The European eel (Anguilla anguilla) is experiencing an unprecedented crisis. Since 1980, its population has declined by more than 90% across all indicators, and the trend continues to be negative. Despite this, it remains a subject of commercial fishing and regular consumption in Spain and other European countries.
The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) has been recommending for 25 years that catches be reduced to near-zero values, and since 2021 it has unequivocally called for the closure of fisheries. In 2008, the IUCN listed the species as “Critically Endangered”.
The Rejection in Spain
On February 17, the Committee of Wild Flora and Fauna of the State Commission for Natural Heritage and Biodiversity decided not to include the eel in the Spanish Catalogue of Threatened Species, despite the scientific opinions of the MITECO (2020 and 2024) that recommended its protection.
Minister Sara Aegesen had announced the protection proposal following the advice of the Scientific Committee, but the autonomous communities opposed it, citing a lack of information and the socioeconomic importance of fishing.
Political Arguments vs. Scientific Evidence
Authorities in Galicia, Asturias, and Catalonia defended fishing as sustainable and low-impact. However, the data shows a different reality:
- In Galicia, nearly 100 boats generated less than 600,000 euros in total (less than 6,000 per boat).
- In Euskadi, 150 eel fishing licenses produced just 100,000 euros (less than 1,000 per license).
- In the Ebro Delta, scientific monitoring by the Generalitat itself confirms the population decline.
These incomes are marginal and do not justify the exploitation of a species on the brink of extinction.
The Background: Discrediting Scientific Knowledge
The refusal to protect the eel reflects a broader trend: the discrediting of scientific knowledge, promoted by economic interests and populist currents. In Europe, this translates into the relaxation of environmental regulations affecting polluting activities.
The case of the eel is paradigmatic: decades of solid scientific evidence are ignored to favor short-term interests, jeopardizing the common good and biodiversity.
Consequences and Future Challenges
The lack of protection for the eel raises uncomfortable questions:
- If we cannot undertake a simple change like stopping fishing a critically endangered species, how will we face greater challenges like territorial aridification, loss of coastline, or unlivable heatwaves?
- Personal sacrifices would be minimal: stop consuming eel and offer economic alternatives to the few families that depend on it.
- Society has the capacity to compensate those affected, but there is a lack of political will to prioritize conservation.
The European eel has become a symbol of the tension between science and politics. Its protection is supported by overwhelming data but rejected by immediate interests. This case shows how costly it is to move towards a true ecological transition and how much short-termism still weighs against the urgency of global environmental crises.
