Response to interpellation 2025/26:292 on the herring and sprat stocks in the Baltic Sea

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Tomas Kronståhl has asked me if I am prepared to take measures to stop or severely limit the large-scale fishing for animal feed in the Baltic Sea, in favor of small-scale, coastal fishing for human consumption.

Mr. Speaker! The sea constitutes an indispensable resource that provides many benefits for humanity and society, including food supply. At the same time, the situation for the Baltic Sea's ecosystem is serious, with a weak stock status for several important fish species and a size distribution that in several cases is shifted towards smaller individuals. To increase knowledge on, among other things, causal relationships, the government has tasked the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management to carry out a time-limited scientific project involving measures corresponding to a relocation of the trawl limit from 4 to 12 nautical miles in parts of the Baltic Sea. The assignment continues until April 2027. The purpose of the project is, among other things, to evaluate the effects on biomass and size structure. It is still too early to draw any conclusions from the time-limited experiment.

The Government is working purposefully and with a holistic view for a better marine environment. In the bill A living sea – increased protection, reduced eutrophication and a sustainable fishery (prop. 2023/24:156), several measures for the recovery of fish stocks in the Baltic Sea are announced. The measures resulting from the marine environment bill on sustainable fisheries management with complementary management of predators shall be able to contribute to a stronger integration into, and interact with, the marine environment work. In line with what is stated in the aforementioned bill, the Government has, among other things, tasked the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management to remove or drastically reduce the so-called influx areas inside the trawl limit and to prepare a basis for international consultations to move the trawl limit for pelagic trawlers over 24 meters in length to 12 nautical miles outside the baseline in Swedish territorial waters in the Baltic Sea. The matter is currently being prepared in the Government Offices.

The Government considers that fishing and aquaculture activities shall be environmentally sustainable in the long term and managed in a manner that is consistent with the goals of achieving benefits in economic and social respects as well as in terms of employment. Furthermore, the activities shall contribute to securing the food supply as part of a long-term sustainable food system, while at the same time, the competitiveness of sustainable small-scale fishing, which is dependent on viable stocks, shall be protected in the long term.

The Government has throughout the entire mandate period worked for sustainable fishing opportunities. By advocating for cautiously set fishing opportunities in negotiations with other countries, we have contributed to a lower fishing pressure on, for example, herring in the Baltic Sea than would otherwise have been the case. We now see certain signs that coastal fishing has gained better access to larger herring. The Government is eager for further improvements.

Mr. Speaker! The Government supports complementary measures, including spawning closures, which are in line with the multi-annual plan for the Baltic Sea. The Government considers that such measures should be expedient, based on scientific advice and not disproportionately affect Swedish coastal fishing or fishing for human consumption negatively – this is so that the measures contribute to recovered fish stocks while the competitiveness of fishing is protected and remains viable.

Coastal fishing usually has limited opportunities to adapt its fishing or move, why special consideration in management is necessary. A lost coastal fishery, and the infrastructure linked to this, is difficult to re-establish. Coastal professional fishing and fishing for human consumption is important for a living countryside and for local food production and food security.

It is the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management that allocates the Swedish fishing opportunities according to objective and transparent criteria. In this allocation, coastal fishing is prioritized, and the agency works based on the principle that small-scale fishing shall always have access to quotas, that is, never have to stop fishing during the year, and that the agency redistributes when necessary.

Based on the Food Strategy 2.0, the government is working to achieve the goals of increased food production through increased profitability and competitiveness in the primary production sector. By ensuring that a larger proportion of the landed fish is used for human consumption, food production can increase without intensifying fishing.

An increased food production from the sea simultaneously requires a demand from consumers, a deepened cooperation between the actors in the value chain including an improved infrastructure for landing and receiving fish, as well as a holistic view on the management of fisheries and the marine environment. A sustainable fisheries management, in close cooperation with marine environment work and with an integrated management of predators such as seals and cormorants, is therefore crucial to strengthen the fish stocks and enable a long-term sustainable food production from the sea.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Tomas Kronståhl (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister Kullgren, for the answer!

I want to start by providing a little background to the question. I asked the minister if he is prepared to take the necessary measures to save the herring and sprat stocks in the Baltic Sea. As we all know, herring and sprat are important pillars for all life in the Baltic Sea and the Baltic Sea's ecosystem. Previously, these species have also been of crucial importance for our coastal communities. Small-scale fishing was a very important part of the food supply locally and regionally and is, not least, an important part of Swedish culture.

Today, the condition of several fish stocks in the Baltic Sea, and thus for small-scale coastal fishers, is very critical. The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, ICES, has for many years warned of a total collapse for several of the stocks, and in several parts of the Baltic Sea, the herring and sprat are now acutely threatened. Despite the knowledge of this fact, the large-scale pelagic fishing in the Baltic Sea, which almost exclusively fishes for animal feed, continues.

Mr. Speaker! Despite these repeated warning signs, reduced quotas and a total fishing ban for, for example, cod, we see no major signs of recovery. There is, as I have said before, a total fishing ban regarding cod. Still, over 10 tons of cod were caught in 2025 as a bycatch, primarily during the fishing of flatfish. If we are to address these problems, it must involve fairly radical measures: either a total ban on the fishing of flatfish or that fishing gear is used which allows the cod to survive.

Everything in the ocean is interconnected. If we are to get the recovery of the cod right, we must significantly reduce or completely cease the large-scale fishing of herring and sprat. During 2025, Swedish vessels caught 27,200 tonnes of sprat, of which over 90 percent went to animal feed. At the same time, approximately 32,000 tonnes of herring and shad were caught. 75 percent of that catch went to animal feed. Only 2,700 tonnes of these 32,000 went to coastal fishing, which fishes for human consumption, that is, for the plate.

There are actually national opportunities, within the framework of the EU's common fisheries policy, to significantly reduce the fishing of herring and sprat for animal feed in the Baltic Sea. We Social Democrats, due to the current situation for both herring and sprat and cod in the Baltic Sea, have proposed that for a period, large-scale fishing, which primarily still goes only to animal feed, be paused and completely prohibited, in order to see and ensure whether it is possible to get back viable stocks of these for the Baltic Sea's survival completely crucial fish species.

If we choose to do so, Mr. Minister, we reduce the fishing by 55,000 tonnes and ensure feed for both cod and salmon and other predatory fish that feed entirely on herring and sprat. My conviction is that this then creates good conditions for a fairly rapid recovery of all endangered stocks.

One can, for example, also choose to work with the distribution of fishing quotas, geographical restrictions, as well as strict protection of spawning grounds. Even time-limited fishing bans become fully possible measures to take nationally.

Is the minister prepared to initiate a change even of today's quota system in favor of fishing for human consumption?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Hanna Westerén (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank Tomas Kronståhl for this important interpellation.

I can also say thank you to the Minister. I could, in fact, quote large parts of the interpellation answer because it expresses so many important ambitions for the Baltic Sea, which happens to be the sea that I, as a Gotlandic resident, live in the middle of.

In the interpellation response, it is stated that the sea shall be strengthened for better health and that fishing shall contribute to Swedish food supply in a sustainable way. The stocks shall recover, and fishing shall remain viable. The Minister himself says that "fishing and aquaculture activities shall be environmentally sustainable in the long term and managed in a way that is compatible with the goals" and that the activities shall "contribute to securing the food supply as part of a long-term sustainable food system while at the same time the competitiveness of sustainable small-scale fishing, which is dependent on viable stocks, is protected in the long term."

It sounds absolutely wonderful. But given what Tomas Kronståhl highlighted regarding the distinction between large and small actors, and the legislation that the Minister points to in his interpellation answer, I really want to highlight how much the proposed legislation would complicate specifically the Gotlandic household fishing.

Peter Kullgren says himself: ”Coastal fishing often has limited opportunity to adapt its fishing or move, which is why special consideration in management is necessary. A lost coastal fishery, and the infrastructure linked to this, is difficult to re-establish. Coastal professional fishing and fishing for human consumption is important for a living countryside and for local food production and food preparedness."

This applies to the highest degree on Gotland, where people have engaged in subsistence fishing with nets for generations. The County Administrative Board of Gotland County is incredibly clear in its referral response that if the proposal were to become law, it would hit the Gotlandic subsistence fishing extremely hard, which in that case would henceforth be referred to fishing with a rod. The County Administrative Board of Gotland County expresses it as follows: "The County Administrative Board however rejects the proposal that the right to recreational fishing should only include fishing with hand tools with the justification that it is an all-too intrusive measure with negative consequences for a traditional subsistence fishing and thus also a negative impact on culturally and historically valuable fishing villages."

I wonder: Is this how we want it to be? Much of what Peter Kullgren highlighted in his response to Tomas Kronståhl is positive and very ambitious. But Gotlandic small-scale fishers highlight, among other things, the Gotlandic fishing villages and keeping them for future generations, but also that they contribute substantially to a Gotlandic food supply. But they risk disappearing with this government's policy.

Peter Kullgren and Tomas Kronståhl point out that the stocks should be able to recover. I want that too. You must not think otherwise. But I mean that specifically the subsistence fishing, which I particularly want to highlight here today, does not threaten any stocks. The threats come from elsewhere.

I wonder if Peter Kullgren is aware of

that Gotland still actually has a lively subsistence fishing, which I would wish for us to preserve and which adds important values to Sweden

that the bill currently out for consultation could mean a veritable knockout for the Gotlandic house-need fishing and thus for Gotland's food supply.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Mr. Speaker! What Hanna Westerén is asking about is the fisheries law investigation. It is an investigation that the previous government appointed and gave directives for. So, it is the Social Democrats' directives that form the basis for it.

It does not mean that the government will decide on everything that is stated in the investigation. It is currently being prepared, and we will return to it in substance.

It is true that the government has an ambitious policy for the Baltic Sea. We want to see a healthier Baltic Sea. And we want to see faster recovery in the fish stocks.

Small-scale fishing constitutes a lifeline for very many coastal areas and is particularly prioritized, partly through what I mentioned earlier.

I can state that the government has stepped up the work to reverse the development in the Baltic Sea, both through national decisions – the marine environment bill is an example – and through the advocacy work that takes place in the EU. As is well known, a very large part of fisheries policy is an EU-common policy area. It is a reality that we need to contend with.

When it comes to the status of fish stocks, the history does not begin in 2022, when I received this responsibility. We have also had to deal with the consequences of previous governments' actions. I do not distrust in any way the intentions of the previous red-green government – the government that ruled when Member Kronståhl entered the Riksdag. I can nevertheless state that it has been completely necessary for us to step up this work, for example the advocacy work towards others, because it is a joint EU effort.

I have had the Baltic Sea fisheries ministers at a meeting at a small-scale fisherman's in Gävle. I have been with the new commissioner on member Westerén's beautiful home island Gotland, where we met small-scale fishermen and discussed these issues. In Stockholm, we managed to organize a minister-level and commissioner-level high-level meeting in the autumn about just the Baltic Sea. At all these occasions, we have lobbied for the Swedish line: restrictive quotas, developed scientific advice, and flexible solutions for small-scale fishing. I have actually made an effort to find examples from previous governments but have not found any.

The quotas have during our time landed higher than we had wished, but we have influenced them in the right direction and protected small-scale fishing in the negotiations. Those who take the time to compare backwards see that the quotas are now lower in relation to scientific advice than at any time with the previous red-green government. For the first time in a long time, we also marked with a no when we made the previous decision.

That we now, according to science, see a certain improvement regarding the availability of large herring may be the most important thing for the small-scale fishers who fish for herring. But we are far from our goal, and therefore we are working with a range of measures. Better management of seals and cormorants, a trawl ban area, and continued work with the action plan to ensure more fish become food are a few examples.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Tomas Kronståhl (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for good ambitions in many parts and good answers in some parts.

The Baltic Sea is perhaps the world's most sensitive sea. Eutrophication, climate change, and an all too heavy fishing pressure have together pushed our important fish stocks to the breaking point that we see today. I can willingly admit that since I entered the Riksdag, I have worked intensively on these issues. I believe and hope that I have learned very much along the way and am not misled in any way. I have learned that these are key species for the very existence of the sea's food chain. If we were to lose them, the consequences would extend further than to fishing. A sea without life would be a complete failure for us all, not least for us in politics.

Mr. Speaker! Doing everything we can to save the fish stocks in the Baltic Sea is, in my opinion, no longer optional or a matter of choice, but absolutely necessary. This is therefore not a party-political debate, but a very important debate for the Baltic Sea's survival.

I believe that we must take the warning signs we receive seriously. We must be guided by facts and science and not allow short-term profit interests to override long-term sustainability, which in this case is absolutely crucial for everyone involved, both those who wish to fish in the future and those who safeguard a living sea. How we act now will be decisive for whether the Baltic Sea in the future will be a living sea or a warning example of what happens if our responsibility for action is pushed into the future.

Mr. Speaker! I do not wish in any way to stand here and criticize the government or the minister unjustifiably. Much has been done that has gone in the right direction. Just as the minister emphasized, one said no to the EU's quota decision for fishing in the Baltic Sea in 2026 because even these quotas were set far too high considering the stock we have in the Baltic Sea. It was a brave and good position that shows that we are now seriously in the process of transforming the fishing policy in the Baltic Sea.

Unfortunately, the arguments were not sufficient to change the EU's decision. Therefore, it is now important that we act as much as we can nationally and at home, while we continue to conduct dialogues with our neighboring countries to achieve a long-term common strategy for sustainable fishing in the future.

Mr. Speaker! I see and feel an ever-increasing support for taking decisive action nationally and taking the real measures required to save these important fish stocks for the future. I also see and feel a very strong support for a shift from today's fisheries management, which to a very large extent is about fishing for animal feed with large pelagic trawlers, which today do not even have the possibility to land their catch in any ports in the Baltic Sea waters. Future fishing must be more focused on human consumption, that is to say, food on the plate.

A reform of the quota distribution is necessary to ensure a better balance between the conditions in the sea and today's fishing methods. Today's quota system unfortunately favors large-scale industrial fishing, which we know goes to animal feed. We believe the future fishing fleet in the Baltic Sea should consist of small and medium-sized coastal fishers who land their catches in Sweden. A larger share of the quotas should go to food. Unused quotas should not be used at all. This would, in the long run, increase the opportunities for Swedish processing and sale, perhaps even export of fish as food.

Can Minister Kullgren imagine appointing an inquiry with experts and parliamentarians who are tasked with trying to transition to a long-term sustainable fishery for human consumption in the Baltic Sea?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Hanna Westerén (S)

Mr. Speaker! I now have only two minutes of speaking time. Tomas Kronståhl has raised many points that I also consider important. I take the liberty of once again focusing on Gotland and the Gotlandic house-need fishing. It worries me so much, in fact.

Peter Kullgren points out that the bill is a fruit of a previous government directive. Even so, I hope I have succeeded in conveying the importance of the fact that one will also continue to be able to fish with nets on Gotland and that we preserve the Gotlandic subsistence fishing for the future. As both the minister himself and Tomas Kronståhl have pointed out, small-scale coastal fishing needs more and specific measures to be able to survive, because the competitive situation is so difficult and the Baltic Sea is so pressured.

If we were to end up in a situation where a stock dies out or where the remaining Gotlandic small-scale fishers decide to put their nets away for good, those are changes that are irreversible. I sincerely hope that such chapters will not be written in the Baltic Sea's history.

I understand that Peter Kullgren has met with Gotlandic subsistence fishers. That feels good and important. I therefore want to conclude by appealing to Peter Kullgren to take into account the contributions of the Gotlandic subsistence fishers to the food supply and for the sustainable stocks in the Baltic Sea when decisions are made regarding a new fisheries act.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I can promise Hanna Westerén that this is clearly on the retina in the further process.

It is difficult to manage to say everything I want to say in this matter, but I will try.

In Tomas Kronståhl's first post, pickled herring was mentioned, Mr. Speaker. He said that we use too little of the Baltic Sea's fish for food. That is true. We should do more. But in Sweden, we have no tradition of eating pickled herring, as is done in many other parts of the Baltic region. For some of the landings, there is therefore no outlet. When fishing, it is generally central both that there is landing capacity and that there is an outlet, that is, consumers who want to eat what is landed.

Here we have another issue with the environmental situation and the environmental toxins that can be measured in, for example, herring and sprat. We have other state agencies that have certainly, with emphasis, set limits on how much one can consume.

I was in Nogersund in Sölvesborg Municipality last week and met fishermen there. The problem was not that one couldn't catch fish. There was plenty of herring, said the small-scale fisherman there. There was simply plenty of fish. The problem is that in the processing industry, there is no market for the products.

We have therefore given a mandate to review this regarding health risks. If we listen to the fishermen and the processing industry in Nogersund, we can state that over a fairly long period of measurements, they have not found limit values that exceed the dioxin levels.

When there is a recommendation not to consume, it is clear that large chains follow the recommendations from the authorities and from non-profit interest organizations. It hits very hard against this type of small-scale production, which is so important. We are working on several fronts to achieve that. It is a very central part of the whole.

As I said initially, we are working with more measures. The trawling limit has been moved out in a trial area of 40 nautical miles from northern Öland to northern Uppland. We are preparing the basis we have received for international consultations regarding a permanent relocation of boats over 24 meters. We have tasked HaV with removing or drastically reducing the entry areas inside the trawling limit.

It is the government's absolute conviction that we need the recovery of the stocks as quickly as possible. To this end, we need to develop the industry along the entire value chain, from fishing to the processing industry and to the consumer and market. Here, it is particularly important with the small-scale fishers.

It is also about more measures and missions aimed at restoring coastal fish stocks. It is now part of the Food Strategy 2.0. We have given several missions to facilitate hunting of seals and cormorants and so on.

When distributing quotas, the coastal fishing quota is allocated first based on the principle that it should be possible to fish freely throughout the year. During 2025, we have also changed the distribution system for regional quotas so that regional vessels always have at least the base level. Finally, the quotas are distributed to the pelagic system.

I can also state that 20 percent of the herring quotas in the Baltic Sea went to coastal vessels and regional vessels in 2020. The year that just passed, 2025, was the same figure 33 percent. That can also be worth noting.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Tomas Kronståhl (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is a good discussion and a good conversation. It is perhaps not so much a debate, but rather we are having a conversation. It is a bit different from the previous debate.

There is currently a great deal of commitment. Very much has happened in recent years, not least considering the wars, what is happening in Ukraine and all such things. We have seen that we must review our own supply capacity. We have seen that we must take care of the food that exists both in the sea and on land.

We also see that the limit values are looking much better for the fish in the Baltic Sea. If we compare ourselves, for example, with Finland, they do not have the same restrictions at all as we do for that fish, but they view it as a very good and fine food. We must help each other to market the Swedish fish in different ways.

With a broad investigation, since we are going to review the quota system in 2030, when the time comes to reform it, we could have a finished proposal. It is about how to achieve a fishery that is not constantly on the edge of overfishing. There must be a margin – you can call it a readiness margin or whatever. We might save 10–15 percent, so that we never end up in an emergency situation.

I am also on board when it comes to the management of sole and red mullet. We must ensure that we get that management started. It would accelerate the growth of the fish stocks and, above all, improve the fishing opportunities for the small coastal fishermen who fish with nets. Today, they have almost no possibility of fishing with nets.

Then I think that the minister, the government, and perhaps we others as well should try to secure support for a reconstruction of landing sites and reception harbors in the Baltic Sea. The best thing would be, Mr. Speaker, if one could achieve this in some form of cooperation where the fishermen themselves are partial owners in these reception stations so that they are not sold to Denmark or anywhere else.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Many thanks to Tomas Kronståhl for a good discussion on important issues! I believe that the fisheries debate as a whole benefits from that tone.

We have made many different efforts and have worked hard to reduce the fishing pressure. I do not perhaps see immediately that an investigation is the given solution in this situation. For some stocks, it has been and continues to be acute. It is rather about that, in the long run, we actually need to do three things.

It is about keeping the quotas as low as possible in the short term. In the medium term, it is about the fact that we must have fewer predators – seals and cormorants – which now eat significantly more than the entire Swedish coastal fishery accounts for. In the long term, we must continue to work with the environmental situation in the Baltic Sea. It is absolutely necessary. Then, of course, I exclude nothing.

Mr. Speaker, you can believe me when I say that we have looked at all possible different angles. For me, the results are what is important. It is about us keeping the quotas and taking as little fish as possible until the stocks have recovered.

Often, the simple solutions are also not feasible. It is too simple to say that we should ban a certain fishery. I do not share the view that it is something we can decide nationally. It does not work that way. We need to reach an agreement because it is a common EU policy. It is several different nations that fish in the Baltic Sea that would be affected. Unfortunately, it is not that simple. It is about keeping the quotas down.

We will continue to work on and protect fishing for food consumption. I thank you for a good discussion.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)