WRITTEN QUESTION E-0764/03 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. Cetacean by-catch.
Date: 2003-03-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law, by-catch, common fisheries policy, marine mammal

C 11 E/114

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

Under what circumstances does Commission believe that the national authorities should obtain the
1.
opinion of the general public when assessing the implications for a site in accordance with Article 6 of the
FFH Directive?

Is it permissible to forego this part of the procedure in the case of projects that are subject to an

2.
assessment of their effects on the environment in accordance with Directive 85/337/EEC (2)?

3.
Does the Commission consider the incorporation of Article 6(3) of the FFH Directive (92/43/EEC)
into Austrian nature conservation law satisfactory as regards obtaining the opinion of the general public?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2003)

Article 6 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of
wild fauna and flora (1) (Habitats Directive) does not oblige authorities to consult the public before taking a
decision on a plan or project potentially affecting significantly a special area of conservation. However,
Member States are not allowed to exclude public consultation for all such plans or for all such projects but
should address this issue appropriately within the implementation of the Habitats Directive. Competent
authorities should for example see on a case by case basis whether public consultation is appropriate.
Moreover, in the light of the Aarhus Convention (2), the Commission, as a matter of principle, is supportive
of broad public access to environmental
the public in
environmental decision-making.

the participation of

information and of

On the questions raised, the following answers can be given:

(cid:1) Public consultation is necessary where the assessment required by Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive
takes the form of an assessment under Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the
assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (3) as amended (EIA
Directive).

(cid:1) As pointed out above, public consultation is in any case required when the assessment under
Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive is incorporated in the environmental impact assessment under
the EIA Directive.

(cid:1) The Austrian legislation transposing the Habitats Directive has been examined by the Commission.
This examination identified several problems of non-conformity, including with regard to Article 6.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) Convention of 25 June 1998 on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to

Justice in Environmental Matters.

(3) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2004/C 11 E/114)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0764/03

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 2003)

Subject: Cetacean by-catch

Can the Commission assure us that it will make every effort to ensure that measures proposed in the
Commission’s Working Document on by-catch will be in place by winter 2003-2004? The proposals
concern important areas such as restriction on the use of certain fishing gears; the mandatory use of
acoustic deterrent devices for certain gill and set net fisheries; on-board cetacean by-catch observer
schemes to be organised by Member States for all flagged or registered vessels and; overall monitoring of
cetacean incidental catches.

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/115

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 April 2003)

The Commission will make every effort to propose, as soon as possible, regulatory measures in order to
protect cetaceans from being taken as bycatch by fishing vessels. It expects to have the proposals ready
before the summer break 2003.

However, the final adoption of such Community legislation rests with the Council of Ministers, after
consultation of the Parliament.

(2004/C 11 E/115)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0765/03

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 March 2003)

Subject: Proposed Swedish ban on cod fishing

With respect to the proposal by Sweden to not participate in the cod fishery on several stocks, the
Commission is encouraging Sweden to consider adopting technical measures as an alternative. Both Reg.
88/98 (1) (technical measures in the Baltic) and Reg. (EC) 850/98 (2) (technical measures in other areas)
include provisions for Member States to take measures going beyond the minimum requirements set out in
these Regulations (Art. 13 of 88/98, Art. 46 of 850/98). Could the Commission please provide a list of the
cases in which Member States have availed themselves of this possibility?

For each instance, could the Commission please specify:

(cid:1) the fishery/fisheries involved, in terms of target species, area and gear type,

(cid:1) when and for how long the measures were enacted,

(cid:1) what measures were adopted by the Member State compared to the CFP requirement,

(cid:1) whether any analysis has been conducted to ascertain if there was any impact from these measures.

It is interesting to note in this respect that, in the Commission’s proposal for a new technical measures
regulation (3), to replace Reg. (EC) 850/98, there appears to be no article corresponding to Art. 46. Yet in
the explanatory memorandum, it is stated that the Commission has ensured that all relevant provisions of
Reg. (EC) 850/98 have been maintained. Could the Commission please explain why the article has been
dropped?

(1) OJ L 9, 15.1.1998, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 125, 27.4.1998, p. 1.
(3) COM(2002) 672 of 3.12.2002.

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2003)

Since the setting up of the Common Fisheries Policy in 1993, the Commission was notified of numerous
national technical measures. The Commission provides in the list which is sent direct to the Honourable
Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat the measures notified to the Commission during the period 2000-
2002. That list is representative of the nature of those measures, regarding for instance the species
concerned or the area or the gear type.