Less glass eels, reduced stocking, falling catches
Is the European eel on the brink of collapse?

The signs are alarming: during the last 20 years the number of European eels fell by more than 90 per cent. Recruitment has been declining since 1980 and reached a historic low in 2001. Scientists have been warning for years that the European eel could become extinct if action is not taken. Europe’s fishermen are already feeling the effects of this development as they find less and less eels in their nets. There are few signs of this on the eel market, however, because the lower catch is compensated by farmed eels. Following a number of difficult years the European eel market stabilized notably again in 2003.

Actually, eel is a fish species that occurs frequently in nearly all European rivers systems and in the coastal waters of Europe and North Africa. As a result of restocking measures it is also to be found around the Danube and numerous other waters in which it did not originally occur naturally. For more than a decade, however, less and less glass eels have been reaching the European coasts and a natural migration into inland waters practically hardly takes place anymore. At the same time, there has been a dramatic fall in eel catches.

No one knows exactly what the reasons are for the eel’s absence but there is certainly no lack of theories and attempts to explain the situation: Overfishing and water pollution are named just as often as river obstructions such as weirs and barriers or hydroelectric power stations whose turbines injure or even kill the eels. Others presume that the nematode Anguillicola crassus that was brought in from Asia at the beginning of the 1980s and parasitizes the swim bladder of the eel weakens them to such an extent that they are no longer capable of migrating to the spawning grounds in the Sargasso Sea. Amidst this confusion of speculations the voices of various interest groups are also audible. Whilst some environmentalists claim that eel are no longer fully capable of reproduction due to increasing contamination with organic chlorine compounds, fishermen sooner blame escalating cormorant stocks for this development. But it is possible that temperature anomalies in the Sargasso Sea might also offer an explanation in that they would lead to less plankton and thus a lack of suitable feed for the eel larvae. The situation is complicated and complex, particularly because there are a lot of mysteries surrounding the eel which have still not been solved. Probably any of the different approaches that is only looking for one single cause falls short, for each of the problems named above contributes in part to the weakening of the eel population. And so it is probably best to aim all measures suited to saving the eel as widely as possible.

And the problem is urgent, for experts already judge the present situation as extremely critical. On average, it takes nearly 15 years for an eel to become mature and migrate for spawning. So the success of actions carried out today will not be visible for decades. Even if long-term thinking is not one of the virtues of politics, it is definitely needed now. For success can only be achieved on the basis of multinational co-operation. The distribution area of eel is huge. It ranges from the coast of North America, across the Atlantic, into the rivers of Europe. In consideration of the life cycle of the eel, protection measures will have to cover the whole area of distribution. Actions within individual countries will have to be tuned to one another, fisheries management and environmental policy more closely combined.

Eel stock outside safe biological limits

A serious problem is the insufficient data basis that is available for eel. Although the species has been fished in Europe for centuries in all life phases from glass eels to silver eels there are still huge gaps in the available statistics. This makes it difficult to recognize alarming developments in good time or to evaluate the success of any introduced measures. In a lot of places, however, the negative changes are in the meantime so noticeable that there are no longer any doubts as to the necessity of protection. In Great Britain, for example, the number of glass eels ascending into rivers has fallen to one per cent of the original figure within 20 years. The situation is much the same in other regions of Europe. More and more states are classifying eel as endangered and putting it on the red list as an endangered species.

In October 2002, the International Council for the Exploitation of the Seas, ICES, also established that eel stocks were outside safe biological limits and that in recent years the fishery had not been sustainable. This implies the very real danger that the population has reached the critical point of no return beyond which there are too few fishes left to be able to reproduce successfully. ICES thus strongly recommends that a stock recovery plan be drawn up or, at least, that fishing be permitted only at a very low level. And it is important to consider all the different development stages of eel. The glass eel fishery in the river estuaries that mainly provides stock for the eel farms must be regulated so that there are still enough glass eels left to ascend into the rivers. Fisheries effort in coastal and inland waters has to be limited so that sufficient eels can survive up to maturity and still migrate to the spawning grounds. Mature eels, in particular, are in danger when they start swimming downriver on their migration. Suitable measures have to be introduced to ensure their survival during this life phase, too. Just how urgent the solution of this problem is can be seen from Dutch tests according to which only one in 700 female eels survives its migration back to the sea. Fishery mortality among silver eel can reach up to 97 per cent.

High glass eel price hinders stocking measures

Furthermore, at least just as serious as this problem is the fact that restocking of eel in rivers and lakes has been falling for years. Restocking (eels are caught in one region and then released in other regions) has a long tradition in Europe, sometimes dating back as far as the 19th century. Mostly, glass eels are taken for this purpose, but sometimes also yellow eels. A characteristic of the glass eel market is huge price fluctuations which can occur from one day to the next, reflecting the interplay of supply and demand. In the meantime it is hardly possible, even during the peak season, to get hold of glass eels of an acceptable quality for below 100 dollars per kilogram. Based on estimations, only 5 per cent of the glass eel catch is currently used for restocking purposes. The consequences of this decrease will become noticeable in several years’ time. For no one can estimate how many eels ascend into the rivers naturally.

In the past, glass eels were mainly used for direct consumption and for restocking natural waters. At that time demand from eel farms played only a subordinate role. During the last decade, however, this spectrum of usage has changed dramatically. Due to rising glass eel prices, direct consumption which, for example, has a long tradition in Spain, has become largely insignificant. It is today practically impossible to sell glass eels for consumption above a seemingly magical limit of 100 euros/kg. Inexpensive surimi products have taken their place.

Majority of eel come from aquaculture

Eel farms have become the main buyers of the glass eel catches. Their requirements are huge, for nearly 95 per cent of all eel species on the world market, which has been relatively constant at just under 250,000 t since the mid-1990s, is produced in aquaculture! The main species produced are Japanese eel (Anguilla japonica), European eel (A. anguilla) and American eel (A. rostrata). On average, farms need about 3 to 4 kilograms of glass eels in the case of European eel, or 2.5 kilograms in the case of Japanese eel, to produce one tonne of marketable eels. Expressed in numbers of eels that means about 10,000 European or 5,000 of the larger Japanese glass eels.

Nearly 90 per cent of world production of farmed eel is produced in Asia. The leading producer is China which supplies about two thirds of the world market. Next come Taiwan and Japan. During recent years, Chinese eel production has been stable at about 160,000 tonnes but total Chinese eel production capacity is estimated to be around 200,000 t. Compared to other Asian states, China’s eel farmers produce eel considerably more cheaply. Whereas production costs in China are between 3.6 and 4.2 US$/kg they are 4.2 to 5.6 in Taiwan and 8.4 dollars per kilogram in Japan.

Originally, China’s eel farmers mainly produced Japonica eels of which a large share was exported live or as kabayaki to Japan. With an annual demand of 130,000 t, Japan is the most important eel market in the world. On average, every Japanese consumer eats about 5 eels per year. Unajuu or unadon, grilled eel fillet which is served with sweet soy sauce and rice, is just as popular in Japan as sushi. The country’s own production, however (a good 21,000 tonnes from aquaculture and about 800 tonnes from fisheries) is not sufficient to cover demand. The difference is mainly imported from China, Taiwan and Malaysia. During the last four decades, however, Japanese glass eel catches in Asia have fallen considerably. In 1965 the catch in Japan amounted to 140 tonnes but had fallen below 40 tonnes by 2000. This means that prices for Japonica glass eels have risen enormously and sometimes they cost well over 10,000 US$/kg! During the same period, prices for European glass eels were only about 300 dollars (the price differences also result from the fact that European glass eels are only half the size of their Japanese cousins and their mortality is four times higher. In addition, European eels grow less quickly and are more susceptible to disease.) Japonica glass eel catches from China are also by no means large enough to meet the eel farms’ requirements.


Sale of glass eels to Asia weakening stocks

In the mid-90s, Asian traders thus began to purchase more and more glass eels in Europe. This had already been common practice previous to that time (at the end of the 80s 3% of glass eel stocks on Asian farms came from Europe) but in the mid-90s purchase volume suddenly rocketed. In individual years, intermediary Asian traders bought up to 75 per cent of the European glass eel catch. It is said that glass eel demand from Asian farms amounts to between 200 and 300 tonnes per year. At the end of the 90s, about 80% of the stock on Asian farms was said to consist of European eels. The growing demand led to a considerable rise in glass eel prices in Europe. The prospect of attractive profits led to more and more glass eels being fished and to an increase in illegal fishing.

In the meantime the situation on the world market has calmed down slightly, however, because demand has fallen for eel for consumption. Chinese farms, in particular, are having difficulty selling their eels on the traditional markets. Although the Japanese eat eel throughout the year, the peak sales period is a few days in July and August. It is particularly smaller eels weighing between 120 and 200 grams that are in demand. They constitute what might be called a benchmark which then dictates price structures for other eel products, too. Demand for large eels is lower in Japan and these can only be sold for very low prices, often below production costs. Chinese farmers thus try to sell these fish in Europe, usually as frozen raw materials for smokehouses. But in Europe, too, the slack market has weakened demand considerably. There are a lot of indications that the eel boom in China is over for the time being. The market’s capacity was presumably overestimated. The situation was additionally exacerbated by the use of prohibited chemicals on some farms with the result that the EU imposed an import ban on Chinese eel products in January 2001. Japan also tightened its import controls when 11 prohibited substances were found in imported eels. An unambiguous sign of the problems within the Chinese eel farming industry is the noticeably waning interest in glass eels from Europe: only 70 tonnes were bought in 2003. In the mid-90s, Asian traders thus began to purchase more and more glass eels in Europe. This had already been common practice previous to that time (at the end of the 80s 3% of glass eel stocks on Asian farms came from Europe) but in the mid-90s purchase volume suddenly rocketed. In individual years, intermediary Asian traders bought up to 75 per cent of the European glass eel catch. It is said that glass eel demand from Asian farms amounts to between 200 and 300 tonnes per year. At the end of the 90s, about 80% of the stock on Asian farms was said to consist of European eels. The growing demand led to a considerable rise in glass eel prices in Europe. The prospect of attractive profits led to more and more glass eels being fished and to an increase in illegal fishing.

In the meantime the situation on the world market has calmed down slightly, however, because demand has fallen for eel for consumption. Chinese farms, in particular, are having difficulty selling their eels on the traditional markets. Although the Japanese eat eel throughout the year, the peak sales period is a few days in July and August. It is particularly smaller eels weighing between 120 and 200 grams that are in demand. They constitute what might be called a benchmark which then dictates price structures for other eel products, too. Demand for large eels is lower in Japan and these can only be sold for very low prices, often below production costs. Chinese farmers thus try to sell these fish in Europe, usually as frozen raw materials for smokehouses. But in Europe, too, the slack market has weakened demand considerably. There are a lot of indications that the eel boom in China is over for the time being. The market’s capacity was presumably overestimated. The situation was additionally exacerbated by the use of prohibited chemicals on some farms with the result that the EU imposed an import ban on Chinese eel products in January 2001. Japan also tightened its import controls when 11 prohibited substances were found in imported eels. An unambiguous sign of the problems within the Chinese eel farming industry is the noticeably waning interest in glass eels from Europe: only 70 tonnes were bought in 2003.

Eel market stabilized at a low level

But it’s not only Asian farmers that judged the markets too optimistically. The European eel farming industry did the same. For many years, the eel market was well balanced, and supply and demand were largely in unison. Since the early 90s, however, a lot of money has been invested in eel farming and more and more new farms established, particularly in The Netherlands, Denmark and Italy which together account for nearly 90 per cent of European farmed eel. In 2001 there were 180 farms throughout Europe producing over 8,500 tonnes of eel. That is much too much for the market, particularly since demand is falling. This might possibly be a consequence of changing age structures within the population: whereas older people like eating eel it is difficult to get young people interested. Production from the three biggest European eel producing nations fell by one quarter in 2002 and numerous farms were closed down. Only the Dutch farmers managed to survive this plight relatively unharmed. Apparently it was not glass eel supplies that were the cause of the farming industry’s problems. Its overall requirements amount to 30 to 40 tonnes per year and because they all pay the same price the conditions of competition are more or less equal. The European eel market stabilized again somewhat, albeit at a low level, in 2003 and would seem to have found a new balance.

Europe’s fishermen hard hit by decline in eels

Whereas, from a global point of view, the eel fishery is not particularly important, the differences between the fishery and aquaculture in Europe are not quite so marked. In 2002 farmed eel production amounted to 10,000 t and, according to official FAO statistics, catches from the wild fishery to about 5,000 tonnes. It is likely, however, that the fishery supplies quite a lot more, however, for the statistics contain considerable gaps. Part of the catch which the fishermen market themselves is rarely registered. Unofficial estimates (with which the EU Commission also works) assume that about 30,000 tonnes of eel were caught in Europe in the 90s. In recent years, the catch volume is thought to have sunk to 10,000 tonnes. Although these figures, too, are only based on rough estimates they probably come very close to the actual situation. Most importantly, they reveal an alarming trend towards declining stocks and catches, the effects of which both inland and coastal fishermen are already feeling very hard. Due to its high market value, eel contributes an important part to their incomes.

But eel stocks are not only dwindling in Europe. There are reports of stock decreases in other regions of the world, too, and of other eel species – from America and Japan, Australia and New Zealand. It has so far been impossible to find a plausible explanation for this obviously worldwide phenomenon. It might be the result of climatic factors that have a negative effect on plankton development or on reproduction. However, none of the attempts made by scientists to explain the situation is really convincing. In Japan, for example, the Japonica stocks have been falling for four decades. And people have been puzzling over the causes for just as long. Too little is known about the population structures of eel. Whilst a lot of money has been spent on researching eel diseases and artificial reproduction and searching for the spawning grounds, little attention has been paid to resource management. Not even the Catch per Unit Effort (CPUE) is known for Japanese eels – a key value that is an indicator for a species’ biomass. This means that the only clues as to the size of the stock are the annual commercial catches. The information available on European eel is not much better, either.


EU Commission is working on an international rescue plan

In the face of this disturbing situation it was already long overdue when the European Commission took measures in October 2003 for the protection of the eel stocks. Until the final presentation and implementation of the rescue plan the Commission wants to use an emergency measures package to ensure that as many mature eels as possible can return to the spawning grounds.

It includes the following:
• Fishing bans in certain regions and for certain development stages of eel
• Determination of total allowable catch volumes and landing sizes
• Redevelopment of habitats
• Supportive technical measures such as the construction of aids for ascending into the rivers
• Stipulation of closed seasons and regions
• Issue of special fishing licences for fishermen
• Strengthening of local eel stocks through restocking

On top of this, the Commission will propose a comprehensive data capture system for eel at community level on the basis of scientific reports. This will definitely have to take into account trade with glass eels.

All member states will be asked to take part in the development of useful immediate measures. Until a stock recovery plan has been presented the eel stocks should be fished as little as possible. The most pressing aim will have to be to enable as many silver eels as possible to re-migrate. Whilst some people believe that these steps are inadequate, others consider them to be exaggerated. The Federation of European Aquaculture Producers (FEAP) suspects that the recommendations made by ICES are based on old data material. Findings from individual rivers had been extrapolated to national level, thereby over dramatizing the situation.

But do petty arguments about evaluations and data make any sense at all when all the signs already point to red? Every step that contributes towards the protection of the eel stocks should be welcomed without reservations and supported. And the possibilities do not seem by any means to be exhausted yet. Whilst in some countries millions are spent on prestige projects that have a powerful effect on the public – the reintroduction of salmon to local waters, for example – eel fails to arouse any great degree of interest. Some of the eel farms that have been closed could be reopened and used to produce robust eel for stocking natural waters. They have a better chance of asserting themselves in the wild than the sensitive glass eels. Time is pressing. The CITES office is already considering putting eel, like sturgeon, onto Appendix II to enable better control of international trade.

Manfred Klinkhardt
© 2004 Eurofish