(2000/C 27 E/066) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1412/99
by Francis DecourriŁre (PPE-DE) to the Commission
(1 September 1999)
Subject: Directive on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
With reference to the application of Annex III of Council Directive 92/43/EEC (1) of 21 May 1992, the text
states under Stage 2, paragraph 2b, that assessment of the Community importance of a site will take intoaccount the geographical situation of the site in relation to the migration routes of species in Annex II andwhether it belongs to a continuous ecosystem situated on both sides of one or more internal Communityfrontiers.
Socio-economic activities are sometimes totally different on the two sides of a frontier and are governed by
national law. For example, hunting and fishing are legitimate and traditional activities in France in coastalareas under public ownership while this is not the case on the other side of the frontier in Belgium.
1. As the economic, social and cultural requirements and the regional and local characteristics must be
taken into account (Article 2 of the Directive referred to above) how does the Commission intend toharmonise the management of these frontier areas, which are environmentally very important (classified asnature reserves, biogenetic reserves, etc.) and are affected by a species in Annex II (Phoca vitulina), withsuch diverse activities?
2. Is one form of management required for these sites?
3. Will these frontier areas benefit from special conditions, in particular financial conditions, during the
implementation phase of Directive 92/43/EEC and its effective implementation in 2004?
(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission
(15 September 1999)
1. Under Article 6(1) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural
habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1), the Member States are responsible for site management. Each
Member State must draw up the conservation measures needed to meet the ecological requirements ofAnnex II species present on the sites. The Commission is involved in the selection of sites but not theirmanagement.
2. The Directive does not require a single form of management for these sites. Each Member State must
assess with its neighbours the degree of cooperation required to ensure that the Directives objective isachieved.
3. Article 8 of the Directive, which relates to the cofinancing of conservation measures on sites hosting
priority habitat types or species, does not give priority to cross-border sites. However, several Communityinstruments allow special attention to be given to these sites. The Commission encourages Member Statesto use these existing instruments for Natura 2000 cross-border site management.
(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2000/C 27 E/067) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1414/99
by Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE) to the Commission
(1 September 1999)
Subject: Hunting of wolves and wolverines in Finland
Is the Commission aware the wolves are being hunted in Finland in contravention of EU rules? Wolves can
be hunted in Finland on the basis of an annually approved quota during the period between 1 Novemberand 31 March 1997 authorisation was given for the hunting of 15 wolves and in 1998 for the hunting ofnine wolves.C 27 E/56 EN 29.1.2000 Official Journal of the European Communities