WRITTEN QUESTION P-1527/00

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Subject: Cockle fishing

The effects of cockle fishing have been a topic of discussion in the Netherlands for years. Cockles are an important food source for oyster-catchers, eider ducks, greenshanks, avocets and other long-legged waders. Oyster-catchers have declined in number in recent years and this winter there was a sudden and as yet unexplained large number of deaths among eider ducks. Furthermore, there are strong indications that cockle fishing is having long-term effects on sediment management in the Wadden Sea(1).

Cockle fishing takes place in the Wadden Sea, which is listed as a protected area under the Wild Birds Directive and as a special protection zone under the Habitats Directive.

Since 1998 a quota of 10 000 tonnes of cockle meat has been in place. This figure is higher that the amount ever fished. From 1984 to 1997 inclusive, the average catch was 4000 tonnes. Only in 1998 was it significantly higher at 9 338 tonnes.

Fisheries policy in the Netherlands is laid down in the 1993 regional economic plan for sea and coastal fishing, which is supplemented by a 1999 policy decision. Under the relevant provisions, fishing is prohibited in 26 % of the Wadden Sea. In addition, the shellfish sector has drawn up its own management plan for the area in which fishing is allowed, and where it has closed a further 5 %. In the remaining area. i.e. 69 % of the Wadden Sea, fishing is virtually free of restrictions.

In Denmark there is hardly any cockle fishing any more and in Germany none whatsoever.

Does the Commission consider that cockle fishing has expanded to such an extent that it should be listed as a new activity within the meaning of the Wild Birds and Habitats directives?

Does it consider that, if the existing activities cause significant damage, the policy should be adapted to allow the area to recover?

Should compensation be provided and, if so, in what form?

Does it consider that cockle fishing is damaging the habitats of protected birds and biotopes such as mussel beds and sea grass meadows?

In the Commission's view, is cockle fishing damaging the mudflats and thus the future food supply?

The agreement between the government and the cockle fishermen is that 60 % of the food requirements of birds in the Wadden Sea is reserved for the birds. Does the Commission consider that 60 % is adequate given the fact that there are scarcely no other sources of supply in the Wadden Sea and those that exist are declining in volume and quality?

Does the Commission think that cockle fishing is, or may be, in breach of the Wild Birds and Habitats directives?

(1) J. Van de Kam, B. Ens, T. Piersma and L. Zwarts (1999), Ecologische atlas van de Nederlandse wadvogels (Ecological Atlas of Dutch waders), Schuyt en Co, Haarlem. A. Koolhaas, T. Piersma and J. M. van den Broeck (1998), Kokkel- en mosselvisserij beschadigen het wadleven, (Cockle and mussel fishing damage life on the mudflats) De levende Natuur 99, 254-260. T. Piersma, A. Dekinga and A. Koolhaas (1993), Een kwetsbare keten: modder, nonnetjes en kanoeten bij Griend, (A vulnerable chain: mud, smew and knots on mudbanks) Waddenbulletin 28: 144-149.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2000)

Cockle fishing is not covered by the common fisheries policy and it is very unlikely that it will become so in the foreseeable future. Cockles exist as localised stocks of interest to one Member State and thus it appears more appropriate that the Member State concerned manages the fishery.

The Wadden Sea has been designated as a special protection area (SPA) within the meaning of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(1) and has been proposed as an area of special Community interest (SCI) within the meaning of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna(2) as well.

Pursuant to Article 7 of Directive 92/43/EEC, Articles 6(2), 6(3) and 6(4) of that Directive apply to a SPA.

According to Article 6(2) of Directive 92/43/EEC the Member States shall take appropriate steps to avoid in a SPA the deterioration of natural habitats and the habitats of species as well as disturbance of the species for which the areas have been designated, in so far as such disturbance could be significant in relation to the objectives of the Directive.

This provision applies to existing activities in a SPA that may have an impact on the conservation status of the bird populations. Its application may imply that such activities must be changed or ended.

New plans or projects that may have implications for the conservation status of the bird populations are covered by Articles 6(3) and 6(4) of Directive 92/43/EEC. On the basis of the information available to it, the Commission is not able to judge whether those provisions also apply to the new shellfish fisheries in the Wadden Sea.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.