WRITTEN QUESTION E-0094/03 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Planned diversion of water from the River Castril to the Jabalcón Canal (Granada, Spain).
Date: 2003-01-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Andalusia, EU control, European Commission, exchange of information, hydraulic works, project evaluation, protected area, protection of animal life, protection of plant life, watercourse

C 192 E/156

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

In keeping with the provisions of the Staff Regulations the Commission has always sought to avoid
discriminating between nationals of different Member States in relation to pensions and in all other
domains.

(1) See the judgement of 14 December 1995 in case T-285/94, Pfloeschner v Commission.

(2003/C 192 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0094/03

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: Planned diversion of water from the River Castril to the Jabalcón Canal (Granada, Spain)

The Association for the Protection and Promotion of the River Castril, along with leaders of several
irrigator communities, local councils themselves, members of the Castril-Jabalcón Platform and a range of
ecological organisations have all informed me of their opposition to the plan to channel water from the
River Castril to the Jabalcón Canal, which was presented by the Guadalquivir Hydrographic Confederation
and was to receive European funding. This project was first publicised in 2000, but was clearly unviable
and was withdrawn as a result of strong public opposition. At the same time, another project, entitled
‘improvement of the river banks and reforestation in the Castril river valley’, is also being presented, and
has already been the subject of two thousand complaints.

This diversion project, which is envisaged as ‘a necessary part of the national hydrographic plan’, would
seriously affect farmers in the area, many of whom are organic farmers, and would impact on the
countryside, on fauna and flora and on the Sierra de Castril natural park, with its precious ecosystem.

Implementation of this project could violate the following directives:

(a) Directive 85/337/EEC (1), as amended by Directive 97/11/EC (2) on the assessment of the effects of

certain public and private projects on the environment;

(b) Directive 92/43/EEC (3) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

What steps will the Commission take to ensure compliance with Community legislation governing the
environment, and more specifically with the directives referred to above?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 2003)

The Commission notes, firstly, that the Spanish authorities have proposed the Sierra del Castril as a site of
Community importance for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network. The Sierra has also been designated a
special protection area for birds under Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation
of wild birds (1). Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC stipulates that any plan or project likely to have a
significant effect on a special area of conservation must be subject to appropriate assessment of its
implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. The authorities must not authorise the
plan or project until they have ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site. If, in
spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a
plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest,
including those of a social or economic nature, the Member State must take all compensatory measures
necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected.

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/157

With regard to Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Directive 97/11/EC, the Commission would point
out that Article 2 stipulates that, before consent is given, projects likely to have significant effects on the
environment by virtue, inter alia, of their nature, size or location are made subject to an assessment with
regard to their effects. This provision applies to the projects listed in Annexes I and II to the Directive. The
water diversion project referred to in the written question could come under Annex I (point 12) or
Annex II (point 10m) depending on its scale and its features. If it comes under Annex I, environmental
impact assessment is compulsory. If it comes under Annex II, the Member State must determine, either
through a case-by-case examination or using thresholds or criteria set by the Member State, or through a
combination of both these procedures, whether the project must be made subject to an assessment.

The information supplied by the Honourable Member does not indicate whether an environmental impact
study of the reported project has been completed. On the basis of that information, therefore, the
Commission cannot assume that there has been any violation of Community law. It will thus be contacting
the Spanish authorities very shortly for information on whether Directives 85/337/EEC and 92/43/EEC
the
have been applied in the case reported in the written question. As guardian of
Commission will in any event take all the necessary steps to ensure that Community law is complied with
in this instance.

the Treaties,

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2003/C 192 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0135/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: EU-Cape Verde international fisheries agreement and development cooperation

In the context of the current EU-Cape Verde international fisheries agreement, can the Commission
indicate:

1. how much the EU has earmarked for the development of the fisheries sector in the Cape Verde

islands?

2. how much the EU pays by way of a financial contribution in exchange for fishing rights for the

Community fleet?

3. how much Community shipowners have to pay in fees for fishing licences and fishing rights?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2003)

1.
Article 2 of the current Protocol to the fisheries agreement between the Community and the Republic
of Cape Verde (1) fixes the level of financial contribution at EUR 680 000 per year. Of this, EUR 280 000 is
used for the measures in support of the Cape Verde fisheries sector specified in Article 3 of the Protocol.

The financial contribution of EUR 680 000 per year represents the amount that is paid in exchange

2.
for the fishing opportunities made available to the Community fleet.

3.

The amounts paid by the vessel owners are fixed in points 2 and 3 of the Annex to the Protocol.

For the tuna fishery, the licence fees are EUR 25 per tonne of tuna caught within the waters of Cape Verde.
The licences are delivered after advance payments of EUR 2 750 for tuna seiners, EUR 2 000 for surface
longliners and EUR 300 for pole and line vessels. In addition to the advance, each vessel must also pay
EUR 100 to finance the observer programme in place. The amount of the advances are deducted from the