'Emergency Measures for Eel'

The EAA suggestions for high prioritised eel emergency measurements

With regards to the ICES findings and figures, we are extremely concerned about the status of the European eel stock and the dramatic decline in numbers of the European eel and, in particular, elvers. We support the Commission's overall outline for an emergency plan and urge that the long term eel action plan will be put in place as soon as possible.

We would like to see these items implemented as high-prioritised emergency measures:
Until an international rebuilding plan is developed, agreed and implemented, we agree with ICES that exploitation of eel should be reduced to the lowest possible level.

To us the three single most important emergency measures would be:
a)installation of eel passes concerning dams and hydropower stations (new and old ones);
b)to combat all poaching for eel and elvers. This measure includes licensing of all commercial eel fishermen;
c)Introduction of a pan-European cormorant management plan.

Eel/fish passes concerning dams and hydropower stations to allow migration up- and downstream
In the ACFA meeting 17 September, 'grids' were discussed. The discussion focused on the distance between the grid bars with a proposal for less distance between the bars; going from 6 cm to 2 or 1,5 cm. Dirt grids (debris racks) at the turbine entrance of hydropower stations are in general not a safe way to lead eels around the turbines of hydropower stations. To our knowledge, this will not help the eel or other fish species. Especially, if the stream is strong the eel will be squashed against the bars (see picture next page) or sucked into the turbines. In this regard far more efficient would be the construction of eel passes. We suggest making it obligatory -and quickly implemented (FIFG funds?) to build eel passes in new and old dams and hydroelectric installations to secure up- and downstream migration for eels and elvers.
To stress the need for eel passes, we refer to the document COM (2003) 573 final, which refers to a study in the Netherlands indicating that of the female eel, only one in seven hundred survives the downstream migration to the sea. The same study indicates mortality due to fishing on silver eels of 97%. The Commission believes it necessary to establish targets for the survival of silver eel from the stage of its "silvering" until its migration to the sea.

-Poaching. Licensing of all commercial eel fishermen is needed. Increased license fees would help, too. Poaching should be combated vigorously. Intensified control and enforcement could be implemented as part of a bigger plan for fishing for other or all fish species.

-Measures to control eel predators, especially cormorant. Eel forms the staple diet of cormorants and at a time when cormorant populations are increasing and eel stocks declining, there is a need for country by country measures to control cormorant numbers as part of a Europe-wide management plan.
Europe has some 900.000 - 1 mill. cormorants (an EAA estimate based upon REDCAFE figures -which are too low and outdated- and own calculations and countings). New REDCAFE figures is to be published later this year. Anglers' own countings in some European countries being compiled now but not yet published. Figures are under way from another counting done by 'the Wetlands International Cormorant Research Group'.
Cormorants are very opportunistic fish eaters and eel is part of the bird's food. One cormorant eats 0.5 kilo fish a day; 900,000 cormorants eat 450 tons a day. If cormorants' food intake includes 1-7 % eels, as suggested by scientists then European cormorants are consuming 1,600 to 11,500 tons of eel every year compared to the estimated commercial landings of 30,000 tons (Commission's figure).
The cormorant population has been on the increase since its protection back in the 80's. A management plan is now urgently needed. A proper management plan in place for cormorants would help the eel as well as other fish species.

-Concerning the Water Framework Directive we would like to see eel included as a species indicator of "good ecological status" in relation to "river continuity", i.e. as a biological quality element.

-We endorse fully the Commission's view that '...most eel management measures need to be implemented at a local level (i.e. the river basin level) and the choice of management instruments to achieve the targets should remain a local choice so far as possible.'