WRITTEN QUESTION P-2780/03 by António Campos (PSE) to the Commission. Forest fires in the Union.
Date: 2003-09-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: environmental risk prevention, fire protection, forest conservation, forestry development, forestry research, forestry statistics, tree, wooded area

C 78 E/426

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The Commission may only support this development through the establishment of a common European
regulatory framework for non-discriminatory market access, safety rules and interoperability requirements.
Additionally, Community funds contribute to the development of rail infrastructure needed to provide
competitive and customer-oriented rail services, particularly on the trans-European rail network.

(1) OJ L 75, 15.3.2001.

(2004/C 78 E/0446)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2780/03

by António Campos (PSE) to the Commission

(11 September 2003)

Subject: Forest fires in the Union

This year, parts of the Union were hit by a wave of forest fires;
catastrophic.

in Portugal these were positively

Given that the Commission spends considerable sums on forest protection plans and forestry measures,

And has the Community information system on forest fires at its disposal.

Can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. What three species were most affected, and what were the surface areas devastated by forest fires, in

each of the Member States in the last 10 years?

2. What percentage do these species account for in each Member State’s woodlands as a whole?

3. What is the size of the areas covered by these more vulnerable species which have been devastated in

the last 10 years?

4. What measures were taken, as part of the management of the EAGGF Guarantee, to prevent the
funding of the more vulnerable species, and what amount of money went into the more fire-resistant
species?

5.

If the Commission has a forest tree flammability scale in graded form, would it provide me with the
details?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 2003)

Under Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 2158/92 (1) the Member States classified their territory by degree
of fire risk. Some 60 million hectares of forest and other wooded areas (60 % private, 40 % public) in six
Member States (France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain) were classed as high and medium-risk
areas. This accounted for 40 % of the total for the fifteen Member States.

Analysis of the Community forest fire information system data for the last 12 years shows that on average
1 % of the forests of the Member States’ risk zones has been affected by fire each year but that in some
parts of Greece, southern Italy and central and eastern Spain more than 3 % of the forest area has burned.

Analysis of the same data also shows that three big areas have had very large numbers of fires: the north-
western Iberian Peninsula (north half of Portugal, Galicia, Asturias), a Franco-Italian triangle comprising
south-eastern France, Corsica, Liguria and Tuscany, and south-western Italy (Sardinia, Sicily, Basilicata,
Calabria).

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/427

If weather conditions (severe drought, wind) are unfavourable and prevention and surveillance inadequate
these large numbers of fires can turn into widespread fires, which is what appears to have happened this
summer, at least in south-eastern France and Portugal.

The information provided by the Member States in their forest-fire protection plans shows the species
affected as varying from one area to another. In Portugal maritime pine (Pinus nigra) is the most affected
species (56 % of the burnt area), ahead of eucalyptus (17 %). In Italy it is chestnut (Castanea sativa) that
burns most in Piedmont. Italy also shows that generally speaking broadleafs are more affected by fire than
conifers, whereas Germany indicates the reverse. In France the Department of Drôme states that downy
oak (Quercus pubescens) is the most affected species and black pine (Pinus nigra) the least.

It may however be pointed out that the worst affected species are undoubtedly in that position because
they are the most widespread in the areas concerned.

The forest protection plans in fact make more reference to particular types of stand as being more affected
than other types rather than to species.

Thus most of the plans indicate as vulnerable:

(cid:1) young conifer plantations in their first few years (France, Germany),

(cid:1) coppice and ‘maquis’ (France, Italy, Spain),

(cid:1) broadleaf standards (France, Italy),

(cid:1) ageing heathland,

(cid:1) conifer plantations (Germany).

The Commission has no detailed figures on the various species burnt each year but in 2000 the Joint
Research Centre at Ispra carried out a study that involved comparing the cartographic images of burnt
zones obtained by remote sensing from space with the Corine-LandCover map.

It showed that in 2000 29 % of the area burnt had broadleaf cover (forest 5 %, sclerophyllous vegetation
13 %, ‘maquis’ 11 %), 8 % was conifer forest and 6 % mixed broadleaf and conifer forest. The rest consisted
of agricultural and agri-forest zones (20 %), natural grassland (10 %), heath, moor and other wasteland 16 %
and other ground cover types (11 %).

Before this question is answered something must be said on the meaning of vulnerability to fire.

For a forest species this is a matter of:

(cid:1) its intrinsic flammability, dependent chiefly on its water retention capacity,

(cid:1) its combustibility, i.e. its susceptibility to fire given the vegetation structure at the location: the cover
afforded by a plant is of varying density and it is associated with various other species of the
herbaceous and shrub storey in a stand of a particular type (coppice, maquis, standards) that is
exploited or maintained to a greater or lesser extent and is at a particular age (natural regeneration,
young plantation, sapling, pole stage etc.),

(cid:1) the presence of triggering or aggravating factors in the environment: proximity of inhabited areas,
badly protected waste dumps, roads, waterways, railways, electricity cables, weather conditions etc.

Thus the vulnerability of any particular species depends on its own qualities (flammability), its behaviour
given the other plants present and the silvicultural techniques used there (combustibility), and external
factors.

The specialists agree in not considering the intrinsic flammability of plants, hence the choice of forest
species, to be a determining factor in fire behaviour. What is important is rather the structure of the stand,
in other words the type of silvicultural management.

C 78 E/428

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

That said, the Commission has no figures on the breakdown by species of burnt plantations. All it knows
is that young plantations are very vulnerable, particularly in their first few years, and that they have to be
protected.

It is for that reason that Article 29(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 1257/1999 (2) stipulates that when forestry
measures are financed by the Community the forest protection plan requirements of Regulation (EEC)
No 2158/92 must be met.

The Commission has no specific EAGGF Guarantee provisions to prevent funding for the more vulnerable
species. Forestry policies are managed at Member State level.

Since 1992 an amount of EUR 7,2 million has however been spent under Regulation (EEC) No 2158/92
on subsidising preventive work to improve the protection of forests considered to be among the more
vulnerable:

(cid:1) improvement of fire resistance for conifer plantations (Germany, Italy, Portugal),

(cid:1) protection of young stands (planted or natural regeneration) (France),

(cid:1) stand management to provide closed cover with a single crown level, research on parcelling by ground

breaks (France),

(cid:1) silvicultural

treatment

to give vertical discontinuity in stands (regular standards, simple coppice

system, introduction of dense cover species) (France),

(cid:1) conversion of coppice to standards (Italy),

There have been numerous studies on plant flammability and combustibility throughout the world,
including a number part-financed by the Community under the research programmes or Regulation (EEC)
No 2158/92.

(Madrid) have for

The Institut national de recherche agronomique (Avignon) and the Instituto de investigaciones
for Mediterranean species
agropecuarias
flammability and can supply them. A number of the Member States’ forestry departments have also
drawn up maps of the susceptibility of forest stands to fire and these are used for fire prevention and
control purposes.

instance drawn up comparative lists

(1) Regulation (EEC) No 2158/92 of 23 July 1992 on protection of the Community’s forest against fire, OJ L 217,

31.7.1992.

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations, OJ L 160,
26.6.1999.

(2004/C 78 E/0447)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2789/03

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 September 2003)

Subject: Banking rules in EU emissions trading: Member States’ right to bank emission allowances

Under Article 3(13) of the Kyoto Protocol, Parties may bank emission allowances from one period to the
next. Under the EU emissions trading directive (not yet published in the Official Journal), decisions may be
taken at national level regarding the possibility of banking to be afforded to operators.

Does the Commission consider that Member States are entitled to bank emission allowances which have
not been allocated, even though the directive applies only to operators (plants)? Does it believe that
Member States will already have that right during the time span covering the EU internal emissions trading
period (2005-2007) and the first Kyoto period (2008-2012)?

Should the emissions trading directive be amended in order to bring it into line with the Kyoto Protocol?