# CE2004078EN.01084001.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/840 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/840

---

(2004/C 78 E/0894)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3641/03

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject:   Definition of ‘forest’: divergence between the definition in a Greek bill and in the Forest Focus regulation

Subject:

The Regulation concerning monitoring of forests and environmental interactions in the Community (Forest Focus) (1) provides that ‘forest’ means land with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10 % and area of more than 0,5 ha (Article 3.a). The Greek government recently tabled a bill in the Greek parliament on the protection of forest ecosystems, the establishment of a forest register, the regulation of property titles over forestry and woodlands in general and other provisions. In total contradiction with the Community definition this bill seeks for reasons of political expediency to define ‘forest’ in such a way as to declassify woodlands and to allow development there. Specifically, this bill — a copy of which I have sent to the Commission — defines ‘forest’ as an area of at least 0,3 ha with tree crown cover of at least 25 % of the area.

1

| 1. | Given that each Member State is obliged to comply with the requirements of existing legislation and that the Forest Focus Regulation forms part of Community legalisation, what measures does the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, intend to take to ensure compliance with its provisions and in particular the definition of ‘forest’? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Given that each Member State is obliged to comply with the requirements of existing legislation and that the Forest Focus Regulation forms part of Community legalisation, what measures does the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, intend to take to ensure compliance with its provisions and in particular the definition of ‘forest’?

| 2. | Is the definition of ‘forest’ proposed by the Greek government more restrictive than the Community's definition and does it exclude land covered by the Community definition? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the definition of ‘forest’ proposed by the Greek government more restrictive than the Community's definition and does it exclude land covered by the Community definition?

| 3. | Does the proposed definition of ‘forest’ diverge from the Community definition? In which Member States is ‘forest’ defined more restrictively than under the Community definition and in which others is it defined more broadly in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity (please provide a table with existing definitions)? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the proposed definition of ‘forest’ diverge from the Community definition? In which Member States is ‘forest’ defined more restrictively than under the Community definition and in which others is it defined more broadly in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity (please provide a table with existing definitions)?

| 4. | How does the Commission intend to avert fragmentation and the exclusion of land and changes in the classification of dwellings which are at present protected by the Community in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC (2) (Natura 2000), and what measures does it intend to take to maintain and preserve existing forests, protect biodiversity and ensure the sustainable management of forests? |
| --- | --- |

4.

How does the Commission intend to avert fragmentation and the exclusion of land and changes in the classification of dwellings which are at present protected by the Community in accordance with Directive 92/43/EEC (2) (Natura 2000), and what measures does it intend to take to maintain and preserve existing forests, protect biodiversity and ensure the sustainable management of forests?

2

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(2 February 2004)

(2 February 2004)

Community legislation does not provide for a comprehensive common forestry policy although the management, conservation and sustainable development of forests are of course addressed through several Union policies.

The draft Greek forest bill has been made available by the Honourable Member to the Commission. However, the draft in question has been substantially modified during the legislative procedure prior to adoption. Once the adopted text of the bill becomes available, the Commission could foresee an assessment of the compatibility of the Greek forest law with Community legislation.

| 1. to 3. | The Commission stresses that the forest related definitions provided in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 2152/2003 of the Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 concerning monitoring of forests and environmental interactions in the Community (Forest Focus) (3) have to be applied by Member States only for the purpose of this Regulation. National forest definitions can still be applied for other purposes such as national monitoring systems. |
| --- | --- |

1. to 3.

The Commission stresses that the forest related definitions provided in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 2152/2003 of the Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 concerning monitoring of forests and environmental interactions in the Community (Forest Focus) (3) have to be applied by Member States only for the purpose of this Regulation. National forest definitions can still be applied for other purposes such as national monitoring systems.

3

| 4. | With regard to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, hereafter ‘Habitats Directive’, it is recalled that this directive makes explicit references to habitat types and not to land use. The habitat types and species listed in Annexes I and II should be included in the Natura 2000 network of sites, following the procedure set out in Article 4 and the selection criteria established by Annexe III of the Directive. The designation of Sites of Community Importance under the Directive is therefore based on the ecological quality of the habitats and species existing in a site and not on the site's land use classification.
  The recently tabled Greek forest law will not modify the classification of the habitat types included in the Habitats Directive and the list of Sites of Community Importance proposed by Greece. Since the Greek proposal of Sites of Community Importance was based on the selection criteria of Annexe III and not on land use criteria, this list is not expected to change. The list of selected sites of Community Importance for the Mediterranean region is expected to be adopted by the Commission by the end of 2004.
  As regards the identification of proposed Sites of Community Importance, it should be borne in mind that Member States have a general obligation to act in such a way as to ensure that the aims of the Directive are not jeopardised. Even in the absence of a Community list, Member States authorities must at least abstain from all activities that may seriously compromise the integrity of a site on the national list, that may cause the deterioration of a natural habitat or significantly disturb species. Furthermore, it should be stressed that the provisions of Articles 12, 13 and 14, which cover certain plant and animal species, are applicable from the date of implementation of the Directive, i.e. 10 June 1994.
  Regarding management of the sites, within six years of the adoption of the list of sites of Community Importance for the Mediterranean region, each Member State concerned should designate them as Special Areas of Conservation and establish relevant priorities.
  Following the adoption and the implementation of the Greek law, the Commission will assess the impact that the possible changes in land use classification may have on the proposed Sites of Community Importance and will take all appropriate measures to ensure the application of Community environmental legislation. |
| --- | --- |

4.

With regard to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, hereafter ‘Habitats Directive’, it is recalled that this directive makes explicit references to habitat types and not to land use. The habitat types and species listed in Annexes I and II should be included in the Natura 2000 network of sites, following the procedure set out in Article 4 and the selection criteria established by Annexe III of the Directive. The designation of Sites of Community Importance under the Directive is therefore based on the ecological quality of the habitats and species existing in a site and not on the site's land use classification.

The recently tabled Greek forest law will not modify the classification of the habitat types included in the Habitats Directive and the list of Sites of Community Importance proposed by Greece. Since the Greek proposal of Sites of Community Importance was based on the selection criteria of Annexe III and not on land use criteria, this list is not expected to change. The list of selected sites of Community Importance for the Mediterranean region is expected to be adopted by the Commission by the end of 2004.

As regards the identification of proposed Sites of Community Importance, it should be borne in mind that Member States have a general obligation to act in such a way as to ensure that the aims of the Directive are not jeopardised. Even in the absence of a Community list, Member States authorities must at least abstain from all activities that may seriously compromise the integrity of a site on the national list, that may cause the deterioration of a natural habitat or significantly disturb species. Furthermore, it should be stressed that the provisions of Articles 12, 13 and 14, which cover certain plant and animal species, are applicable from the date of implementation of the Directive, i.e. 10 June 1994.

Regarding management of the sites, within six years of the adoption of the list of sites of Community Importance for the Mediterranean region, each Member State concerned should designate them as Special Areas of Conservation and establish relevant priorities.

Following the adoption and the implementation of the Greek law, the Commission will assess the impact that the possible changes in land use classification may have on the proposed Sites of Community Importance and will take all appropriate measures to ensure the application of Community environmental legislation.

---

(1)  COD 2002/0164 C5-0292/2003, Regulation not yet published in the OJ.

1

(2)  OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

2

(3)  OJ L 324, 11.12.2003.

3

---