31.17.  78 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 181/21 
2.4.3.  It is proposed  that  the third  indent  in Article  6 
(4) should  read  'including  wines  intended  compulsorily 
for the  manufacture  of potable  spirits  produced  in 
specified  regions'. 
2.4.4.  As  regards  Article  6 (5),  it would  be interesting 
to make  it compulsory  for mean  alcoholic  strength  to be 
bfoken  down  by yield  class,  as well  as by geographical 
unit. 
2.4.5.  The  Committee  does  not agree  with  discriminat-
ing between  Member  States  on the  grounds  of the 
amount  of quality  wines  psr they  produce.  It proposes 
that all producer  countries  should  have  to produce 
separate  figures  on the mean  natural  alcoholic  strength 
of their  table  wines  and  their  quality  wines  psr. 
2.5. Article  9 
The Committee  considers  that  the expenditure  necessary 
for carrying  out intermediate  surveys  could  come  out of 
the EEC  budget. 
Done  at Brussels,  29 March  1978. 2.6. Article  10 
The Committee  notes  that,  according  to the  Com-
mission,  the derogations  provided  for in Article  10 (4) 
are to be incorporated  into  another  Community  Regu-
lation. 
3. Conclusions 
3.1. The  Committee  notes  with  interest  that,  according 
to the Commission,  the Member  States  themselves  will 
be largely  responsible  for  carrying  out  surveys,  es-
pecially  as regards  the choice  of methods  for attaining 
the Commission's  objectives.  The  Committee  would, 
however,  stress  the need  for statistics  that  can  be com-
pared  with  one  another. 
3.2. Finally,  the Committee  is aware  of the importance 
of the  present  proposed  Regulation  being  adopted  as 
soon  as possible,  so that  the basic  surveys  can be carried 
out in the 1978/79  marketing  year. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Basil  de FERRANTI 
Opinion  on the proposals  for: 
— a Council  Regulation  defining  for 1978  measures  for conservation  and  management  of 
fishery  resources  by the establishment  of quotas 
— a Council  Regulation  laying  down  technical  measures  for the conservation  of fishery 
resources 
— a Council  Regulation  laying  down  certain  measures  of control  for fishing  activities 
— a Council  Decision  on financial  participation  by the Community  in respect  of the inspec-
tion and  surveillance  operations  in the maritime  waters  of Denmark  and  Ireland 
— a Council  Regulation  laying  down  special  aid measures  for herring  fisheries  in the North 
Sea and  the Celtic  Sea 
The texts  referred  to the Committee  have  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the European 
Communities  No  C 278  of 18 November  1977,  pages  3 and  8, No C 307  of 21 December 
1977,  page  3, and  C 286  of 29 November  1977,  page  3. 
No C 181/22 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 31.7.  78 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 16 November  and  13 December  1977,  the  Council  referred  the abovementioned  pro-
posals  to the Economic  and  Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Articles  43 and  47 of the 
Treaty  establishing  the European  Economic  Community. 
B. OPINION  OF  THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  prepared  its opinion  on the above  matter  at its 157th 
plenary  session,  held  in Brussels  on 29 and  30 March  1978. 
The full  text  of the opinion  is as follows: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to the  Treaty  establishing  the  European 
Economic  Community,  and  in particular  Articles  43 and 
47 thereof, 
Having  regard  to the  requests  made  by the  Council  of 
the European  Communities  on 16 November  1977  and 
13 December  1977  for an opinion, 
Having  regard  to the decision  taken  by its Bureau  on 22 
November  1977,  instructing  the Section  for Agriculture 
to draw  up an opinion  on the  abovementioned  pro-
posals, 
Having  regard  to the  amendments  proposed  by  the 
Commission  on 16 January  1978  to the  above  pro-
posals, 
Having  regard  to the opinion  adopted  by the Section  for 
Agriculture  on 9 March  1978, 
Having  regard  to the  oral  report  made  by the  rappor-
teur,  Mr Wick, 
Having  regard  to the  discussions  at its 157th  plenary 
session  on 29  and  30  March  1978  (meeting  of 30 
March  1978), 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
by a large  majority,  four  votes  against  and  one  absten-
tion: 
1. Following  the.  progress  made  at the Third  UN  Con-
ference  on the Law  of the Sea,  many  countries,  including 
Iceland  and  Norway,  extended  their  fishing  limits  to 
200 miles  in 1976  and  1977.  This  meant  that  fishing 
fleets  from  other  countries  were  no longer  able  to fish 
these  waters.  There  was  thus  a distinct  possibility  that 
these  fleets  would  be forced  to switch  their  operations 
to waters  directly  adjoining  the territorial  waters  of the Member  States.  In November  1976,  the  Council  conse-
quently  decided  that  from  1 January  1977  the Member 
States  would  jointly  extend  their  territorial  waters  to 
200 miles.  This  established  the  principle  of joint  man-
agement  of these  waters. 
2. There  was,  however,  no proper  legal  basis  for joint 
management.  Regulation  (EEC)  No  101/76  on  the 
structural  policy  for fisheries  in the Community  merely 
states  that  all Community  fishing  vessels  shall  have  free 
access  to the waters  of the  Member  States  without  dis-
crimination.  However,  Article  100  of the  Treaty  of 
Accession  authorizes  Member  States  to introduce  tem-
porary  12  mile  limits  with  access  restricted  to local 
fishermen  and  vessels  with  traditional  fishing  rights  in 
these  waters.  This  exemption  runs  out  on 31 December 
1982. 
3. Joint  management  required  an outline  Regulation 
setting  out principles  covering  fishing  operations  in EEC 
waters  and  .on 6 October  1976  the Commission  submit-
ted a proposal  for  a Council  Regulation  establishing  a 
Community  system  for  the  conservation  and  manage-
ment  of fishery  resources  i1). 
4. This  proposal  has  two  main  features:  (a) measures 
to conserve  and  replenish  fish  stocks  and  (b)  manage-
ment  measures.  By laying  down  total  allowable  catches 
(TACs)  for individual  species  in EC waters,  it is hoped 
that fish  stocks  can  be maintained  and  replenished. 
TACs  are designed  to ensure  an optimal  level  of fishing 
of available  stocks.  The  draft  Regulation  also  provided 
for restrictions  on certain  types  of fishing  gear,  the 
establishment  of zones  in which  fishing  is prohibited  at 
certain  times  or may  only  be carried  out  with  specific 
fishing  gear,  and  seasonal  restrictions. 
(i) OJ No C 255,  28. 10. 1976,  p. 3. 
31.17.  78 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 181/23 
5. The  chief  management  measure  is the  proposed 
breakdown  of part  but not all of the TAG  into  national 
quotas.  A Community  reserve  is to be set aside  for 
specific  objectives.  Policing  will  of course  also  be neces-
sary.  Structural  and  social  measures  are also  proposed. A. Proposal  for a Council  Regulation  defining  for 1978 
measures  for  conservation  and  management  of 
fishery  resources  by the establishment  of quotas 
1. General  comments 
6. We  should  refer  here  to the Committee's  opinion  on 
the proposal  for a Council  Regulation  on a programme 
for restructuring  the non-industrial  inshore  fishing  in-
dustry  (1). 1.1. The  Commission  contends  that  the  introduction 
of TACs  is based  on scientific  principles  except  in a 
small  number  of special  cases.  To disregard  the concept 
of the TAC  would  be to ignore  the best  available  advice 
and the consequences  for fish  stocks  would  be serious. 
7. At  its 155th  plenary  session,  held  on 1 and  2 Feb-
ruary  1978,  the Committee  also  adopted  an opinion  on 
the proposal  for  a Council  Directive  on certain  im-
mediate  measures  to adjust  capacity  in the  fisheries 
sector  (2). 1.2. Total  allowable  catch  quotas  have  been  based  as 
far as possible  on the individual  fish  stock  keys  used  by 
the North-East  Atlantic  Fisheries  Commission  (NEAFC) 
up to 1976.  Only  Scotland  and  Ireland  have  been 
exempted  from  these  keys  in order  to take  account  of 
the vital  interests  of communities  which  depend  mainly 
on fishing  for their  livelihood. 
8. The  Commission  has  now  submitted  five  draft  de-
tailed  Regulations.  The  first  of these  is the proposal  for 
a Regulation  defining,  for 1978,  measures  for conserva-
tion and  management  of fishery  resources  by the estab-
lishment  of quotas.  The  establishment  of technical 
measures  for the conservation  of stocks  is a logical  pre-
lude to the division  of these  stocks  into  quotas. 
The Commission  has also  submitted:  (i) a proposal  for a 
Regulation  laying  down  certain  measures  of control  for 
fishing  activities  by Community  vessels,  (ii) a proposal 
for a Council  Decision  on financial  participation  by the 
Community  in respect  of the inspection  and  surveillance 
operations  in the maritime  waters  of Denmark  and  Ire-
land,  (iii)  a communication  to the Council  on the prob-
lems  of the  herring  fisheries  in the North  Sea  and  the 
Celtic  Sea  and  (iv)  a proposal  for a Regulation  laying 
down  special  aid measures  for these  fisheries.  The  pro-
posals  will  be considered  in the above  order. 1.3. On  16 December  1976  the Committee  adopted  its 
opinion  on the proposal  for a Council  Regulation  estab-
lishing  a.Community  system  for the conservation  and 
management  of fishery  resources  (3). Paragraph  1.10  of 
the opinion  stated  that  the proposed  outline  Regulation 
would  be followed  by more  detailed  Regulations.  The 
Committee  notes  this.  Management  of EC fish  stocks  is 
absolutely  essential  and  the  Committee  therefore  ac-
cepts  the  introduction  of TACs  and  quotas  for  the 
major  species.  Given  the  exceptional  political  signifi-
cance  of the  allocation  of national  quotas,  the  Com-
mittee  proposes  to comment  only  on the  fundamental 
issues  raised  by the proposal.  The  Committee  approves 
the proposal,  subject  to the above  comments. 
1.4. Doc.  COM(76)  535  made  provision  for  a Com-
munity  reserve  stock  to allow  Member  States'  quotas  to 
be adjusted.  The  present  proposal  does  not,  however, 
contain  such  a provision.  Such  a reserve  is nevertheless 
necessary  to give  the Community  sufficient  latitude  to 
negotiate  effectively  on reciprocal  fishing  rights  with 
non-EC  States.  Even  if the  initial  quotas  had  to be 
modified,  there  would  be no reduction  in the  overall 
potential  catch  of the Member  States. 
(!) OJ No C 197,  23. 8. 1976,  p. 21. 
(:) OJ No C 84, 8. 4. 1978,  p. 12. (3) OJ No C 255,  28. 10. 1976,  p. 3. 
No C 181/24 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 31. 7. 78 
2. Specific  comments 
2.1. If further  damage  to the  Community  fishing 
industry  is to be avoided,  negotiations  with  non-EC 
countries  on fishing  rights  in their  waters  must  be 
started  as soon  as possible  and  brought  to a speedy 
conclusion.  These  negotiations  should  also  take  account 
of the  agreements  which  some  Member  States  have 
concluded  with  non-member  countries. 
2.2. The  Commission  should  endeavour  to make 
available  greater  quantities  of fish  by imposing  more 
stringent  restrictions  on fishing  for purposes  other  than 
human  consumption.  These  quantities  should  be con-
sidered  as a quid  pro  quo  or as a means  of compen-
sation  in talks  between  the  Community  and  non-
member  countries  who  have  negotiated  or are  due  to 
negotiate  agreements  on reciprocal  fishing  rights. 
2.3. In order  to protect  the individual  Member  States' 
quotas,  measures  should  be taken  to make  it impossible 
for ships  to change  from  one  Member  State's  flag  to 
another  or to curtail  such  practice.  Freedom  of estab-
lishment  must  however  be preserved. 
B. Proposal  for  a Council  Regulation  laying  down 
technical  measures  for  the  conservation  of fishery 
resources 
1. General  comments 
1.1. The  proposal  provides  for  a large  number  of 
measures  to protect  fishing  grounds  so as to permit  the 
optimal  management  of available  stocks. 
1.2. The  Member  States  have  so far  applied  such 
measures  in line  with  recommendations  from  the 
Fisheries  Commissions  for the North  Atlantic  (ICNAF 
and NEAFC). 
1.3. These  measures  include  the establishment  of zones 
(for individual  species  of fish)  in which  fishing  is either 
prohibited  or restricted  to certain  times,  certain  types  of 
vessels  or certain  gear.  Other  measures  include  standard 
mesh  sizes  for nets,  minimum  sizes  and  weights  for the 
fish taken,  etc.  As  the  proposal  cannot  cover  all 
measures  for  conserving  and  managing  fish  stocks, 
Member  States  are to be allowed  to retain  their  existing 
measures  as long  as they  are non-discriminatory  and  do not conflict  with  the  relevant  decisions  of the  Inter-
national  Fisheries  Commissions  or the  proposal  under 
consideration. 
1.4. The  Commission  has  stated  that  it is intended  to 
extend  the scope  of the Regulation  to other  areas.  The 
Committee  will  therefore  confine  itself  to endorsing  the 
principles  contained  in the proposal. 
1.5. Certain  technical  data  in the proposal  are incom-
plete,  e.g.  the list of permissible  processing  methods  in 
Article  12 (1). 
2. Specific  comments 
2.1. Articles  1 and 2 
2.1.1.  Subject  to the findings  of a scientific  study,  the 
Eastern  Channel  should  be included  in that  part  of 
Region  2 defined  in Annex  1 as being  'outside  the 
North  Sea'. 
The footnote  to Annex  1 states  that  Division  VII d) (the 
'Eastern  Channel')  is to be regarded  as forming  part  of 
the North  Sea.  Division  VII d) is fished  differently  from 
Area  IV (geographically  the North  Sea).  Different  ves-
sels are  used  and  the  socio-economic  conditions  are 
different.  Although  it cannot  be stated  with  absolute 
certainty  that  Division  VII d) is distinct  from  the North 
Sea, there  is no scientific  evidence  either  that  it (and  the 
fish stocks  which  it contains)  is in fact  part  of the North 
Sea. 
2.2. Article  3 
2.2.1.  Whiting  should  be regarded  as a special  cat-
egory  in Annex  2 for which  a mesh  considerably  smaller 
than  90 mm  may  be used,  pending  justification  of this 
exception  by scientific  studies. 
Article  3 and  Annex  2 do not deal  specifically  with  fish-
ing for whiting.  Under  the  draft  Regulation,  the mesh 
size used  in fishing  for this  species  is to be the same  as 
that for other  demersal  fish,  i.e. 90 mm.  It is acknowl-
edged  that  the  use  of trawl  nets  with  90 mm  mesh, 
which  reduces  whiting  catches  by almost  50 %, would 
cause  a considerable  drop  in turnover  and  in fisher-
men's  earnings. 
Official  Journal  of the European  Communities  No  C 181/25 31.17.  78 
2.3. Article  3 (2) 
2.3.1.  The  Committee  proposes  the  deletion  of the 
words  'carry  on board  or'. 
Deep-sea  fishing  vessels  are  designed  and  equipped  for 
worldwide  use  and  consequently  carry  gear  for catching 
species  outside  EEC  waters.  Such  gear  includes  nets 
with  meshes  between  50  mm  and  the  minimum 
specified  for Region  2 in Annex  1. 
2.4. Article  4 (1) first  indent 
Replace  'are  carried'  by 'are  used'.  Cf.  reasons  given 
above. 
2.5. Article  10 
Special  arrangements  should  be made  for  Nephrops  in 
the light  of socio-economic  conditions  and  scientific 
evidence.  An abrupt  changeover  to 70 mm  mesh  (Re-
gion  II) and  60 mm  mesh  (Region  III)  for  Nephrops 
fishing  would  be absolutely  disastrous  for  the  small-
scale  fishermen  who  rely  chiefly  on Nephrops  for  their 
living.  Moreover,  it is believed  that  the Commission  has 
contemplated  amending  the relevant  proposals. 
C. Proposal  for a Council  Regulation  laying  down  cer-
tain measures  of control  for  fishing  activities  by 
Community  vessels 
1. General  comments 
1.1. If it is to be successful,  the common  fisheries  pol-
icy must  incorporate  rules  to ensure  that  Community 
stock  conservation  and  management  measures  are  ob-
served,  particularly  as individual  fishermen  may  derive 
substantial  benefits  from  non-compliance.  Effective 
policing  is therefore  essential  to secure  the  viability  of 
the common  fisheries  policy. 
1.2. The  draft  Regulation  lays  down  rules  to ensure 
effective  and  non-discriminatory  inspection  of fishing 
vessels  and  their  activities  by the Member  States  within 
their  ports  and  territorial  waters.  Inspection  methods 
are to be standardized  as far as possible. 1.3. The  Committee  endorses  the  draft  Regulations 
objectives  and  welcomes  the proposals  for  strict  super-
vision  of quotas  and  provisions  on technical  measures 
such  as minimum  fish  and  mesh  sizes.  The  Committee 
fears,  however,  that  to make  each  Member  State  re-
sponsible  for  supervising  its own  fisheries  and  fishing 
fleets  may  lead  to the Regulations  being  applied  differ-
ently  in individual  Member  States.  The  Commission 
should  strictly  enforce  Article  14, which  empowers  it to 
check  up on the  way  Member  States  are applying  indi-
vidual  controls. 
2. Specific  comments 
2.1, Article  1 (2) 
Community  legislation  should  be aligned  so as to ensure 
Community-wide  uniformity  of  legal  proceedings 
against  fishing  vessels. 
2.2. Article  3 
The obligation  for  vessels  to keep  a record  of fishing 
activities  could  create  problems  for inshore  fishing  boats 
which  have  small  crews.  Exemptions  should  be pro-
vided  for here.  The  desired  supervision  is achieved  since 
the fishing  grounds  in question  are  known  and  catches 
and species  are recorded  where  the fish  are landed.  Fish 
which  is subject  to a quota  must  not  be transferred  at 
sea to another  vessel,  for  landing  outside  Community 
territory,  unless  the  skipper  of the  fishing  vessel  con-
cerned  has  informed  the Member  State  responsible  for 
policing  the  grounds,  of the  species  and  quantities  of 
fish involved  in the transfer. 
Intensive  surveillance  should  be used  to prevent  ships 
from  switching  flags  at sea. 
2.3. Article  16 
If the Member  States  were  allowed  to introduce  inspec-
tion measures  going  beyond  the requirements  laid  down 
in the Regulation,  there  would  be a serious  risk  of dis-
crimination  between  Member  State  fishermen  and  ship-
owners.  They  would  be subject  to very  different  rules 
and obligations  and  the  legal  situation  could  become 
extremely  confused. 
No C 181/26 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 31. 7. 78 
D. Proposal  for  a Council  Decision  on financial  par-
ticipation  by the  Community  in respect  of the  in-
spection  and  surveillance  operations  in the maritime 
waters  of Denmark  and  Ireland 
1. General  comments 
1.1. Effective  policing  obviously  requires  the  swiftest 
possible  reinforcement  of inspection  and  surveillance 
facilities  covering  the  entire  fishing  grounds  of the 
Member  States,  or at least  the major  ones.  The  Com-
mission  has  drafted  this  proposal  in furtherance  of the 
Council  declaration  of 3 November  1976,  which  recog-
nized  that  the implementation  of existing  and  proposed 
surveillance  arrangements  should  be accompanied  by 
action  to ensure  an equitable  distribution  of costs.  Fol-
lowing  the extension  of their  territorial  waters,  Danish 
and Irish  expenditure  on policing  fishing  grounds  off 
Ireland  and  Greenland  is out  of all proportion  to the 
benefits  which  the two  countries  derive  from  fishing  in 
those  grounds. 
1.2. The  Committee  therefore  supports  the  Commis-
sion proposal  that  a portion  of Danish  and  Irish  expen-
diture  should  be reimbursed  by the  Community.  Poli-
cing of fishing  zones  by the Member  States  benefits  the 
entire  Community  and  it is only  right  that  the  Com-
munity  should  shoulder  the greater  part  of the costs. 
1.3. The  Committee  deplores  the inconsistency  of the 
dates  given,  at least  in the Italian  version  of the  draft 
Decision. 
2. Specific  comments 
2.1. Article  1 (2) 
The Committee  calls  for  a significant  increase  in the 
Community  contribution  towards  the  cost  of policing 
the extended  Irish  territorial  waters. 
2.2. Article  2 
The Committee  proposes  that  the  level  of the  Com-
munity's  contribution  be  reviewed  at the  earliest 
possible  time. E. Communication  from  the Commission  to the Coun-
cil concerning  the problems  of the  herring  fisheries 
in the North  Sea  and  the Celtic  Sea, 
and the 
Proposal  for  a Council  Regulation  laying  down 
special  aid  measures  for  herring  fisheries  in the 
North  Sea  and  the Celtic  Sea 
1. General  comments 
1.1. In view  of the ban  on herring  fishing  in the North 
Sea and  the Celtic  Sea (until  31 December  1978  and  31 
December  1977  respectively),  the Commission  deems  it 
necessary  to propose  special  measures  to preserve  the 
Community's  herring  fleet  and  ensure  that  it is able  to 
fish for herring  after  stocks  have  been  replenished.  The 
Commission  therefore  proposes  additional  financial 
assistance  for concerns  which  normally  fish  for herring 
in the North  Sea  and  the Celtic  Sea. 
1.2. The  Committee  regrets  that  the recitals  ignore  the 
impact  of conservation  measures  on the  processing 
industry.  Since  the  latter  have  also  been  hit  by the 
temporary  ban  on herring  fishing,  it should  perhaps  also 
receive  assistance. 
1.3. The  Committee  would  point  out  that  there  are 
discrepancies  between  the  dates  given  in the  various 
language  versions  of the  Commission  document.  The 
Italian  version  in particular  needs  revision. 
2. Specific  comments 
2.1. Article  1 (2) 
Article  1 (2) stipulates  that  in order  to qualify  for 
compensation,  a fishery  undertaking  must  show  that  it 
obtained  at least  10 % of its average  income  for 1974, 
1975  and  1976  from  herring  fishing  in the North  Sea  or 
the Celtic  Sea.  This  requirement  may  create  consider-
able problems  for  fishing  undertakings  which  have  a 
vessel  specially  fitted  out  for  herring  fishing  in the 
North  Sea  or Celtic  Sea,  as well  as other  ships  engaged 
in totally  different  types  of fishing.  They  could  not fulfil 
31.17.  78 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 181/27 
the 10 % income  requirement  and  would  thus  not  qual-
ify for compensation  for  losses  occasioned  by the  ban 
on herring  fishing. The Committee  notes  that  the term  'undertaking'  covers 
individual  vessels.  The  Committee  assumes  that  the 
appropriate  amendments  will  be made. 
Done  at Brussels,  30 March  1978. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Basil  de FERRANTI 
ANNEX 
to the opinion  of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
The following  passages  of the Section  opinion  were  replaced  by amendments  adopted  during  discussion: 
2.2. These  quantities  could  compensate  for any  losses  incurred  as a result  of measures  taken  by non-
member  States  and  could  be a bargaining  factor  in negotiations  on fishing  rights  in non-EC  waters. 
Voting 
Unanimous. 
2.3. In  order  to protect  individual  Member  States'  quotas,  steps  should  be taken  to make  it more  dif-
ficult  for Member  State  vessels  to change  flags.  Freedom  of establishment  must,  however,  be preserved. 
Opinion  on the proposal  for a Council  Directive  on statistical  returns  in respect  of carriage 
of goods  by road,  as part  of regional  statistics 
The text  referred  to the Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the European 
Communities  No  C 11 of 13 January  1978,  page  4. 
A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
On 9 January  1978,  the Council  referred  the abovementioned  proposal  to the Economic  and 
Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Article  213  of the  Treaty  establishing  the European 
Economic  Community. Voting 
Unanimous.