Procedure : 2008/0112(CNS)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : A6-0206/2009

Texts tabled :

A6-0206/2009

Debates :

PV 21/04/2009 - 23
CRE 21/04/2009 - 23

Votes :

PV 22/04/2009 - 6.40
Explanations of votes
Explanations of votes
Explanations of votes

Texts adopted :


REPORT     *
PDF 220kWORD 301k
2 April 2009
PE 414.121v03-00 A6-0206/2009

on the proposal for a Council regulation concerning the conservation of fisheries resources through technical measures

(COM(2008)0324 – C6-0282/2008 – 2008/0112(CNS))

Committee on Fisheries

Rapporteur: Cornelis Visser

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
 PROCEDURE

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a Council regulation concerning the conservation of fisheries resources through technical measures

(COM(2008)0324 – C6-0282/2008 – 2008/0112(CNS))

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2008)0324),

–   having regard to Article 37 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0282/2008),

–   having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A6-0206/2009),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty;

3.  Calls on the Council to notify Parliament if it intends to depart from the text approved by Parliament;

4.  Asks the Council to consult Parliament again if it intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

5.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

Amendment  1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 7 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(7a) Given that both the homogeneous rules which are generally applicable in all areas and those applicable specifically on a regional basis are of similar importance for fisheries management, they should be adopted by the Council.

Justification

The majority of Regional Advisory Councils (RACs), fisheries sectors and administrations accept the regionalisation contained in the proposal, but there is practically a unanimous view that regional regulations should also be adopted by the Council, which would mean consulting the European Parliament and the RACs.

Amendment  2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(12a) As an additional clarification, in order to prevent future disputes due to the misinterpretation of rules, and in line with the approach recently introduced, the Commission should supplement the provisions of this Regulation by publishing an annex containing illustrations to explain the characteristics of fishing gear.

Justification

The articles relating to the characteristics of the various types of fishing gear are highly technical. In order to prevent possible misinterpretation, the industry has asked that the regulation be supplemented with illustrations in line with the approach introduced by the Commission in Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 on technical measures in the Baltic Sea, inter alia. There is no reason why a similar clarification should not be provided for the Atlantic.

Amendment  3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(13a) It is necessary to prevent situations that cause distortions of competition or confusion among operators and consumers and that could lead to failure to comply with minimum sizes, and therefore the rules should also apply to products deriving from imports. To this end, the Commission should submit, as soon as possible, a proposal to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 104/20001, in order to harmonise biological sizes with marketing sizes.

 

1Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products (OJ L 17 21.1.2000, p. 22).

Justification

It is calculated that almost 70% of fishery products consumed in the EU derive from imports. The fishing sector has unanimously requested that such imports be subject to the same rules as domestic products, and it has in particular insisted on harmonisation between the minimum sizes regulated through legislation on technical measures and those contained in Regulation (EC) No 104/2000.

Amendment  4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) A vessel must immediately move to another area when maximum by-catches are exceeded.

(15) In order to ensure adequate protection for marine resources, protect breeding areas or sensitive areas and reduce discards, restrictions should be placed on fishing activity in certain areas and periods and with certain gear and attachments.

Justification

Even though the introduction of closed areas in real time is a measure that may prove useful in very specific areas and fisheries, the general use of this measure would raise many more problems than it would solve. For multi-species fisheries, small vessels or fleets fishing far away from their home port, the measure could prove both devastating and impracticable. Closed areas and periods may be a more suitable solution where highly general measures are to be imposed.

Amendment  5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) Where conservation is seriously threatened, the Commission and Member States should be authorised to take appropriate provisional measures to be implemented in real time.

(17) Where conservation is seriously threatened, the Commission, at its own initiative or at the substantiated request of the Member States, should be authorised to take appropriate provisional measures to be implemented in real time.

Justification

Such measures are already provided for under Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. Care should be taken to avoid creating legal uncertainty in view of the possibility of discretionary use of the rules.

Amendment  6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(19) The measures necessary for the implementation of this Regulation, including specific provisions for each area covered by a Regional Advisory Council, should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of the implementing powers conferred on the Commission.

(19) The measures necessary for the implementation of this Regulation should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of the implementing powers conferred on the Commission.

Justification

The majority of Regional Advisory Councils (RACs), fisheries sectors and administrations accept the regionalisation contained in the proposal, but there is practically a unanimous view that regional regulations should also be adopted by the Council, which would mean consulting the European Parliament and the RACs.

Amendment  7

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Article 2a

 

Regional regulations

 

                                                    

The Council, on a proposal from the Commission, shall, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 37 of the Treaty, adopt the measures applicable specifically in the various regions corresponding to the various Regional Advisory Councils (RACs).

Justification

The majority of Regional Advisory Councils (RACs), fisheries sectors and administrations accept the regionalisation contained in the proposal, but there is practically a unanimous view that regional regulations should also be adopted by the Council, which would mean consulting the European Parliament and the RACs.

Amendment  8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 - point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) 'beam trawl' means a bottom trawl in which the horizontal opening of the net is provided by a beam;

(b) 'beam trawl' means a bottom trawl in which the horizontal opening of the net is provided by a beam, where a beam is a round pipe made out of steel supported by two slides; the construction is towed over the seabed;

Justification

The definition of beam trawl should be clear to everyone.

Amendment  9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 - point e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) 'codend' means the last 8 m of the towed gear measured from the codline when the mesh size is equal or more than 80 mm and means the last 20 m of the towed gear measured from the codline when mesh size is less than 80 mm;

(e) 'codend' means the last 6 m of the towed gear measured from the codline when the mesh size is equal or more than 80 mm and means the last 20 m of the towed gear measured from the codline when mesh size is less than 80 mm;

Justification

The cod end is sometimes much shorter than 8 metres.

Amendment  10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4 - paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

3a. In the case of small pelagics (sardine, anchovy, horse mackerel and mackerel) the possibility for 10% of catches to be made up of undersized fish shall be maintained.

Justification

Fishing targeting these species generally involves catches of large quantities of fish, and it is normal to have a mix of adult and undersized fish. Bearing in mind that individual fish are not separated in this type of fishery, the possibility provided for in Article 19(2)(a) of Regulation 850/1998 should be maintained.

Amendment  11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

One net rule

Combinations of nets

It shall be prohibited to carry on board, during any fishing voyage, any combination of nets of more than one range of mesh size.

 

1. The Council, on a proposal from the Commission, shall regulate cases where vessels may carry on board one or more than one combination of nets of more than one range of mesh size during the same fishing voyage.

 

2. These criteria shall take account of:

 

(a) the distance between the home port of the vessel concerned and the fishing area;

 

(b) the degree to which the fishery being practised is a multi-species fishery and the economic importance of secondary species by comparison with the target species;

 

(c) whether any of the fishing operations during a particular voyage are carried out using a net with a mesh size larger than those provided for in this Regulation.

 

3. The content of this Article shall be regulated within the framework laid down in Article 2a of this Regulation.

Justification

Even though the intention of the Commission proposal is understandable, the wording of the Article is too simplistic to allow its generalisation and has met with unanimous rejection on the part of the sector and the RACs. Some flexibility needs to be introduced so that, without losing all the elements intended by the legislator, the measure’s implementation is more closely adapted to the circumstances in the various fisheries and does not cause unacceptable economic losses for the fleet.

Amendment  12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 - paragraph 2 - point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) attach, when fishing with towed gear with a mesh size less than 80 mm, to the outside of the codend a strengthening bag. The mesh size of the strengthening bag shall be at least twice as large as that of the codend;

(a) attach, to the outside of the cod end a strengthening bag. The mesh size of the strengthening bag shall be at least twice as large as that of the cod end;

Justification

There is no scientific basis for limiting the use of a strengthening bag to only towed gear with a mesh size less than 80 mm.

Amendment  13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 - paragraph 2 - point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(ba) use strengthening bags on the outside of the codend on vessels licensed for trawl nets with a mesh size equal to or larger than 60 mm in ICES zones VIII, IX and X;

Justification

Vessels licensed to use trawls with a mesh size equal to or greater than 60 mm regularly use these devices to protect their nets.

Amendment  14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 - paragraph 3 - point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) any towed gear with a mesh size equal to or larger than 80 mm having more than 100 open meshes and less than 40 open meshes in any circumference of the codend, excluding the joining or the selvedges;

deleted

Amendment  15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 - paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. By way of derogation from paragraphs (2)(a), (3)(b), (3)(d) and (3)(e), the mesh size of 80 mm shall be replaced by 60 mm when fishing in ICES zones VIII, IX and X.

deleted

Amendment  16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 - paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The immersion time of gillnets and trammel nets shall not exceed 48 hours.

2. The immersion time of gillnets and trammel nets shall not exceed 24 hours.

Justification

Standard practice among fleets using gillnets and trammel nets, as they themselves concede, is to lower them at dawn and raise them mid-morning, so that they are never lowered for more than 20 hours. Increasing the immersion time to twice the length that is standard practice would lead to a clear increase in fishing effort and discards.

Amendment  17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 - paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Where fishing is conducted using gillnets and trammel nets, the use of more than 50 km of nets shall be prohibited.

3. Where fishing is conducted using gillnets and trammel nets, the use of more than 40 km of nets shall be prohibited.

Justification

Reducing the length of nets is a suggestion made by the sector itself as a contribution to ensuring the sustainability of fishing resources and activity.

Amendment  18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 - paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. By way of derogation from Article 8, it shall be permitted to deploy gillnets with a mesh size equal to or greater than 120 mm and less than 150 mm north of 48°N or with a mesh size equal to or greater than 100 mm and less than 130 mm south of 48°N, in waters of less than 600 metres charted depth, provided that they are no more than 100 meshes deep, have a hanging ratio of not less than 0.5, and are rigged with floats or equivalent floatation. The nets shall each be of a maximum of 5 nautical miles in length, and the total length of all nets deployed at any one time shall not exceed 25km per vessel. The maximum immersion time shall be 24 hours.

1. By way of derogation from Article 8, it shall be permitted to deploy gillnets with a mesh size equal to or greater than 120 mm and less than 150 mm north of 48°N or with a mesh size equal to or greater than 100 mm and less than 130 mm south of 48°N, in waters of less than 400 metres charted depth, provided that they are no more than 100 meshes deep, have a hanging ratio of not less than 0.5, and are rigged with floats or equivalent floatation. The nets shall each be of a maximum of 5 nautical miles in length, and the total length of all nets deployed at any one time shall not exceed 25km per vessel. The maximum immersion time shall be 24 hours unless weather conditions make hauling of the nets impossible.

Justification

In the first version there was by mistake stated that gill nets should not be more than 400 meshes deep. This was not correct. It should be 100 meshes deep.

Amendment  19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 - paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. By way of derogation from Article 8, it shall be permitted to deploy gillnets with a mesh size equal to or greater than 250 mm, in waters of less than 600 metres charted depth, provided that they are no more than 15 meshes deep, have a hanging ratio of not less than 0.33, and are not rigged with floats or other means of floatation. The nets shall each be of a maximum of 10km in length. The total length of all nets deployed at any one time shall not exceed 100 km per vessel. The maximum immersion time shall be 72 hours.

2. By way of derogation from Article 8, it shall be permitted to deploy gillnets with a mesh size equal to or greater than 250 mm, in waters of less than 600 metres charted depth, provided that they are no more than 15 meshes deep, have a hanging ratio of not less than 0.33, and are not rigged with floats or other means of floatation. The nets shall each be of a maximum of 10km in length. The total length of all nets deployed at any one time shall not exceed 60 km per vessel. The maximum immersion time shall be 72 hours.

Justification

Reducing the length of nets is a suggestion made by the sector itself as a contribution to ensuring the sustainability of fishing resources and activity.

Amendment  20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 - paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where the quantity of undersized fish caught exceeds 10% of the total quantity of the catches in any one haul, the vessel shall move away to a distance of at least five nautical miles from any position of the previous haul before continuing fishing.

1. Where the weight of undersized fish caught, in accordance with Annex I, exceeds 10% of the total weight of the catches in any one haul, and this situation recurs in a series of three consecutive hauls, the vessel shall move away to a distance of at least five nautical miles from any position of the previous haul before continuing fishing.

 

By way of derogation from the previous subparagraph, for local and inshore fisheries with particular characteristics owing to both the depth and composition of the seabed and distance from the coast, and subject to a scientific report substantiating those characteristics, the obligation to move away may be less than five nautical miles provided that it is guaranteed that fishing activity is not carried out on a concentration of juveniles.

Justification

Un único lance de pesca no aporta información suficiente para determinar la presencia de una concentración de inmaduros en una zona determinada ya que también podría deberse a un encuentro ocasional y puntual sin continuidad en el espacio-tiempo. Asimismo, en el caso de constatarse la presencia de una concentración o zona de cría de inmaduros, es necesario adaptar las distancias de seguridad para aquellos caladeros muy cercanos a la costa en los que no es posible el distanciamiento propuesto. Además, debido a las especiales características de estos caladeros, las concentraciones de inmaduros están limitadas en zonas no muy extensas que se pueden evitar con desplazamientos más moderados.

Amendment  21

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 - paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. If the minimum and/or maximum percentages of target species, excluding undersized fish of the target species, allowed to be caught with the mesh size range admissible for that species and retained on board, in any one haul have not been in agreement with the percentages laid down in detailed rules adopted in accordance with Article 22, the vessel must immediately move a minimum of 10 nautical miles from any position of the previous haul and throughout the next haul keep a minimum distance of 10 nautical miles from any position of the previous haul.

2. The Council, on a proposal from the Commission, shall determine the corresponding closed areas and periods within the framework of Article 2a of this Regulation.

Justification

Even though the introduction of closed areas in real time is a measure that may prove useful in very specific areas and fisheries, the general use of this measure would raise many more problems than it would solve. For multi-species fisheries, small vessels or fleets fishing far away from their home port, the measure could prove both devastating and impracticable. Closed areas and periods may be a more suitable solution where highly general measures are to be imposed.

Amendment  22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The catching, retention on board, the transhipment, storage, landing, sale, display or offer for sale of marine organisms caught using methods incorporating the use of explosives, poisonous or stupefying substances, electric current or any kind of projectile shall be prohibited.

The catching, retention on board, the transhipment, storage, landing, sale, display or offer for sale of marine organisms caught using methods incorporating the use of explosives, poisonous or stupefying substances, electric current or any kind of projectile shall be prohibited, except pulse trawl fishing.

Amendment  23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 - paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Where the conservation of certain species or fishing grounds is seriously threatened, including where a high congestion of juvenile fish is detected, and where any delay would result in damage which would be difficult to repair, a Member State may take appropriate conservation measures in respect of the waters under its sovereignty or jurisdiction. The Member State concerned shall ensure that such measures do not discriminate against fishing vessels from other Member States.

1. Where the conservation of certain species or fishing grounds is seriously threatened, including where a high congestion of juvenile fish is detected, and where any delay would result in damage which would be difficult to repair, a Member State may take appropriate conservation measures in respect of the waters under its sovereignty or jurisdiction. The Member State concerned shall ensure that such measures do not discriminate against fishing vessels from other Member States. Before such measures are implemented, the appropriate Regional Advisory Councils and the Commission shall be consulted.

Justification

Consultation by the Commission should take place to prevent competition distortion. (Consultation of the appropriate RACs is necessary to involve the sector.)

Amendment  24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 - paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where any delay in reducing or eliminating discards would result in damage which would be difficult to repair, a Member State may take appropriate non-discriminatory conservation measures in respect of the waters under its sovereignty or jurisdiction in accordance with Article 16.

2. Where any delay in reducing or eliminating discards would result in damage which would be difficult to repair, the Commission, at its own initiative or at the substantiated request of a Member State, may take appropriate non-discriminatory conservation measures in respect of the waters under the sovereignty or jurisdiction of the Member State concerned. Before such measures are taken, the Commission and the relevant Regional Advisory Council shall be consulted

Justification

Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 already provides for an urgent procedure that enables the Commission to act in this type of situation. The new wording contained in the proposal would only add serious legal uncertainties, since it does not provide any mechanism to guarantee that the Member State will not use these measures in a discriminatory manner or for political rather than scientific purposes, which has regrettably already occurred on too many occasions in the past.

Justification

Consultation by the Commission should take place to prevent competition distortion. (Consultation of the appropriate RACs is necessary to involve the sector.)

Amendment  25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Article 21a

 

Future regulation

 

Rules governing the regulation of the following elements of the technical measures shall be adopted by a Council regulation:

 

(a) the minimum and maximum percentages of the target species among the living aquatic resources retained on board;

 

(b) the mesh size ranges admissible for each target species;

 

(c) provisions for the reduction or elimination of discards and the improvement of the selectivity of fishing gear;

 

(d) measures concerning the restriction of fishing activities in specific periods and/or specific areas referred to in Article 2 on the basis of the best scientific information available in order to protect marine habitats in those areas.

Justification

These important questions should be addressed by a Council Regulation.

Amendment  26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Detailed rules for the implementation of this Regulation shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 30(2) of Regulation No 2371/2002. These rules shall lie down in particular:

Other technical measures to implement this Regulation to protect marine habitats or fisheries resources shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 30(2) of Regulation No 2371/2002.

(a) the minimum and maximum percentages of the target species among the living aquatic resources retained on board;

 

(b) the mesh size ranges admissible for each target species;

 

(c) provisions for the reduction or elimination of discards and the improvement of the selectivity of fishing gear;

 

(d) measures concerning the restriction of fishing activities in specific periods and/or specific areas referred to in Article 2 on the basis of the best scientific information available in order to protect marine habitats in those areas;

 

(e) other technical measures to protect marine habitats or fishery resources.

 

Amendment  27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 - paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

2a. The entry into force of this Regulation shall provide for a period for the adjustment of fleets and the adoption of supplementary rules.


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

This proposal intends to simplify, in a comprehensive package of technical measures, the current regulatory framework concerning the conservation of fisheries resources through technical measures by replacing the following regulations which have been modified at least ten times. The priority is to establish a new set of simpler and clearer rules.

-     Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms(1).

-     Council Regulation (EC) No 2549/2000 of 17 November 2000 establishing additional technical measures for the recovery of the stock of cod in the Irish Sea (ICES Division VIIa)(2).

The origin of this proposal are the Council conclusions adopted on 21 June 2004, in which the Council invited the Commission to present a new proposal on technical measures in the Atlantic, to replace Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms in order to promote more environmentally-friendly fishing methods.

This package of technical measures is intended to achieve the protection of juvenile fish, and an important part of these measures is designed to limit their capture, for example, by measures to improve the selectivity of fishing gear or fixing certain closed seasons/areas. Other measures are intended to protect certain species or ecosystems by limiting fishing effort, by the adoption of closures. The need to reduce discards is also reflected in the adoption of appropriate technical measures.

The approach of this Regulation is different from the Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98. The idea is to adopt now a framework regulation which concentrates on measures that would be expected to be permanent. It would also, however, lay down the procedures to be applied when dealing with measures that would be expected to evolve rather quickly and with measures that are very technical. The Regulation should favour the application of a procedure for adoption of new rules through commitology procedure.

This system proposes a new legislative package, which not only simplifies current complex rules but also introduces specific provisions for each 'RAC area', reflecting regional differences. Such a legislative proposal implies a more regionalised approach in order to improve their effectiveness. A comprehensive and coherent package with the right balance between measures generally applicable in all areas and those specific to the localised RAC areas will be proposed, namely one framework Council Regulation with general principles and provisions, and the complementary Commission Regulations with specific technical rules for each 'RAC area'.

The proposal applies to commercial and recreational fishing in all European waters except for the Mediterranean Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, and in fisheries for highly migratory fish stocks in all waters, for which specific rules apply. It will bring together most of the existing technical measures in various Community regulations for the Atlantic and the North Sea.

In general the new proposal orientation is broadly similar to the 1998 legislation in terms of type of technical measures, the novelties are the increase the number of measures relating to gear and handling, such as maximum length, depth of use and immersion time for gillnets

The new proposal take into account a new reality set up by the 2002 reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, the regional advisory councils, as a relevant consultative organism between the Commission and the stakeholders.

Observations by the rapporteur

The amendments proposed by the rapporteur are intended first and foremost to clarify a number of ambiguous points in the Commission proposal. They also seek to amend articles to which there are manifest practical objections in such a way as to overcome the objections.

The Commission proposals refer only to minimum landing sizes of fish species listed in Annex 1 to the proposed regulation. A literal interpretation could be that minimum sizes only have to be enforced for the species listed there. That, of course, cannot be the intention, and the rapporteur therefore considers that species not listed in Annex 1 should also not be landed below a certain minimum size. Moreover, species for which minimum sizes have been decided by a producer organisation should be included.

Simplification of the rules applicable is one of the purposes of the Commission's new proposals. Bearing this aim in mind, the rapporteur has sought to unify the rules where different measures still apply to different areas.

Lastly, the new regulation proposed by the Commission also contains articles which are flagrantly incompatible with practice. So far, nearly all the nets in use are made from knitted and knotted twines. The rapporteur considers that it is therefore unrealistic to expect the fishing industry, in the case of nets with a mesh size of 80 mm or greater, to use only diamond meshes or keep all bars of the mesh of equal length. Because of traction forces and for example as a result of nets snagging on wrecks on the seabed, meshes may sometimes not be entirely diamond-shaped. In the rapporteur's view, it would be excessive, in such cases, to require that not a single mesh in the net should deviate from the pure diamond shape. This could in practice result in large fines for something which has virtually no impact on the chances of escape of small fish.

The rapporteur warns that the most important elements concerning the technical measures should be adopted by Council regulation as proposed in Amendment 18. In this way, the Council and the Parliament are properly involved in the adoption of the regulations.

(1)

    OJ L 125, 27.4.1998, p. 1

(2)

    OJ L 292, 21.11.2000, p. 5. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1456/2001 of 16 July 2001


PROCEDURE

Title

Conservation of fisheries resources through technical measures

References

COM(2008)0324 – C6-0282/2008 – 2008/0112(CNS)

Date of consulting Parliament

18.7.2008

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

PECH

2.9.2008

Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

2.9.2008

 

 

 

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

ENVI

25.6.2008

 

 

 

Rapporteur(s)

       Date appointed

Cornelis Visser

2.7.2008

 

 

Date adopted

31.3.2009

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

15

0

0

Members present for the final vote

Elspeth Attwooll, Iles Braghetto, Paulo Casaca, Avril Doyle, Emanuel Jardim Fernandes, Carmen Fraga Estévez, Hélène Goudin, Heinz Kindermann, Rosa Miguélez Ramos, Philippe Morillon, Ulrike Rodust, Struan Stevenson, Catherine Stihler, Margie Sudre, Cornelis Visser

Substitute(s) present for the final vote

Raül Romeva i Rueda

Date tabled

2.4.2009

Last updated: 15 April 2009Legal notice