WRITTEN QUESTION E-1127/02 by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission. Fishing activities and marine resources.
Date: 2002-04-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Italy, competence of the Member States, fishery management, fishing industry, fishing rights, fishing vessel, management of resources

14.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 277 E/149

(2002/C 277 E/169)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1107/02

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Increase in deaths of dolphins

Is the Commission aware of the recent deaths of dolphins off the coasts of Devon and Cornwall?

Will the Commission consider compulsory monitoring of all cetacean bycatch in pelagic trawl fisheries?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2002)

The Commission is aware of the problem posed by pelagic trawls operating in the Celtic Sea and Western
Channel, where important by-catch of dolphins takes place every winter.

The Commission intends to design a comprehensive plan to protect cetaceans from the effects of fishing at
the Community scale.

Notwithstanding the obligations set up by the Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1), this plan will include systematic monitoring
of by-catch by observers on board as well as technical measures to mitigate the mortality of cetaceans due
to fishing. It is expected that the scientific and technical basis that will support such a plan will be made
available around June 2002.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2002/C 277 E/170)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1127/02

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Fishing activities and marine resources

Fishing is one of the activities which in Europe has a significant socio-economic impact because it involves
small owners, cooperatives and major employers, employing thousands of workers, processing thousands
of tonnes of fish and derived products, worth many millions of euros.

Given that:

7 the basic principle underlying Community directives in this sector is that funding should be directed

towards measures to adapt fleet capacities to resources,

7 in the formulation of Community policies, the environmental impact of certain measures is given

priority consideration,

7 in the drafting and implementation of Community directives in this sector, an assessment is made of
the impact on workers and biological resources, and this always takes due account of actual and
proven maritime production capacities,

7 other international organisations have made statements on this subject, and most recently the FAO,

which has drawn up a ‘Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries’.

Considering that the operators in this sector are faced with a reduction in fishing capacities (Ancona CNR
survey), accompanied by an increase in the number of vessels present in the same maritime zone, which in
the short term may cause maritime resources to collapse (maritime fisheries research institute).

C 277 E/150

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

Will the Commission state whether, in implementing Community directives, Member States are allowed to
create conditions of competition between fleets belonging to different regions of the same country or
between fleets from the same region (as is currently the case in Italy, in the Marches Region, because the
decision of the Ministry for Agricultural and Forestry Policy to authorise vessels from the Ascoli province
to fish in Ancona province waters is having serious economic and social repercussions and leading to
public unrest), which have a significant impact on fishing capacities and the quality of catches in that area
and damage the interests of small owners in particular?

Will the Commission state whether the current crisis can be tackled using the aid instruments referred to
in Article 16(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 (1), which provides for ‘a plan […] for the recovery of
a resource threatened with exhaustion’, rather than by displacing fleets, as the Italian Government Ministry
has done, or whether other Community instruments can be used to deal with this situation?

(1) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999, p. 10.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2002)

The distribution of fishing rights between fishing vessels of a Member State is a competence of that
Member State. In the case mentioned, the impact of the situation described, such as a conflict between
local fleets,
is something that the Italian authorities should evaluate and decide on, provided that an
increase in fishing rights does not lead to an over-exploitation of the resource.

Article 16(1c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December 1999 laying down the detailed
rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector, establishes that
Member States may grant compensation to fishermen and owners of vessels for temporary cessation of
activities when a plan is introduced for the recovery of a resource threatened with exhaustion. In the event
of unforeseeable circumstances, particularly those caused by biological factors, (Regulation (EC) No 2792/
1999 Article 16.1a), compensation may last no more than two months per year. In order to apply this
option a favourable report from the Scientific, technical and economic committee for fisheries (STECF) on
the corresponding recovery plan would be required. However, it must be stressed that this type of aid is
designed to assist the recovery of threatened resources, not to solve conflicts about rights to resources.
Further, tie-up aid schemes are designed to address short-term difficulties associated with stock recovery.
Events that occur repeatedly in a fishery should be taken into account in multiannual management plans
and be taken in charge by the sector itself.

(2002/C 277 E/171)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1128/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 April 2002)

Subject: Obstacles to the provision of drinking water in the Netherlands as a result of the increasing

chemical pollution of the Rhine

1.
Is the Commission aware that, in general, on the basis of agreements between the Rhine riparian
states, the water in the lower reaches of the Rhine, which in the past was strongly contaminated with
waste products from the German and Swiss chemical industries and French potash mines, has since 1995,
again been suitable for immediate transport via pipelines to sedimentation and purification basins or to
dune areas where drinking water is produced for Amsterdam, Rotterdam and other large towns in the
western Netherlands?

2.
Is it also aware that since 1998 the supply of water to these purification plants has often had to be
suspended as a result of serious levels of chemical pollution, for example, between 12 November and
22 December 2001 and between 4 and 24 January 2002 in response to high levels of the pesticides
isoproturon and chlorotoluron, prompting an investigation into the consequences by the Ministry of
Transport and Water Management, which has responsibility for surface water in the Netherlands?