|
The problem of dolphin by-catch in the bass fishery off Devon and Cornwall is just an example of the problem of by-catch of protected or threatened species. Cetaceans, which are strictly protected under Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, suffer mortality from diverse types of fishing, not just the winter bass fishery in the Western Channel. Updated details on by-catch of cetaceans may be obtained from the report of the STECF (Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries) subgroup on Fishery and the Environment. Details on the problem can also be found from the 2002 report of the Advisory Committee for the Environment (ACE) of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.
The above-mentioned reports also highlight possible remedial measures to keep by-catch of cetaceans under control. However, technical details that will be needed to draft efficient measures proportionate to the threat to cetacean populations are still missing. The Commission expects to have a complete picture of these details by June 2002.
As far as the monitoring of by-catch is concerned, it should be borne in mind that Article 12 of Directive 92/43/EEC already stipulates this obligation for Member States, as well as the obligation to set up remedial measures. The Commission believes that, in any case, action at Community level is required for monitoring and alleviation of by-catch to be effective.
On the basis of the forthcoming reports of STECF and ICES, and following further consultation, the Commission will elaborate the appropriate legislative proposals on monitoring and mitigation of by-catch. Whether these measures will include measures similar to the drift-net ban cannot be anticipated at this stage.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1100/02
by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission
(04 April 2002)
Subject: Bycatch of dolphins and other cetaceans in European waters, especially that accruing as a result of pelagic trawling
The UK Government has suggested that up to 50 dolphins a day are being caught in the European bass fishery, with an unknown number being caught in other pelagic fisheries in the English Channel and Bay of Biscay. The report of the Irish trial pair trawl fishery for albacore tuna(1) records a bycatch rate of 145 cetaceans caught by just four pairs of trawlers in the 1999 season. In his answer to Written Question E-0500/02(2) on behalf of the Commission, Commissioner Fischler states that 'it is evident that there is a need to establish protection measures and to concentrate these in the Baltic Sea, the Southern North Sea, the English Channel and the Celtic sea.'
According to the provisions of Council Directive 92/43/CEE of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Habitats)(3), Member States are required to establish a system to monitor the incidental capture and killing of these species, and, in the light of information gathered, to take further research or conservation measures as required to ensure that incidental capture and killing does not have a significant negative impact on the species concerned. They were also required to report to the Commission on the implementation of the provisions of the Directive by 30 September 2001, but, in fact, several Member States failed to do so. Can the Commission indicate which Member States those were?
Is the Commission content to allow Member States to fail to meet their obligations under the Council Directive with impunity, and, if not, what options or sanctions are available to the Commission? Does the Commission have any power to insist on Member States allowing independent observers (including Commission officials) to monitor levels of bycatch?
Finally, national and Community funds continue to be made available to subsidise the building of fishing vessels, including those which use pelagic trawls, at a time when fishing stocks in Community waters are rapidly dwindling and some species are close to extinction. Does the Commission have the power to insist that monies are made available only to certain types of fishing vessels, and what is the justification for such subsidies generally if they serve to reduce the stocks which need urgently to be replenished if the Community's fishing fleets are to retain long-term viability?
(1) Diversification trials with alternative tuna fishing techniques including the use of remote sensing technology. Final Report to the Commission of the European Communities. Directorate-General for Fisheries. EU contract No. 98/010.
(2) OJ C
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
E-1100/02EN
Answer given by Mr Fischler
on behalf of the Commission
(29 May 2002)
The Honourable Member makes reference to the letter sent by the Member of the Commission responsible for Fisheries and Agriculture to Fisheries Ministers of Member States in December 2000, where information was requested on the action taken to assess by-catch levels. Replies were missing from Spain, France, Ireland, Italy and Portugal.
What has become evident from the information received until present is that, to be effective, both monitoring and mitigation measures should be taken in a coordinated manner at Community level, using the management tools of the Common Fisheries Policy. The Commission is at present in the process of gathering the technical elements that will allow to issue a proposal setting out effective and proportional management measures. The proposal is expected to be ready in the coming months and may include the obligation to accept observers on board of fishing vessels.
This being said, the Commission will not give up using all its political and legal means, which may include initiating infraction procedures before the Court of Justice, to guarantee that all Member States comply with their obligations emanating from Community law.
The Honourable Member refers also to the use of Community funds to subsidise the building of fishing vessels. The Commission wishes to underline that, according to current legislation, public aid to vessel building is conditional upon the removal of an equivalent capacity from the corresponding fleet segment. In addition, public aid for scrapping vessels is only given if the capacity withdrawn cannot be replaced. These measures also apply to the pelagic trawler segment of the fleet, whose capacity, consequently, cannot be increased. The Commission is considering, in the framework of the forthcoming reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, to propose an approach to management of fleet capacity which will include the removal of all subsidies for building of new vessels.
|
