Wild-caught seafood

Swedish fisheries and consumption from a sustainability perspective

Hanna Torén

Örebro University, Academy of Natural Science and Technology

Degree Project, Second Level

Biology, 15 higher education credits

Supervisor: Magnus Engwall

2

Contents

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 3

Sammanfattning ....................................................................................................................... 3

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 4

Production capacity .................................................................................................................. 6

Biological impacts ............................................................................................................................... 6

Chemical impacts ................................................................................................................................ 8

Physical impacts .................................................................................................................................. 9

Climate related impacts ....................................................................................................................... 9

Contaminants .......................................................................................................................... 11

Mercury ............................................................................................................................................. 11

Persistent organic pollutants .............................................................................................................. 12

Other contaminants............................................................................................................................ 13

Environmental impact ........................................................................................................... 14

Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 16

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 18

Acknowledgement .................................................................................................................. 18

References ............................................................................................................................... 19

Appendix I ............................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix II ............................................................................................................................. 29

3

Abstract

Swedish wild-caught seafood is a natural resource that has been utilized for thousands of

years but a variety of anthropogenic impacts affect the aquatic environment in ways that

might impair the opportunity to use the provided ecosystem goods in the future. The objective

of this study is to discuss wild-caught aquatic food resources in Sweden from a sustainability

perspective focusing on long-term production capacity, food safety and environmental impact

of fisheries. Several human impacts (biological, chemical, climatic and physical) is severely

affecting the production capacity and some commercially utilized species face the risk of

extinction. Humans are exposed to methylmercury, persistent organic pollutants and other

contaminants through seafood consumption. Swedish fisheries have severe negative

environmental effects and contribute to global warming, acidification, eutrophication,

spreading of toxins and loss of biodiversity. Lack of knowledge makes it impossible to

completely assess whether Swedish wild-caught seafood is a sustainable food resource but

available information indicate that the current use of and impact on aquatic ecosystem

services are unsustainable and that an increasing part of the Swedish seafood demand will be

met through import.

Sammanfattning

Svensk vildfångad fisk och vildfångade skaldjur är en naturresurs som nyttjats i flera tusen år

men olika typer av mänsklig påverkan på den akvatiska miljön riskerar att försämra

möjligheterna att nyttja dess ekosystemtjänster i framtiden. Syftet med denna studie är att

analysera svensk vildfångad fisk och vildfångade skaldjur ur ett hållbarhetsperspektiv med

fokus på långsiktig produktionsförmåga, livsmedelssäkerhet och fiskets miljöpåverkan.

Mänsklig påverkan (biologisk, kemisk, klimatmässig och fysisk) påverkar

produktionskapaciteten negativt och vissa kommersiellt nyttjade arter är utrotningshotade.

Människor exponeras för metylkvicksilver, organiska miljöföroreningar och andra

föroreningar genom konsumtion av fisk och skaldjur. Svenskt fiske har stor miljöpåverkan

och bidrar till global uppvärmning, försurning, övergödning, spridandet av giftiga ämnen och

förlust av biologisk mångfald. Kunskapsbrist gör det omöjligt att göra en fullständig

bedömning av huruvida svensk vildfångad fisk och vildfångade skaldjur är hållbara

livsmedelsresurser men tillgänglig information indikerar att det nuvarande nyttjandet av och

påverkan på akvatiska ekosystemtjänster är ohållbart och att en ökande andel av den svenska

efterfrågan på fisk och skaldjur kommer att mötas genom import.

4

Introduction

Aquatic food is a natural resource that has been utilized by human beings in Sweden since the

colonization during the Mesolithic period (Olson, 2008). The average consumption of

seafood, i.e. fish, crustaceans and molluscs, is approximately 16 kg per capita and year in

Sweden (SBA, 2010). The main species consumed are salmon (Salmo salar), herring (Clupea

harengus), cod (Gadus morhua) and shrimps (Failler et al., 2008). Seafood is a valuable

source of protein, fat (especially polyunsaturated fatty acids), vitamins (especially vitamin D),

minerals and trace elements (Hambreaus, 2009). Consumption of seafood reduces the risk of

cardio-vascular diseases (Becker et al., 2007) and the Swedish National Food Administration

[SNFA] recommends an increased consumption (SNFA, 2010a).

Sweden ranks 48th

in the world on capture production of seafood (Paisley et al., 2010).

Commercial marine fisheries in the North Sea, the Norwegian Sea, Skagerrak, Kattegat and

the Baltic Sea account for the main quantity of seafood landings in Sweden (SBF, 2010a).

Baltic marine fisheries are single species fisheries for cod, sprat (Sprattus sprattus) or herring

while the mixed fisheries of the Swedish west coast fish for a variety of species (Sterner &

Svedäng, 2005). The landings of commercial marine fisheries were 197 000 metric tons in

2009 (SBF, 2010a). 40 % (76 000 metric tons) of the landings consisted of seafood for human

consumption (figure 1). The commercial fishing in Swedish inland waters is mainly located in

the four biggest lakes –Vänern, Vättern, Mälaren and Hjälmaren (SBF, 2010a). The most

important target species are pikeperch (Sander lucioperca), vendace (Coregonus albula),

perch (Perca fluviatilis) and eel (Anguilla anguilla) (Lehtonen et al., 2008). The freshwater

landings by commercial fishermen were 1 600 metric tons in 2009 (SBF, 2010b). The marine

and freshwater catch by leisure fishermen was 13 000 metric tons in 2009 (SBF, 2010c). The

most common species caught by leisure fishermen are perch and pike (Esox lucius).

Figure 1. Seafood landings by Swedish commercial marine fisheries from 1915 to 2009 (SS, 1959;

SBF, 2006; 2010a)

5

Seafood is the only major human food source that is primarily harvested from natural

populations – hence capture fisheries solely depend on the production capacity of aquatic

ecosystem services. The supply of ecosystem goods has usually been taken for granted which

has resulted in poor management (Rönnbäck et al., 2007) but environmental protection and

sustainable development are becoming increasingly important issues in fisheries (Roig et al.,

2009). The overall objective of Sweden’s food-related policies is a sustainable production that

ensures food security and protects environmental values (MAS, 2010). This includes a high-

quality and resource efficient food production from the fisheries sector. Sustainability is often

defined as meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of

future generations to meet their needs (WCED, 1987). Human activities in the past and

present however influence the aquatic environment in ways that might affect the opportunity

to use the provided ecosystem goods and services in the future (Österblom, 2009).

Most environmental toxicants end up in the aquatic ecosystem (Hanson et al., 2009) and some

hazardous substances bioaccumulate in crustaceans and fish which leads to humans being

exposed to them through seafood consumption (Viklund, 2010). One of the goals of the Baltic

Sea Action Plan is a Baltic Sea undisturbed by hazardous substances – a goal that includes an

ecological objective stating that all fish should be safe to eat (HELCOM, 2007). Fisheries are

affecting target-species and non-target species as well as the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem

(Thrane et al., 2009). The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO]

have stated that 80 % of the world´s marine fish stocks (groups of fish exploited in a specific

area or by a specific method) are overexploited, depleted or recovering from overexploitation

(FAO, 2009). The objectives of the Swedish fisheries sector are to minimize the direct and

indirect effects of fisheries on biological diversity as well as to attain and maintain a long

term production of Swedish seafood (SBF, 2007a). The outcome of the Swedish National

Environmental Objective “A rich diversity of plant and animal life” should include that

species that are exploited through fishing are managed in such a way that they can be

harvested as a renewable resource in the long term without affecting ecosystem structures or

functions (EOP, 2010).

The objective of this study is to discuss wild-caught aquatic food resources in Sweden from a

sustainability perspective focusing on issues concerning long-term production capacity, food

safety and environmental impact of fisheries.

6

Production capacity

The main limitation for the seafood industry is the availability of raw material (Ziegler &

Hansson, 2003). Table 1 (appendix I) lists the 49 seafood species that are most frequently

caught by Swedish fisheries. The International Council for Exploration of the Sea [ICES] has

made an assessment of the state of 19 fishing stocks among 12 of these species (ICES, 2009).

10 stocks (including 3 stocks of herring) are overexploited and therefore not able to give a

high yield in the future unless fishing pressure is reduced. The population sizes of herring in

the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak have declined by 35–50% during the last three decades (Larsson

et al., 2010). According to Svedäng & Bardon (2003) depletion might be more severe than

concluded by the current stock assessments. 11 of the 49 species listed in table 1 are included

in the Official Swedish Red List (SSIC, 2010). 4 species are categorized as Critically

Endangered (CR) which means that they are considered to be facing an extremely high risk of

extinction in the wild. 5 species (including cod) are listed as Endangered (EN) and are

considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction. The cod biomass in the Baltic Sea is

well below the long term average (MacKenzie et al., 2007) and the adult cod abundance along

the Swedish west coast was reduced by more than 90% between 1982 and 1999 (Svedäng &

Bardon, 2003).

The aquatic ecosystems in Sweden have been submitted to several human impacts (biological,

chemical, climatic and physical) during a long period of time (Degerman et al., 2001;

MacKenzie et al., 2007; Lehtonen et al., 2008). Anthropogenic influence has severely affected

the production capacity of seafood but the relationships between different variables and

responses are difficult to interpret (MacKenzie et al., 2007; Rönnbäck et al., 2007; Lehtonen

et al., 2008; Barange & Perry, 2009).

Biological impacts

The biological impact on aquatic environments has mainly been from fisheries (Degerman et

al., 2001, SBF, 2010c). The worldwide collapse of marine resources is considered to be due to

overexploitation (Sterner & Svedäng, 2005; Leadley et al., 2010) and the decline in adult cod

abundance in Skagerrak and Kattegat are caused by fishing mortality (Cardinale & Svedäng,

2004). Over-exploitation can cause significant extinction risk for marine species and a high

fishing pressure is the most significant threat to 7 of the 11 red-listed species listed in table 1

(SSIC, 2010). 6 out of these are marine species. Fishing mortality is the dominant threat to 11

other marine fish and shark species listed in the Official Swedish Red List including

porbeagle (Lamna nasus) and basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus) (CR), rat fish (Chimaera

monstrosa), thornback ray (Raja clavata) and roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides

rupestris) (EN), school shark (Galeorhinus galeus), Greenland shark (Somniosus

microcephalus) and velvet belly lantern shark (Etmopterus spinax) (VU) and Norway redfish

(Sebastes viviparus) (NT). Common skate (Dipturus batis) and Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser

oxyrinchus) are listed as regionally extinct (RE) since the last individual potentially capable

of reproduction has disappeared from the region. The majority of Swedish lake fisheries are

managed in a biologically sustainable way according to judgments based on current

knowledge (SBF, 2010c). Overfishing is however a threat also to some freshwater fish stocks

and is the major cause of the decline of arctic char in Vättern (Lehtonen et al., 2008).

7

Depleted stocks may not recover even if the fishing intensity is substantially reduced

(Degerman et al., 2001; Sterner & Svedäng, 2005; Cardinale & Svedäng, 2004).

Fishing tends to be selective since gear is designed to remove large (and indirectly older)

individuals (Leadley et al., 2010, Law, 2000). Since fishing mortality often is very high and

the phenotypic variation within species is caused by genetic differences, fishing causes

evolutionary change. Fishery-induced changes in size and age at maturity have been observed

in heavily exploited stocks and might be hard to reverse. In 2000 and 2001 the abundance of

large adult fish of the species cod, haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus), whiting

(Merlangius merlangus), plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) and dab (Limanda limanda) in

Skagerrak was very low compared to historical records (Svedäng, 2003). The average

maximum length of the plaice population in Skagerrak and Kattegat has been reduced with 10

cm from 1901 to 2007 and the adult biomass in 2007 was 40 % of the maximum level during

the period (Cardinale et al., 2010). It is however uncertain whether these phenotypic changes

are caused by evolution (Law, 2000) and whether the selection pressure caused by fishing is

compatible with long-term production capacity. Besides changes on the species phenotypic

traits, overfishing might reduce or change the genetic variation within and between

populations (Leadley at al., 2010, Laikre et al., 2005). Different populations should be

harvested separately to avoid overfishing and since a fishery stock may represent only part of

or more than one genetically distinct population the term stock is insufficient when trying to

achieve a biologically sustainable management (Bruckmeier & Neuman, 2005; Laikre et al.,

2005). Genetic information is currently lacking for many of the seafood species exploited in

Swedish waters (Laikre et al., 2005). No changes can however be detected in the amount of

genetic diversity or in the spatial genetic structure of heavily exploited herring in the Baltic

Sea and Skagerrak between 1979/1980 and 2002/2003 (Larsson et al., 2010).

Introductions of new species can be fatal to the original fauna, e.g. through competition and

spreading of diseases, and might be irreversible (Laikre et al., 2005; Lehtonen et al., 2008;

SBF, 2010c). A lot of introductions are performed yearly into Swedish waters – intentionally

through stocking or unintentionally through e.g. shipping – and an increasing amount of

invasive species are occurring on the Swedish coats (Lehtonen et al., 2008; SBF, 2010c).

Illegal introductions of infested non-native signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) are

threatening the native noble crayfish (Astacus astacus) by spreading the crayfish plague

(Aphanomyces astaci) (SBF, 2010c). Released or escaped farmed fish may transfer non-

adapted genes to natural populations (Laikre et al., 2005). Salmon that escape from

aquaculture facilities have the capacity for long distance dispersal (Hansen & Youngson,

2010). Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) is a non-native species and the most common

species for stocking and for commercial farming (Lindberg et al., 2009). The dispersal of

released or escaped rainbow trout can be rapid and long-ranged but the inability to find

suitable spawning habitats may be an obstacle to reproduce successfully. Increased shipping

and expansion of aquaculture will increase the risk of invasive species in the future (Leadley

et al., 2010).

8

Chemical impacts

One of the most important factors that contribute to the degradation of aquatic ecosystems is

pollution (Hanson, 2009). Chemical effects include acidification, eutrophication and pollution

from toxic compounds (Degerman et al., 2001). Acidification has deteriorated the ecological

status of several Swedish freshwaters (Lehtonen et al., 2008) and high inorganic Al

concentrations may pose a problem to biota in lakes with low pH values (Wällstedt et al.,

2009). Sulphate deposition has decreased during the last decades leading to the expectations

that fish populations can be reestablished in the formerly acidified lakes (Lehtonen et al.,

2008). Nutrient loads from point sources have decreased during recent decades which can be

seen in the response of freshwater fish but still there are highly eutrophic lakes and rivers that

have high biomasses of less valuable cyprinid fish that are favored by eutrophication – e.g.

roach (Rutilus rutilus), rudd (Rutilus erythrophthalmus) and bream (Abramis brama)

(Degerman et al., 2001; Lehtonen et al., 2008). Eutrophication is a serious problem both on

the west coast (SBF, 2010c) and in the Baltic Sea where it has led to decreased flatfishes and

cod populations (Rönnberg & Bonsdorff, 2004). Decreased transparency caused by

eutrophication has resulted in reduced amount of vegetation used as fish nurseries (Rönnberg

& Bonsdorff, 2004; Rönnbäck et al., 2007). The reduction in Baltic cod recruitment is mainly

caused by lack of available reproduction areas (Rönnberg & Bonsdorff, 2004; Margonski et

al., 2010). Blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) have been favored by increased nutrient loads to the

Baltic Sea because of the increased phytoplankton production (Rönnbäck et al., 2007). Decay

of dead algae leads to depletion of oxygen levels in the water, i.e. hypoxia, and impaired

habitat for multicellular organisms (e.g. flatfishes) in the bottom waters of the Baltic Sea

(Rönnberg & Bonsdorff, 2004; Conley et al., 2009). The reduced oxygen levels leads to

lowered food abundance which indirectly affect higher trophic levels, i.e. fish (Rönnbäck et

al., 2007). Hypoxia supports growth of cyanobacteria which contributes to hypoxia and

sustained eutrophication. The cyanobacteria Nodularia spumigena produces a toxin called

nodularin which may induce liver damage in fish and reduce fish growth and survival

(Persson et al., 2009).

Hazardous substances may damage the ecosystem e.g. through impaired health and harmed

reproduction of animals. Vital physiological functions in fish known to be affected by

pollutants are growth and energy metabolism, liver function and detoxification, immune

defense, ion balance and red blood cell function (Hanson & Larsson, 2009). Even though

pharmaceuticals often are detected at very low concentrations they may pose a risk to biota

due to their biological potency (Roig et al, 2009; Fick et al., 2010). There is little knowledge

about the environmental concentrations and the ecotoxicology of pharmaceutical products –

especially when it comes to their effect on aquatic organisms – but very few cases of serious

adverse effects have been reported. Fish with blood plasma levels of levonorgestrel exceeding

human therapeutic levels have been found in a Swedish study of fish exposed to treated

sewage effluents (Fick et al., 2010). Levonorgestrel is a synthetic steroid that is used in

contraceptives and that has been shown to reduce fish fertility. Health monitoring indicates

that fish are exposed to an increasing amount of environmental pollutants that are unknown or

not subjected to any monitoring (Viklund, 2010). Studies of the gonad size of female perch on

the Swedish Baltic coast have shown a reduced or delayed gonad development due to an

9

increased exposure to environmental pollutants (Hanson et al., 2009). Reduced gonad size and

delayed maturity suggest that reproduction is negatively affected and that the perch

populations are at risk but this has not been shown (Hanson, 2009).

Physical impacts

Habitat loss and fragmentation are among the greatest threats to freshwater fish (Leadley et

al., 2010) and physical impacts like dams and canals have resulted in negative effects

(Degerman et al., 2001). Lake regulation impacts the littoral ecosystems and causes negative

effects on feeding and nursing areas for fish and dams for water-level regulation impede the

access to spawning areas of stream spawners (Lehtonen, et al., 2008). During the two

previous centuries a lot of Swedish streams were channelized to facilitate the transport of

timber on water and riverine fish are still negatively affected by reduced habitat quality

leading to fry displacement and impaired juvenile recruitment (Lehtonen et al., 2008; Palm et

al., 2010). Restoration of channelized streams could therefore benefit fish populations (Palm

et al., 2010). The upstream migration of anadromous salmon and brown trout (Salmo trutta) is

impaired in many Swedish rivers due to hydropower stations (Lundqvist et al., 2008).

Hydroelectric plants and other habitat alterations also increase the loss of downstream-

migrating smolts (Calles & Greenberg, 2009; Serrano et al., 2009). Improved migration

facilities for both upstream spawners and downstream migrants in regulated rivers are

therefore important in order to create self-sustaining populations of threatened salmonids

(Lundqvist et al., 2008; Calles & Greenberg, 2009). Sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus),

lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis) and eel are other examples of migratory species that have been

negatively affected by physical barriers constructed by humans (Lehtonen et al., 2008). Today

different activities of fish habitat restoration are directed at rivers and lakes and hydropower

companies perform compensatory stocking of mainly salmon and brown trout.

Coastal habitats – especially vegetated habitats (macroalgae and seagrasses) – support marine

fisheries in Sweden by providing nursery, feeding and breeding areas for the majority of

commercially utilized species (Eriksson et al., 2004; Rönnbäck et al., 2007). Boating

activities in marinas and along ferryboat routes have negative impacts on species richness and

coverage of aquatic vegetation (Eriksson et al., 2004). Habitat destruction is not however the

main threat to cod, haddock, whiting or dab on the west coast (Svedäng, 2003) and does not

represent a limiting factor for recruitment of plaice on the Swedish west coast (Cardinale et

al., 2010). Off-shore energy parks might have positive as well as negative effects on the

species targeted by fisheries (Langhamer et al., 2010). They produce underwater noise,

electric and magnetic fields and hinder commercial fishing but might at the same time benefit

fisheries by providing artificial reefs and no-take areas with the potential to increase fish

abundance, species richness and fish size.

Climate related impacts

Fish stocks are susceptible to a variety of climate change impacts and the vulnerability of

fisheries is likely to be higher where they already suffer from overexploitation (Daw et al.,

2009). High latitude aquatic ecosystems will face a reduced ice cover, warmer water

temperatures and a longer growing season resulting in increased primary production (Barange

& Perry, 2009). Ocean acidification is predicted to increase due to the increased uptake of

10

carbon dioxide – a process that will harm shell-borne organisms and corals (Leadley et al.,

2010). Climate change will lead to spreading of pathogens to higher altitudes (Barange &

Perry, 2009) and to increased rainfall that might affect the distribution and bioavailability of

chemicals in coastal areas (Hanson et al., 2009). Climate change and warmer winters

increases the variability in nitrate concentrations which may pose a major challenge to biota

in Swedish lakes (Weyhenmeyer, 2009).

The ability of fish to adapt to changing environments is species-specific and all fish

populations will not be able to adapt to the predicted climate change (Lehtonen et al., 2008).

The range of warmer-water species will expand while the range of cold-water species will

contract (Barange & Perry, 2009). The ranges of Swedish freshwater species are determined

primarily by climate, especially temperature, and climate change will probably lead to the

decrease or collapse of cold water fish populations (Lehtonen et al., 2008). The catch of cold-

water species like burbot (Lota lota), maraene (Coregonus maraena), vendace and char

(Salvelinus umbla) in Swedish commercial freshwater fisheries have declined from 1994-

2009 while the catch of warmer-water species like perch, asp (Aspius aspius), pike, pikeperch,

bream, roach and tench (Tinca tinca) have increased during the same period (SBF, 2010c).

Climate, i.e. magnitude and frequency of inflow into the Baltic as well as water temperature,

is affecting cod, herring and sprat recruitment in the Baltic Sea through different opportunities

for egg and larval viability (Nissling, 2004; Margonski et al., 2010). Decreasing frequency of

inflows of salty and oxygenated North Sea water have had a negative effect on Baltic Sea

ecosystem (Jansson & Stålvant, 2001). The knowledge about effects of temperature on cod

reproduction is inconclusive (MacKenzie et al., 2007). According to Margonski et al. (2010)

mild winters are related to low cod recruitment while herring and sprat recruitment are

positively related to temperature. Nissling (2004) states that temperature has no significant

effect on cod reproduction but that sprat egg and larvae show a higher survival in higher

temperatures. Climate changes have contributed to the increasing sprat population in the

Baltic Sea (Casini et al., 2008).

11

Contaminants

Environmental pollutants are characterized by often being environmental persistent and

bioaccumulating as well as produced in large amounts and used in ways that enable them to

spread to the environment (Viklund, 2010). The intake of hazardous substances from fish

varies considerably depending both on amount of fish consumed and catchment area of the

consumed fish (Berger et al., 2009). The balance between health benefits and risks due to

dietary fish intake is not very well understood (Mikoczy & Rylander, 2009). A Swedish study

of consumers with high dietary intake of marine fish showed that west coast fishermen and

their wives had a decreased overall mortality and significantly fewer deaths from respiratory

and cardiovascular diseases as well as a lower than expected cancer incidence – findings that

could indicate a positive impact of high fish consumption (Berger et al., 2009). These effects

were not shown for east coast fishermen and their wives who had higher concentrations of

persistent organic pollutants [POPs] in blood as well as a higher consumption of fatty fish.

Mercury

Human activities are responsible for a significant part of the dispersion of heavy metals

(Mukherjee et al., 2004) and long-range transport by air pollution is the origin of most of the

Hg in freshwater fish in Sweden (Bishop et al., 2009). There is a clear indication that forest

harvesting leads to increases in mercury bioaccumulation in downstream aquatic biota. Half

of the Swedish lakes contain high concentrations of Hg (Mukherjee et al., 2004).

Methylmercury (MeHg) is the form of mercury that is most susceptible to biomagnification in

the aquatic food chain and is therefore the dominant form of Hg in fish (Bishop et al., 2009).

Ingestion through food is generally the most important pathway for mercury exposure

(Mukherjee et al., 2004). MeHg in food is almost completely absorbed in the human

gastrointestinal tract and is spread to all body tissues (Becker et al., 2007). Methylmercury

can damage both the peripheral and the central nervous system (CNS) and the most

significant risk occurs during prenatal CNS development.

Samples taken from 2001 to 2009 of pike (several lakes), perch (Baltic Sea and several lakes),

burbot (Vättern & Vänern), salmon (Vättern) and brown trout (Vättern & Vänern) have

exceeded the maximum level of mercury in muscle meat of fish stated in the regulations on

maximum levels for certain contaminants in food (EC No 1881/2006) established by the

Commission of the European Communities (Petersson- Grawè et al., 2007; IVL, 2010;

Sundström & Jorhem, 2010). The development of mercury concentrations in marine biota is

not consistent and significant increasing as well as decreasing trends are observed for herring

(Bignert et al., 2010). Increasing trends are observed for cod, burbot and blue mussels while a

decreasing trend is observed for perch. The Hg concentrations in char from Vättern have

increased during the last period of years (SBF, 2010c). The precipitation of mercury

compounds has decreased during the last decades but increased leakage from forest areas after

windfalls caused by winter storms may increase Hg levels in fish in the future (Lehtonen et

al., 2008).

SNFA recommends limited intake of perch, pike, pikeperch, burbot, halibut (Hippoglossus

hippoglossus), shark, ray and eel due to high levels of mercury (Becker et al., 2007). Pregnant

and breastfeeding women and women of child-bearing age who anticipate becoming pregnant

12

are recommended to refrain from eating these kinds of fish. The MeHg exposure of the

majority of Swedish population is at a safe level compared to tolerable daily intake (TDI)

recommendations. A few percent of Swedish children and pregnant women have higher than

recommended intake of mercury. There are big differences in the consumption pattern and a

small minority of the population who consume large amounts of fish with elevated MeHg

levels might have an intake so high that it increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases.

Persistent organic pollutants

Dioxins (polychlorinated dibenzo-para-dioxins [PCDDs] and polychlorinated dibenzofurans

[PCDFs]) and PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) are examples of persistent organic pollutants

[POPs]. Dioxins are unintentionally created during combustion of organic materials and PCBs

have been used in a wide variety of manufacturing processes (Bignert et al., 2010).

Sediments, atmospheric deposition and freshwater inputs are sources of POPs in aquatic

systems (Sundqvist et al., 2009). POPs are important environmental pollutants because of

their lipophilic properties, their ability to bioaccumulate, their ability to long-distance

transport and their long half-life times (Rignell-Hydbom et al., 2009; Hardell et al., 2010).

Dairy products and fatty food are the main sources of human exposure to PCB (Hardell et al.,

2010). Dioxins and PCBs are well absorbed in the human gastrointestinal tract and are spread

in the adipose tissue (Becker et al., 2007). Dioxins and PCBs can have negative effects on the

CNS, the immune system and the development of organs and some are classified as

carcinogenic substances.

Samples of salmon (Baltic Sea and several rivers), trout (several rivers), herring (Baltic Sea),

char (Vättern) and vendace (Vänern) have exceeded the maximum levels of dioxins stated in

EC No 1881/2006 (Ankarberg et al., 2007; SNFA, 2010b). Samples of salmon (Baltic Sea and

one river), trout (several rivers) and herring (Baltic Sea) have exceeded the maximum levels

of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs. There is no significant change in the concentrations of

dioxins in herring from the Baltic Sea and Kattegat (Bignert et al., 2010). The concentrations

of PCBs in herring and cod from the Baltic Sea and Kattegat, perch from the Baltic Sea, blue

mussels from Kattegat and char from Vättern show a significant decreasing trend as a result

of restrictions (Bignert et al., 2010; SBF, 2010c).

SNFA recommends limited intake of herring from the Baltic Sea, salmon and trout from the

Baltic Sea, Vänern and Vättern as well as char from Vättern due to high levels of dioxins and

PCBs (Becker et al., 2007). Fish account for about half of the food intake of dioxins in

Sweden. The median intake of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs in Swedish adults is

approximately half of the TDI but 14 % of the population has an intake that exceeds TDI. 5 %

of the women of reproductive age have an intake that exceeds TDI – mainly because of a high

consumption of fatty fish from the Baltic Sea. 65 % of four year old, 41 % of eight year old

and 14 % of eleven year old Swedish children have an intake of dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs

that exceeds the recommended TDI. There was a decreasing trend for the sum of PCBs in

samples of Swedish men and women during 1993–2007 (Hardell et al., 2010).

13

Other contaminants

The nuclear power plant accident in Chernobyl 1986 caused significant radioactive fallout in

Sweden and constant monitoring of radiation will be required for several generations to come

(Nesterenko et al., 2009). The radioactivity has dropped but quite high levels can still be

measured in some lakes (Lehtonen et al., 2008; Nesterenko et al., 2009). The maximum level

of 1500 Becquerel/kg wet weight set by SNFA was exceeded in Swedish samples of perch,

pike, trout and char during 2000-2002 (LIVSFS 1993:36; SRSA, 2010). SNFA recommends

limited intake of fish with more than 300 Bq/kg wet weight and zero intake of fish with more

than 10 000 Bq/kg wet weight (Becker et al., 2007). Levels exceeding 10 000 Bq/kg wet

weight have been measured in samples of perch in 2000 and 2001 and in pike in 2001 (SRSA,

2010).

The use of chemicals has increased steadily and several substances with potential negative

effects are released into the environment (Hanson & Larsson, 2009). Only a small fraction of

the substances in use are subjected to environmental monitoring (Viklund, 2010). Fish is one

of the media that is included in the Swedish Screening Programme for certain hazardous

substances (SEPA, 2009). The following substances have been detected in fish muscle:

organophosphates, octadecyl-3-(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxiphenyl)-propionate, silver, mysk

substances, hexavalent chromium, palladium and bisphenol A. These findings indicate that

fish consumed by humans are a source of human exposure to various potential problematic

substances. Fish caught in polluted freshwater systems can be a significant source of dietary

human exposure to perfluorinated alkyl substances [PFAS] and may continue to be for many

years or decades to come (Berger et al., 2009). The current knowledge about perflourinated

substances is not sufficient to make a risk assessment of PFAS in food (Ankarberg et el.,

2007).

14

Environmental impact

Fishery activities and the exploitation of target species have direct and indirect effects on non-

target species, the aquatic ecosystem and the entire environment – resulting in feedback

effects on target species (Thrane et al., 2009). Environmental impacts of fisheries vary

considerably depending on e. g. target species and fishing method (table 2, appendix II).

Swedish fisheries have a negative impact on 8 out of 16 Swedish Environmental Objectives;

“A balanced marine environment”, “Flourishing coastal areas and archipelagos”, “Flourishing

lakes and streams”, “A rich diversity of plant and animal life”, “A magnificent mountain

landscape”, “Reduced climate impact”, “Natural acidification only”, “Zero eutrophication”

and “A non-toxic environment” (SBF, 2007b).

Environmental impacts of fisheries occur in the fishing stage and in the post-landing phases of

the products life cycle, i.e. in the processing industry, sale and transport processes, during

shopping, cooling and food preparation as well as during disposal of packaging and leftovers

(Thrane et al, 2009). Life Cycle Analysis [LCA] of cod from the Baltic Sea and Norway

lobster from Kattegat reveal that fishery is the phase that contributes the most to global

warming potential, acidification, eutrophication, aquatic ecotoxicology and photochemical

ozone creation (Ziegler et al., 2003; Ziegler & Valentinsson, 2008). This is mainly due to

diesel production and combustion which are the processes that account for the majority of the

energy consumption. The amounts of greenhouse gas emissions produced by marine diesel

engines are considerable and contribute to climate change as well as to acidification and

eutrophication (Ziegler & Hansson, 2003; Daw et al., 2009). Beam and bottom trawls are

generally the most fuel consuming fishing methods (Thrane et al., 2009, table 2).

Overexploitation of seafood resources is increasing the environmental impact of seafood

production by reducing the catch per unit effort (Ziegler & Hansson, 2003; Ziegler et al.,

2003; Daw et al., 2009; Thrane et al., 2009).

The discards in Swedish fisheries are significant (Ziegler et al., 2003; Ziegler & Valentinsson,

2008) and correspond to 5-20 % of the total catch of cod, more than 50 % of the total catch of

plaice, haddock and witch (Glyptocephalus cynoglossus) and 85 % of the total catch of

whiting (SBF, 2010c). The discards include several additional species e.g. flounder

(Platichthys flesus), Nephrops, dab, turbot (Psetta maxima), long rough dab (Hippoglossoides

platessoides), brown crab (Cancer pagurus), gurnard (Eutriglia gurnardus) and hake

(Merlucchius merlucchius) (Ziegler et al., 2003; Ziegler & Valentinsson, 2008). Almost all

the discarded individuals die. Discard in fisheries contributes to eutrophication (Ziegler &

Valentinsson, 2008). An improved selectivity has the potential to reduce the discard rates by

reducing the catch of fish below the minimum landing size (Madsen et al., 2010).

The goal of Swedish fisheries management is to choose the fishing methods that cause the

least possible environmental damage (SBF, 2007a) but a significant proportion of the seafloor

is currently affected by fishing gear targeting demersal seafood species (Nilsson & Ziegler,

2007; Ziegler & Valentinsson, 2008). 44 % of the total Kattegat area was affected by trawling

by Swedish fishermen during 2001-2003 (Nilsson & Ziegler, 2007). Corals, sponges,

polychaetes and bivalves are very sensitive to fishing disturbance and are damaged both by

direct physical impact of the fishing gear and by sediment material clogging the filtering

15

organs. Species with long life-cycles, slow recruitment and low fecundity are more sensitive

than species with other life history strategies. Muddy seafloor areas are considered to have a

high recoverability but approximately 40 % of the muddy seafloors in the Kattegat remain in

a continuously disturbed condition due to trawling (Nilsson & Ziegler, 2007; Ziegler &

Valentinsson, 2008). Even very low levels of fishing intensity will have a high impact on

habitats with fragile components (e.g. coral reefs) (Nilsson & Ziegler, 2007). Abandoned, lost

or otherwise discarded fishing gear has a number of environmental impacts including

continued catch of and interactions with target and non-target species (Ziegler et al., 2003;

Ziegler & Valentinsson, 2008; Macfadyen et al., 2009).

The disappearance of top marine predators can cause major ecosystem changes due to top-

down processes (Casini et al., 2008). Intermediate predators may increase and reduce the

abundance of mesograzers like small crustaceans and gastropods, causing an increase of

nuisance algae (Baden et al., 2010). The interaction between bottom-up and top-down

processes can be complex but overfishing may play an important role in the decline of

eelgrass (Zostera sp.) in Skagerrak. The sharp decline in cod biomass has resulted in a trophic

cascade effect in the Baltic Sea during the past three decades (Casini et al., 2008). The decline

of the top predator fish has been followed by an increase in its main prey, the

zooplanktivorous sprat, a decrease in zooplankton and an increase of phytoplankton. The

observed cascade effects have caused a reorganization of the Baltic Sea ecosystem (Casini et

al., 2009). Two alternative ecosystem structures (one cod-dominated and one sprat-

dominated) that are separated by an ecological threshold (a certain level of sprat abundance)

have been identified. These alternatives are characterized by different functioning and

stability. Current conditions of high sprat abundance may impair cod recruitment by top-down

regulation of sprat on the food resources for cod larvae and ultimately undermine both cod

and ecosystem recovery (Casini et al, 2008; 2009). The ecosystem change in the Baltic Sea

may therefore be hard to reverse.

16

Discussion

The knowledge of the aquatic ecosystems is relatively poor and the natural state is often

unknown which makes it very difficult to detect and value changes (Rönnbäck et al., 2007;

Leadley et al., 2010; Cardinale et al., 2010). Uncertainties regarding future impact on

ecosystem services, organism’s ability to adapt as well as complex interactions between

ecological, social and economic systems make long term predictions extremely uncertain

(Barange & Perry, 2009; Daw et al., 2009; Leadley et al., 2010). Hence the current

information and knowledge is insufficient when attempting to completely assess whether

Swedish wild-caught seafood is a sustainable food resource.

When it comes to long-term production capacity, the status has only been assessed for a

minority of the utilized stocks and the feedback systems that prevent recovery of fish

populations are far from fully understood (Nilsson & Ziegler, 2007; Leadley et al., 2010).

There is however available data that clearly shows that the current use of wild populations of

fish, crustaceans and molluscs is threatening the long-term production capacity and that some

of the damages may be impossible or hard to reverse. The environmental impacts of fisheries

are only beginning to be understood (Leadley et al., 2010) and current LCA methods are not

adapted to assess environmental impacts of fisheries (Thrane et al., 2009) but the available

information reveals that Swedish fisheries have severe negative environmental impacts.

Nature may not be very fragile due to its ability to shift into new states but the maintenance of

ecosystem services on which human societies depend (e.g. production capacity of wild

populations of fish, crustacenas and molluscs) may be (Rönnbäck et al., 2007). Lack of

information is a problem also when trying to assess the food safety of wild-caught seafood.

Knowledge regarding the occurrence in seafood and risks associated with consumption are

lacking for a huge amount of substances. The environmental persistence and increasing trends

of some contaminants are however concerning.

The previous sections reveal several future challenges associated with wild-caught aquatic

food resources in Sweden. A variety of human impacts – including fisheries – are threatening

the future production capacity and food safety of Swedish seafood. The total demand of

seafood is however expected to increase in Sweden during the following two decades and

imports of seafood are expected to increase as a consequence (Failler et al., 2008). Import is

already today an important and growing source of seafood. Sweden imported more than

500 000 metric tons of seafood in 2009 and the amount have increased with approximately 60

% since 2004 (SS, SBA, 2010). The maximum production potential of the world’s capture

fisheries have been met but the demand for seafood will increase in the future leading to

increased fishing pressure and decreased future global landings of seafood (Leadley et al.,

2010). One way to increase the production of capture fisheries could be to fish for species that

are not utilized at all or under-utilized today. Aquaculture is another way to increase world

supply of seafood. Aquaculture accounts for about 45% of the fish consumed by humans

worldwide and aquaculture production is expected to increase in many parts of the world

(Paisley et al., 2010). However aquaculture relies on wild populations since captured seafood

is used as feed for some cultured species and since wild populations are used by aquacultures

to obtain broodstock or juveniles (FAO, 2009). The global aquaculture will continue to grow

17

but the growth rate will decrease and it could not be taken for granted that the growth in

production will match the growing demand.

Domestic aquaculture is another alternative source of supply. Sweden has good conditions for

aquaculture but a limited production – mainly of rainbow trout, blue mussels and char

(Paisley et al., 2010). There are several environmental impacts connected to aquaculture

including eutrophication, the use of feed and the risk of spreading genetic material, diseases

and parasites (Ziegler, 2008). The aquaculture production in Sweden is expected to remain

constant or decline until 2030 because of environmental concerns and regulations (Failler et

al., 2008; Paisley et al., 2010). Farming of blue mussels that feed on phytoplankton may be a

sustainable method for producing seafood while simultaneously decreasing marine

eutrophication (Lindahl et al., 2005). Blue mussel farming for consumption and for absorption

of pollutants and prevention of eutrophication will probably increase as will oyster farming

but the quantities produced will remain limited (Failler et al., 2008; Paisley et al., 2010).

Farming of Arctic char in hydroelectric water reservoirs may improve the local environment

by increasing the nutrient levels (Paisley et al., 2010). One idea is to move nutrients from the

Baltic Sea to oligotrophic rivers by catching fish in the Baltic Sea and use it to feed farmed

Arctic char (Eriksson et al., 2010). Aquaculture might also be a way to produce safe seafood

since farmed fish generally contain significantly lower levels of contaminants compared to

wild-caught fish (Becker et al., 2007).

A considerable amount of Swedish wild-caught seafood is in fact reared and released.

Stocking is a widely used method to compensate for the damages to fishing and to prevent

wild populations from becoming extinct (Laikre et al., 2005; Rönnbäck et al., 2007; Lehtonen,

et al., 2008). Except for direct human consumption Swedish seafood farms produce fish for

the national conservation of species program, for restocking and for put-and-take fisheries

(Paisley et al., 2010). The farmed species include rainbow trout, brown trout, salmon, Arctic

char, eel, pike-perch and crayfish. There is criticism about the practice of releasing reared fish

and according to Laikre et al. (2005) it is often carried out to be able to maintain a high

fishing pressure that may result in overharvest of the wild populations.

To change the diet is one approach to reduce the environmental impact of human activities in

order to reach sustainability. The amount of energy used to produce seafood might be very

high or fairly low compared to other sources of protein (Carlsson-Kanyama & González,

2009; Ziegler, 2008) since there are considerable differences in the environmental impact of

different seafood production systems. People might choose seafood that is produced in a more

sustainable way if they are given the choice and sustainable production is becoming

increasingly important for marketing reasons (Ziegler & Hansson, 2003). Increased seafood

consumption does not have to result in an increased environmental impact if consumers

choose seafood with relative low impact (Ziegler, 2008).

This study is far from conclusive regarding factors affecting the sustainability of wild-caught

aquatic seafood in Sweden. Focus has been on anthropogenic influences on production

capacity and the impacts of predators like seals and cormorants are for example not taken into

consideration. Only contaminants originated from human-induced pollution are included in

18

the assessment of food safety while seafood as source of infection is not. The study have been

focusing on ecological factors of sustainability but when dealing with issues of sustainability,

social as well as economic considerations have to be taken into account. It is also important to

bear in mind that there are other values, except from production, connected to aquatic

ecosystems, e.g. stabilizing and regulating biological functions, cultural values (i.e.

recreational and educational functions) and existence values (Rönnbäck et al., 2007; SBF,

2007a).

Conclusions

- Lack of knowledge makes it impossible to completely assess whether Swedish wild-

caught seafood is a sustainable food resource.

- Available information indicate that the current use of and impact on Swedish aquatic

eco-system services are unsustainable and threatening the long-term production

capacity and food safety of wild-caught seafood.

- The future increasing demand of seafood in Sweden will probably be met by import of

wild-caught and cultured fish and shellfish.

Acknowledgement

Thanks to Magnus Engwall for valuable support.

19

References Ankarberg, E., Aune, M., Concha, G., Darnerud, P.-O., Glynn, A., Lignell, S. & Törnkvist, T. 2007.

Riskvärdering av persistenta klorerade och bromerade miljöföroreningar i livsmedel. Swedish National

Food Administration. Rapport 9: 2007

Baden, S., Boström, C., Tobiasson, S., Arponen, H. & Moksnes, P.-O. 2010. Relative importance of trophic

interactions and nutrient enrichment in seagrass ecosystems: A broad-scale field experiment in the Baltic–

Skagerrak area. Limnology and Oceanography 55: 1435-1448

Barange, M. & Perry, R. I. 2009. Physical and ecological impacts of climate change relevant to marine and

inland capture fisheries and aquaculture. In: Cochrane, K., De Young, C., Soto, D. & Bahri, T. (eds).

Climate change implications for fisheries and aquaculture: overview of current scientific knowledge. FAO

Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 530: 7-106

Becker, W., Darnerud, P.O. & Petersson-Grawé, K. (2007). Fiskkonsumtion – risk och nytta. National Food

Administration, Sweden. Rapport 12-2007

Berger, U., Glynn, A., Holmström, K. E., Berglund, M., Halldin Ankarberg, E. & Törnkvist, A. 2009. Fish

consumption as a source of human exposure to perfluorinated alkyl substances in Sweden – Analysis of

edible fish from Lake Vättern and the Baltic Sea. Chemosphere 76: 799-804

Bignert, A., Danielsson, S., Nyberg, E., Asplund, L., Eriksson, U., Nylund, K., Berger, U. & Haglund, P. 2010.

Comments concerning the National Swedish Contaminant Monitoring Programme in Marine Biota, 2010.

Swedish Museum of Natural History. Report 1: 2010

Bishop, K., Allan, C., Bringmark, L., Garcia, E., Hellsten, S., Högbom, L., Johansson, K., Lomander, A., Meili,

M., Munthe, J., Nilsson, M., Porvari, P., Skyllberg, U., Sørensen, R., Zetterberg, T. & Åkerblom, S. 2009.

The effects of forestry on Hg bioaccumulation in nemoral/boreal waters and recommendations for good

silvicultural practice. Ambio 38: 373-380

Bruckmeier, K. & Neuman, E. 2005. Local fisheries management at the Swedish coast: biological and social

preconditions. Ambio 34: 91-100

Calles, O. & Greenberg, L. 2009. Connectivity is a two-way street – the need for a holistic approach to fish

passage problems in regulated rivers. River Research and Applications 25: 1268-1286

Cardinale, M. & Svedäng, H. 2004. Modelling recruitment and abundance of Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua, in the

eastern Skagerrak–Kattegat (North Sea): evidence of severe depletion due to a prolonged period of high

fishing pressure. Fisheries Research 69: 263-282

Cardinale, M., Hagberg, J., Svedäng, H., Bartolino, V., Gedamke, T., Hjelm, J., Börjesson, P. & Norén, F. 2010.

Fishing through time: population dynamics of plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) in the Kattegat–Skagerrak

over a century. Population Ecology 52: 251-262

Carlsson-Kanyama, A. & González, A. D. 2009. Potential contributions of food consumption patterns to climate

change. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 89 (suppl): 1704-1709

Casini, M., Hjelm, J., Molinero, J.-C., Lövgren, J., Cardinale, M., Bartolino, V., Belgrano, A. & Kornilovs, G.

2009. Trophic cascades promote threshold-like shifts in pelagic marine ecosystems. Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences 106: 197-202

Casini, M., Lövgren, J., Hjelm, J., Cardinale, M., Molinero, J.-C. & Kornilovs, G. 2008. Multi-level trophic

cascades in a heavily exploited open marine ecosystem. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 275: 1793-1801

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 of 19 December 2006 setting maximum levels for certain

contaminants in foodstuffs. The commission of the European communities

Conley, D. J., Bonsdorff, E., Carstensen, J., Destouni, G., Gustafsson, B. G., Hansson, L.-A., Rabalais, N. N.,

Voss, M. & Zillén, L. 2009. Tackling hypoxia in the Baltic Sea: is engineering a solution? Environmental

Science & Technology 43: 3407-3411

Daw, T., Adger, W. N., Brown, K. & Badjeck, M.-C. 2009. Climate change and capture fisheries: potential

impacts, adaptation and mitigation. In: Cochrane, K., De Young, C., Soto, D. & Bahri, T. (eds). Climate

change implications for fisheries and aquaculture: overview of current scientific knowledge. FAO Fisheries

and Aquaculture Technical Paper 530: 107-150

Degerman, E., Hammar, J., Nyberg, P & Svärdson, G. 2001. Human impact on the fish diversity in the four

largest lakes of Sweden. Ambio 30: 522-528

EOP – Environmental Objectives Portal. A rich diversity of plant and animal life. [online] (2010-11-10).

Available: http://www.miljomal.nu/Environmental-Objectives-Portal/16-A-Rich-Diversity-of-Plant-and-

Animal-Life/ (2010-12-18)

Eriksson, B. K., Sandström, A., Isæus, M., Schreiber, H. & Karås, P. 2004. Effects of boating activities on

aquatic vegetation in the Stockholm archipelago, Baltic Sea. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 61: 339-

349

Eriksson, L.-O., Alanärä, A., Nilsson, J. & Brännäs, E. 2010. The Arctic charr story: development of subarctic

freshwater fish farming in Sweden. Hydrobiologia 650: 265-274

20

Failler, P., Van de Walle, G., Lecrivain, N., Himbes, A. & Lewins, R. 2008. Future prospects for fish and fishery

products. 4. Fish consumption in the European Union in 2015 and 2030. Part 2. Country projections. Food

and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FIEP/C972/4, Part 2

FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2009. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department.

The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2008

Fick, J., Lindberg, R. H., Parkkonen, J., Arvidsson, B., Tysklind, M. & Larsson, D. G. J. 2010. Therapeutic

levels of levonorgestrel detected in blood plasma of fish: results from screening rainbow trout exposed to

treated sewage effluents. Environmental Science & Technology 44: 2661-2666

Hambraeus, L. 2009. Seafood in human nutrition. In: Fisheries, sustainability and development. Royal Swedish

Academy of Agriculture and Forestry. 325-340

Hansen, L. P. & Youngson, A. F. 2010. Dispersal of large farmed Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, from simulated

escapes at fish farms in Norway and Scotland. Fisheries Management and Ecology 17: 28-32

Hanson, N. & Larsson, Å. 2009. Experiences from a biomarker study on farmed rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus

mykiss) used for environmental monitoring in a Swedish river. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

28: 1536-1545

Hanson, N. 2009. Population level effects of reduced fecundity in the fish species perch (Perca fluviatilis) and

the implications for environmental monitoring. Ecological Modelling 220: 2051-2059

Hanson, N., Förlin, L. & Larsson. Å. 2009. Evaluation of long-term biomarker data from perch (Perca

fluviatilis) in the Baltic Sea suggests increasing exposure to environmental pollutants. Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry 28: 364-373

Hardell, E., Carlberg, M., Nordström, M. & van Bavel, B. 2010. Time trends of persistent organic pollutants in

Sweden during 1993–2007 and relation to age, gender, body mass index, breast-feeding and parity. Science

of the Total Environment 408: 4412-4419

HELCOM – Helsinki Commission. 2007. Baltic Sea Action Plan

ICES – International Council for Exploration of the Sea. 2009. Report of the ICES Advisory Committee, 2009.

ICES Advice, 2009. Book 6, 8, 9 &10

IVL – Swedish Environmental Research Institute. Kvicksilver i biota. [online] 2010 Available:

http://www3.ivl.se/db/plsql/dvsb_hg$b1.actionquery (20120-12-20)

Jansson, B.-O. & Stålvant, C.-E. 2001. The Baltic basin case study – towards a sustainable Baltic Europe.

Continental Shelf Research 21: 1999-2019

Laikre, L., Palm, S. & Ryman, N. 2005. Genetic population structure of fishes: implications for coastal zone

management. Ambio 34: 111-119

Langhamer, O., Haikonen, K. & Sundberg, J. 2010. Wave power – sustainable energy or environmentally costly?

A review with special emphasis on linear wave energy converters. Renewable and Sustainable Energy

Reviews 14: 1329-1335

Larsson, L.C., Laikre, L., André, C., Dahlgren, T.G. & Ryman, N. 2010. Temporally stable genetic structure of

heavily exploited Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) in Swedish waters. Heredity 104: 40-51

Law, R. 2000. Fishing, selection and phenotypic evolution. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 659-669

Leadley, P., Pereira, H. M., Alkemade, R., Fernandez-Manjarres, J. F., Proenca, V., Scharlemann, J. P. W. &

Walpole, M. J. 2010. Biodiversity Scenarios: Projections of 21st century change in biodiversity and

associated ecosystem services. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity Technical Series 50

Lehtonen, H., Rask, M., Pakkasmaa, S. & Hesthagen, T. 2008. Freshwater fishes, their biodiversity, habitats and

fisheries in the Nordic countries. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management 11: 298 -309

Lindahl, O., Hart, R., Hernroth, B., Kollberg, S., Loo, L.-O., Olrog, L., Rehnstam-Holm, A.-S., Svensson, J.,

Svensson, S. & Syversen, U. 2005. Improving marine water quality by mussel farming: a profitable

solution for Swedish society. Ambio 34: 131-138

Lindberg, M., Rivinoja, P., Eriksson, L.-O. & Alanärä, A. 2009. Post-release and pre-spawning behaviour of

simulated escaped adult rainbow trout Oncorhynhus mykiss in Lake Övre Fryken, Sweden. Journal of Fish

Biology 74: 691-698

Livsmedelsverkets föreskrifter (LIVSFS 1993:36) om vissa främmande ämnen i livsmedel

Lundqvist, H., Rivinoja, P., Leonardsson, K. & McKinnell, S. 2008. Upstream passage problems for wild

Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in a regulated river and its effect on the population. Hydrobiologia 602:

111-127

Macfadyen, G., Huntington, T. & Cappell, R. 2009. Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear. FAO

Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 523, UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies 185: 29-46

MacKenzie, B.R., Bager, M., Ojaveer, H., Awebro, K., Heino, U., Holm, P. & Must, A. 2007. Multi-decadal

scale variability in the eastern Baltic cod fishery 1550-1860 – Evidence and causes. Fisheries Research 87:

106-119

Madsen, N., Tschernij, V. & Holst, R. 2010. Improving selectivity of the Baltic cod pelagic trawl fishery:

Experiments to assess the next step. Fisheries Research 103: 40-47

21

Margonski, P., Hansson, S., Tomczak, M. T. & Grzebielec, R. 2010. Climate influence on Baltic cod, sprat, and

herring stock-recruitment relationships. Progress in Oceanography (in press)

MAS – Ministry of Agriculture Sweden. The Government Offices of Sweden. 2010. Sustainable food in Sweden.

Memorandum

Mikoczy, Z. & Rylander, L. 2009. Mortality and cancer incidence in cohorts of Swedish fishermen and

fishermen’s wives: Updated findings. Chemosphere 74: 938-943

Mukherjee, A. B., Zevenhoven, R., Brodersen, J., Hylander, L. D. & Bhattacharya, P. 2004. Mercury in waste in

the European Union: sources, disposal methods and risks. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 42: 155-

182

Nesterenko, A. V., Nesterenko, V. B. & Yablokov, A. V. 2009. Radiation protection after the Chernobyl

catastrophe. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1181: 287-327

Nilsson, P. & Ziegler, F. 2007. Spatial distribution of fishing effort in relation to seafloor habitats in the

Kattegat, a GIS analysis. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 17: 421-440

Nissling, A. 2004. Effects of temperature on egg and larval survival of cod (Gadus morhua) and sprat (Sprattus

sprattus) in the Baltic Sea – implications for stock development Hydrobiologia 514: 115-123

Olson, C. 2008. Neolithic Fisheries. Osteoarchaeology of Fish Remains in the Baltic Sea Region. Doctoral

Dissertation. Osteoarchaeological Research Laboratory, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies,

Stockholm University

Österblom, H. (2009). Human impact on aquatic ecosystems. In: Fisheries, sustainability and development. The

Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry. 21-33

Paisley, L.G., Ariel, E., Lyngstad, T., Jónsson, G., Vennerström, P., Hellström, A. & Østergaard, P. 2010. An

overview of aquaculture in the Nordic countries. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 41: 1-17

Palm, D., Lepori, F. & Brännäs, E. 2010. Influence of habitat restoration on post-emergence displacement of

brown trout (Salmo trutta L.): a case study in a northern Swedish stream. River Research and Applications

26: 742-750

Persson, K.-E., Legrand, C. & Olsson, T. 2009. Detection of nodularin in European flounder (Platichthys flesus)

in the west coast of Sweden: Evidence of nodularin mediated oxidative stress. Harmful Algae 8: 832-838

Petersson- Grawè, P., Concha, G. & Ankarberg, E. 2007. Riskvärdering av metylkvicksilver i fisk. Swedish

National Food Administration. Rapport 10: 2007

Rignell-Hydbom, A., Skerfving, S., Lundh, T., Lindh, C. H., Elmståhl, S., Bjellerup, P., Jönsson, B. A. G.,

Strömberg, U. & Åkesson, A. 2009. Exposure to cadmium and persistent organochlorine pollutants and its

association with bone mineral density and markers of bone metabolism on postmenopausal women.

Environmental Research 109: 991-996

Roig, B., Greenwood, R. & Barcelo, D. 2009. An international conference on “Pharmaceuticals in the

Environment” in a frame of EU Knappe project. Environment International 35: 763-765

Rönnbäck, P., Kautsky, N., Pihl, L., Troell, M., Söderqvist, T. & Wennhage, H. 2007. Ecosystem goods and

services from Swedish coastal habitats: Identification, valuation, and implications of ecosystem shifts.

Ambio 36: 534-544

Rönnberg, C. & Bonsdorff, E. 2004. Baltic Sea eutrophication: area-specific ecological consequences.

Hydrobiologia 514: 227-241

SBA – Swedish Board of Agriculture. (2010). Consumption of food and nutritive values, data up to 2008.

Statistikrapport 2010:3

SBF – Swedish Board of Fisheries. 2006. Fakta om svenskt fiske. Statistik tom 2005

SBF – Swedish Board of Fisheries. 2007a. Precisering av begreppet hållbart nyttjande för fiskesektorn

SBF – Swedish Board of Fisheries. 2007b. Miljömålen och fisket. Fiskeriverkets rapport om sitt sektorsansvar

för miljömålsfrågor

SBF – Swedish Board of Fisheries. 2009. Fem studier av fritidsfiske 2002-2007. Finfo 2009:1

SBF – Swedish Board of Fisheries. 2010a. Swedish sea-fisheries during 2009. Definitive data. JO 55 SM 1001

SBF – Swedish Board of Fisheries. 2010b. Fishing in inland waters by commercial fishermen in 2009.

Preliminary data. JO 56 SM 1001

SBF – Swedish Board of Fisheries. 2010c. Fiskbestånd och miljö i hav och sötvatten. Resurs- och miljööversikt

2010

SEPA – Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Results from the Swedish Screening Programme

2006/2007-2008. What concentrations of hazardous substances do we find in the environment? Rapport

6301

Serrano, I., Rivinoja, P., Karlsson, L. & Larsson, S. 2009. Riverine and early marine survival of stocked salmon

smolts, Salmo salar L., descending the Testebo River, Sweden. Fisheries Management and Ecology 16:

386-394

22

SNFA – Swedish National Food Administration. Persistent organic pollutants in fatty fish in Sweden 2000-2003.

Interim reports 1-5. [online] (2010-09-23b) Available: http://www.slv.se/en-gb/Group1/Food-

Safety/Persistent-organic-pollutants-in-fatty-fish-in-Sweden-2000-2003/ (2010-12-20)

SNFA – Swedish National Food Administration. Råd om fisk. [online] (2010-09-06a) Accessible:

http://www.slv.se/sv/grupp1/Mat-och-naring/Kostrad/Rad-om-fisk/ (2010-11-11)

SRSA – Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. Cesiumdatabas. [online] (2010-07-15) Available:

http://apps.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se/miljodb/webquery.aspx (2010-12-20)

SS – Statistics Sweden. (1959). Historical statistics of Sweden. Climate, land surveying , agriculture, forestry,

fisheries – 1955

SS –Statistics Sweden, SBA – Swedish Board of Agriculture. 2010. Yearbook of agricultural statistics 2010

including food statistics.

SSIC – Swedish Species Information Centre. The 2010 Red List of Swedish Species. [online] (2010) Available:

http://snotra.artdata.slu.se/artfakta/GetSpecies.aspx?SearchType=Advanced (2010-12-18)

Sterner, T. & Svedäng, H. 2005. A net loss: Policy instruments for commercial cod fishing in Sweden. Ambio

34: 84-90

Sundqvist, K. L., Tysklind, M., Cato, I., Bignert, A. & Wiberg, K. 2009. Levels and homologue profiles of

PCDD/Fs in sediments along the Swedish coast of the Baltic Sea. Environmental Science & Pollution

Research 16: 396-409

Sundström, B. & Jorhem, L. 2010. Metaller i fisk i Sverige – sammanställning av analysdata 2001-2005.

Swedish National Food Administration. Rapport 14: 2010

Svedäng, H. & Bardon, G. 2003. Spatial and temporal aspects of the decline in cod (Gadus morhua L.)

abundance in the Kattegat and eastern Skagerrak. ICES Journal of Marine Science 60: 32-37

Svedäng, H. 2003. The inshore demersal fish community on the Swedish Skagerrak coast: regulation by

recruitment from offshore sources. ICES Journal of Marine Science 60: 23-31

Thrane, M., Ziegler, F. & Sonesson, U. 2009. Eco-labelling of wild-caught seafood products. Journal of Cleaner

Production 17: 416-423

Viklund, K. (ed). 2010. Havet 2010 – om miljötillståndet i svenska havsområden. Swedish Environmental

Protection Agency. Swedish Institute for the Marine Environment

Wällstedt, T., Edberg, F. & Borg, H. 2009. Long-term water chemical trends in two Swedish lakes after

termination of liming. Science of the Total Environment 407: 3554-3562

WCED – World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future

Weyhenmeyer, G. A. 2009. Do warmer winters change variability patterns of physical and chemical lake

conditions in Sweden? Aquatic Ecology 43: 653-659

Ziegler, F. & Hansson, P.-A. 2003. Emissions from fuel combustion in Swedish cod fishery. Journal of Cleaner

Production 11: 303-314

Ziegler, F. & Valentinsson, D. 2008. Environmental life cycle assessment of Norway lobster (Nephrops

norvegicus) caught along the Swedish west coast by creels and conventional trawls – LCA methodology with

case study. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 13: 487-497

Ziegler, F. 2008. Delrapport fisk. På väg mot miljöanpassade kostråd. Swedish National Food Administration.

Rapport 10: 2008

Ziegler, F., Nilsson, P., Mattsson, B. & Walther, Y. 2003. Life Cycle Assessment of frozen cod fillets including

fishery-specific environmental impacts. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 8: 39-47

23

Appendix I

Table 1. The 49 seafood species most frequently caught in Swedish fisheries, catch for human consumption by marine and freshwater commercial fishermen in 2009

and leisure fishermen in 2006, stock assessments according to ICES Advice 2009 and assessments of extinction risk and most significant threat according to the 2010

Red List of Swedish Species (SBF, 2009, 2010a,b; ICES, 2009; SSIC, 2010).

Species Catch

(million kg)

ICES Advice Red List

Spawning biomass in

relation to

precautionary limitsi

Fishing mortality in

relation to

precautionary limitsii

Fishing mortality in

relation to highest

yieldiii

Categoryiv Most

significant

threat

Herring (Clupea harengus)

Eastern Baltic Sea

Bothnian Sea

Western Baltic Sea, Kattegat and

Skagerrak (spring spawners)

North Sea, Kattegat and Skagerrak

(autumn spawners)

39

-

-

-

Increased risk

Increased risk

Harvested sustainably

-

Harvested sustainably

Overexploited

Appropriate

Overexploited

Overexploited

- -

European sprat (Sprattus sprattus)

Baltic Sea

16

-

Increased risk

Overexploited

- -

Cod (Gadus morhua)

Western Baltic Sea

Eastern Baltic Sea

14

Increased risk

-

-

Harvested sustainably

Overexploited

Appropriate

EN High fishing

pressure

24

Species Catch

(million kg)

ICES Advice Red List

Spawning biomass in

relation to

precautionary limitsi

Fishing mortality in

relation to

precautionary limitsii

Fishing mortality in

relation to highest

yieldiii

Categoryiv Most

significant

threat

Kattegat

North Sea and Skagerrak

Reduced reproductive

capacity

Reduced reproductive

capacity

-

Increased risk

-

Overexploited

Mackerel (Scomber scombrus)

Northeast Atlantic

8

Full reproductive

capacity

Increased risk

Overexploited

- -

Pike (Esox lucius)

3 - - - - -

Perch (Perca fluviatilis)

3 - - - - -

Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis)

2 - - - - -

Saithe (Pollachius virens)

Skagerrak, Kattegat and the North Sea

1

Full reproductive

capacity

Harvested sustainably

Appropriate

- -

Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus)

1 - - - - -

Vendace (Coregonus albula)

1 - - - - -

Trout (Salmo trutta)

Baltic Sea

1

Populations are on

average much below

potential

-

-

- -

Maraene (Coregonus maraena)

1 - - - - -

Greater weever (Trachinus draco)

1 - - - - -

Pikeperch (Sander lucioperca) 0,1-1 - - - - -

25

Species Catch

(million kg)

ICES Advice Red List

Spawning biomass in

relation to

precautionary limitsi

Fishing mortality in

relation to

precautionary limitsii

Fishing mortality in

relation to highest

yieldiii

Categoryiv Most

significant

threat

Salmon (Salmo salar)

Baltic Sea

0,1-1

Low at-sea

(post-smolt)

survival in recent

years threatens

stock recoveries

-

-

- -

Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

0,1-1 - - - - -

European eel (Anguilla anguilla)

0,1-1 - - - CR Not known

Small sand eel (Ammodytes marinus)

& Lesser sand eel (Ammodytes

tobianus)

North Sea

0,1-1

Increased risk

-

-

- -

European plaice (Pleuronectes

platessa)

North Sea

0,1-1

Full reproductive

capacity

Harvested sustainably

Overexploited

- -

Char (Salvelinus umbla) & Arctic char

(Salvelinus alpinus)

0,1-1 - - - - -

Grayling (Thymallus thymallus)

0,1-1 - - - - -

Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus)

North Sea and Skagerrak

0,1-1

Full reproductive

capacity

Harvested sustainably

Appropriate

EN High fishing

pressure

European flounder (Platichthys flesus)

0,1-1 - - - - -

26

Species Catch

(million kg)

ICES Advice Red List

Spawning biomass in

relation to

precautionary limitsi

Fishing mortality in

relation to

precautionary limitsii

Fishing mortality in

relation to highest

yieldiii

Categoryiv Most

significant

threat

Brown crab (Cancer pagurus)

0,1-1 - - - - -

Crayfish

Signal crayfish (Pacifastacus

leniusculus)

European crayfish (Astacus astacus)

0,1-1

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

CR

-

Crayfish

plague

Witch (Glyptocephalus cynoglossus)

0,1-1 - - - - -

Angler (Lophius piscatorius)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Spiny Dogfish (Squalus acanthias) < 0,1 - - - CR High fishing

pressure

Lumpsucker (Cyclopterus lumpus)

< 0,1 - - - NT Not known

Whiting (Merlangius merlangus)

North Sea

< 0,1

-

-

Overexploited

VU High fishing

pressure

European hake (Merlucchius

merlucchius)

Skagerrak, Kattegat and the North Sea

< 0,1

Full reproductive

capacity

Harvested sustainably

Overexploited

- -

Atlantic pollock (Pollachius

pollachius)

< 0,1 - - - CR High fishing

pressure

Turbot (Psetta maxima)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Common ling (Molva molva) < 0,1 - - - EN High fishing

pressure

27

Species Catch

(million kg)

ICES Advice Red List

Spawning biomass in

relation to

precautionary limitsi

Fishing mortality in

relation to

precautionary limitsii

Fishing mortality in

relation to highest

yieldiii

Categoryiv Most

significant

threat

Sole (Solea solea)

Skagerrak, Kattegat and the North Sea

< 0,1

Full reproductive

capacity

Harvested sustainably

Appropriate

- -

European lobster (Homarus

gammarus)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Brill (Scophthalmus rhombus)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Atlantic wolffish (Anarhichas lupus)

< 0,1 - - - EN Not known

Common dab (Limanda limanda)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Lemon sole (Microstomus kitt)

< 0,1 - - - - -

European flat oyster (Ostrea edulis)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Blue mussel (Mytilus edulis)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus) < 0,1 - - - EN High fishing

pressure

Cusk (Brosme brosme)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Grey gurnard (Eutrigla gurnardus)

< 0,1 - - - - -

Garfish (Belone belone)

< 0,1 - - - - -

28

i Spawning biomass (amount of adult fish) in relation to precautionary limits recommended by ICES. The category “Full reproductive capacity” means that the fish stock is in

a healthy state and that the spawning biomass is above the minimum level recommended by ICES. “Increased risk” means that the amount of adult fish is below the

recommended minimum level and that there is a risk that production is reduced. “Reduced reproductive capacity” means that the stock is depleted.

ii Fishing mortality in relation to precautionary limits recommended by ICES. The category “Harvested sustainably” means that the fishing pressure is under the maximum

level recommended by ICES. “Increased risk” means that the fishing pressure is higher than the recommended maximum level and could lead to depletion of the stock.

“Harvested unsustainably” means that the fishing pressure is much higher than the recommended maximum level and is likely to deplete the stock.

iii

Fishing mortality in relation to highest yield is a measure of the level of fishing pressure that will lead to a high yield in the long term. The category “Below target” means

that there is scope for more fishing to get a higher yield in the long term. “Appropriate” means that fishing pressure is at the right level to get the most fish from the stock in

the long term. “Overexploited” means that fishing pressure is too high and that more fish could be taken from the stock in the future if fishing pressure was reduced.

iv A species is Critically Endangered (CR) when it is considered to be facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild. A species is categorized as Endangered (EN)

when it is considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild. A species is Vulnerable (VU) when it is considered to be facing a high risk of extinction in the

wild. A species is categorized as Near Threatened (NT) when it is close to qualifying for or is likely to qualify for a threatened category in the near future.

29

Appendix II

Table 2. Environmental impact of commercial fisheries for 25 seafood target species in areas where Swedish fisheries operate (Ziegler, 2008). The environmental

impact assessment include status and management of target species, size and species selection of fishing gear, seafloor impact, energy consumption, ghost-fishing and

catch quality.

Target species Fishing gear Fishing area Environmental impact

Status and

management of

fishing stocksv

(2-20)

Size

selectionvi

(1-10)

Species

selection

(1-10)

Seafloor

impact

(1-10)

Energy

efficiencyvii

(1-10)

Ghost-

fishing

(1-10)

Catch

qualityviii

(1-10)

Sum

(8-80)

Angler (Lophius

piscatorius)

Gillnet Northeast Atlantic 16 3 5 4 4 9 7 48

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 16 7 8 9 10 2 6 58

Bottom trawl

(BACOMA)

Baltic Sea 16 3 6 9 10 2 5 51

Atlantic wolffish

(Anarhichas lupus)

Gillnet Northeast Atlantic 18 3 5 4 4 9 4 47

Longline Northeast Atlantic 18 4 5 2 5 3 2 39

Brown crab (Cancer

pagurus)

Creel Northeast Atlantic 2 1 4 3 7 5 1 23

Cod (Gadus morhua)

Bottom trawl

(BACOMA)

Baltic Sea 20 3 6 9 10 2 5 55

Gillnet Skagerrak, Kattegat and

the Baltic Sea

20 3 5 4 4 9 7 52

Bottom trawl Norwegian Sea 8 7 8 9 9 2 6 49

Longline Norwegian Sea 8 4 5 2 4 3 2 28

Danish seine Skagerrak and Kattegat 20 3 7 6 5 2 3 46

Bottom trawl with

sorting grid

Norwegian Sea 8 5 8 9 9 2 5 46

30

Target species Fishing gear Fishing area Environmental impact

Status and

management of

fishing stocksv

(2-20)

Size

selectionvi

(1-10)

Species

selection

(1-10)

Seafloor

impact

(1-10)

Energy

efficiencyvii

(1-10)

Ghost-

fishing

(1-10)

Catch

qualityviii

(1-10)

Sum

(8-80)

Bottom trawl Skagerrak and Kattegat 20 7 8 9 10 2 6 62

Bottom trawl with

sorting grid

Skagerrak and Kattegat 20 5 8 9 10 2 5 59

Common ling (Molva

molva)

Gillnet Northeast Atlantic 18 3 5 4 4 9 7 50

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 18 7 8 9 10 2 6 60

Longline

Northeast Atlantic 18 4 5 2 5 3 2 39

European eel

(Anguilla anguilla)

Fyke net Skagerrak and Kattegat 20 3 9 3 8 7 2 52

Gillnet

Baltic Sea 20 3 9 4 4 9 7 66

European flounder

(Platichthys flesus)

Gillnet Baltic Sea 2 3 5 4 3 9 7 33

Bottom trawl Baltic Sea 2 7 8 9 9 2 6 43

European hake

(Merlucchius

merlucchius)

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic,

northern stock

6 7 8 9 8 9 6 53

Gillnet/ Longline Northeast Atlantic,

southern stock

18 3 5 3 6 7 7 49

European lobster

(Homarus

gammarus)

Creel Skagerrak and Kattegat 6 2 2 2 7 5 1 25

European plaice

(Pleuronectes

platessa)

Beam trawl North Sea 12 9 9 10 10 2 7 59

Danish seine Skagerrak and Kattegat 6 3 7 6 5 2 3 32

Bottom trawl

Skagerrak and Kattegat 6 7 8 9 9 2 6 47

31

Target species Fishing gear Fishing area Environmental impact

Status and

management of

fishing stocksv

(2-20)

Size

selectionvi

(1-10)

Species

selection

(1-10)

Seafloor

impact

(1-10)

Energy

efficiencyvii

(1-10)

Ghost-

fishing

(1-10)

Catch

qualityviii

(1-10)

Sum

(8-80)

European sprat

(Sprattus sprattus)

Purse seine Northeast Atlantic 2 5 6 2 2 1 2 20

Haddock

(Melanogrammus

aeglefinus)

Danish seine Northeast Atlantic 4 3 7 6 5 2 3 30

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 4 7 8 9 9 2 6 45

Bottom trawl with

sorting grid

Northeast Atlantic 4 5 8 9 9 2 5 42

Halibut

(Hippoglossus

hippoglossus)

Gillnet Northeast Atlantic 20 3 5 4 4 9 7 52

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 20 7 8 9 10 2 6 62

Herring (Clupea

harengus)

Pelagic trawl Northeast Atlantic 2 5 6 1 4 2 3 23

Purse seine Northeast Atlantic 2 5 6 2 2 1 2 20

Pelagic trawl Baltic Sea 2 5 6 1 3 2 3 22

Purse seine

Baltic Sea 2 5 6 2 1 1 2 19

Lemon sole

(Microstomus kitt)

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 12 7 8 9 9 2 6 53

Mackerel (Scomber

scombrus)

Pelagic trawl Northeast Atlantic 16 5 6 1 4 2 3 37

Maraene (Coregonus

maraena)

Gillnet, fyke net,

fish trap

Baltic Sea ? 3 5 4 3 9 2 ?

Gillnet Vättern 16 3 5 4 4 9 7 48

Gillnet

Other Swedish lakes 2 3 5 4 3 9 2 28

32

Target species Fishing gear Fishing area Environmental impact

Status and

management of

fishing stocksv

(2-20)

Size

selectionvi

(1-10)

Species

selection

(1-10)

Seafloor

impact

(1-10)

Energy

efficiencyvii

(1-10)

Ghost-

fishing

(1-10)

Catch

qualityviii

(1-10)

Sum

(8-80)

Northern shrimp

(Pandalus borealis)

Shrimp trawl with

sorting grid

Northeast Atlantic 2 7 4 8 9 2 5 37

Shrimp trawl with

sorting grid

Northeast Atlantic 2 7 9 8 9 2 6 43

Norway lobster

(Nephrops

norvegicus)

Lobster trawl with

sorting grid

Skagerrak, Kattegat and

the North Sea

2 7 4 9 9 2 5 38

Creel Skagerrak 2 3 2 3 7 5 1 23

Lobster trawl Skagerrak, Kattegat and

the North Sea

2 7 9 9 9 2 6 44

Perch (Perca

fluviatilis)

Gillnet Baltic Sea and Swedish

lakes

2 3 4 1 3 9 9 31

Pikeperch (Sander

lucioperca)

Gillnet/fyke net Hjälmaren 2 3 4 3 3 9 2 26

Gillnet/fyke net Other Swedish lakes 4 3 4 3 3 9 2 28

Saithe (Pollachius

virens)

Gillnet Northeast Atlantic 2 3 5 4 3 9 7 33

Danish seine Northeast Atlantic 2 3 7 6 5 2 3 28

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 2 7 8 9 9 2 6 43

Bottom trawl with

sorting grid

Northeast Atlantic 2 5 8 9 9 2 5 40

Salmon (Salmo salar)

Gillnet Sweden 18 3 5 3 6 7 7 49

Sole (Solea solea)

Gillnet North Sea 2 7 8 4 3 9 7 40

33

Target species Fishing gear Fishing area Environmental impact

Status and

management of

fishing stocksv

(2-20)

Size

selectionvi

(1-10)

Species

selection

(1-10)

Seafloor

impact

(1-10)

Energy

efficiencyvii

(1-10)

Ghost-

fishing

(1-10)

Catch

qualityviii

(1-10)

Sum

(8-80)

Spiny dogfish

(Squalus acanthias)

Gillnet Northeast Atlantic 20 3 5 4 4 9 7 52

Turbot (Psetta

maxima)

Gillnet Baltic Sea 10 7 5 4 4 9 7 46

Whiting (Merlangius

merlangus)

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 12 7 8 9 9 2 6 53

Bottom trawl with

sorting grid

Northeast Atlantic 12 5 8 9 9 2 5 50

Witch

(Glyptocephalus

cynoglossus)

Bottom trawl Northeast Atlantic 12 7 8 9 9 2 6 53

Danish seine Northeast Atlantic 12 3 7 6 5 2 3 38

Cusk (Brosme

brosme)

Longline Northeast Atlantic ? 4 5 2 4 3 2 ?

v The environmental impact assessment is based on the amount of biological knowledge about the stocks, occurrence of illegal fishing, stock assessments by ICES and other

organizations as well as management plans. The environmental impact is presented on a scale ranging from 2-20 where 20 stands for the highest impact.

vi The environmental impact assessment is based on the selectivity of the used fishing gear and fishing method and on the survival rate of discards. The environmental impact

is presented on a scale ranging from 1-10 where 10 stands for the highest impact.

vii The energy efficiency assessment is based on available LCA studies, stock assessments and the distance between the fisheries and Sweden.

viii The environmental impact assessment is based on fishing methods and the sensibility of target species.

34