WRITTEN QUESTION E-2747/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(3 September 1998)

Subject: Extension of the hunting season in France - failure to transpose the bird protection directive in France - request for immediate measures

France is the only EU Member State apart from Greece to have failed to transpose the bird protection directive (79/409) designed to protect migratory species of birds, although the directive was unanimously adopted by the Council of Ministers under a French presidency. Open season for the hunting of water fowl has now been declared in France from the third weekend in July to the last day of February, although this is a blatant violation of the abovementioned directive. The Member is aware that the Commission has already begun proceedings against France on this issue, but the question of immediate measures still remains.

1. What immediate measures does the Commission intend to take to provide protection at once for migratory birds which begin the journey to their winter habitat in mid-August and those that are still breeding?

2. Is the Commission aware that without immediate measures successful incubation and the undisturbed migration of the birds to, as well as back from, their winter quarters is endangered?

3. What further urgent measures will the Commission be taking against this scandalous law? When can definitive proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Communities be expected?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 1998)

1. As the Honourable Member rightly points out, in 1997 the Commission began infringement proceedings against France for failure of its hunting seasons to comply with the provisions of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds.(1) The opening and closing dates for hunting in France do not guarantee complete protection of bird species during their return to their breeding grounds and during nesting and rearing. On 24 June 1998, the Commission decided to notify a reasoned opinion against France, which is the second step in the infringement procedure under Article 169 of the EC Treaty. In announcing this decision, the Commission stated that the proceedings pre-date the legislative changes which have been adopted by the French Parliament and that it feared that these changes, which consolidate the shortcomings of the system, may exacerbate problems regarding the French hunting season.(2) The reasoned opinion was notified on 5 August 1998 with a period of two months for compliance.

In addition, the Commission does not have the power to introduce urgent measures itself. Under Article 186 of the EC Treaty "the Court of Justice may in any cases before it prescribe any necessary interim measures". Since this case has not been brought before the Court, the Commission cannot ask for urgent measures to be taken at this stage.

2. Yes.

3. Article 169 of the EC Treaty gives a Member State the opportunity to comply with a reasoned opinion within the period laid down in it. It is only at the end of this period that the Commission may decide to bring the matter before the Court if no measures have been taken to comply with the opinion.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2) Press release of 24 June 1998 (IP/98/562). .