WRITTEN QUESTION E-2288/99 by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Exotic animals.
C 219 E/140 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 1. 8. 2000 Co-incineration can reduce the quantity of waste needing to be transported to landfill sites. The use of the energy content of materials sorted at source which are classified as waste, but which emit harmless combustion gases when burnt, contributes greatly to sustainable development. 1. What is the Council doing to ensure that the drafting of the directive takes into account the efficient sorting of waste at source in Finland and the use of energy this makes possible? 2. Is it possible that the authorities supervising incineration could be given wider powers to be flexible in individual cases, where this is justified in the light of the type of waste and the technical level of the installation? Reply (31 January 2000) As the Member of Parliament may know, the Commission proposal on incineration of waste was very carefully examined by the Council, taking into consideration the different situations in the Member States. The Council reached a political agreement during its meeting in June 1999. The Council has formally adopted its common position on 25 November 1999, and the transmission to the European Parliament has been done on the occasion of its plenary on 1-2 December 1999. As the Member of Parliament may note from the common position, the Council has taken due account of his concerns in that incineration or co-incineration of harmless material such as vegetable waste from agriculture and forestry or wood waste is excluded from the scope of the Directive. Moreover, it is stipulated that the heat generated during the incineration or co-incineration process should be recovered as far as practicable. As far as measurements are concerned, periodical instead of continuous measurements may be allowed by the supervising authorities subject to certain conditions for hydrogen chloride (HCl), hydrogen fluoride (HF) and sulphur dioxide (SO2); moreover, the frequency of measurements for heavy metals, dioxins and furans have, provided some very strict conditions are fulfilled, also been reduced. (2000/C 219 E/177) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2288/99 by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission (13 December 1999) Subject: Exotic animals Council Regulation (EC) 338/97 (1) of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein contains provisions governing the trade in and transport of species of wild fauna and flora. The number of animals which die during transport is to be monitored by the Community, and where appropriate import restrictions may be imposed. How many animals of what species have died during transport since the entry into force of Regulation 338/97? Have import restrictions been imposed in this connection? (1) OJ L 61, 3. 3. 1997, p. 1. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (11 January 2000) Under Article 39 3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 939/97 of 26 May 1997 laying down detailed rules concerning the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 on the protection of species of 1. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 219 E/141 wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1), Member States maintain where possible records of the percentage of specimens of species listed in Annexes A and B to Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97, which were dead on arrival in the Community. The establishment of these percentages has appeared to be difficult at Community level. However, most of the Member States, in order to improve the monitoring of the mortality rate of live animals concerned, are participating now in an investigation programme proposed by the CITES animal committee by which customs involved in inspection of live specimens have to declare mortality at the time of import for a selected number of more frequently traded mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians. Information provided under this monitoring system should be available as from this year. Information gathered by the Belgian customs authorities during the period 1994-1996 revealed a mortality percentage for all bird species of 3 % (with a mortality rate for parrots of 1 %) and mammals near 0 %. No import restrictions based on the criterion of mortality during transport have been envisaged up to now. (1) OJ L 140, 31. 5. 1997. (2000/C 219 E/178) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2289/99 by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission (13 December 1999) Subject: Whaling in Russia According to the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS), between 30 and 50 white whales (belugas) have been killed in the past few months in the Sea of Okhotsk. The blubber and meat were exported to Japan. A further 12 animals were caught alive to be exported to dolphinariums worldwide. Commercial whaling has been prohibited since 1986. Now the Russian government is permitting the hunting of belugas in the Sea of Okhotsk and the export of meat and blubber to Japan. In other words, the trade in products from small whales has begun again after many years. Is the Commission aware of this? If so, what measures does it propose to take? Will the Commission take measures to bring about an immediate end to the import of white whale products and live belugas to Japan? If so, what? Will the Commission take measures against the further killing and capture of white whales by Russia? If so, what? Will the Commission take measures to withdraw export licences and to ensure that all white whales captured alive by Russia are immediately released? If so, what? Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (11 January 2000) The Commission is aware of reports on recent white whale hunting by Russian vessels