WRITTEN QUESTION E-0003/04 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission. Trade in wild birds.
Date: 2004-01-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United States, import (EU), market approval, protected species, protection of animal life, trade regulations

C 84 E/750

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

does not cease to be a motorway in accordance with the provisions of the Directive 1999/62/EC of the
Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of
certain infrastructures (1). The Directive does not cover private cars. The decision to reduce tolls paid by
private cars as suggested in the question is, therefore, a matter for concessionary motorways according to
their own commercial policy and the national legal requirements.

(1) OJ L 187, 20.7.1999.

(2004/C 84 E/0845)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0003/04

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 January 2004)

Subject: Trade in wild birds

Is the Commission aware of the legal trade in wild-caught birds in Europe? Between 1997 and 2000 nearly
half a million birds, mainly parrots, were imported into Europe.

Would the Commission consider protecting these birds by introducing legislation to ban this, similar to
that now valid in the USA? Since the introduction in the USA of the ‘Wild Bird Conservation Act’,
poaching has fallen. It is anticipated that European legislation would have the same effect.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

The Commission is fully aware of legal trade in wild birds and there is already specific Community
legislation in place to protect wild birds.

Most of the wild bird species that are in demand in trade (including parrots) are listed in the appendices to
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). CITES is
implemented in the EU through Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the
protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1). The primary purpose of CITES
and of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 is to protect wild species of flora and fauna from unsustainable
trade. The aims of CITES are not against all trade in wildlife, but to contribute to the conservation of these
species by regulating trade therein, whilst fighting illegal traffic.

Under the Wild Bird Conservation Act (WBCA), the United States does not allow the import of CITES-
listed birds caught from the wild, except as allowed by certain exemptions under the WBCA. One of the
exemptions is for birds from an approved sustainable use management program, but currently there are no
approved programs. At the moment, the Commission does not see a need to introduce similar legislation
for the reasons mentioned below.

Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 lists the endangered species according to their threat status in four
annexes (A to D). Annex A concerns the species that need the most protection because they are threatened
with extinction. Because of their critical conservation status commercial trade in wild specimens of these
species is prohibited (cid:1) such trade is only allowed for purposes of conservation benefit (cid:1) e.g. research,
education, captive breeding projects etc. However, the bulk of the annexed species are in Annex B. This
annex lists species that are not necessarily threatened with extinction but may become so. Commercial
trade in these species is strictly regulated.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/751

The above Regulation goes further than CITES in imposing strict controls on the importation of Annex B
species. Under these stricter measures, the importation of certain species can be suspended if it is judged to
be unsustainable. There is also a requirement that live animals be transported in a humane manner.
In addition, the import of certain species from all countries of origin can be suspended if they are at high
risk of mortality during transport or premature mortality in captivity. In fact, this EU legislation which
implement CITES is amongst the most comprehensive of its kind in the world.

All wild bird species naturally occurring in the European territory of the Member States of the European
Union are protected under Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild
interests from exerting a possible
birds (2) (hereafter ‘Birds Directive’). In order to prevent commercial
harmful pressure on exploitation levels, the Directive imposes a general ban on commercialization, with
the exception of a small number of species listed in Annex III of the Directive, where commercialization
may be permitted if the birds are legally acquired.

With regard to the question of a trade ban for all European wild birds, the Commission would refer the
Honourable Member to the existing prohibition under the above-mentioned Birds Directive. However, in
the case of imported birds, the various aspects of the effectiveness of the Community legislation on trade
in wildlife and its compliance with the principle of sustainable use of wildlife must be taken into account.
The latter principle is considered to be a better solution for conservation of wildlife by many authorities
worldwide than a ban on all
international trade in birds listed under CITES. It is the Commission’s
conviction that the CITES Convention offers an effective tool to bring the concept of sustainable use of
wildlife into practice. An outright ban, on the other hand, would simply encourage exporting countries to
switch to other less sustainable forms of land use and would not be in the best interests of the species
concerned. Most probably, it would also encourage smuggling and circumventions because of the absence
of a link to the socio-economic aspects embedded in the concept of sustainability.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.
(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2004/C 84 E/0846)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0023/04

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Inadequate information to the Commission concerning the Bothnia Line

The Commission has approved the Swedish Government’s application to extend the Bothnia Line
eastwards, which gave the journey time and operation of the line as ‘compelling reasons’ for exploiting the
biggest delta in northern Europe, a classified Natura 2000 area.

Even before the opinion was delivered last spring, the National Rail Administration had economised on
extending the line eastwards, thereby invalidating the ‘compelling reasons’ for the project. According to
Chef de Cabinet Rolf Annerberg, the Commission has not been provided with this information. The
government has authorised the line and the savings. Is the Commission satisfied with the inadequate
information provided by the government?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 2004)

The Commission has not been informed of any changes in the planning of Botniabanan that would
invalidate the compelling reasons which justified the positive opinion for the project. It will ask the
Swedish authorities about
the changes in the project development referred to. The
Commission will inform the Honourable Member about the outcome of the further inquiries.

the nature of