Why Removing Ghost Nets from the Ocean Is Critical to Tackling Both Danger to Marine Life and the Microplastics Crisis
- carrielove1217
- Aug 6
- 5 min read
As world leaders of industry reconvene in Geneva for the resumed fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2) to finalise a Global Plastics Treaty, we share our understanding of what is to be discussed as well as our preferences and priorities for the removal of ghost nets in the global plastic pollution crisis.
The inevitability of finding ourselves in this predicament comes from decades of unhindered plastics production. The profiteering of huge industries have to this date been unwilling to take responsibility for the full life cycle of their production and wilfully ignoring the wellbeing of life on earth is finally being called to account. That is the hope of every environmentally concerned organisation who have been pushing for legislation for decades. As awareness about the plastics crisis - and its devastating effect on all aspects of environmental health grows, momentum is building for a treaty to match the enormity of the challenge.
Over the next few weeks, national delegations need to finally reach a unilateral consensus to create a legally binding international agreement on plastic pollution.
The second part of the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5.2) follows the collapse of talks after a deadlock that prevented a deal in Bhusan, South Korea in December last year.
At the UN Ocean Conference last month, ministers and representatives from more than 95 countries signed a declaration dubbed the ‘Nice Wake-Up Call’, spelling out what’s needed for a meaningful outcome to this treaty. What is crucial is a full lifecycle approach, with compulsory limits regarding virgin plastic production and the elimination of toxic chemicals in their production.
"95 Countries signed a declaration dubbed the ‘Nice Wake-Up Call"
Much attention is rightly focused on controlling plastic production and pollution. But there is one critical piece of the plastic crisis that must not be overlooked in these negotiations:
the urgent need to remove legacy plastic pollution, particularly ghost nets, from the ocean.
Ghost nets; abandoned, lost, or discarded fishing gear, represent one of the deadliest and most persistent forms of marine debris. Drifting unhindered in the international territory of the high seas, these plastic nets continue to "fish" long after they’ve been lost, ensnaring turtles, dolphins, whales, and seabirds in silent, deadly traps. But the problem goes deeper. literally.
"Ghost nets; abandoned, lost, or discarded fishing gear, represent one of the deadliest and most persistent forms of marine debris."
A Source of Microplastics Hidden in Plain Sight
Ghost nets, often made of nylon, polyethylene, and polypropylene, are not biodegradable. Any talk of them taking - however many years - to ‘degrade’ means simply that they can only slowly fragment into microplastics if left unrecovered and unrecycled, which then enter the marine food web, affecting everything from plankton to top predators, and, in the interconnectedness of us all on this planet…humans too. As microplastics accumulate in our oceans, they find their way into seafood, drinking water, and even the air we breathe.
Despite this, cleanup of marine plastic, especially ghost gear in the oceans, has received far less political attention than upstream solutions like recycling and reduction. Yet the science is clear: without removing the plastic already choking our oceans, we will never eliminate the microplastics problem at its root.
"Without removing the plastic already choking our oceans, we will never eliminate the microplastics problem at its root."
A Legal Vacuum all at Sea
The issue of ghost nets is further complicated by legal ambiguity. Much of this waste floats in areas beyond national jurisdiction, such as the infamous Great Pacific Garbage Patch. With no one nation legally responsible, cleanup efforts fall between the cracks of international law.
Luis Vayas, the Chair of the convention's current stance leans toward voluntary measures at the national level. But many countries seek the opposite, saying mandatory measures at the global level will be required to end plastic pollution given its omnipresent nature.
Delegates and lobbyists have previously expressed a strong preference to exclude language on plastic production and ‘chemicals of concern’ from the text entirely since the last meeting, So strong was their influence that chemicals of concern used in the production of virgin plastics were excluded from the text from the last meeting that will be taken up in Geneva.
We suggest emphatically that due to the powerful reach of industry lobbyists, voluntary responsibility in an international jurisdiction is frankly a recipe for continuing short sighted blind spots and inaction, with the consequences affecting ecosystems and economies worldwide.This is why it’s critical that the Global Plastics Treaty includes binding commitments not only to reduce plastic production and enforce product design standards, but also to fund and mandate cleanup, including removal of ghost gear from international waters.
Negotiating Cleanup into the Global Plastics Treaty
While essential, the conventions focus on upstream measures alone will not remove the 75–199 million tons of plastic waste already circulating in the marine environment. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has stated that addressing plastic pollution “is not just an environmental issue, it is a global challenge that demands urgent and collective action.”
“Plastic pollution is not just an environmental issue, it is a global challenge that demands urgent and collective action.”
This must include removing ghost nets that continue to kill marine life and break down into microplastics, further polluting oceans, beaches, and food chains. Treating this as a downstream issue ignores the fact that these ghost nets are active sources of ongoing pollution, akin to leaking oil wells in our oceans.
Financial Support Must Match the Challenge
Like many global environmental agreements, profits versus financing is a sticking point. Delegates in Geneva are still debating whether the treaty’s financial mechanism should be managed through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) or via a dedicated, independent fund. Either way, funding for marine cleanups, including ghost net removal and recycling must be a core element of any final agreement.
Some countries have proposed Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes to help fund cleanups, requiring plastic producers to pay for the environmental cost of their products. This is a promising path forward, and at Ecotribo we suggest a thoroughly fair way to balance those who have profited for years out of producing and utilising this material with no end of life plan.
Why the Time to Act Is Now
Ghost nets are a uniquely destructive form of pollution; stealth, mobile, and deadly. Their contribution to marine biodiversity loss, ecosystem damage, and the global microplastics crisis is severe and measurable. Yet they are also relatively low-hanging fruit for coordinated international cleanup efforts, if the funding and political will are there.
At Ecotribo we are committed to clearing the ghost nets that wash up in the South West of the UK and cleaning and recycling the ghost nets into functional products for life.
Including ghost net cleanups in the Global Plastics Treaty is not optional; it is essential. It represents one of the clearest intersections between ocean health and human health. As Inger Andersen of UNEP said at INC-5.2: “Plastic pollution is already in nature, in our oceans, and even in our bodies... But this does not have to be our future.”
At Ecotribo we are committed to clearing the ghost nets that wash up in the South West of the UK and cleaning and recycling the ghost nets into functional products for life.
If the treaty fails to tackle the legacy plastic haunting our seas, including ghost nets, we risk leaving behind an invisible tide of microplastics that will haunt future generations. There is only one way out of the inevitability of this polluted future and that is through a turn around of global attitudes at the top level and a willingness to get our hands dirty and clean up the dangerous mess we have made.
Comments