# IMMC.EESC-2020-05637-AC.ENG.xhtml.EESC-2020-05637-00-00-AC-TRA-EN.docx

EN

NAT/810

NAT/810

Bluefin tuna catch documentation

Bluefin tuna catch documentation

OPINION


  European Economic and Social Committee


  Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a catch documentation programme for Bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 640/2010

  [COM(2020) 670 final – 2020/0302 (COD)]

OPINION

European Economic and Social Committee

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a catch documentation programme for Bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 640/2010

[COM(2020) 670 final – 2020/0302 (COD)]

Rapporteur working alone: Florian MARIN

Rapporteur working alone: Florian MARIN

Referral

| Referral | European Parliament, 11/11/2020


  Council, 11/11/2020 |
| --- | --- |
| Legal basis | Article 3(1)(d) and Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union |
| | |
| Section responsible | Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment |
| Adopted in section | 11/01/2021 |
| Adopted at plenary | 27/01/2021 |
| Plenary session No | 557 |
| Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions) | 250/0/9 |

Referral

European Parliament, 11/11/2020

European Parliament, 11/11/2020

Council, 11/11/2020

Council, 11/11/2020

Legal basis

Legal basis

Article 3(1)(d) and Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Article 3(1)(d) and Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Section responsible

Section responsible

Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment

Adopted in section

Adopted in section

11/01/2021

11/01/2021

Adopted at plenary

Adopted at plenary

27/01/2021

27/01/2021

Plenary session No

Plenary session No

557

557

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

Outcome of vote
  (for/against/abstentions)

250/0/9

250/0/9

1.Conclusions and recommendations

1.

Conclusions and recommendations

1.1The EESC considers the adoption of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) recommendations to be important and appropriate because the EU has been a contracting party of ICCAT since 1986 and must ensure compliance with all the measures approved by ICCAT within EU law.

1.1

The EESC considers the adoption of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) recommendations to be important and appropriate because the EU has been a contracting party of ICCAT since 1986 and must ensure compliance with all the measures approved by ICCAT within EU law.

1.2The EESC recommends that facilitating and ensuring access to information resources and technical assistance for fishermen and actors in the distribution chain for using the eBCD (electronic Bluefin tuna Catch Document) system must remain a priority for the European Commission and the Member States.

1.2

The EESC recommends that facilitating and ensuring access to information resources and technical assistance for fishermen and actors in the distribution chain for using the eBCD (electronic Bluefin tuna Catch Document) system must remain a priority for the European Commission and the Member States.

1.3The deadlines stipulated at the level of ICCAT Recommendation 18-13 must take into account the impact and situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, including possible delays in achieving the reporting requirements imposed by ICCAT.

1.3

The deadlines stipulated at the level of ICCAT Recommendation 18-13 must take into account the impact and situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, including possible delays in achieving the reporting requirements imposed by ICCAT.

1.4The EESC considers that all necessary efforts must be made to ensure compliance, accuracy and synergy between BCDs and eBCDs, as well as an efficient traceability, validation and verification process.

1.5The EESC considers that Article 4 is in part taken from Recommendation 18-13, Part II, Validation of BCDs, point 11 to the effect that the validation process for each ton caught, landed, caged, harvested, transhipped, domestically traded or exported must be performed each time it lands, transfers, harvests, tranships, domestically trades or exports Bluefin tuna.

1.6The EESC recommends expanding the proposal based on ICCAT Recommendation 18-13, Part II – Validation of BCDs, 12, which regulates situations in which the section of BCD format does not provide enough room to ensure complete tracking of BFT from catch to market. An annex could be attached to the original BCD using the original BCD format and number.

1.7The EESC recommends adding to Article 2(5)(b) the word "trap" as in Article 2(5)(a). It would then read as follows: "trade, in one Member State or between two or more Member States, in farmed Bluefin tuna caught in the Convention area by a Union catching vessel or trap, and which is caged in a farm established in the territory of the Union".

1.8The EESC recommends adding to Article 3(2) the word "lot". It would then read as follows: "A BCD shall be completed for each lot of Bluefin tuna caught by a fishing vessel or trap, transferred, landed or transhipped at ports by fishing vessels or traps, or caged or harvested by farms."

1.9The Commission should consider the impact of implementing Article 5, 3, (b) because although it is an ICCAT recommendation it will require companies to alter their logistics – disassembling pallets and re-identifying each package.

1.10The EESC would like the Commission and the Member States to consider registration and validation of fish parts, even without the validation of caging, in order to maximise value and avoid waste. At present, when tuna die after arriving at the farm, they may not be sold because the caging has not yet been validated. Caging depends on an assessment made with stereoscopic cameras, which takes about two months, so these specimens must be frozen or destroyed. This goes against the Commission's initiatives on food losses and food waste.

2.Gist of the Commission proposal

2.1The purpose of the present proposal


  1


  is to transpose into EU law new Bluefin tuna Catch Documentation measures adopted by the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), to which the European Union (EU) has been a contracting party since 1986.

2.2The ICCAT Convention provides for a framework for regional cooperation on the conservation and management of tuna and tuna-like species in the Atlantic Ocean and adjacent seas, and for the adoption of recommendations applicable in the ICCAT Convention area which become binding on the Contracting Parties.

2.3The European Union thus has an obligation to ensure compliance with all the measures approved by ICCAT within EU law. The proposed regulation repeals Regulation (EU) No 640/2010 of 7 July 2010 by integrating new ICCAT measures related to the mandatory use of the electronic Bluefin tuna Catch Document (eBCD) system with a view to identifying the origin of all Bluefin tuna, allowing paper BCDs only for exceptions.

2.4The proposal provides for delegated powers to be conferred on the Commission, pursuant to Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, enabling it to swiftly incorporate future amendments to the ICCAT recommendations into EU law.

2.5EU legislation should implement the ICCAT recommendations in order to place EU and third country fishermen on an equal footing and to ensure that the rules are fully accepted and implemented by all.

2.6The measures envisaged in the proposal concern the technical specifications of the Bluefin tuna Catch Document and re-export certificate, its validation by the Member States, the recording and validation of catch and subsequent trades in the eBCD system, the tagging provisions, Member States' verifications of information and annual reporting to ICCAT.

2.7Catching vessel masters, trap operators, farm operators, sellers and exporters must complete a BCD for each lot of Bluefin tuna caught, landed, caged, harvested, transhipped, domestically traded or exported. All trade events must be recorded and validated in the eBCD system.

2.8Each lot of Bluefin tuna re-exported must be accompanied by a Bluefin Tuna Re-export Certificate validated by the Member State. The operator responsible for the re-export will issue the Bluefin Tuna Re-export Certificate and will request the validation.

3.General comments

3.1The EESC considers it appropriate and important to transpose into EU law the measures adopted by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), which have a beneficial role to play in managing Bluefin tuna stocks. The EESC welcomes the efforts made by the European Commission and the Member States to comply with all the conditions and recommendations made by ICCAT by transposing them into specific legislation, as they have had both an economic and a social impact at Member State level.

3.2The EESC appreciates the efforts and sacrifices made by the Commission, the Members States and the fishing industry to recover Bluefin tuna stocks by applying the strict rules of ICCAT. The management of Bluefin tuna stocks in the Eastern Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean is a success story, as stocks are at a historic high.

3.3The EESC generally agrees with the proposed regulation, as it transposes an ICCAT recommendation. At the same time, the EESC considers that the existence and use of an electronic documentation system has made it possible to collect and use much faster data on Bluefin tuna traceability, the system that has been fully implemented since January 2017. The use of digital solutions to ensure the control of the sustainability of Bluefin tuna stocks facilitates easier and more efficient interpretation of data.

3.4The EESC recommends compliance with the rules and recommendations made by ICCAT and transposed by the European Union into its legislation to ensure fair and equitable conditions for all fishermen.

3.5The EESC recommends that the European Commission and the Member States facilitate and ensure access to information resources and technical assistance for fishermen and actors in the distribution chain to use the eBCD system correctly, in a way that is both compliant and efficient.

3.6The deadlines stipulated at the level of ICCAT Recommendation 18-13 must take into account the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, recognising that delays may occur in achieving the reporting situations imposed by ICCAT.

3.7The EESC recommends that all necessary efforts be made to ensure compliance, accuracy and synergy between BCDs and eBCDs in the interest of successful and compliant documentation of the Bluefin tuna traceability and reporting system, especially in the case of exceptions and derogations mentioned in recommendation 18-13.

4.Specific comments

4.1The EESC considers that Article 4 is in part taken from Recommendation 18-13, Part II, Validation of BCDs, point 11 to the effect that the validation process for each ton caught, landed, caged, harvested, transhipped, domestically traded or exported must be performed each time it lands, transfers, harvests, tranships, domestically trades or exports Bluefin tuna.

4.2The EESC recommends expanding the proposal based on ICCAT Recommendation 18-13, Part II – Validation of BCDs, 12, which regulates situations in which the section of BCD format does not provide enough room to ensure complete tracking of BFT from catch to market. An annex could be attached to the original BCD using the original BCD format and number for the rare cases in which this may be necessary.

4.3The EESC recommends adding to Article 2(5)(b) the word "trap" as in Article 2(5)(a), to read as follows: "trade, in one Member State or between two or more Member States, in farmed Bluefin tuna caught in the Convention area by a Union catching vessel or trap, and which is caged in a farm established in the territory of the Union".

4.4The EESC recommends adding to Article 3(2) the words "lot of" to read as follows: "A BCD shall be completed for each lot of Bluefin tuna caught by a fishing vessel or trap, transferred, landed or transhipped at ports by fishing vessels or traps, or caged or harvested by farms."

4.5The Commission should consider the impact of implementing Article 5, 3, (b) because although it is an ICCAT recommendation it will require companies to alter their logistics – disassembling pallets and re-identifying each package.

4.6The EESC would like the Commission and the Member States to consider registration and validation of fish parts, even without the validation of caging, in order to maximise value and avoid waste. At present, when tuna die after arriving at the farm, they may not be sold because the caging has not yet been validated. Caging depends on an assessment made with stereoscopic cameras, which takes about two months, so these specimens must be frozen or destroyed. This goes against the Commission's initiatives on food losses and food waste.

Brussels, 27 January 2021

Christa SCHWENG

The president of the European Economic and Social Committee

_____________