OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending for the sixteenth time Regulation (EEC) No. 3094/86 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources
Date: 1994-09-15
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: conservation of fish stocks, conservation of resources, fishery management, fishing industry, fishing net













EUR-Lex - 51994AC1022 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51994AC1022

OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending for the sixteenth time Regulation (EEC) No. 3094/86 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources  


Official Journal C 393 , 31/12/1994 P. 0175 





Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending for the sixteenth time Regulation (EEC) No 3094/86 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources () (94/C 393/26)On 12 April 1994 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 48 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 1 September 1994. The Rapporteur was Mr Muñiz Guardado.At its 318th Plenary Session (meeting of 15 September 1994), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following Opinion by a large majority with 7 votes against and 12 abstentions.SUMMARYThe present Opinion deals with a problematic form of fishing which, according to technical experts and biologists, is harmful; for this reason the United Nations and other major bodies recommend that it be outlawed.The problem mainly concerns the North-East Atlantic, from the 30oW meridian to the Bay of Biscay. The situation is rather different in the Baltic and requires separate study.The use of large drift-nets has been a subject of discussion in Europe for more than five years now because of (i) the impact of this technique on fishing grounds and confrontation between those fleets which use it and those which do not, and (ii) the ecological consequences of by-catches, most obviously marine mammals, as well as navigation problems affecting all types of vessel.At a time when the imbalance between fishery resources and effort is leading the EU to reduce its fishing effort, the Committee considers that a destructive method such as drift-netting, which only employs a limited number of fishermen, should be outlawed; at most, it should only be permitted with nets less than 2.5 km long, within the 12 mile limit of each Member State, as the European Parliament stated in December 1993.1. General comments The Committee broadly approves the proposal, subject to the following comments.1.1. The uncontrolled expansion of drift-netting is very dangerous as it can lead to an excessive increase in fishing effort of the target species and can constitute a serious hazard to navigation. It does not accord with Regulation (EEC) No 3094/86 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources, for which strict and thorough surveillance is needed.1.1.1. Fishing effort grew by some 250 % between 1988 and 1992, with catches rising from 750 tonnes in 1988 to 7,300 tonnes (provisional data) in 1993, according to the Commission Communication COM(94) 50 final, point 4.2.3 and tables 1 and 2, page 22.1.2. Drift-netting for salmon and salmonids in the Baltic must be regulated by the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission as the situation there is completely different from that of the Atlantic.1.3. Vessels which have hitherto used drift-nets of up to 5 km should be authorized to fish with drift-nets of up to 2.5 km, or, where appropriate, should immediately apply for Community aid for the reconversion of the fleet. This reconversion should be carried out as rapidly as possible for all vessels, taking into account the social repercussions.1.4. Drift-netting could continue if it could be properly monitored and controlled, in accordance with the European Parliament resolution of December 1993 which proposes that the Commission, upon receipt of a reasoned application from a Member State, may authorize the use of drift-nets within the 12 mile limit, in accordance with rules to be drawn up for each specific case.1.5. In order to ensure that drift-nets do not pose a hazard to shipping, drift-netters should be obliged to keep the net attached to the vessel and the headline submerged. Incidents have already occurred, notably at night, between fishing vessels and patrol boats, whose propellers have been caught up in drift-nets which have not been properly extended or indicated.1.5.1. The presence of the headline on the surface generally poses a hazard to shipping; the headline, must, therefore, be submerged. Observations at sea, particularly by Commission inspectors, confirm that the risk is significantly reduced if the headline is submerged, even if not far below the surface.1.6. Vessels using nets of under 2.5 km length must be subject to additional regulations relating to their possible biological effects.1.7. Drift-netting entails a large number of by-catches of other species. The UN General Assembly has issued Resolutions () calling for an immediate moratorium on the growth of large-scale deep-sea drift-netting in the high-sea zones of the North Pacific and in all high-sea zones outside the Pacific.1.8. The most widely accepted definition of large drift-nets is that given in the Wellington Convention, which sets this at 2.5 km. There are more restrictive definitions; the use of 5 km drift nets should therefore be out of the question.1.9. According to the Scientific and Technical Committee on Fisheries (STCF), 1 km of net per crew member is needed for this type of fishing to be profitable. The STCF recognizes that this leads to the use of a fraudulent length of net, with a high number of by-catches.1.10. The Committee proposes that an urgent study be carried out on drift-netting with a view to its possible prohibition or abolition on the grounds of its effects:- in disrupting the eco-system;- on problems for shipping;- in increasing the fishing effort;- in cutting jobs on vessels;- in the field of compatibility with the Community's international obligations.Meanwhile, the Committee urges that existing regulations be applied strictly.2. Specific comments Article 9aArticle 9a(2): Given that the derogation for the use of drift-nets of more than 2.5 km expired on 31 December 1993, it is hard to see why new exceptions should be granted to vessels which have been entered on the Community Register since 1992. It is illogical to have concurrent authorization and derogation.Article 9a(3): A separate Regulation should be drawn up for this area. It should include (i) the requirement that the relevant vessels are to figure on a list to be drawn up by the Commission on the basis of reasoned requests, and (ii) the stipulation of a maximum total net length of 21 km per vessel. This separate Regulation should be drawn up by the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission.Article 9a(4) should be deleted.Article 9aaArticle 9aa(3): The Committee maintains that the proportional reductions for 1995, 1996 and 1997 should relate specifically to catches and fishing effort (vessels), since the aim of the Draft Regulation is the disappearance and reconversion of the drift-netting fleet, with reference to the number of vessels existing in 1993.Article 9aa(4): The fishing effort shall be calculated according to catch and number of vessels on the basis of one kilometre of drift-net used for one day.The fishing effort and the reference catches for each target species shall be the sum of the fishing efforts and catches of the vessels having used the drift-nets not exceeding 2.5 km in 1993.Article 9aa(5): Reference is again made to 5 km; the Committee believes that the Draft Regulation should be based on a maximum of 2.5 km as is, in practice, already occurring in 1994.Article 9cArticle 9c(1): The expression 'more than' should be deleted throughout the Article. For the reasons given above, there should be no discussion of anything more than 2.5 km.Article 9c(2): In this paragraph, reference to Article 9a(2) and (3) should be deleted. The paragraph should be worded as follows: 'All vessels using this type of gear shall keep on board a radio beacon so that the competent authorities of the flag Member State may locate them at all times in whatever waters they are operating or in whatever port they are moored'.Article 9c(3): The information obtained from logbooks and landing certificates, the position data collected under the terms of paragraph 2 and the information acquired from the inspections referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to an immediate systematic cross-check supported by aerial surveys if necessary.Article 9c(4): The paragraph, as in (2) above, should be worded as follows: 'Observers appointed by the flag Member State shall be put on board fishing vessels using this type of gear, for at least ten consecutive days per vessel during each fishing voyage. This arrangement must guarantee the presence of observers for at least half the total number of fishing days each month. The observers shall note and record the fishing activities of the vessels on which they are present in a report which they shall transmit at the end of the observation period to the competent authorities of the flag Member State, which will forward it to the Commission.'Article 9c(5): The total weight of albacore landed by the (90) vessels authorized to fish with drift-nets of less than 2.5 km may not exceed 4,200 tonnes in 1994.Justification:If the vessels which have hitherto been allowed to use drift-nets of up to 5 km represent a third of the total, then restricting their catch to 2,800 tonnes in 1994 would mean:- 30 vessels/5 km = 2,800 tonnes - 60 vessels/2.5 km = 2,800 tonnes ------- Total catch  5,600 tonnes Outlawing 5 km nets would mean that all 90 vessels have to use 2.5 km nets. The maximum possible catch would then be:- 30 vessels/2.5 km = 1,400 tonnes - 60 vessels/2.5 km = 2,800 tonnes ------- Total catch  4,200 tonnes.Done at Brussels, 15 September 1994.The Presidentof the Economic and Social CommitteeSusanne TIEMANN() OJ No C 118, 29. 4. 1994, p. 2.() 44/225, 85th Plenary Session, 22. 12. 1988.45/197, 71st Plenary Session, 21. 12. 1990.46/215, 79th Plenary Session, 20. 12. 1991.