WRITTEN QUESTION E-4006/00 by Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) to the Commission. Use of silver iodide.
Date: 2000-12-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community of Valencia, EU control, Spain, chemical salt, degradation of the environment, drought, environmental risk prevention, labelling, marketing, national financing

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/43

(2001/C 187 E/045)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3764/00

by Mar(cid:237)a Sornosa Mart(cid:237)nez (PSE) to the Commission

(4 December 2000)

Subject: Spanish government subsidies for use of silver iodide for anti-hail protection

The Spanish Ministry of Agriculture recently introduced a new category of subsidies to finance anti-hail
protection measures based on silver iodide, a substance which farmers(cid:146) organisations and others believe to
be extremely harmful both to the environment and to crops. This Spanish government measure has been
introduced with the assent of the insurance companies, who favour the use of this heavy metal since it
avoids them having to pay compensation for possible hail damage.

It has been proven that anti-hailstorm protection by means of fumigation with silver iodide (spreading it
by means of light aircraft or launching rockets into the air) provokes serious environmental damage and
can also lead to a reduction in rainfall as a result of the crystallisation of the water condensed in the clouds
(see data supplied by Seprona, the Spanish Nature Protection Service).

Despite these considerations raised by the farmers(cid:146) organisations, the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture
approved, in August 2000, the subsidies for anti-hail protection measures based on silver iodide.

What action does the Commission intend to take to prevent the use of this metal, given its highly
damaging impact on agriculture and the environment in the Community?

(2001/C 187 E/046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4006/00

by Carles-Alfred Gas(cid:242)liba i B(cid:246)hm (ELDR) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Use of silver iodide

Dry farming crops (dried fruit and olives) in the El Maestrat and Els Ports districts of the Valencian
Community have recently been suffering as a result of a peculiar lack of summer storms. Without these
storms, it is almost impossible to save the harvest. The drought in question may be being caused by the
unnatural manipulation of the weather; every time a storm threatens, various small planes fumigate the
area with silver iodide so as to prevent hail storms.

This substance, according to farmers(cid:146) collectives and ecologists, would appear to be toxic and extremely
harmful to the environment and to the crops.

The Spanish Government(cid:146)s State Official Gazette No 28 790 of 11 August 2000 records that the Ministry
of Agriculture gave the go ahead for subsidies for anti-hailstorm systems employing silver iodide.

Is the Commission aware of these facts?

Can the Commission tell me whether the use of this substance is banned, and if it is, what steps it intends
to take?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3764/00 and E-4006/00
given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2001)

To the Commission(cid:146)s knowledge silver iodide is produced in and/or imported into the Community at a rate
of no more than 10 tonnes per year. Information is collected on such substances and there is a risk
assessment in each individual case in pursuance of Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993
on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances (1) i.e. those substances that were on the

C 187 E/44

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

Community market before September 1981 and which are set out in the European Inventory of Existing
Commercial Chemical Substances (EINECS). Given the high number of substances set out in the EINECS
(more than 100 000), the regulation is introduced an order of priority. Four lists of priority substances
have been published, for which the risk assessment has been or will be carried out. The Commission is
able to inform the Honourable Member that silver iodide is not contained in any of those four lists.
Nevertheless, the Community could decide in future to ask for information on that substance in order to
assess it under Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 or other Community legal instruments, and with a view to the
possible adoption of risk-management measures. Those measures could include a marketing and use
restriction.

Moreover, the silver iodide used against hail is not considered to be a plant protection product (agricultural
pesticide) within the meaning of Directive 91/414/EEC (2) governing the marketing of such products.

Moreover, in accordance with Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of
dangerous substances (3), manufacturers, distributors and importers of a chemical substance must comply
with the provisions of the Directive with regard to the classification, packaging and labelling of that
substance. These provisions also apply to silver iodide, even if it is currently not included in Annex I to
that Directive.

The Spanish authorities have not notified the Commission, as required by Article 88 (former Article 93) of
the EC Treaty of the subsidised use of silver iodide against hail as provided for in the Spanish Official
Journal, issue No 28790 of 11 August 2000. The Commission will ask the Spanish authorities to give
notification of that subsidy in pursuance of said Article 88 of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 84, 5.4.1993.
(2) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991.
(3) OJ B 196, 16.8.1967.

(2001/C 187 E/047)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3766/00

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 December 2000)

Subject: Labelling and checking of animal skins

In reply to a recent question on the labelling of animal skins, Commissioner Lany said that the trade in
cats and dogs is not prohibited in the Community under the CITES convention. Such a ban has been
announced in the USA, partly because it is not easy to distinguish between the skins of endangered species
and those of cats and dogs. University research has also confirmed that the visual checking of skins is
a totally useless measure.

Is the Commission considering stricter checks in order to prevent the skins of protected animal species
being imported into the EU as cat and dog skins?

Is the Commission considering announcing a ban on cat and dog skins, both in order to improve the
protection of these animals against commercial exploitation, and in order to close the loopholes in the
CITES convention and to improve compliance with the ban on the trade in the skins of endangered
species?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2001)

The Commission(cid:146)s responsibilities towards animal protection have increased under the recent amendments
of the Community, which includes a Protocol requiring the European institutions and Member States to
pay full regard to animal welfare when drawing up policies concerned. Therefore, Commission(cid:146)s policies