WRITTEN QUESTION E-3615/03 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Fishing for migratory salmon.
Date: 2003-12-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: authorised catch, catch quota, common fisheries policy, fishery management, fishing regulations

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/835

(2004/C 78 E/0888)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3614/03

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: Cultivation of sweet rowanberries

The Commission has exclusive competence for agricultural support. Hence this question: have the
authorities of a Member State acted correctly in not allocating agricultural support to all farmers on the
same basis but allocating it according to their place of residence? The Finnish authorities have not granted
the appropriate support to farmers who cultivate sweet rowanberries in what the authorities consider to be
the ‘wrong’ part of the country, i.e. in an area which is not a berry cultivation area. Are rowanberries
which have been bred so as to make them sweet defined as berries or fruit?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2004)

Member States can as their priorities dictate subsidize particular crops provided that the aid is compatible
with Community law. Up to now they have had to submit all such proposed aids to the Commission for
clearance as compatible (see Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector (1)). We have
however recently adopted as part of the CAP reform a set of rules (2) under which Member States will be
able to grant agricultural aids falling into certain categories without first having to request our approval.
These block exemptions will speed up implementation of the new agricultural State aids and also facilitate
implementation of the national programmes to raise environmental, animal welfare and hygiene standards
in agriculture.

In the absence of precise information on the measure to which the Honourable Member refers we cannot
comment on its compatibility with Community law.

On the question of whether the fruit (pihlajanmarja in Finnish) yielded by the rowan tree (Sorbus
aucuparia) is a fruit or a berry, we consider that it is a berry and hence also a fruit, since berries are by
definition also fruits.

(1) OJ C 28, 1.2.2000.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1/2004 of 23 December 2003 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the
EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises active in the production, processing and marketing of
agricultural products, OJ L 1, 3.1.2004.

(2004/C 78 E/0889)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3615/03

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: Fishing for migratory salmon

The main spawning areas for wild salmon in the Baltic include the rivers which flow into the Gulf of
Bothnia. When salmon swim out to sea from their spawning areas, they can be freely caught even by those
who do not have any duty to take measures to preserve migratory salmon stocks. Are the existing
restrictions on fishing sufficient to preserve fish stocks, and could Member States’ quotas take account of
their measures to preserve stocks in the rivers where the fish reproduce?

C 78 E/836

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2004)

The regulation at Community level of the fishery for salmon in the Baltic Sea includes total allowable
catches (TACs) and quotas as well as technical measures, with a view to ensuring a sustainable utilisation
of the resources. As is general within the framework of the Common Fisheries Policy, the Commission
bases its proposals concerning TACs and fishing quotas on scientific advice. By using these working
methods, the Commission believes indeed that the existing regulation of fishery will allow us to preserve
stocks.

the important elements of

As regards the allocation of quotas, the quotas for individual Member States are based on the concept of
relative stability which is one of
the Common Fisheries Policy (cid:1) see
Article 20(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 (1). However, at the level of the International Baltic
Sea Fisheries Commission (IBSFC) and within the framework of the Salmon Action Plan 1997-2010,
Recommendation No XIX which was adopted in 2002 might lead to some changes in the future along the
lines that the Honourable Member is suggesting. In the afore-mentioned Resolution, it is stated that IBSFC
will decide on additional fishing possibilities on surplus reared salmon, which will be allocated to the
Parties in relation to their release of smolt. It should also be noted that in order to utilise these additional
fishing possibilities, the Party in question shall prove that it can target only reared salmon, by conducting
fishery for the additional fishing possibilities in defined terminal fishery areas and by participating in a
comprehensive adipose fin clipping programme which will allow for distinction between wild and reared
salmon. The purpose of this new harvesting strategy is to shift fishery from the mixed wild and reared
salmon fishery to a fishery that mainly targets reared salmon populations.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of

fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy, OJ L 358, 31.12.2002.

(2004/C 78 E/0890)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3616/03

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Setting fishing quotas for the new Member States

(5 December 2003)

How does the Commission intend to set appropriate fishing quotas in the Baltic when the new Member
States join the Union, and will it be possible, for example, to include in them obligations on the new
Member States with regard to salmon restocking?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2004)

The relative stability keys for the first allocation of fishing quotas to the new Member States are laid down
in the Treaty of Accession. For the Baltic Sea, the allocation keys are based on current practice in the
International Baltic Sea Fisheries Commission (IBSFC). The total allowable catches (TACs) for the Baltic Sea
in 2004 were agreed at the Annual Session of the IBSFC in September-October 2003 and the results are
transposed into the Community legislation through the TAC and Quota Regulation for 2004.

As regards salmon restocking, there are currently no such obligations on the Member States in Community
legislation and there will thus not be any for the new Member States either. However at IBSFC level, where
the new Member States bordering the Baltic Sea are all involved, there is a series of Recommendations
regarding the Salmon Action Plan 1997-2010, which includes that ‘wild salmon populations shall be
re-established in potential salmon rivers’.