that is spreading. But if one looks at the emission statistics from both the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and the government's climate reporting, one can note that emissions decreased in 2022, decreased in 2023, and in the forecast are expected to increase slightly in 2024 to then decrease again in 2025 and 2026. After that, it of course depends on what policy is pursued. If the government is allowed to stay, emissions are expected to continue to decrease until 2030. In total, emissions will have decreased more than they have increased during this government. The claims that the government's climate policy as a whole increases emissions are simply incorrect. But that is a debate for another occasion.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.