European fishing companies are circumventing international catch limits by reflagging their vessels under African and Middle Eastern nations, capturing a third of the Indian Ocean's tropical tuna even as vulnerable species struggle to recover from severe overfishing, according to a new report released Thursday.
The investigation by the Blue Marine Foundation and Kroll reveals that European-owned firms have registered more than 50 massive purse seine ships and supply vessels under the flags of the Seychelles, Mauritius, Kenya, Tanzania and Oman to access greater catch limits, effectively expanding their operations despite the European Union's public commitments to reduce fishing pressure on depleted stocks.
Vulnerable Species Under Pressure
The practice has allowed European companies to maintain and even increase their catch of tropical tuna at a time when yellowfin and bigeye tuna populations remain under significant pressure, still rebounding from being severely overfished. The report comes ahead of an annual meeting of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission in the Maldives, which brings together the EU and 28 countries with a stake in the tuna fishery.
Jess Rattle, head of investigations at the London-based environmental charity Blue Marine Foundation, said the research aimed to answer a critical question: "Were they owned by the coastal states whose quota they were now using, or in fact, were they owned by the EU?" The investigation found that while European companies have long fished under the Seychelles flag, registering under the flags of Oman and Kenya represents a new expansion of the practice.
The Scale of European Operations
The European fishing fleet operates dozens of purse seiners throughout the Indian Ocean, massive vessels that can hold as much as 4 million pounds of fish at a time. These ships, which get their name from their giant nets that encircle tuna and close like a drawstring purse, were first introduced to the Indian Ocean by Spanish and French tuna companies four decades ago. They fish for skipjack, yellowfin and bigeye tuna destined for cans on grocery store shelves.
Benedict Hamilton, a managing director at Kroll, said: "Europe's opportunity to help stop overfishing is greater than first appears." The statement underscores how the true extent of European fishing operations has been obscured by the reflagging practice.
Industry Defends Practices
Europeche Tuna Group, which represents the European tuna industry, defended the arrangements as reflecting long-term investment and strong local partnerships. Spokesperson Anne-France Mattlet said the European industry benefits regional economies by paying taxes and fishing license fees, investing in local infrastructure, and unloading tuna and other fish in their ports and canneries. Mattlet confirmed the report's findings that Europeche has more than 50 purse seine and supply ships operating throughout the Indian Ocean, including with non-EU flags.
Maciej Berestecki, a spokesperson for the European Commission, distanced the EU from responsibility, saying that reflagging is "a private business decision not influenced by public authorities" and that the EU does not defend or represent the interests of vessels flagged to other countries. Berestecki added: "The EU has done, and keeps doing, its utmost to promote and respect catch limits."
History of Tensions
The EU has occasionally clashed with coastal nations seeking greater control over fishing practices in waters at their doorstep. Five years ago, with yellowfin tuna stocks in sharp decline, the Maldives accused the EU of not putting forth a serious proposal to lower tuna quotas at a contentious meeting of the tuna commission. Three years ago, the EU objected to a proposal from Indonesia for a closure on purse seine fishing gear that passed with the support of 15 other countries.
In recent years, the tuna commission has implemented new management measures to rebuild vulnerable yellowfin and bigeye tuna stocks, which are beginning to show signs of recovery. The EU agreed to reduce the yellowfin tuna catch for EU-flagged vessels by 21%. However, Glen Holmes, senior officer with Pew Charitable Trusts, suggested those new limits may be pushing European fishing companies to look to other countries' quotas to maintain their catch.
Call for Transparency
Holmes and colleagues from Pew, Global Fishing Watch and other environmental groups are advocating for greater ownership transparency among fishing fleets in the Indian Ocean. Shipowners have long registered vessels under the flags of foreign countries, much to the dismay of transparency advocates, who say the practice limits oversight of those ships. Sanctioned oil tankers in the 'ghost fleet', for instance, frequently change their name and flags to conceal their ownership.
Certain flags have become known as 'flags of convenience,' offering companies low fees and lenient attitudes toward fishing or trade rules. Some countries may simply have fewer resources to enforce the laws of the sea. A report this year by the environmental group Oceana found European companies routinely register fishing vessels under the flags of foreign nations, including some countries the EU has accused of "turning a blind eye to illegal fishing activities."
Vanya Vulperhorst, Oceana's illegal fishing campaign director for Europe, said greater transparency would help the EU better enforce its own laws, which prevent any European individual from benefiting financially from the practices of illegal fishing, and would shed light on "the real EU fleet." Vulperhorst said: "What we found last year is that the real European fleet, if you add the non-EU flagged vessels, doubles."
Why This Matters:
The reflagging practice undermines international efforts to protect vulnerable tuna populations and restore ocean health, placing corporate profits ahead of ecological sustainability and the long-term interests of coastal communities. When European companies can effectively double their fleet size by exploiting regulatory gaps, it renders catch limits meaningless and perpetuates the overfishing that has already severely depleted yellowfin and bigeye tuna stocks. The lack of ownership transparency prevents effective oversight and enforcement, allowing well-resourced corporations to circumvent rules designed to ensure equitable and sustainable access to shared marine resources. For developing coastal nations with limited enforcement capacity, the practice shifts the burden of conservation onto those least able to bear it while wealthy European firms maintain outsized access to fisheries in waters far from their shores. Without stronger international regulations requiring ownership disclosure and preventing quota shopping through reflagging, the recovery of threatened tuna populations remains uncertain, threatening both ocean ecosystems and the food security of communities that depend on these fisheries.