Resolution on a new strategy for agriculture in arctic regions
Date: 1999-03-09
Institutions: Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, European Parliament
Subjects: Arctic, agricultural situation













EUR-Lex - 51999IP0073 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51999IP0073

Resolution on a new strategy for agriculture in arctic regions  


Official Journal C 175 , 21/06/1999 P. 0027 





A4-0073/99Resolution on a new strategy for agriculture in arctic regionsThe European Parliament,- having regard to Rule 148 of its Rules of Procedure,- having regard to Article 39 of the EC Treaty,- having regard to the Acts of Accession of Finland, Sweden and Austria,- having regard to the conclusions of the Luxembourg European Council of December 1997 ((Conclusions of the Luxembourg European Council Presidency of 12/13 December 1997.)),- having regard to its resolution of 18 June 1998 on reform of the common agricultural policy (Agenda 2000) (COM(97) 2000 - C4-0522/97 ((OJ C 210 of 6.7.1998, p. 180.)),- having regard to the report of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the opinion of the Committee on Regional Policy (A4-0073/99),A. whereas arctic and sub-arctic regions comprise approximately 2.5% of the area of farmland in use and 38% of the area of forests in the EU; whereas forests are an indissoluble part of arctic farming, but only once in a generation is significant income derived from sales based on them,B. whereas in arctic, sub-arctic, mountainous and sparsely populated areas, farming is of vital importance in keeping the land inhabited and the regions viable,C. whereas the strengths of arctic agriculture include the high standard of environmental protection, the low livestock density per hectare and the use of livestock farming and treatment methods which are sustainable from the points of view of ethics and animal welfare,D. whereas residues of heavy metals and other substances in arctic foodstuffs are very low, very little use is made of plant protection products on account of the low prevalence of plant diseases, animals' health is good and antibiotics are not used to prevent animal diseases,E. whereas the occurrence of salmonella in food products in various areas presents a risk to the health of consumers,F. whereas Europe succeeds on world markets only by virtue of its quality production,G. whereas because of the small population base, peripheral location and centralised trade structure of arctic areas and, to some extent, because of administrative obstacles which affect them, certain agricultural production costs are much higher there than elsewhere in the EU,H. whereas the Agenda 2000 proposals relating to the price of cereals place cereals in a more competitive position than grass fodder in countries where it is not possible to cultivate maize, thereby driving livestock production in completely the wrong direction from the point of view of ecology and ethics by causing ruminants to be fed on concentrates and cereals, which do not form part of their natural diet,I. whereas the common agricultural policy was tailored to the requirements of the best conditions prevailing in mainland Europe and does not take sufficient account of the agricultural production problems caused by the special production conditions in the EU's arctic, sub-arctic or mountain regions or indeed the drought-stricken Mediterranean regions,J. whereas the annual temperature sum in the European Union ((Sum of the temperatures on the days of the year on which the temperature attains +5°C.)) ranges from 400°C to 3000°C,K. whereas the best conditions for cultivation and agricultural production exist in regions where the annual temperature sum is between 2200°C and 1400°C,L. whereas high temperature sums, attaining figures as high as 3000°C, together with low rainfall, cause drought, particularly in the Mediterranean,M. whereas the EU's arctic and sub-arctic regions comprise Finland, the area of Sweden north of Stockholm, parts of Scotland and certain Alpine regions where the annual temperature sum lies between 1300°C and 400°C,N. whereas the range of crops which can be cultivated is substantially smaller in arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions than elsewhere in Europe; whereas the cost of plant breeding for the requisite varieties is high on account of the small volume involved,O. whereas yields fall by around 400 kg per 100°C reduction in the temperature sum,P. whereas the producer prices obtainable on the market in high-production-cost arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions are often insufficient to cover agricultural production costs, which jeopardises the survival of motivation for enterprise and work in farming,Q. whereas the short growing and grazing seasons and smaller yields, including grass and pasture yields, in arctic regions lead to higher production costs per hectare and livestock unit,R. whereas the climatic disadvantages of the EU's arctic and sub-arctic regions, with their short growing and grazing seasons, place agriculture in these regions at a permanent competitive disadvantage,S. whereas in addition to their climatic disadvantage, the widely dispersed locations of field parcels in arctic regions, the efficient machinery necessitated by the short sowing and harvesting seasons and the need to dry cereals and hay add to farm production costs,T. whereas the arctic climate does not dry cereals or hay adequately, so that they have to be dried mechanically to ensure that they will keep during storage,U. whereas the Agenda 2000 proposal metes out extremely harsh treatment to less-favoured areas where the viability of agriculture is already poor, and whereas under Agenda 2000 producer prices would fall, and this fall would be only partially compensated, which represents a grave threat to the survival of agricultural production on the European family-farming model in the EU's arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions,V. whereas costs are higher in the arctic regions on account of the long distances over which goods have to be transported, the long journeys to ports, for example, and the brevity of the periods during which ports are not closed by ice,W. whereas in arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions it will be extremely difficult to meet the pasturing requirement for cattle set forth in Agenda 2000, as roughage must be stored for use during the long winter, and this takes up at least 2/3 of the area down to grass,X. whereas the proposed additional milk quota for arctic and mountain regions does not solve the problem of viability of milk production, and cannot be regarded as compensation for the loss of income; whereas the additional quota will create pressure to reduce the producer price for milk as competition increases; whereas in arctic regions it will be difficult to produce milk in accordance with the additional quota because no compensation is to be paid for the price reduction,Y. whereas cattle farming in arctic regions is based on good stock and long indoor feeding, which naturally raise costs; whereas the high mean yield leads to high unit costs, so that the milk producer price compensation ought to be higher; whereas roughage has to be harvested and stored during the short growing season for use during the period of more than 8 months when cattle have to be kept indoors,1. Considers it important to attain the objective stated as follows in the conclusions of the Luxembourg summit of December 1997: 'European agriculture must, as an economic sector, be versatile, sustainable, competitive and spread throughout European territory, including regions with specific problems';2. Considers that the abovementioned European Council conclusion of December 1997 can best be attained by regionalising agricultural policy and incorporating into the rules of the common agricultural policy the requisite special measures for the EU's arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions where the annual temperature sum is less than 1300° C and drought-stricken regions;3. Considers that the EU's common agricultural policy should be regionalised and made more flexible in order to take account of the special needs of arctic, sub-arctic, mountain and drought-stricken regions;4. Considers that enterprise and the motivation to work should be preserved in agriculture throughout EU territory, which means that producers should derive the bulk of their income from the market and that it should be based on their production, rather than in the form of subsidies;5. Considers that the problems of viability and competitiveness faced by arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions require special systems, which should be funded primarily by the Community; considers that the continuity of agriculture in the EU is under particular threat in arctic regions and other regions affected by special problems;6. Calls for producers to receive compensation for losses of income arising from the Agenda 2000 proposals, taking full account of regional conditions;7. Considers it indispensable to review the basis for subsidies under the common agricultural policy's organisation of the market in cereals to take better account of the fall in producer prices, particularly real losses in regions where conditions are difficult;8. Considers that additional costs arising from permanent climatic disadvantages, such as short growing and grazing seasons, long distances, widely dispersed locations of field parcels and cold winters should be taken into account in the common agricultural policy's area-based and livestock subsidies in arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions;9. Recalls that although ownership of forests is a traditional element in arctic agriculture, only once in a generation is significant income derived from sales based on them;10. Reiterates its call in its abovementioned Resolution of 18 June 1998 for support to be paid for grass silage in arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions, corresponding to that paid for maize silage;11. Considers it evident that high unit costs in milk production require higher compensation payments to milk producers; takes the view that the same support should be paid in respect of the proposed additional quota for arctic and mountain regions as for the basic quota;12. Considers that, since the changes to the basis for the extensification premium proposed in Agenda 2000 are totally unsuited to arctic production conditions, the requirements for the extensification premium should be altered, taking into account the whole feed production area on a farm for the purpose of calculating extensiveness, and the grazing requirement should be waived for areas covered with snow;13. Considers it essential to study the viability and competitiveness of beef production based on dairy cattle breeds and the scope for inclusion in the EU's quality system;14. Calls on the Commission to clarify the real impact of the proposed additional milk quota on the viability of milk production in arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions, taking account of the impact of increased competition on producer prices;15. Calls on the Commission to promote more actively than at present sustainable development and high standards of environmental protection, animal welfare and ethically sound agriculture throughout EU territory by rendering subsidies conditional on compliance with such requirements, and calls on the Commission to render conditions for payment of environmental subsidies more stringent with the aim of reducing the use of fertilisers and plant protection products;16. Urges the Commission to adopt ambitious objectives for reducing to a minimum the prevalence of salmonella within EU territory and halting the use of antibiotics to prevent animal diseases, with the aim of safeguarding the health of consumers;17. Considers it important to improve the expertise of food laboratories in the EU in order to obtain reliable information about food safety;18. Considers it essential that good European farming practice should consistently be taken as a condition for direct support throughout the EU so that the high ethical and environmental standards applied in European agriculture can be asserted as one of the central objectives of the next WTO negotiations;19. Urges the Commission, in future decisions on support, to take account of the additional costs arising from the need to dry cereals and hay;20. Regards it as a fundamental precondition for the viability of production that national support systems under which the amount of subsidy payable depends on the number of head of livestock should be permitted in pig, poultry and sheep farming in arctic, sub-arctic and mountain regions where production costs are significantly higher than elsewhere in Europe on account of climatic and natural conditions; considers that transitional periods do not eliminate such permanent natural disadvantages;21. Considers it important to identify higher costs of production inputs in certain arctic and peripheral regions due to the distortion of competition resulting from administrative factors and the centralisation of trade, and to find ways of achieving genuine competition in the production input sector;22. Considers it important to take account in Community support schemes of the fact that production costs in arctic and peripheral regions are increased by the long transport distances;23. Considers that agriculture in the northernmost parts of the EU is of the utmost importance not only for the production of foodstuffs but also with a view to preserving a varied and living countryside and maintaining and facilitating employment and social structures in all parts of the countries concerned; considers that flexible and specially adapted agricultural support is needed in this specific region in order to be able to keep the countryside alive and protect this unique environment;24. Considers it important that local production, local processing, on-farm processing, direct sales of products and diversification of production should be encouraged and that smallness of scale should be supported; calls on the Commission, therefore, to study the scope for aiding small-scale production and traditional production systems, breeds and species; does not consider the quota system appropriate to arctic agriculture, and takes the view, inter alia, that free milk quotas are too small and ought to be adjusted to enable local processing to be further developed;25. Considers that support must cover the entire production chain, from the production of raw materials to the processed product, so as to help small-scale processing develop, whereas current rules are chiefly geared to the needs of 'large-scale' activities; considers also that support systems must be tailored to current farm ownership structures and size;26. Considers that agriculture in sub-arctic and arctic regions is traditionally very environment-friendly and that it should continue to be geared increasingly towards environmentally sustainable production, which, in addition to minimising pollution, also entails taking due account of the energy consumed in the production of food;27. Considers it important to encourage and enable people to remain in the northernmost regions of Europe and hence stem population loss, and to facilitate immigration to them, in order to prevent depopulation; believes that, in view of the harsh conditions, including seven-month winters and poor soil, the scope for part-time farming is a condition that must be encouraged, for example by providing assistance for combining farming with other occupations;28. Takes the view that ecologically and environmentally sound tourism should be promoted and its marketing developed;29. Considers that communications and transport in arctic and sub-arctic regions are seriously hampered by geographical and climatic factors, and that these problems are further aggravated by the sparseness of population and the distances to population centres and markets; considers that aid for transport is called for in these regions;30. Considers that, with regard to the provision of public services, the subsidiarity principle should continue to be complied with, allowing Member States to define requirements for services available to society at large; stresses that subsidised services and services provided by public bodies are often the only way of supplying, for example, public transport in sparsely populated areas, health care and social services;31. Stresses the importance of enabling the Sami culture and reindeer farming to develop on the Sami people's own terms, with Community support;32. Proposes special assistance within reindeer farming for investment to enhance product-development skills and develop local processing of reindeer products which should ultimately give individual reindeer-owners more employment while reducing the need to increase numbers of reindeer, thus also easing pressure on reindeer pastures;33. Calls on the Commission to study ways of aiding mobile slaughterhouses in order to avoid unnecessary animal transport and increase viability;34. Calls for specific support for decentralised production and direct marketing of regional products in order to reduce long-haul transport and to increase consumer access to fresh and high-quality food;35. Calls on the Commission to draw up a comprehensive account of the differences in biological conditions affecting agriculture in the EU's arctic and mountain regions in comparison with the rest of the EU and to make the necessary adjustments to the common agricultural policy;36. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.