WRITTEN QUESTION E-0651/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Failure to act on requests to take action against mass collecting of lapwings' eggs in the Dutch province of Friesland.
Date: 2003-03-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, European Commission, Friesland, animal breeding, bird, customs and traditions, derogation from EU law, egg, infringement procedure (EU), protection of animal life

C 280 E/78

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

21.11.2003

Should the possibility provided by the new Dutch flora and fauna law for provinces to authorise the
5.
collecting of lapwings’ eggs, a possibility not used by the other eleven Dutch provinces, be abolished on
grounds of incompatibility with the directive on the conservation of wild birds?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

(2003/C 280 E/083)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0651/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Subject: Failure to act on requests to take action against mass collecting of lapwings’ eggs in the Dutch

province of Friesland

Is the Commission aware that the Association of Friesian Bird Protection Patrols (Bond van Friese
1.
Vogelbeschermingswachten (BFVW)), which has asked it not to forbid the current practice of collecting
lapwings’ eggs in the Dutch province of Friesland,
is not a nature protection organisation, but an
association of lapwings’ egg collectors, and that all the major nature and environmental protection
organisations oppose the collecting of lapwings’ eggs?

2.
Is the Commission also aware that there is no question of strict controls on egg collecting, the
controls consisting simply in the issuing by the BFVW of a collector’s permit to any resident of Friesland
who asks for one?

3.
Is the Commission aware that the right to collect eggs in Friesland cannot be regarded as a reward
for people who conserve birds’ nests and protect them as much as possible when agricultural work is
being done, since this also happens extensively in Dutch provinces where this right does not exist?

4. What action is the Commission taking on complaint No 4931 filed with the Directorate-General for
the Environment by the organisation Faunabescherming in 1999, which concerned the continuing mass
collection of lapwings’ eggs in Friesland?

5. What have been the results of the Commission’s inquiry, announced in Written Answer P-0134/02 (1)
on 25 February 2002, undertaken in the context of preparing infringement proceedings before the Court
of Justice, and of its examination of the Netherlands authorities’ reaction thereto?

6. When will the proceedings that have been initiated reach their conclusion? Is it clear whether the EU
will allow this violation of the directive on the conservation of wild birds, which has already been going
on for 24 years, to continue?

(1) OJ C 205 E, 29.8.2002, p. 76.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0650/03 and E-0651/03
given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 April 2003)

The Commission is aware of the traditional taking of lapwing eggs from the wild in the province of
Friesland in the Netherlands.

Lapwing, as any other European naturally occurring bird species, falls under the scope of Council Directive
79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (hereafter referred to as the Directive).

Article 5 of the Directive strictly forbids inter alia, the taking of eggs from the wild. Exceptions to this
general prohibition may only be granted under the strict derogation system set out in Article 9 of the
Directive, provided that there is no other satisfactory solution, only for one of a limited number of reasons.

21.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280 E/79

An infringement procedure is ongoing on this issue. In this respect, the Commission has issued a reasoned
opinion pursuant to Article 226 of the EC Treaty. In the absence of an answer to this reasoned opinion,
the Commission decided to bring the case before the Court of Justice in Luxembourg. Shortly afterwards,
the authorities of the Netherlands responded to the reasoned opinion. This answer and a supplementary
answer of January 2003, as well as information received from the complainant, are currently under
assessment. In addition, in as far as these have not yet been brought forward during the infringement
procedure, the Commission will take the elements mentioned by the Honourable Member into account in
this context.

Depending on the outcome of the assessment of all the elements involved, the Commission may conclude
that the conditions of Article 9 of the Directive have been fulfilled and close the case. Otherwise, the
Commission could decide to implement its former decision and bring the case before the Court of Justice.

(2003/C 280 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0659/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(6 March 2003)

Subject: Seizure of a large number of enormous illegal waste dumps in Sicily and Directive 75/442/EEC

In the last few weeks about a hundred illegal waste dumps have been discovered in Sicily, including:

(a) a dump containing waste of every kind,

including special and hazardous waste, spread over five
municipalities in the province of Messina, between the Monti Peloritani and the river Mela, close to a
tourist area of great
importance for the Region of Sicily and covering 225 square kilometres,
equivalent to one hundredth of the surface area of Sicily;

(b) a dump containing industrial quantities of special non-hazardous waste located in the municipality of
Ribera (Agrigento) in the district of Mancusi, a protected geological site near the river Verdura, and
extending over 65 000 square metres;

(c) a dump containing 215 tonnes of railway sleepers, to be considered as special hazardous waste
because they are impregnated with cresolates, located near the station of Megara Giannalena, in the
vicinity of the municipality of Augusta (Syracuse) and covering an area of 40 000 square metres.

According to Article 7 of Directive 75/442/EEC (1) Member States are obliged to take the necessary
measures to ensure that any holder of waste has it handled by a private or public waste collector or by an
undertaking carrying out recovery or disposal, unless he disposes of it himself. If the identity of the holder
is unknown (as in the case of illegal dumps), it is up to the national authorities to adopt the measures
necessary to comply with the provisions of Article 7. The uncontrolled dumping of waste in the long term
also constitutes an infringement of Article 4 of Directive 75/442/EEC, according to which waste must be
recycled or disposed of without endangering human health and without harming the environment
(European Court of Justice, Case C-365/97 (cid:1) S. Rocco).

Can the Commission say:

(cid:1) whether the Region of Sicily has received Community funding for the reclamation of areas in which

illegal dumps were located and/or to create and manage controlled dumps;

(cid:1) since the large number of dumps discovered, the vast areas involved and the volume of material
dumped imply that for a long time there were no controls, what steps it will take in accordance with
Directive 75/442/EEC?

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39.