WRITTEN QUESTION E-1051/00 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Minimum landing size for flatfish under EU Regulation 850/98.
C 72 E/16 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 6. 3. 2001 integrity of an official, the Where there are serious unfounded accusations against the professional administration is required under Article 24 of the Staff Regulations to take all necessary steps to restore the good name of the official concerned. In such cases the administration enjoys a wide discretion, subject to review by the Community judicature, regarding the choice of the ways and means of providing the official with assistance. It must refute those allegations and do everything possible to restore the good name of the official concerned. Assistance under Article 24 can therefore take various forms depending on the type of threat or action and the wishes of the victim. Under Article 17 officials are required to exercise the greatest discretion with regard to all facts and information coming to their knowledge in the course or in connection with the performance of their duties. Secret information acquired by a member of the OLAF staff should therefore not be used for any other purpose than the execution of the tasks conferred to the official. It is for the Director of the Office to take the necessary organisational measures if he considers that potential ethical conflicts could arise between the duties of an official and his activities in a trade union. (2001/C 72 E/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1051/00 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission (4 April 2000) Subject: Minimum landing size for flatfish under EU Regulation 850/98 Annex XII of the new EU Regulation 850/98 (1) has omitted to specify the minimum landing size for various species of flatfish (turbot, brill, lemon sole, witch flounder, flounder and yellowtail flounder), as the previous regulation had done. Will the Commission say: 1. 2. Is this omission accidental, or deliberate? In the latter case, why did it take this step? Does it agree that there should be a minimum landing size for every species of fish destined for 3. consumption, so that the fish are able to spawn at least once, thereby preserving stocks? 4. Is it aware that undersized fish cannot be marketed owing to the lack of flesh? Does it agree therefore that the minimum size for plaice should not be lowered to below 25 cm if it 5. is to qualify as a fish for consumption? (1) OJ L 318, 27. 11. 1998, p. 63. Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (31 May 2000) The omission is deliberate and was agreed by Member States during debate leading to the revision of the technical measures package for the north-east Atlantic as laid down in 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. The major thrust of the Commission in establishing the revised technical measures package was to improve, wherever possible and to the extent possible, the selectivity of fishing gears with respect to the major fish species in Community waters. With some minor exceptions, the fish species referred to in Annex XII of Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 are the species which support the major fisheries. Again to the extent possible, the Commission then attempted to establish minimum landing sizes for these species in relation to the selectivity of the fishing gears used in their capture. 6. 3. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 72 E/17 The flatfish species listed by the Honourable Member are not major species. Individuals of these species will be retained by fishing gears deployed primarily to catch the major species. If retained and then returned to the sea, almost all fish, including those listed by the Honorable Member, are either dead or moribund. There is little or no conservation effect to be gained by discarding. To establish a minimum landing size for each species to ensure that individuals of each species were able to spawn at least once would imply adoption of very large mesh sizes to ensure that individuals of any species are not caught, and therefore killed, until they reach the size of first maturity. To provide the conditions suggested by the Honourable Member for plaice, for example, would require adoption of a mesh size in excess of 130 millimetre (mm). Unfortunately, this mesh size would retain few sole. Plaice are very often caught simultaneously with sole for which the optimum mesh size is 80 mm. If the latter mesh size is used in the mixed plaice and sole fishery, plaice of lengths 17 centimetre (cm) and above will be retained. The size at first maturity is well above 17 cm. There is no satisfactory solution to this problem and to many other similar problems in other mixed fisheries. Undersizedí fish should not be landed but should be discarded into the sea because they are of a length less than that defined in Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98. Where no minimum size is defined, however, any fish may be landed but there is no obligation to do so. If small fish can find no market, then fishermen may discard them. However, if a market can be found it appears preferable to land and sell such fish rather than return them to the sea, dead or moribund. Many plaice are caught simultaneously with sole in fisheries operating with 80 mm mesh size. Under these conditions, plaice of lengths equal to and greater than 17 cm will be retained. This was the Commissionís basis for its original proposal for a minimum size of 17 cm for plaice. The compromise reached established a minimum size of 22 cm. If, therefore, a minimum size of 25 cm is now established, all plaice of between 17 and 24 cm should be returned to the sea, dead or moribund. This would contribute little or nothing to the conservation of plaice. It should also be pointed out that there is no qualification of fish as áfish for consumptioní. With the exception of some conditions relating to herring, fish landed may be used for any purpose. (2001/C 72 E/020) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1052/00 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission (4 April 2000) Subject: EU Regulation 850/98: monitoring compliance with the provisions laid down in Title III, Article 29 (maximum engine power of 221 kW) In order to protect flatfish stocks EU Regulation 850/98 (1) makes provision for áboxesí within which the maximum engine power that may be used by fishing vessels is 221 kW. Germanic Lloyd has, however, stated that despite controls on and the sealing of engines, all types of engine and particularly those fitted with electronic injection devices can be manipulated to increase the engine power over the maximum permitted. In view of the above, will the Commission say: 1. Does it consider the controls on engine power to be sufficient, although there are indications that engines can be manipulated, despite being sealed? 2. Does it agree that technical rules (for instance, the number of chains placed in front of the nets) can be monitored more easily and more rapidly and are less open to manipulation and can contribute just as much to conserving stocks?