Procedure : 2018/0050(COD)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : A8-0005/2019

Texts tabled :

A8-0005/2019

Debates :

Votes :

PV 17/01/2019 - 10.7
CRE 17/01/2019 - 10.7

Texts adopted :


REPORT     ***I
PDF 910kWORD 118k
10.1.2019
PE 622.269v02-00 A8-0005/2019

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multi-annual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea

(COM(2018)0115 – C8-0104/2018 – 2018/0050(COD))

Committee on Fisheries

Rapporteur: Clara Eugenia Aguilera García

ERRATA/ADDENDA
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
 PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
 FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multi-annual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea

(COM(2018)0115 – C8-0104/2018 – 2018/0050(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2018)0115),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0104/2018),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 11 July 2018(1),

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries and the position in the form of amendments of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A8-0005/2019),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment    1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5)  The objectives of the CFP are, amongst others, to ensure that fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally sustainable in the long term, to apply the precautionary approach to fisheries management and to implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management.

(5)  The objectives of the CFP are, amongst others, to ensure exploitation of marine living biological resources that provide long-term sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions. With the purpose of ensuring that fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally and socio-economically sustainable in the long term, to apply the precautionary approach to fisheries management and to implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management. It will also help supply the Union market with food of high nutritional value, reduce the Union market's dependence on food imports, encourage the direct and indirect creation of employment and economic development in coastal areas, and to ensure a fair standard of living for the fisheries sector, including the artisanal and small-scale fisheries sector, as provided for in Article 4 of Regulation(EU) No 1380/2013.

Amendment    2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6)  For the achievement of the CFP objectives, a number of conservation measures such as multi-annual plans, technical measures and the setting and allocation of fishing opportunities, should be adopted.

(6)  For the achievement of the CFP objectives, a number of conservation measures such as multi-annual plans, technical measures and the setting and allocation of fishing opportunities, should be adopted. However, we will not be able to restore fish stocks if we fail to reduce the growing impact of pollution, which comes mostly from land-based sources, but also from maritime activities (transport, oil, tourism, etc.).

Amendment    3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6a)  Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 includes the restoration and maintenance of populations of harvested species above levels capable of producing MSY as an explicit goal, as regards the exploitation of living marine biological resources. To achieve that goal, in accordance with Article 2 thereof, all stocks should gradually reach the level of exploitation capable of producing the maximum sustainable yield by 2015 if possible, or at the latest by 2020. In the pursuit of that target, particular account shall be taken of the economic and social impact.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7)  Pursuant to Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, multi-annual plans are to be based on scientific, technical and economic advice. In accordance with those provisions, the multi-annual plan provided for in this Regulation should contain objectives, quantifiable targets with clear timeframes, conservation reference points, safeguards and technical measures designed to avoid and reduce unwanted catches.

(7)  Pursuant to Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, multi-annual plans are to be based on scientific, technical and economic advice. In accordance with those provisions, the multi-annual plan provided for in this Regulation should contain objectives, quantifiable targets with clear timeframes, conservation reference points, safeguards and technical measures designed to avoid, reduce as far as possible unwanted catches, and to minimise the impacts of fishing activities on the marine environment.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8)  ‘Best available scientific advice’ refers to publicly available scientific advice that is supported by the most up-to-date scientific data and methods and has either been issued or reviewed by an independent scientific body that is recognised at Union or international level.

(8)  ‘Best available scientific advice’ refers to publicly available scientific advice that is supported by the most up-to-date scientific data and methods and has either been issued or peer-reviewed by an independent scientific body that is recognised at Union or international level such as the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) or General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM), and meet the requirements of Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11)  France, Italy and Spain have adopted management plans under Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006. However, there is a lack of consistency between the plans and they do not take account of all the gears exploiting demersal stocks and the straddling distribution of certain stocks and fishing fleets. Besides, those plans have proven ineffective in meeting the objectives set in the CFP. Member States and stakeholders have expressed support for the development and implementation of a multi-annual plan at Union level for the stocks concerned.

(11)  France, Italy and Spain have adopted management plans under Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006. However, there is a lack of consistency between the plans and they do not take account of all the gears exploiting demersal stocks and the straddling distribution of certain stocks and fishing fleets. Besides, those plans have proven ineffective in meeting the objectives set in the CFP. Member States and stakeholders have expressed support for the development and implementation of a multi-annual plan at Union level for the stocks concerned. The countries should implement the measures set out in this Regulation jointly in order to maximise their effectiveness.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12)  The STECF has shown that exploitation of most demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean exceeds by far the levels required to achieve MSY.

(12)  The STECF has shown that exploitation of certain demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean exceeds by far the levels required to achieve MSY.

Justification

The STECF has scientific information on certain species which it has assessed; this does not constitute the majority of stocks in the western Mediterranean.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15)  Given their importance, the plan provided for in this Regulation should cover recreational fisheries catching western Mediterranean demersal stocks. Where such fisheries have a significant impact on stocks, the multi-annual plan provided for by this Regulation should provide for the possibility of specific management measures.

(15)  As recreational fisheries can have a significant impact on fish resources, the multiannual plan should provide a framework to ensure that they are conducted in a manner compatible with the objectives of that plan. Member States should collect catch data of recreational fisheries. Where such fisheries have a significant impact on those resources, the plan should provide for the possibility to decide on specific management measures which do not harm the professional fisheries sector.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16)  The geographical scope of the multi-annual plan should be based on the geographical distribution of stocks as indicated in the best available scientific advice. Future changes to the geographical distribution of stocks as set out in the multi-annual plan may be needed due to improved scientific information. Therefore, the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts adjusting the geographical distribution of stocks set out in the multi-annual plan if the scientific advice shows a change in the geographical distribution of the relevant stocks.

(16)  The geographical scope of the multi-annual plan should be based on the geographical distribution of stocks as indicated in the best available scientific advice. Future changes to the geographical distribution of stocks as set out in the multi-annual plan may be needed due to improved scientific information. Therefore, the Commission may adopt a new proposal adjusting the geographical distribution of stocks set out in the multi-annual plan if the scientific advice shows a change in the geographical distribution of the relevant stocks.

Justification

Article 1(2) establishes the scope of the Regulation (stocks and GFCM sub-areas) and Annex 1 specifies which effort groups are included in the fishing effort regime. Both parts contain key elements of the legislative act and Parliament should be consulted before any amendments are made, in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17)  The objective of the plan provided for in this Regulation should be to contribute to the achievement of the CFP, and in particular, reaching and maintaining MSY for the target stocks, implementing the landing obligation for demersal stocks subject to minimum conservation reference size, and promoting a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, bearing in mind coastal fisheries and socio-economic aspects. It should also implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to minimise negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem. It should be coherent with the Union’s environmental legislation, in particular the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 (in accordance with Directive 2008/56/EC28) and the objectives of Directive 2009/147/EC29 and Council Directive 92/43/EEC30 .

(17)  The objective of the plan provided for in this Regulation should be to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the CFP, and in particular, restoring and maintaining fish stocks above levels of biomass capable of producing MSY for the target stocks, implementing the landing obligation for demersal stocks subject to a minimum conservation reference size, ensuring a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, bearing in mind coastal fisheries and socio-economic aspects. It should also implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to minimise the negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem. It should be coherent with the Union’s environmental legislation, in particular the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 (in accordance with Directive 2008/56/EC28 ) and it should contribute to the achievement of favourable conservation status for species and habitats as required by the objectives of Directive 2009/147/EC29 and Council Directive 92/43/EEC30.

__________________

__________________

28 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive) (OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19)

28 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive) (OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19)

29 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).

29 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).

30 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).

30 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).

Amendment    11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(17a)  A restructuring of the fleet may be necessary for the effective implementation of this Regulation and for the fulfilment of the objectives of the CFP. It is therefore necessary to provide for the possibility for the countries to draw up fleet and effort restructuring plans in order to enhance selectivity and energy efficiency, for which reason they should have access to aid for scrapping and modernisation. To this end, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund should be amended to take account of these instruments.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(17b)  The late entry into force of this Regulation and the dynamic nature of mixed fisheries should be taken into account in efforts to reach the fishing mortality target in line with the FMSY ranges, granting the support needed to correct any socio-economic imbalances in the fisheries sector.

Justification

Given the current state of stocks and the late presentation by the Commission of this proposal, it is impossible to achieve MSY in all the stocks concerned by the end of 2020 without unprecedented and catastrophic reductions in western Mediterranean fleets.

Amendment    13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 21

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(21)  Appropriate safeguards should be put in place to ensure that the targets are met and to trigger remedial measures where needed, amongst others where stocks fall below the conservation reference points. Remedial measures should include emergency measures in accordance with Articles 12 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, fishing opportunities and other specific conservation measures.

(21)  Appropriate safeguards should be put in place to ensure that the targets are met and to trigger remedial measures where needed, amongst others where stocks fall below the conservation reference points. Remedial measures should include emergency measures in accordance with Articles 12 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, fishing opportunities and other specific conservation measures, but also financial aid for fishermen directly affected by those measures.

Amendment    14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23)  In order to ensure transparent access to fisheries and the achievement of target fishing mortalities, a Union fishing effort regime should be adopted for trawls which are the main gear used to exploit demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean. To that end, it is appropriate to determine effort groups in order for the Council to establish maximum allowable fishing effort, expressed as numbers of fishing days, on an annual basis. Where necessary, the effort regime should incorporate other fishing gears.

(23)  In order to ensure transparent access to fisheries and the achievement of target fishing mortalities, the Union should have sound data and reliable statistics, on the basis of which a fishing effort regime should be adopted for trawls which are the main gear used to exploit demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean. To that end, the Council should determine maximum allowable fishing effort, expressed as numbers of fishing days, on an annual basis. Where necessary, the effort regime should incorporate other fishing gears.

Justification

Fishing efforts would be better managed jointly in each geographical sub-area because the proposed length categories create arbitrary differentiations within the fleet. The rapporteur proposes doing away with effort groups.

Amendment    15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 24

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(24)  Given the worrying situation of nearly all demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean and in order to reduce the current high levels of fishing mortality, the fishing effort regime should entail a significant reduction of effort in the first year of implementation of the plan provided for in this Regulation.

deleted

Amendment    16

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 25

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(25)  Where scientific advice shows that recreational fisheries have a significant impact on the fishing mortality of the stocks concerned, the Council should take them into account. To that effect, the Council may set fishing opportunities through the effort regime for commercial catches which takes into account the volume of recreational catches and/or to adopt other measures restricting recreational fisheries.

(25)  Where scientific advice shows that recreational fisheries have a significant impact on the fishing mortality of the stocks concerned, the Council should take them into account. To that effect, the Council will set fishing opportunities through the effort regime for commercial catches which takes into account the volume of recreational catches in order not to jeopardise commercial/professional fisheries and/or to adopt other measures restricting recreational fisheries, keeping in mind that such measures should never be to the detriment of professional fishing activities.

Amendment    17

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 26

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(26)  Where scientific advice shows that the fishing effort regime is not sufficient to meet the objectives or targets of the plan provided for in this Regulation, management measures based on total allowable catches should be introduced in order to complement the effort regime.

(26)  Where scientific advice shows that the fishing effort regime is not sufficient to meet the objectives or targets of the plan provided for in this Regulation, where appropriate, technical measures that allow for the improvement of the stock status by reducing the fishing mortality of the target species should be introduced in order to complement the effort regime.

Justification

Management measures based on total allowable catches (TACs) are not appropriate for the Mediterranean, given their difficulty in applying this measure in multi-specific fisheries and where stocks are shared with non-EU countries. It would be preferable to apply the technical measures that allow the improvement of the state of the stock by reducing the fishing mortality of the target species, where appropriate.

Amendment    18

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 27a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(27a)  In order to ensure the effective implementation of the management measures at regional level, Member States should put in place a co-management scheme involving Advisory Councils, fishermen’s organisations and competent institutions/authorities to strengthen dialogue and the engagement of the parties.

Amendment    19

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(28)  In order to protect nursery areas and sensitive habitats, and safeguard small-scale fisheries, the coastal zone should be regularly reserved for more selective fisheries. Therefore, the plan provided for in this Regulation should establish a closure for trawls operating within the 100 m isobath for three months each year.

(28)  In order to protect nursery areas and sensitive habitats, and safeguard small-scale fisheries, the coastal zone should be regularly reserved for more selective fisheries. Therefore, the plan provided for in this Regulation should establish a closure for trawls operating within the 100 m isobath for three months each year on a case-by-case basis, when necessary and justified by science, through regionalisation.

Justification

The proposal to establish a closure for the use of trawls within the 100 m isobath from May 1 to July 31 might, in some cases, be a disproportionate and unjustified measure, not based on science. In many areas the continental shelf ends abruptly, reaching a great depth in just a few miles, making it impossible for trawlers to fish beyond this area. The measure proposed would deeply affect not only trawlers, but also sectors depending on trawls, such as ports, auctions and ancillary industries.

Amendment    20

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 29

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(29)  Further conservation measures should be taken as regards demersal stocks. In particular, in accordance with the scientific advice, it is appropriate to have additional closures in areas with high aggregations of spawning individuals in order to protect a severely harmed adult stage of hake.

(29)  Further conservation measures should be taken as regards demersal stocks. In particular, in accordance with the scientific advice, it is appropriate to have additional closures in areas with high aggregations of spawning individuals in order to protect a severely harmed adult stage of hake and areas with high concentrations of juvenile fish, without prejudice to fair compensation for fishermen affected by those closures.

Amendment    21

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(30)  The precautionary approach should apply for by-catch stocks and for demersal stocks for which sufficient data are not available. Specific conservation measures should be adopted in accordance with Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 where the scientific advice shows that remedial measures are needed.

(30)  The precautionary approach should apply for by-catch stocks and for demersal stocks for which sufficient data are not available. Specific conservation measures should be adopted in accordance with Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 where the scientific advice shows that remedial measures are needed, provided that fishermen affected by those measures are given fair compensation.

Amendment    22

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 31 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(31a)  In order to protect sensitive species and habitats endangered and impacted by demersal fishing activities, the plan should establish management measures for the relevant fisheries.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 37

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(37)  In order to provide legal certainty, it is appropriate to clarify that temporary cessation measures that have been adopted in order to attain the objectives of the plan provided for in this Regulation can be deemed eligible for support under Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council32.

(37)  In order to provide legal certainty, it is appropriate to clarify that temporary cessation measures, or permanent cessation measures under restructuring plans, that have been adopted in order to attain the objectives of the plan provided for in this Regulation can be deemed eligible for support under Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council32

_________________

_________________

32 Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2328/2003, (EC) No 861/2006, (EC) No 1198/2006 and (EC) No 791/2007 and Regulation (EU) No 1255/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 149, 20.5.2014, p. 1).

32 Regulation (EU) No 508/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2328/2003, (EC) No 861/2006, (EC) No 1198/2006 and (EC) No 791/2007 and Regulation (EU) No 1255/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 149, 20.5.2014, p. 1).

Amendment    24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  blue and red shrimp (Aristeus antennatus) in GFCM sub-area 1;

(a)  blue and red shrimp (Aristeus antennatus) in General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) sub-areas 1-5-6;

Justification

Reducing the number of paragraphs makes it easier to understand the species list.

Amendment    25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b)  blue and red shrimp (Aristeus antennatus) in GFCM sub-area 5;

deleted

Amendment    26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c)  blue and red shrimp (Aristeus antennatus) in GFCM sub-area 6;

deleted

Amendment    27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d)  deep-water rose shrimp (Parapenaeus longirostris) in GFCM sub-area 1;

(d)  deep-water rose shrimp (Parapenaeus longirostris) in GFCM sub-areas 1-5-6-9-10-11;

Justification

Reducing the number of paragraphs makes it easier to understand the species list.

Amendment    28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e)  deep-water rose shrimp (Parapenaeus longirostris) in GFCM sub-area 5;

deleted

Amendment    29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f)  deep-water rose shrimp (Parapenaeus longirostris) in GFCM sub-area 6;

deleted

Amendment    30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point g

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(g)  deep-water rose shrimp (Parapenaeus longirostris) in GFCM sub-areas 9-10-11;

deleted

Amendment    31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point h

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(h)  giant red shrimp (Aristaeomorpha foliacea) in GFCM sub-area 9;

(h)  giant red shrimp (Aristaeomorpha foliacea) in GFCM sub-area 9-10-11;

Justification

Reducing the number of paragraphs makes it easier to understand the species list.

Amendment    32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point i

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(i)  giant red shrimp (Aristaeomorpha foliacea) in GFCM sub-area 10;

deleted

Amendment    33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point j

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(j)  giant red shrimp (Aristaeomorpha foliacea) in GFCM sub-area 11;

deleted

Amendment    34

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point k

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(k)  European hake (Merluccius merluccius) in GFCM sub areas 1-5-6-7;

(k)  European hake (Merluccius merluccius) in GFCM sub areas 1-5-6-7-9-10-11;

Justification

Reducing the number of paragraphs makes it easier to understand the species list.

Amendment    35

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point l

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(l)  European hake (Merluccius merluccius) in GFCM sub areas 9-10-11;

deleted

Amendment    36

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point m

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(m)  Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) in GFCM sub-area 5;

(m)  Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) in GFCM sub-area 5-6-9-11;

Justification

Reducing the number of paragraphs makes it easier to understand the species list.

Amendment    37

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point n

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(n)  Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) in GFCM sub-area 6;

deleted

Amendment    38

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point o

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(o)  Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) in GFCM sub-area 9;

deleted

Amendment    39

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point p

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(p)  Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus) in GFCM sub-area 11;

deleted

Amendment    40

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point q

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(q)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-area 1;

(q)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-areas 1-5-6-7-9-10;

Justification

Reducing the number of paragraphs makes it easier to understand the species list.

Amendment    41

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point r

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(r)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-area 5;

deleted

Amendment    42

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point s

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(s)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-area 6;

deleted

Amendment    43

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point t

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(t)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-area 7;

deleted

Amendment    44

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point u

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(u)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-area 9; and

deleted

Amendment    45

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point v

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(v)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-area 10.

deleted

Amendment    46

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point va (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(va)  red mullet (Mullus barbatus) in GFCM sub-area 11;

Amendment    47

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  This Regulation shall apply to by-catch stocks caught in the western Mediterranean Sea when fishing for the stocks referred to in paragraph 1. It shall also apply to any other demersal stocks caught in the western Mediterranean Sea and for which sufficient data are not available.

3.  This Regulation shall apply to by-catch stocks caught in the western Mediterranean Sea when fishing for the stocks referred to in paragraph 1 and shall aim to ensure that exploitation of those stocks restores and maintains populations of harvested species, which shall be fished in accordance with the provisions on fisheries management laid down in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.It shall also apply to any other demersal stocks caught in the western Mediterranean Sea and for which sufficient data are not available.

Amendment    48

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  This Regulation also specifies details for the implementation of the landing obligation in Union waters of the western Mediterranean Sea for all stocks of species to which the landing obligation applies under Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

5.  This Regulation also specifies details for the implementation of the landing obligation in Union waters of the western Mediterranean Sea for stocks of species to which the landing obligation applies under Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 which are caught in demersal fisheries.

Amendment    49

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2)  ‘range of FMSY’ means a range of values provided in the best available scientific advice, in particular by the Scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (‘STECF’), where all levels of fishing mortality within that range result in maximum sustainable yield (‘MSY’) in the long term given a fishing pattern and under existing average environmental conditions without significantly affecting the reproduction process for the stocks in question. It is derived to deliver no more than a 5 % reduction in long-term yield compared to the MSY. It is capped so that the probability of the stock falling below the limit reference point (BLIM) is no more than 5 %;

(2)  ‘range of FMSY’ means a range of values provided in the best available scientific advice where all levels of fishing mortality within that range result in maximum sustainable yield (‘MSY’) in the long term given a fishing pattern and under existing average environmental conditions without significantly affecting the reproduction process for the stocks in question. It is derived to deliver no more than a 5 % reduction in long-term yield compared to the MSY. It is capped so that the probability of the stock falling below the limit reference point (BLIM) is no more than 5 %;

Justification

Where it concerns the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), the expression ‘in particular’ should be removed, as other independent scientific advice recognised as such at Union or international level should also be taken into account, such as that provided by the GFCM’s Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC).

Amendment    50

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(3)  ‘FMSY point value’ means the value of the estimated fishing mortality that with a given fishing pattern and current environmental conditions gives the long-term maximum yield;

(3)  ‘FMSY' means the value of the estimated fishing mortality that with a given fishing pattern and current environmental conditions gives the long-term maximum yield;

Amendment    51

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8)  ‘BLIM’ means the limit reference point, expressed as spawning stock biomass and provided in the best available scientific advice, in particular by STECF, below which there may be reduced reproductive capacity;

(8)  ‘BLIM’ means the limit reference point, expressed as spawning stock biomass and provided in the best available scientific advice, below which there may be reduced reproductive capacity;

Justification

Where it concerns the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), the expression ‘in particular’ should be removed, as other independent scientific advice recognised as such at Union or international level should also be taken into account, such as that provided by the GFCM’s Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC).

Amendment    52

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9)  ‘BPA’ means the precautionary reference point, expressed as spawning stock biomass and provided in the best available scientific advice, in particular by STECF, which ensures that the spawning stock biomass has less than 5 % probability of being below BLIM;

(9)  ‘BPA’ means the precautionary reference point, expressed as spawning stock biomass and provided in the best available scientific advice, which ensures that the spawning stock biomass has less than 5 % probability of being below BLIM;

Justification

Where it concerns the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), the expression ‘in particular’ should be removed, as other independent scientific advice recognised as such at Union or international level should also be taken into account, such as that provided by the GFCM’s Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC).

Amendment    53

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(12a)  Recreational fisheries mean any fishing activities made by a ship of any type, with a hull length of 2.5 metres or more, regardless of the means of propulsion, intended for sports or leisure purposes, and not engaged in trade.

Amendment    54

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(12b)  'co-management' means the process of managing resources for the fulfilment of the CFP objectives in which competent administrations, local fishers, non-governmental organisations, research institutions and sometimes other fisheries and coastal resource stakeholders, each with specific responsibilities and rights, share the power for decision-making over the management of a fishery.

Amendment    55

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(12c)  ‘best available scientific advice’ means publicly available scientific advice that is supported by the most up-to-date scientific data and methods which has either been issued or peer-reviewed by an Union or international independent scientific body that is recognised at the Union or international level such as the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) or General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM), and meet the requirements laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Amendment    56

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  The plan shall contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the common fisheries policy, as listed in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, in particular by applying the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels which can produce MSY.

1.  The plan shall be based on a fishing effort regime aiming to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the common fisheries policy, as listed in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, in particular by applying the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels which can produce MSY. As provided by in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, the maximum sustainable yield exploitation rates shall be achieved as soon as possible and on a progressive, incremental basis by 2020 for all stocks to which this Regulation applies, and maintained thereafter. In the context of the objectives of this plan, particular account shall be taken of socio-economic sustainability, notably the impact on the communities concerned.

Amendment    57

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  The plan shall implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to ensure that negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem are minimised. It shall be coherent with Union environmental legislation, in particular with the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 as set out in Article 1(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC and the objectives set out in Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2009/147/EC and Articles 6 and 12 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC.

3.  The plan shall implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to ensure that negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem, and in particular on vulnerable habitats and protected species, including marine mammals, reptiles and seabirds, as well as incidental catches, are minimised. It shall be coherent with Union environmental legislation, in particular with the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 asset out in Article 1(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC and the objectives set out in Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2009/147/EC and Articles 6 and 12 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC.

Amendment    58

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  Measures in the plan shall be taken on the basis of the best available scientific advice. Where there is insufficient data, a comparable degree of conservation of the relevant stocks shall be pursued.

5.  Measures in the plan shall be taken on the basis of the best available scientific advice.

Amendment    59

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  The target fishing mortality in line with the ranges of FMSY defined in Article 2 shall be achieved as soon as possible, and on a progressive, incremental basis by 2020 for the stocks concerned, and shall be maintained thereafter within the ranges of FMSY.

1.  The target fishing mortality in line with the ranges of FMSY defined in Article 2 shall be achieved as soon as possible, and on a progressive, incremental basis by 2020, for the stocks concerned, and shall be maintained thereafter within the ranges of FMSY. In the pursuit of that target, particular account shall be taken of the economic and social impact of the calendar proposed, in accordance with Article 9, paragraph 4 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Amendment    60

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  The ranges of FMSY shall be requested, in particular from STECF, based on this plan.

2.  The ranges of FMSY shall be requested from an independent scientific body recognised as such at Union or international level, in particular STECF or the GFCM’s SAC.

Justification

Where it concerns the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), the expression ‘in particular’ should be removed, as other independent scientific advice recognised as such at Union or international level should also be taken into account, such as that provided by the GFCM’s Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC).

Amendment    61

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  In accordance with Article 16(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, when the Council fixes fishing opportunities, it shall establish those opportunities for the assemblage of stocks concerned, within the range of FMSY available at that time for the most vulnerable stock.

3.  In accordance with Article 16(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, when the Council fixes fishing effort measures, it shall establish those measures for the assemblage of stocks concerned, within the range of FMSY available at that time for the most vulnerable stock.

Justification

Management measures based on total allowable catches (TACs) are not appropriate for the Mediterranean, given their difficulty in applying this measure in multi-specific fisheries and where stocks are shared with non-EU countries. It would be preferable to apply the technical measures that allow the improvement the state of the stock by reducing the fishing mortality of the target species, where appropriate.

Amendment    62

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.  By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 3, fishing opportunities may be set at levels that are lower than the ranges of FMSY.

4.  By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 3, fishing effort may be set at levels that are lower than the ranges of FMSY. The social and economic impact on the fleets concerned shall be particularly taken into account, in accordance with Article 9, paragraph 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1380/2013.

 

(If this COMP AM is adopted, the term "fishing opportunities" will be replaced by "fishing effort" throughout the whole text, and a consequential change would be required at the end of recital 22 to delete the words "and/or catches".)

Amendment    63

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  By way of derogation from paragraphs 3 and 4, fishing opportunities may be set above the range of FMSY available at that time for the most vulnerable stock, provided that all stocks concerned are above the BPA:

5.  By way of derogation from paragraphs 3 and 4, fishing effort may be set above the range of FMSY available at that time for the most vulnerable stock, provided that all stocks concerned are above the BPA:

(a)  if, on the basis of the scientific advice or evidence, it is necessary for the achievement of the objectives laid down in Article 3 in mixed fisheries;

(a)  if, on the basis of the best available scientific advice, it is necessary for the achievement of the objectives laid down in Article 3 in mixed fisheries;

(b)  if, on the basis of the scientific advice or evidence, it is necessary to avoid serious harm to a stock due to intra- or inter-species stock dynamics; or

(b)  if, on the basis of the best available scientific advice, it is necessary to avoid serious harm to a stock due to intra- or inter-species stock dynamics; or

(c)  in order to limit variations in fishing opportunities between consecutive years to a maximum of 20 %.

(c)  in order to limit variations in fishing effort between consecutive years to a maximum of 10 % and up to 30 % of the cumulative effort in the first 3 years of the plan.

Amendment    64

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  Where the scientific advice shows that the spawning biomass of any of the stocks concerned is below the precautionary reference point (BPA), remedial measures shall be adopted to ensure the rapid return of the stocks concerned to levels above those capable of producing MSY. In particular, by way of derogation from Article 4(3) and (5), fishing opportunities shall be set at levels consistent with a fishing mortality that is reduced within the range of FMSY for the most vulnerable stock, taking into account the decrease in biomass.

1.  Where the scientific advice shows that the spawning biomass of any of the stocks concerned is below the precautionary reference point (BPA), remedial measures shall be adopted to ensure the rapid return of the stocks concerned to levels above those capable of producing MSY. In particular, fishing effort may be set at levels not exceeding the exploitation rate consistent with maximum sustainable yield and consistent with a fishing mortality that is reduced within the range of FMSY for the most vulnerable stock, within a geographical sub-area (GSA), taking into account the decrease in biomass.

Amendment    65

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Where the scientific advice shows that the spawning biomass of any of the stocks concerned is below the limit reference point (BLIM), further remedial measures shall be taken to ensure the rapid return of the stock to levels above those capable of producing MSY. In particular, by way of derogation from Article 4(3) and (5), those measures may include suspending the targeted fishery for the stock concerned and the adequate reduction of the fishing opportunities.

2.  Where the scientific advice shows that the spawning biomass of any of the stocks concerned is below the limit reference point (BLIM), further remedial measures shall be taken to ensure the rapid return of the stock to levels above those capable of producing MSY. In particular, by way of derogation from Article 4(3) and (5), those measures may include suspending the targeted fishery for the stock concerned and the adequate reduction of the fishing effort measures, provided that fishermen affected by those measures are given fair compensation.

Amendment    66

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4.  The choice of measures referred to in this Article shall be appropriate with the nature, gravity, duration and repetition of the situation where the spawning stock biomass is below the levels referred to in Article 5.

4.  The choice of measures referred to in this Article shall be appropriate with the nature, gravity, duration and repetition of the situation where the spawning stock biomass is below the levels referred to in Article 5, and those measures shall be conditional upon fishermen affected by their application receiving fair compensation.

Amendment    67

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  A fishing effort regime shall apply to all vessels fishing with trawls in the areas and length categories defined in Annex I.

1.  A fishing effort regime shall apply to all vessels fishing with trawls in Geographical Sub-Areas (GSA), and vessels length categories defined in Annex I. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation and Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 in order to amend Annex I with the aim to include depth intervals for the stocks concerned by this Regulation. Those delegated acts shall only be adopted subsequent to the report referred to in Article 17 being available for each of the preceding five years.

Amendment    68

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Each year, in accordance with the scientific advice, the Council shall set a maximum allowable fishing effort for each effort group by Member State.

2.  Every three years, in accordance with the best available annual scientific advice, the Council shall set a maximum allowable fishing effort for each effort group by Member State.

Amendment    69

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  For the first year of implementation of the plan, the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be substantially reduced from the baseline provided for in paragraph 4, in accordance with the scientific advice.

3.  For the first year of implementation of the plan, except for GSAs in which effort has already been reduced by more than 20 % during the baseline period provided for in paragraph 4, the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be reduced by10 % from that baseline, in accordance with the best available scientific advice on the state of stocks.

Amendment    70

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  for the first year of application of this Regulation, the baseline shall be calculated for each effort group as the average effort expressed as number of fishing days between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2017 and take account only of vessels active during that period;

(a)  for the first year of application of this Regulation, the baseline shall be calculated for each GSA as the maximum confirmed effort expressed as number of fishing days between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2017 and take account only of vessels active during that period;

Justification

The reference period has been extended so that the figures obtained are more representative. The number of annual fishing effort days should be based on the maximum number of confirmed days (using the vessel-monitoring system (VMS), logbooks, etc.), bearing in mind that in past years, the sector has voluntarily reduced the number of fishing days. This would penalise those who have chosen to manage fishing grounds more responsibly.

Amendment    71

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  Where the scientific advice shows significant catches of a particular stock with fishing gears other than trawls, fishing effort levels shall be set for such particular gear or gears on the basis of such scientific advice.

5.  Where the best available scientific advice shows an increase of more than 10 % in catches of a particular stock with fishing gears other than trawls, fishing effort levels shall be set for such particular gear or gears on the basis of such scientific advice.

Amendment    72

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6.  Where the scientific advice shows that recreational fisheries have a significant impact on the fishing mortality of a particular stock, the Council may limit recreational fisheries when setting fishing opportunities in order to avoid exceeding the total target of fishing mortality.

6.  Where the best available scientific advice shows that recreational fisheries have a significant impact on the fishing mortality of a particular stock, the Council shall limit recreational fisheries when setting fishing effort in order to avoid exceeding the total target of fishing mortality, without reducing the fishing opportunities of professional fishers. Member States may include recreational fisheries in specific national management plans to ensure effective data collection, monitoring and control of certain fisheries.

Amendment    73

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 8

deleted

Total allowable catches

 

Where the best available scientific advice shows that the fishing effort regime is not sufficient to meet the objectives or targets set out in Articles 3 and 4, the Council shall adopt complementary management measures based on total allowable catches.

 

Justification

Establishing a common TAC and quota regime in the Mediterranean could lead to many implementing difficulties and would give rise to new problems in the monitoring of choke species, among others, as fisheries in the area are mixed. To prevent the concept of an effort regime becoming distorted, on the basis of this multi-annual plan, management measures should be concentrated and the possibility for this other type of measures to be proposed in the future should be left open.

Amendment    74

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b)  distribute national quotas fairly among fleet segments, giving consideration to traditional and artisanal fisheries; and

(b)  distribute national quotas fairly among the fleet, giving consideration to traditional and artisanal fisheries; and

Amendment    75

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  Where a Member State allows vessels flying its flag to fish with trawls, it shall ensure that such fishing is limited to a maximum of 12 hours per fishing day, five fishing days per week or equivalent.

3.  Where a Member State allows vessels flying its flag to fish with trawls, it shall ensure that such fishing is limited to a maximum of 12 hours per fishing day, five fishing days per week or equivalent. In duly justified cases, where provisions of Article 11 of this Regulation imply an increase in the hours of travel, a maximum of 18-hours per fishing day shall be possible subject to specific prior authorisation by the Member State.

Amendment    76

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  Member States shall ensure that the total capacity, expressed in GT and kW, corresponding to the fishing authorisations issued in accordance with paragraph 4 is not increased during the period of application of the plan.

5.  Member States shall ensure that the total capacity, expressed in GT and kW, corresponding to the fishing authorisations issued in accordance with paragraph 4 is not increased during the period of application of the plan. An exchange of capacity between the different management areas shall be permitted, should the improvement in the state of the resources allows for it.

Justification

This provision should leave open the possibility of exchanging capacity between the different management areas (GSA), in case the improvement in the state of the resources allows for it (meeting the criteria already established in the regulations regarding global capacity ceilings). The exchange of capacity must respect at all times the total ceilings allocated to each Member State.

Amendment    77

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

7a.  Member States shall ensure effective data collection enabling the impact of recreational fisheries on the stocks covered by this Plan to be assessed.

Justification

Data on recreational fisheries are needed to assess the latter's impact on the populations

Amendment    78

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 7 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

7b.  With the aim of improving the state of stocks, Member States may establish a co-management regime in order to achieve the objectives of the plan, in accordance with the local specificities of a fishery.

Amendment    79

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  In addition to what is provided for by Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, the use of trawls in the western Mediterranean Sea shall be prohibited within the 100 m isobath from 1 May to 31 July each year.

1.  In addition to what is provided for by Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, the use of trawls in the western Mediterranean Sea shall be prohibited within the 100 m isobath from 1 July to 31 September each year, when necessary and justified on the best available scientific advice, in accordance with article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 or by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 of that Regulation. Derogations from those provisions may, however, be made depending on isobath variation in terms of distance from the coast, on specific coastal features in the basin concerned, and on the characteristics of the fleets operating there.

Justification

A ban, whereby trawls could not be used within the 100 m isobath from 1 May to 31 July, should be considered unacceptable if isobath variation, in terms of distance from GSA coasts, is not taken into account. Other factors that are being disregarded are the specific features of the coasts in the basin concerned and fleet characteristics as regards shipping licences and technical equipment for the target species which vessels catch.

Amendment    80

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Within two years of the adoption of this Regulation and on the basis of the scientific advice, the Member States concerned shall establish other closure areas where there is evidence of a high concentration of juvenile fish and of spawning grounds of demersal stocks, in particular for the stocks concerned.

2.  Within two years of the adoption of this Regulation and on the basis of the best available scientific advice, if the established closure areas have proved insufficient in terms of stock recovery, the Member States concerned shall establish other closure areas where there is evidence of a high concentrations of juvenile fish, fish below minimum conservation reference size and of spawning grounds of demersal stocks, in particular for the stocks concerned.

Amendment    81

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  Where the closure areas referred to in paragraph 2 affect fishing vessels of several Member States, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 and Article 18 of this Regulation and on the basis of the scientific advice, establishing the closure areas concerned.

3.  Where the closure areas referred to in paragraph 2 affect fishing vessels of several Member States, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 and Article 18 of this Regulation and on the basis of the best available scientific advice, establishing the closure areas concerned.

Amendment    82

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Other technical conservation measures

Specific conservation measures

Justification

As this article is similar to Article 8 of the multiannual plan for the North Sea, the texts should be aligned with one another.

Amendment    83

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 supplementing this Regulation by establishing the following technical conservation measures:

1.  If the best available scientific advice is that remedial measures need to be taken to conserve any of the demersal stocks referred to in Article 1(2) of this Regulation, , the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation and Article 18 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 supplementing this Regulation by establishing specific conservation measures, for fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the Western Mediterranean Sea:

Amendment    84

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  In the absence of a joint recommendation as referred to in Article 15(2) and after expiry of the applicable deadlines set out in that Article, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 supplementing this Regulation by adopting the measures listed in paragraph 1, where the scientific advice shows that specific action is required to ensure that any of the stocks to which this Regulation applies is managed in accordance with Article 3.

deleted

Amendment    85

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

For all stocks of species in the western Mediterranean Sea to which the landing obligation applies under Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 supplementing this Regulation by adopting detailed measures for that obligation as provided for in points (a) to (e) of Article 15(5) or Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

For all stocks of species in the western Mediterranean Sea to which the landing obligation applies under Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, and for incidental catches of pelagic species in fisheries exploiting the stocks referred to in Article 1(2) to which the landing obligation applies, after consulting the Member States, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 15 supplementing this Regulation by adopting detailed measures for that obligation as provided for in points (a) to (e) of Article 15(5) or Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Amendment    86

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a.  In view of the shared nature of the stocks and where necessary, Member States shall establish regional partnerships with third countries outside the EU under the auspices of GFCM, in order to ensure the effectiveness of the regional management plans.

Justification

It is important to be able to cooperate, in the framework of the GFCM, with third countries with which the stocks covered by this Plan are shared, so as to ensure an efficient fisheries management.

Amendment    87

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  Where the scientific advice shows a change in the geographical distribution of the stocks listed in Article 1(2), the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 to amend this Regulation by adjusting the areas specified in Article 1(2) and Annex I in order to reflect that change.

deleted

Justification

Article 1(2) establishes the scope of the Regulation (stocks and GFCM sub-areas) and Annex 1 specifies which effort groups are included in the fishing effort regime. Both parts contain key elements of the legislative act and Parliament should be consulted before any amendments are made, in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Amendment    88

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Where the scientific advice shows that the list of stocks set out in Article 1(2) needs to be amended, the Commission may submit a proposal for the amendement of that list.

2.  Where the scientific advice shows that the list of stocks set out in Article 1(2) needs to be amended, the Commission, after consulting the Member States concerned, may submit a proposal for the amendment of that list.

Amendment    89

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  For the purposes of the annual report provided for in Article 50 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, quantifiable indicators shall include annual estimates of F/FMSY and SSB for the stocks concerned and, where possible, for by-catch stocks. They may be complemented with other indicators on the basis of the scientific advice.

1.  For the purposes of the annual report provided for in Article 50 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, quantifiable indicators shall include annual estimates of F/FMSY and SSB for the stocks concerned, socio-economic indicators and, where possible, for by-catch stocks. They may be complemented with other indicators on the basis of the scientific advice.

Justification

The CFP is based on the biological aspects of fisheries but also provides for synergy with the socio-economic aspects of fisheries.

Amendment    90

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Five years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the results and the impact of the plan on the stocks to which this Regulation applies and on the fisheries exploiting those stocks, in particular as regards the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 3.

2.  Three years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the results and the impact of the plan on the stocks to which this Regulation applies and on the fisheries exploiting those stocks, in particular as regards the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 3.

Amendment    91

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  The delegation of power referred to in Articles 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from the date of the entry into force of this Regulation. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of that period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for five-year periods, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months beforehand.

2.  The delegation of power referred to in Articles 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from the date of the entry into force of this Regulation. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of that period. The delegation of power may be extended for five-year periods if the European Parliament and the Council jointly request this.

Amendment    92

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 shall enter into force only if neither the European Parliament nor the Council has expressed an objection within two months of being notified or if, before the expiry of that period, they have both informed the Commission that they will not object. The period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.

6.  A delegated act adopted pursuant to Articles 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 shall enter into force only if neither the European Parliament nor the Council has expressed an objection within three months of being notified or if, before the expiry of that period, they have both informed the Commission that they will not object. The period shall be extended by three months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.

Amendment    93

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund shall make provision for support measures for permanent cessation measures, provided that a Member State can prove that the fleet segment’s activities are not in line with the fishing opportunities available to that segment, in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) 508/2014, by way of derogation from paragraph 4 of that Article.

Amendment    94

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

FISHING OPPORTUNITIES

FISHING EFFORT MEASURES

Justification

Management measures based on total allowable catches (TACs) are not appropriate for the Mediterranean, given their difficulty in applying this measure in multi-specific fisheries and where stocks are shared with non-EU countries. It would be preferable to apply the technical measures that allow the improvement of the state of the stock by reducing the fishing mortality of the target species, where appropriate.

(1)

OJ C 367, 10.10.2018, p. 103.


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Background and context

The western Mediterranean is one of the most developed fishery sub-regions in the Mediterranean. It accounts for around 31% of total landings in that area (i.e. EUR 1.35 billion of a total of EUR 4.79 billion) and around 19% of the officially reported Mediterranean fishing fleet.

Demersal fisheries in the Mediterranean are in high demand. The western Mediterranean is home to a large number of fish and crustacean species.

The main species caught there are hake, red mullet, several species of red shrimp and lobster.

Demersal species are mainly caught with trawl nets, but gear such as trammel nets, gillnets, traps and longlines are also often used.

Demersal fisheries in the western Mediterranean are currently managed through national management plans adopted pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006 (the ‘MedReg’). Spain, France and Italy have adopted management plans under this regulation which have proven to be ineffective in helping to achieve the objectives set in the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).

The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) has shown that exploitation of certain demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean far exceeds the levels required to achieve maximum sustainable yield (MSY): more than 80% of the assessed stocks are overfished in this sub-region. Furthermore, the biomass of some of these stocks is close to the critical reference levels, indicating that there is a high probability of collapse.

The Committee thus believes a multi-annual plan should be devised for the conservation and sustainable exploitation of demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean.

The proposal provides for:

• measurable fishing mortality targets to be achieved by 2020 at the latest by enabling the management of the stocks concerned according to maximum sustainable yield and by ensuring flexibility for mixed fisheries;

• the introduction of a critical conservation reference level for each stock at which it would be in serious danger of collapse and a precautionary reference point as a safety margin;

• safeguard measures to enable a stock to be replenished if it falls below the precautionary reference or critical reference levels;

• the introduction of a fishing effort regime at EU level for all trawls that fish in the areas listed in Annex I for trawl fishing length categories as defined in that Annex;

• a ban on trawls that operate below the 100 m isobath between 1 May and 31 July of each year, with a view to protecting sensitive breeding grounds and habitats and preserving artisanal fishing by earmarking the coastal zone for more selective fisheries;

• regionalisation provisions as required to extend and/or amend exemptions for species with high survival rates and de minimis exemptions; establishment of regional cooperation between Member States with a view to adopting the appropriate rules; landing and specific conservation measures, including technical measures, for certain stocks;

• scientific monitoring to assess progress towards maximum sustainable yield for stock underlying demersal fisheries and, where possible, for by-catch stocks.

Views of the Rapporteur

The rapporteur welcomes the work undertaken to date by the Commission and the co-legislators to develop multiannual plans for regional management of fishing and the conservation of fishing resources, but she considers that the specific characteristics of the western Mediterranean should be integrated into this proposal for a multiannual management plan.

The rapporteur has therefore tabled amendments to the proposal with a view to ensuring that resources are conserved in a way that fits with the socio-economic realities of the fleets by adapting the fishing effort regime accordingly, including co-management as a possible means for managing fishing resources in the western Mediterranean.

Socio-economic sustainability

Article 2 of Regulation 1380/2013 establishes that the objectives of the CFP encompass both environmental and socio-economic sustainability.

The Commission’s proposal includes measures which should ensure that resources are conserved and stocks are environmentally sustainable. However, to achieve both socio-economic and environmental sustainability, the rapporteur has proposed some changes so that a balance can be achieved and the impact on territories reduced.

Thus, in cases where effort reduction irreversibly compromises the viability of a fishing company, for the sake of both shipowners and seamen and crew, the rapporteur has suggested that Member States should be able to go further than temporary cessation measures and take steps to compensate for the permanent cessation of vessels affected by the effort reduction measures proposed in this plan.

Regarding closed areas, the rapporteur takes the view that some flexibility must be afforded with regard to the ban on trawls within 100 m isobaths in geographical sub-areas where that ban is rendered unenforceable by the topography of the seabed and/or the measure’s socio-economic impact. Given the major differences in the extension of the continental shelf along the west coast of the Mediterranean, this measure would have an unequal, unfair and disproportionate effect on the region’s fleets. Local fleets have adapted to the characteristics of their grounds, therefore, an excessive reduction in those grounds based solely on geographical or topographical criteria could cause irreversible socio-economic damage to the fishing sector.

Adaptation of the fishing effort regime

The rapporteur considers that fishing efforts would be better managed jointly in each geographical sub-area because the proposed length categories create arbitrary differentiations within the fleet. Therefore, the length categories should be done away with, given that, in most cases, the trawler fleet is between 12 and 24 metres. In practice, no such differentiation is made.

On the other hand, the ‘significant’ reduction of fishing effort during the first year of the plan, which the Commission’s proposal fails to quantify and would have a catastrophic effect if applied literally, needs to be specified. The rapporteur suggests that fishing effort be reduced by 10% in the first year, except for GSAs in which the fishing effort has already been reduced by more than 20%. The 2002 CFP reform introduced measures to combat overfishing and improve conservation and promote sustainable exploitation of resources, including, for the first time, a long-term focus on stock management. Since the 2013 CFP reform, the EU has been committed to achieving maximum sustainable yield by 2015 in the stocks for which that was possible and by 2020 at the latest. Certain territories in the EU have made considerable strides in reducing fleets with the aim of contributing to the CFP objectives, and, in the interests of fairness, the proposal for substantial fleet reductions must take their efforts into account.

What is more, to concentrate efforts by the fishing sector to follow an effective and responsible fishing effort regime, the rapporteur has suggested that provisions which establish a common TAC and quota regime in the Mediterranean be done away with. A regime of that kind could lead to many implementing difficulties and would give rise to new problems in the monitoring of choke species, among others, as fisheries in the area are mixed. To prevent the concept of an effort regime becoming distorted, on the basis of this multi-annual plan, the rapporteur has proposed that management measures be concentrated and that the possibility be left open that this other type of measures can be proposed in the future.

Co-management

The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) defines co-management as the process of managing fisheries resources in which governments share power with the community of local resource users and each party is given specific responsibilities and rights relating to information and decision-making in the management of resources. Specifically, the local user community is made up of the fisheries sector and other stakeholders such as NGOs and scientific institutions, along with other local stakeholders.

Many demersal fisheries in the western Mediterranean are local or supra-local and therefore a participatory approach – with the effective involvement of the fisheries sector, the administration and other stakeholders, such as the scientific community – ensures that management measures reflecting the reality of fishing in the area. Empowering stakeholders in the management of the plan at maritime territory level therefore ensures that they are fully involved, making it easier for them to accept and apply management measures.

The rapporteur has been greatly impressed by the co-management experiences brought to her attention and therefore suggests that Member States voluntarily introduce co-management regimes whenever they see fit, so that the plan can be adapted to reflect local fishing realities as closely as possible.

19.9.2018

POSITION IN THE FORM OF AMENDMENTS

of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety

for the Committee on Fisheries

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a multi-annual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea

(COM(2018)0115 – C8-0104/2018 – 2018/0050(COD))

On behalf of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety: Adina‑Ioana Vălean

AMENDMENT

The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety presents the following amendments to the Committee on Fisheries, as the committee responsible:

Amendment    1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(6a)  Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 includes the restoration and maintenance of populations of harvested species above levels capable of producing MSY as an explicit goal, as regards the exploitation of living marine biological resources. Therefore, in accordance with Article 2(2) thereof, the corresponding exploitation rate was to be achieved by 2015 where possible and, on a progressive, incremental basis at the latest by 2020 for all stocks, and should be maintained thereafter.

Amendment    2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7)  Pursuant to Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, multi-annual plans are to be based on scientific, technical and economic advice. In accordance with those provisions, the multi-annual plan provided for in this Regulation should contain objectives, quantifiable targets with clear timeframes, conservation reference points, safeguards and technical measures designed to avoid and reduce unwanted catches.

(7)  Pursuant to Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, multi-annual plans are to be based on scientific, technical and economic advice. In accordance with those provisions, the multi-annual plan provided for in this Regulation should contain objectives, quantifiable targets with clear timeframes, conservation reference points, safeguards and technical measures designed to avoid and reduce unwanted catches and to minimise the impact on the marine environment.

Amendment    3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12)  The STECF has shown that exploitation of most demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean exceeds by far the levels required to achieve MSY.

(12)  The STECF has shown that exploitation of most demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean exceeds by far the levels required to achieve MSY, and that over-exploitation poses a high biological risk that those stocks will collapse.

Amendment    4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15)  Given their importance, the plan provided for in this Regulation should cover recreational fisheries catching western Mediterranean demersal stocks. Where such fisheries have a significant impact on stocks, the multi-annual plan provided for by this Regulation should provide for the possibility of specific management measures.

(15)  As recreational fisheries can have a significant impact on fish resources, the multiannual plan should provide a framework to ensure that they are conducted in a manner compatible with the objectives of that plan. Member States should collect catch data of recreational fisheries. Where such fisheries have a significant impact on those resources, the plan should provide for the possibility to decide on specific management measures.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17)  The objective of the plan provided for in this Regulation should be to contribute to the achievement of the CFP, and in particular, reaching and maintaining MSY for the target stocks, implementing the landing obligation for demersal stocks subject to minimum conservation reference size, and promoting a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, bearing in mind coastal fisheries and socio-economic aspects. It should also implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to minimise negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem. It should be coherent with the Union’s environmental legislation, in particular the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 (in accordance with Directive 2008/56/EC28 ) and the objectives of Directive 2009/147/EC29 and Council Directive 92/43/EEC30 .

(17)  The objective of the plan provided for in this Regulation should be to contribute to the achievement of the CFP, and in particular, restoring and maintaining fish stocks above levels of biomass capable of producing MSY for the target stocks, implementing the landing obligation for demersal stocks subject to minimum conservation reference size, and promoting a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, bearing in mind coastal fisheries and socio-economic aspects. It should also implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management by reducing, and when possible eliminating, the negative effects of fishing activities in the marine environment. That plan should also contribute to the achievement of good environmental status, as laid down in Directive 2008/56/EC28, and to the achievement of favourable conservation status for habitats and species as required by Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council29 and the Council Directive 92/43/EC30 respectively.

_________________

_________________

28 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive) (OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19)

28 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive) (OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19)

29 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).

29 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7).

30 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).

30 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7).

Amendment    6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(18)  It is appropriate to establish the target fishing mortality (F) that corresponds to the objective of reaching and maintaining MSY as ranges of values which are consistent with achieving MSY (i.e. FMSY). Those ranges, based on best available scientific advice, are necessary to provide flexibility to take account of developments in the scientific advice, contribute to the implementation of the landing obligation and accommodate mixed fisheries. Based on this plan, they are derived to deliver no more than 5 % reduction in the long-term yield as compared with MSY. In addition, the upper limit of the FMSY range is capped with the aim that the probability of the stock falling below the biomass limit reference point (BLIM) is no more than 5 %.

(18)  In order to achieve the objectives established in Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, it is appropriate to establish the target fishing mortality (F) that corresponds to the objective of reaching and maintaining, but not exceeding MSY exploitation rate, as ranges of values which are consistent with achieving MSY (i.e. FMSY). Those rates should be achieved as soon as possible and, on a progressive, incremental basis at the latest by 2020 for all stocks to which this Regulation applies, and maintained thereafter. Those ranges, based on best available scientific advice, are necessary to provide flexibility to take account of developments in the scientific advice, contribute to the implementation of the landing obligation and accommodate mixed fisheries. Based on this plan, they are derived to deliver no more than 5 % reduction in the long-term yield as compared with MSY. In addition, the upper limit of the FMSY range is capped with the aim that the probability of the stock falling below the biomass limit reference point (BLIM) is no more than 5 %.

Amendment    7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19)  For the purposes of fixing fishing opportunities, there should be FMSY ranges for ‘normal use’ and, subject to the good status of the stocks concerned, more flexible FMSY ranges. It should be possible to set fishing opportunities within the latter only if, on the basis of the scientific advice, this is necessary to achieve the objectives laid down in this Regulation in mixed fisheries, to avoid harm to a stock caused by intra- or inter-species stock dynamics, or to limit year-on-year variations in fishing opportunities.

deleted

Amendment    8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(28a)  In order to protect sensitive species, in particular those critically endangered due to fishing impacts, management measures should be applied to fisheries. Therefore, the plan provided for in this Regulation should establish management measures including modification of vessels gears, modification of vessels activities, and modifications of the vessels.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 31 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(31a)  Furthermore, the Commission should continue to be empowered, in a multiannual plan, to establish sensitive protected areas for the recovery of fish stocks, in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

4a.  This Regulation also specifies details for the implementation of minimising the impact of fisheries on the marine environment, in particular the incidental catches of protected species, in Union waters of the western Mediterranean Sea for all fisheries fishing in those waters.

Amendment    11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  The plan shall contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the common fisheries policy, as listed in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, in particular by applying the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels which can produce MSY.

1.  The plan shall contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the common fisheries policy, as listed in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, in particular by applying the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels which can produce MSY. The maximum sustainable yield exploitation rates shall be achieved as soon as possible and on a progressive, incremental basis by 2020 at the latest, for all stocks to which this Regulation applies, and maintained thereafter.

Amendment    12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  The plan shall implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to ensure that negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem are minimised. It shall be coherent with Union environmental legislation, in particular with the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 as set out in Article 1(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC and the objectives set out in Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2009/147/EC and Articles 6 and 12 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC.

3.  The plan shall implement the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management in order to ensure that negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem, and in particular on vulnerable habitats and protected species, including marine mammals, reptiles and seabirds, are minimised. It shall be coherent with Union environmental legislation, in particular with the objective of achieving good environmental status by 2020 as set out in Article 1(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC and the objectives set out in Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2009/147/EC and Articles 6 and 12 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC.

Amendment    13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b)  contribute to the fulfilment of other relevant descriptors contained in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC in proportion to the role played by fisheries in their fulfilment.

(b)  contribute to the fulfilment of other relevant descriptors contained in Annex I to Directive 2008/56/EC in proportion to the role played by fisheries in their fulfilment and ensure that negative impacts of fishing on the marine environment are minimised, in particular regarding vulnerable habitats and protected species, including marine mammals, reptiles and seabirds.

Amendment    14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  By way of derogation from paragraphs 3 and 4, fishing opportunities may be set above the range of FMSYPA:

deleted

(a) if, on the basis of the scientific advice or evidence, it is necessary for the achievement of the objectives laid down in Article 3 in mixed fisheries;

 

(b) if, on the basis of the scientific advice or evidence, it is necessary to avoid serious harm to a stock due to intra- or inter-species stock dynamics; or

 

(c) in order to limit variations in fishing opportunities between consecutive years to a maximum of 20 %.

 

Amendment    15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  Where the scientific advice shows that the spawning biomass of any of the stocks concerned is below the precautionary reference point (BPA), remedial measures shall be adopted to ensure the rapid return of the stocks concerned to levels above those capable of producing MSY. In particular, by way of derogation from Article 4(3) and (5), fishing opportunities shall be set at levels consistent with a fishing mortality that is reduced within the range of FMSY for the most vulnerable stock, taking into account the decrease in biomass.

1.  Where the scientific advice shows that the spawning biomass of any of the stocks concerned is below the precautionary reference point (BPA), remedial measures shall be adopted to ensure the rapid return of the stocks concerned to levels above those capable of producing MSY. In particular, by way of derogation from Article 4(3) and(5), fishing opportunities shall be set at levels not exceeding the exploitation rate consistent with maximum sustainable yield and consistent with a fishing mortality that is reduced within the range of FMSY for the most vulnerable stock, taking into account the decrease in biomass.

Amendment    16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Each year, in accordance with the scientific advice, the Council shall set a maximum allowable fishing effort for each effort group by Member State.

2.  Each year, in accordance with the best available scientific advice, the Council shall set a maximum allowable fishing effort for each effort group by Member State.

Amendment    17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3.  For the first year of implementation of the plan, the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be substantially reduced from the baseline provided for in paragraph 4, in accordance with the scientific advice.

3.  For the first year of implementation of the plan, the maximum allowable fishing effort shall be substantially reduced from the baseline provided for in paragraph 4, in accordance with the best available scientific advice.

Amendment    18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5.  Where the scientific advice shows significant catches of a particular stock with fishing gears other than trawls, fishing effort levels shall be set for such particular gear or gears on the basis of such scientific advice.

5.  Where the best available scientific advice shows significant catches of a particular stock with fishing gears other than trawls, fishing effort levels shall be set for such particular gear or gears on the basis of such scientific advice.

Amendment    19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6.  Where the scientific advice shows that recreational fisheries have a significant impact on the fishing mortality of a particular stock, the Council may limit recreational fisheries when setting fishing opportunities in order to avoid exceeding the total target of fishing mortality.

6.  Where the best available scientific advice shows that recreational fisheries have a significant impact on the fishing mortality of a particular stock, the Council may limit recreational fisheries when setting fishing opportunities in order to avoid exceeding the total target of fishing mortality.

Amendment    20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1.  In addition to what is provided for by Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, the use of trawls in the western Mediterranean Sea shall be prohibited within the 100 m isobath from 1 May to 31 July each year.

1.  In addition to what is provided for by Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, the use of trawls in the western Mediterranean Sea shall be prohibited within at least the 100 m isobaths from 1 May to 31 July each year.

Amendment    21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Within two years of the adoption of this Regulation and on the basis of the scientific advice, the Member States concerned shall establish other closure areas where there is evidence of a high concentration of juvenile fish and of spawning grounds of demersal stocks, in particular for the stocks concerned.

2.  Within two years of the adoption of this Regulation and on the basis of the scientific advice, the Member States concerned shall establish other closure areas where there is evidence of a high heavy concentrations of juvenile fish, fish below minimum conservation reference size and of spawning grounds of demersal stocks, in particular for the stocks

Amendment    22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Article 12a

 

Management of incidental catches of protected species

 

1. For the management of protected seabirds that are impacted by fishing in the western Mediterranean Sea, management measures shall be adopted for all longline vessels, including applying scaring devices on-board vessels, setting the nets at night, and increasing the sink rate of the hooks.

 

2. Where Member States do not implement management measures to protect species and habitats in the western Mediterranean Sea on which fishing has an impact, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 18, supplementing this Regulation by adopting detailed management measures.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a)  specifying the characteristics of fishing gear, in particular mesh size, hook size, number of hooks, construction of the gear, twine thickness, size of the gear or use of additional devices to improve selectivity;

(a)  specifying the characteristics of fishing gear, in particular mesh size, hook size, number of hooks, construction of the gear, twine thickness, size of the gear or use of additional devices to improve selectivity, to reduce unwanted catches and to minimise the negative impact of fishing operations on the ecosystem;

Amendment    24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b)  limiting the use of fishing gear, in particular immersion time and depth of gear deployment, so as to improve selectivity;

(b)  limiting the use of fishing gear, in particular immersion time and depth of gear deployment, or application of technical measures, so as to improve selectivity, to reduce unwanted catches and to minimise the negative impact of fishing operations on the ecosystem;

Amendment    25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c)  prohibiting or limiting fishing in specific areas or time periods to protect spawning and juvenile fish, fish below the minimum conservation reference size or non-target fish species;

(c)  prohibiting or limiting fishing in specific areas or time periods to protect spawning and juvenile fish, fish below the minimum conservation reference size or non-target fish species, and to minimise the negative impact of fishing operations on the ecosystem;

Amendment    26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d)  prohibiting or limiting fishing in specific areas or time periods to protect vulnerable ecosystems and species;

(d)  prohibiting or limiting fishing in specific areas or time periods to protect vulnerable ecosystems and species, and to minimise the negative impact of fishing operations on the ecosystem;

Amendment    27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2.  Five years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation and every five years thereafter, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the results and the impact of the plan on the stocks to which this Regulation applies and on the fisheries exploiting those stocks, in particular as regards the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 3.

2.  Two years after the date of entry into force of this Regulation and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the results and the impact of the plan on the stocks to which this Regulation applies and on the fisheries exploiting those stocks, in particular as regards the achievement of the objectives set out in Article 3.


PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

Establishing a multi-annual plan for the fisheries exploiting demersal stocks in the western Mediterranean Sea

References

COM(2018)0115 – C8-0104/2018 – 2018/0050(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

8.3.2018

 

 

 

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

PECH

15.3.2018

 

 

 

Committees asked for opinions

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

15.3.2018

REGI

15.3.2018

 

 

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

REGI

27.3.2018

 

 

 

Rapporteurs

       Date appointed

Clara Eugenia Aguilera García

22.3.2018

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

21.3.2018

21.6.2018

24.9.2018

 

Date adopted

10.1.2019

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

18

5

1

Members present for the final vote

Marco Affronte, Clara Eugenia Aguilera García, Renata Briano, David Coburn, Diane Dodds, Sylvie Goddyn, Carlos Iturgaiz, Werner Kuhn, António Marinho e Pinto, Gabriel Mato, Norica Nicolai, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Ricardo Serrão Santos, Isabelle Thomas, Peter van Dalen, Jarosław Wałęsa

Substitutes present for the final vote

José Blanco López, Ole Christensen, Rosa D’Amato, Norbert Erdős, Jens Gieseke, Czesław Hoc, Nosheena Mobarik

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

Tilly Metz

Date tabled

10.1.2019


FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

18

+

ECR

Peter van Dalen, Czesław Hoc, Nosheena Mobarik

EFDD

David Coburn, Rosa D'Amato

NI

Diane Dodds

PPE

Norbert Erdős, Jens Gieseke, Carlos Iturgaiz, Werner Kuhn, Gabriel Mato, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Jarosław Wałęsa

S&D

Clara Eugenia Aguilera García, José Blanco López, Renata Briano, Ole Christensen, Ricardo Serrão Santos

5

-

ALDE

António Marinho e Pinto, Norica Nicolai

EFDD

Sylvie Goddyn

VERTS/ALE

Marco Affronte, Tilly Metz

1

0

S&D

Isabelle Thomas

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

Last updated: 11 January 2019Legal notice