The European eel, or Anguilla anguilla, is currently listed in Appendix II of the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species. This means it is not currently threatened with extinction, but may become threatened if trade is not closely controlled. There are now calls to list the species under Appendix I, which means the species is at immediate threat of extinction. If this were indeed to happen, the trade in glass eels and eel meat would be permitted only under exceptional circumstances. The commercial exploitation of the species would be placed on hold, forcing drastic changes to both eel fisheries and aquaculture.
At the Sustainable Eel Group, we believe that a well-managed, well-monitored, and environmentally conscious commercial sector is key to the eel’s long-term survival. We believe this partly because we recognise the essential role responsible fishers, processors, and traders play in monitoring the population, in restocking rivers across Europe and North Africa, and in closing the grey area between the legal and illegal trades. But also because our fifteen years’ experience in the industry has shown us that the legal commercial fishing makes a negligeable contribution to the wider problem of the eel’s decline. The principal threats have come, and still come, from habitat loss, migration barriers, and climate change. A broader perspective means advocating for practical and sustainable solutions that address these graver issues.
An article published last week, bringing together contributions from Willem Dekker Florian Stein, and others, seems to re-enforce our position, underscoring that conservation efforts must be both rigorous and pragmatic. Whilst protection for the species is of course necessary, a blanket ban on European eel trade under Appendix I of CITES could risk unintended consequences, pushing trade further into the shadows, exacerbating the pressures on American eel, or Anguilla rostrata, and undermining hard-won advances in transparency, monitoring and enforcement as fish processing moves outside Europe. It is our view, and the authors’, that a more adaptive and holistic approach is required; one that strengthens existing regulations while ensuring the survival of both the species and the communities dependent on them.
The European eel faces a multiplicity of threats, many of which stem not from fishing but from habitat degradation, climate change, and barriers to migration. By singling out trade as the principal or only issue, we risk misallocating resources and failing to address problems which have more pronounced impacts. SEG has long advocated for an evidence-based, regulated approach to conservation and protection which acknowledges the necessity of responsible management over outright prohibition. Lessons from the past show that trade restrictions alone do not ensure species recovery, especially when they drive market demand into illegal channels.
Instead of shutting down the European eel industry entirely, solutions should focus on improving industry oversight, financing collaborative law enforcement efforts, and closing the grey area between the ethical and unethical, or legal and illegal trades. A genus-level listing under Appendix II could support the coordination of eel conservation efforts internationally, creating stricter monitoring systems without shifting the onus from the protection of one species to another, or triggering a surge in glass eel prices on the black market. Such an approach would build upon the significant strides made since Anguilla anguilla’s inclusion in Appendix II, where increased oversight, combined with European Union measures such as the Action Plan Against Wildlife Trafficking, has already made meaningful progress in curbing illegal trade. If we continue to pursue plans for the 2030 Green Deal, there is the potential for an estimated 25,000 km of additional free migration. An about-turn in European eel policy could put this and the broader counter-trafficking campaign at risk.
It has been proven time and again that piecemeal approaches risk undermining and walking back international conservation efforts. Other anguillid eel species, particularly the American eel, are already under pressure, and failing to regulate them effectively is reshaping illicit trade patterns at the time of writing. The Sustainable Eel Group’s position is simple: what is needed is not prohibition, but precision; better risk assessments, improved conservation strategies, and international cooperation to ensure a sustainable stock for generations to come.