pdf35

Ribogospod. nauka Ukr., 2025; 4(74): 5-31
DOI: https://doi.org/10.61976/fsu2025.04.005
UDC [639.2/.3:504]:34(4+477)

Environmental and regulatory aspects of the experience for some EU countries and Ukraine in assessing damage to fisheries

I. Buzevych, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0000-0001-7526-9774, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv
V. Hurbyk, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0000-0002-0835-1257, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv
О. Hurbyk, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0000-0002-8653-2942, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv

Purpose. To consider the environmental aspects of qualifying the degree of damage in some European Union countries and in Ukraine. To identify prospects for further development of Ukrainian methodological approaches to classifying offenses according to the basic principles of classifying damage, which require further development or improvement.

Methodology. General scientific research methods were used to prepare the article, among which analysis, synthesis, generalization, induction, deduction, explanation should be noted.

Findings. According to the results of the analysis of the legislation of some European Union countries, it was established that in the Federal Republic of Germany, the qualification of offenses is carried out in accordance with local legislation and is carried out according to the following criteria: catching fish without a license, during the spawning or wintering period, using prohibited fishing gears, preventing migration, transporting fishing gears outside the fishing grounds, and taking protected species. In the Kingdom of Spain, the qualification of offenses by the significance of the harm is carried out according to the following criteria: destruction of the distribution area, fishing during the spawning or migration period, harvesting of species whose fishing is prohibited, stocking (releasing) invasive fish species into natural water bodies, and violation of fishing rules.

Ukraine provides for both criminal and administrative liability for poaching aquatic biological resources. Basic principles of qualification of damage caused to aquatic biological resources as a result of illegal fishing, animal or other aquatic exploitation, is qualified as significant according to the following criteria: taking fish or animals, the catching of which is prohibited, catching fish during the spawning period, taking a large number of fish, destroying rare species or those whose reproduction is difficult.

Originality. Methodological aspects of qualifying the materiality of damage in Ukraine are highlighted for the first time. An analytical description of the legislation of some EU countries in the field of illegal fishing in their inland waters has been carried out.

Practical Value. The basic principles of qualifying the materiality of damage are necessary to determine the type of liability resulting from illegal fishing of aquatic biological resources in the inland waters of Ukraine.

Keywords: materiality of damage, qualification, ecological value, poaching.

REFERENCES

  1. Mickiewicz, Maciej, Wołos, Arkadiusz, & Trella, Marek. (2020). Characteristics of illegal inland fishing according to the opinions of Polish fisheries guards. Fisheries & Aquatic Life, 28, 125-132. https://doi.org/10.2478/aopf-2020-0015.
  2. De La Torre-Lascano, C. M., Quiroz-Peña, J. I., Páez-López, D. O., & y García-Cáceres, D. V. (2024). Crimen organizado transnacional y su incidencia en la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada, en el archipiélago de Galápagos. Jurídicas, 21(2), 267-287. https://doi.org/10.17151/jurid.2024.21.2.14.
  3. Gore, M. L., & Bennett, A. (2022). Importance of deepening integration of crime and conservation sciences. Conservation Biology, 36 (13). https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13710.
  4. Agnew, David J., Pearce, John, Pramod, Ganapathiraju, Peatman, Tom, Watson, Reg, Beddington, John R., & Pitcher, Tony J. (2009). Estimating the Worldwide Extent of Illegal Fishing. PloS one, 4, e4570, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0004570.
  5. Blaise Kuemlangan, Elizabeth-Rose, Amidjogbe, Julia, Nakamura, Alessandra, Tomassi, Rudolph, Hupperts, Buba, Bojang, & Teresa, Amador. (2023). Enforcement approaches against illegal fishing in national fisheries legislation. Marine Policy, 149, 105514. ISSN 0308-597X. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105514.
  6. FAO (2020). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020. Sustainability in action. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en.
  7. Stefanus, A. A., & Vervaele, J. A. E. (2021). Fishy business: regulatory and enforcement challenges of transnational organised IUU fishing crimes. Trends Organ Crim, 24, 581-604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-021-09425-y.
  8. Rivera, Antonella, Núñez‐Vallecillo, Mayra, San Martín‐Chicas, Julio, Guardiola, Paolo, Fulton, Stuart, & González‐Gil, Ricardo (2025). Drivers and potential solutions for transnational Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing (IUU) in the Gulf of Honduras. People and Nature, 7 (6). https://login.research4life.org/tacsgr1doi_org/10.1002/pan3.70030.
  9. Hanamulamba, Pinto Leonidio, Tierry, Val de Medeiros, Igor Hister, Lourenço, Marcelo Rodrigues, dos Anjos, & Luis Felipe, de Almeida Duarte (2025). The small-scale fisheries sector in a developing country: assessing SWOT and recommendations for sustainability in Namibe (Angola). Fisheries Science , 91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12562-024-01830-w.
  10. Wyatt, Tanya. (2013). Wildlife trafficking: A deconstruction of the crime, the victims, and the offenders. New York: Palgrave Macmillian. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137269249.
  11. Nahuelhual, L., Vallejos, T., Campos, G., Vergara, X., Gelcich, S., & Estévez R. (2023). Reframing illegal fishing in small-scale fisheries as a wicked problem. Fish and Fisheries, 24 (3). https://doi.org/doi_org/10.1111/faf.12741.
  12. Mendelsohn, R., & Olmstead, S. (2009). The economic valuation of environmental amenities and disamenities: methods and applications. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 34(1), 325-347. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-011509-135201.
  13. Salles, Jean-Michel. (2011). Valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services: Why put economic values on Nature? Comptes Rendus. Biologies, Biodiversity in face of human activities. La biodiversite face aux activites humaines, 334, 5-6, 469-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2011.03.008.
  14. Yung, En Chee. (2004). An ecological perspective on the valuation of ecosystem services. Biological Conservation, 120, 4, 549-565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.03.028.
  15. Smith, V. K. (1990). Can We Measure the Economic Value of Environmental Amenities? Southern Economic Journal, 56(4), 865-878. https://doi.org/10.2307/1059877.
  16. Mudgal, S., Chenot, B., & Salès, K. (2013). Implementation challenges and obstacles of the Environmental Liability Directive. BIO Intelligence Service: Implementation challenges and obstacles of the Environmental Liability Directive, Final report prepared for European Commission – DG Environment. In collaboration with Stevens & Bolton LLP. hal.science. Retrieved from: https://hal.science/hal-03859602.
  17. Pouikli, Kleoniki C. (2016). Overview of the implementation of the directive 2004/35/EC on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage at European level. Desalination and Water Treatment, 57, 25, 11520-11527. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2015.1101620.
  18. Directive 2004/35/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage. data.europa.eu. Retrieved from: https://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2004/35.
  19. Czech, E. K. (2007). Liability for Environmental Damage According to Directive 2004/35/EC. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 16(2), 321-324.
  20. Dyrektyva Rady 92/43/IeES vid 21 travnia 1992 roku pro okhoronu pryrodnykh oselyshch ta dykoi fauny i flory : Dyrektyva; YeES vid 21.05.1992 № 92/43/IeES. (2013). Verkhovna Rada Ukrainy.zakon.rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/987_004-92.
  21. Stattia 249 Kryminalnoho kodeksu Ukrainy (2001). Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy (VVR), 25-26.
  22. Section 292 Fish poaching. Criminal Code in the version published on 13 November 1998 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 3322), as last amended by Article 2 of the Act of 22 November 2021 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 4906). dejure.org. Retrieved from: https://dejure.org/gesetze/StGB/293.html.
  23. Tierschutzgesetz in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 18. Mai 2006 (BGBl. I S. 1206, 1313), das zuletzt durch Artikel 2 Absatz 20 des Gesetzes vom 20. Dezember 2022 (BGBl. I S. 2752) geändert worden ist”§ 4b. (2022). www.gesetze-im-internet.de. Retrieved from: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tierschg/__4b.html
  24. Fischereigesetz für Baden-Württemberg. Vom 14. November 1979 (GBl. S. 466, 1980 S. 136). letzte berücksichtigte Änderung: zuletzt geändert durch Artikel 1 des Gesetzes vom 15. Oktober 2024 (GBl. 2024 Nr. 85). (2024). www.landesrecht-bw.de. Retrieved from: https://www.landesrecht-bw.de/bsbw/document/jlr-FischGBW1979pG3.
  25. Section 292 Fish poaching. Criminal Code in the version published on 13 November 1998 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 3322), as last amended by Article 2 of the Act of 22 November 2021 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 4906). (2021). dejure.org. Retrieved from: https://dejure.org/gesetze/StGB/293.html.
  26. § 38 Verbot schädigender Mittel/ Fischereigesetz für Baden-Württemberg (FischG) Vom 14. November 1979. (1980). Fundstelle: GBl, 466, 136.
  27. § 39 (Fn 11) Verbot schädigender Mittel. Bekanntmachung der Neufassung des Landesfischereigesetzes vom 22.06.1994 : Geltende Gesetze und Verordnungen (SGV. NRW.)  mit Stand vom 1.11.2025. (2025). recht.nrw.de. Retrieved from: https://recht.nrw.de/lmi/owa/br_bes_detail?bes_id=3852&aufgehoben=N&det_id=684083&anw_nr=2&menu=1&sg=1.
  28. Gesetz des Landes Baden-Württemberg zum Schutz der Natur und zur Pflege der Landschaft (Naturschutzgesetz - NatSchG) Vom 23. Juni 2015: letzte berücksichtigte Änderung: zuletzt geändert durch Artikel 11 des Gesetzes vom 7. Februar 2023 (GBl. S. 26, 44). (2023). www.landesrecht-bw.de. Retrieved from: https://www.landesrecht-bw.de/bsbw/document/jlr-NatSchGBW2015rahmen.
  29. § 36 Mitführen von Fanggeräten/ letzte berücksichtigte Änderung: § 28 geändert (Art. 26 Ges. v. 17.03.2022, GVOBl. S. 301). (2022). faolex.fao.org. Retrieved from: https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/ger84746.pdf.
  30. § 45 Mitführen von Fanggeräten und sonstiger Fangmittel. (2015). Gesetzblatt für Baden-Württemberg, 14, 585-628. www.landesrecht-bw.de. Retrieved from: https://www.landesrecht-bw.de/bsbw/document/VB-BW-AD-GBl2015-14-585-3.
  31. § 43 Schonbezirke. Fischereigesetz für Baden-Württemberg (FischG). (2015). Gesetzblatt für Baden-Württemberg, 14, 136. www.landesrecht-bw.de. Retrieved from: https://www.landesrecht-bw.de/bsbw/document/VB-BW-AD-GBl2015-14-585-3.
  32. § 69 Abs. 3 Nr. 1 in der Fassung des Gesetzes vom 29. Juli 2009, Teil I, S. 2542: Niedersachsen – Ausnahme von den Anforderungen des § 43 Abs. 1 des Niedersächsischen Durchführungsgesetzes zum Bundesnaturschutzgesetz (NAGBNatSchG) vom 19. Februar 2010. (2010). Niedersächsisches Gesetzblatt, I, 970.
  33. Bundesgesetz zum Naturschutz vom 29. Juli 2009, zuletzt geändert durch Artikel 48 des Gesetzes vom 23. Oktober 2024. (2024). Federal Law Gazette, I, 323.
  34. Bayerisches Naturschutzgesetz (BayNatSchG) vom 23. Februar 2011 (GVBl. S. 82, BayRS 791-1-U), das zuletzt durch § 10 des Gesetzes vom 25. Juli 2025 (GVBl. S. 254). (2025). gesetze-bayern.de. Retrieved from: https://www.gesetze-bayern.de/Content/Document/BayNatSchG/true?view=Print.
  35. Pro zatverdzhennia spetsialnykh taks dlia obchyslennia rozmiru shkody, zapodiianoi porushenniam zakonodavstva pro pryrodno-zapovidnyi fond: postanova Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy, vid 10 travnia 2022 r. № 575. (2022). zakon.rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/575-2022-%D0%BF#Text.
  36. § 13 Grundsatz. Fischereigesetz für Baden-Württemberg (FischG) Vom 14. November 1979. (1979). www.umweltdigital.de. Retrieved from: https://www.umweltdigital.de/v.37474.
  37. García, Isabel Artime. (2022). A pioneering country in the fight against the infringement of the international legal regime for fisheries. Marine Policy, 144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2022.105230.
  38. Teijo, Carlos. (2023). Criminal sanctions and IUU fishing: The case of Spain. Marine Policy, 147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2022.105341.
  39. Oanta, Gabriela A. (2022). The application of administrative sanctions in the fight against IUU fishing: An assessment of Spanish practice. Marine Policy, 144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2022.105211.
  40. Artículo 327 del Código Penal. Capítulo III: De los delitos contra los recursos naturales y el medio ambiente. Título XVI: De los delitos relativos a la ordenación del territorio y el urbanismo, la protección del patrimonio histórico y el medio ambiente. www.conceptosjuridicos.com. Retrieved from: https://www.conceptosjuridicos.com/codigo-penal-articulo-327.
  41. Real Decreto 1095/1989, de 8 de septiembre, por el que se declaran las especies objeto de caza y pesca y se establecen normas para su protección. (1989). BOE, 218, de 12/09/1989. www.boe.es. Retrieved from: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/1989/09/08/1095/con.
  42. Real Decreto 670/1978, de 11 de marzo, sobre Cofradías de Pescadores / Presidencia del Gobierno. (1978). www.boe.es. Retrieved from: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/1978/03/11/670/con.
  43. Grupo de Investigación GEISA1. (2003). La virtualidad de las Cofradías de Pescadores en Andalucía (The virtuality of Fishing Confraternities in Andalusia). Univ. de Sevilla. Zainak, 25, 37-57.
  44. Artículo 325 del Código Penal. Capítulo III: De los delitos contra los recursos naturales y el medio ambiente. Título XVI: De los delitos relativos a la ordenación del territorio y el urbanismo, la protección del patrimonio histórico y el medio ambiente. www.conceptosjuridicos.com. Retrieved from: https://www.conceptosjuridicos.com/codigo-penal-articulo-325.
  45. Fernández, S., Arboleya, E., Dopico, E., Ardura, A., & García-Vázquez, E. (2019). Non-indigenous fish in protected spaces: Trends in species distribution mediated by illegal stocking. Aquatic Conserv: Mar Freshw Ecosyst, 29, 2240-2252. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.3238.
  46. Banha, F., Gago, J., & Margalejo, D. (2024). Angler’s preferences, perceptions and practices regarding non-native freshwater fish. Rev Fish Biol Fisheries, 34, 385-404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-023-09819-x.
  47. Miranda, Rafael. (2010). Additional records of non-native freshwater fishes for the Ebro River basin (Spain) Aquatic invasions, 5 (3), 291-296. https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2010.5.3.06.
  48. Artículo 333 del Código Penal. Capítulo III: De los delitos contra los recursos naturales y el medio ambiente. Título XVI: De los delitos relativos a la ordenación del territorio y el urbanismo, la protección del patrimonio histórico y el medio ambiente. www.conceptosjuridicos.com. Retrieved from: https://www.conceptosjuridicos.com/pe/codigo-penal-articulo-333.
  49. Artículo 330 del Código Penal. Título XVI: De los delitos relativos a la ordenación del territorio y el urbanismo, la protección del patrimonio histórico y el medio ambiente. Capítulo III: De los delitos contra los recursos naturales y el medio ambienteLIBRO II: Delitos y sus penas. www.conceptosjuridicos.com. Retrieved from: https://www.conceptosjuridicos.com/pe/codigo-penal-articulo-330.
  50. Real Decreto 1118/1989, de 15 de septiembre, por el que se determinan las especies objeto de caza y de pesca comercializables y se dictan normas al respecto. (1989). www.boe.es. Retrieved from: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/1989/09/15/1118/con.
  51. Presidencia de la Xunta de Galicia/ LEY 2/2021, de 8 de enero, de pesca continental de Galicia de 23 de marzo de 2021 (2021). BOE, 70, 33094-33140. www.boe.es. Retrieved from: https://www.boe.es/eli/es-ga/l/2021/01/08/2.
  52. Pons-Hernandez, M., & Petrossian, Gohar, A. (2025). Using crime script analysis to unveil illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing of European eels. Marine Policy, 173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106569.
  53. Alonso, A. I., & van Uhm, D. P. (2023). The illegal trade in European eels: outsourcing, funding, and complex symbiotic-antithetical relationships. Trends Organ Crim, 26, 293-307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-023-09490-5.
  54. Chainey, S. P., & Alonso Berbotto, A. A. (2022). Structured methodical process for populating a crime script of organized crime activity using OSINT. Trends Organ Crim, 25, 272-300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-021-09428-9.
  55. Pro sudovu praktyku u spravakh pro zlochyny ta inshi pravoporushennia proty dovkillia: Postanova Plenumu Verkhovnoho sudu Ukrainy № 17 vid 10.12.2004 r. (2021). mepr.gov.ua. Retrieved from: https://mepr.gov.ua/nakaz-mindovkillya-29-vid-19-01-2021.
  56. Pro zatverdzhennia perelikiv vydiv tvaryn, shcho zanosiatsia do Chervonoi knyhy Ukrainy (tvarynnyi svit), ta vydiv tvaryn, shcho vykliucheni z Chervonoi knyhy Ukrainy (tvarynnyi svit) (2021). Nakaz Mindovkillia, Perelik vid 19.01.2021, No. 29.
  57. Materialy do 4-ho vydannia Chervonoi knyhy Ukrainy. Tvarynnyi svit. Seriia: «Conservation Biology in Ukraine» (Iss. 6, vol. 2.) (2018). Kyiv: Instytut zoolohii imeni I. I. Shmalhauzena NAN Ukrainy.
  58. Buzevych, I. Iu. (2023). Biolohichne obgruntuvannia utochnennia kilkisnykh pokaznykiv istotnosti shkody, zavdanoi vodnym bioresursam vnaslidok zainiattia nezakonnym rybnym dobuvnym promyslom (na period 2023-2025 rr.). Kyiv: Instytut rybnoho hospodarstva NAAN.
  59. Pro zatverdzhennia taks dlia obchyslennia rozmiru shkody, zavdanoi porushenniam zakonodavstva pro rybne hospodarstvo vnaslidok nezakonnoho dobuvannia (vylovu), znyshchennia abo poshkodzhennia vodnykh bioresursiv, a takozh nezakonnoho znyshchennia chy pohirshennia seredovyshcha isnuvannia vodnykh bioresursiv: postanova Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy, vid 29 veresnia 2023 r. № 1042. (2023). zakon.rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1042-2023-%D0%BF#Text.
  60. Pravyla promyslovoho rybalstva u vnutrishnikh rybohospodarskykh vodnykh obiektakh (ikh chastynakh): Zatverdzheni nakazom Minahropolityky Ukrainy vid 10 kvitnia 2023 roku № 785, zareiestrovanym v Ministerstvi yustytsii Ukrainy 24.04.2023 r. za № 665/39721. Baza danykh “Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy”. zakon.rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0665-23#Text.
  61. Pravyla liubytelskoho rybalstva: Zatverdzheni nakazom Minahropolityky Ukrainy vid 19 serpnia 2022 roku № 700, zareiestrovanym v Ministerstvi yustytsii Ukrainy 16.11.2022 r. za № 1412/38748// Baza danykh “Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy”. zakon.rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1412-22#Text.
Home2025№ 4/2025 (74)2025_04-005_031-Buzevych