9 Amendments of Manuel PIZARRO related to 2019/2158(INI)
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights the importance of taking into consideration morphological and geographical characteristics of areas in where OWFs should be settled in.
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Stresses that the Mediterranean Sea should be evaluated separately taking into account its own characteristics with regard to the potential and the requirements for the development of offshore renewable energy.
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that potential artificial reef effects are in particular not confirmed for commercial species and are limited to the operational phase of an offshore wind turbine and that decommissioning may make any benefits temporary;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Proposes to assess the combination and integration of OWFs within maritime protected areas (MPAs) against clearly defined habitat and biodiversity conservation objectives, including those pertaining to fisheries resources;prohibit the settlement of OWFs in MPAs, which role is fundamental to preserve biodiversity
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses that today, fishing activities (active or passive) in OWFs are currently limited or prohibited in mostall Member States;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is concerned about the fact that, separately from prohibitions and restrictions to fishing activities, fishers tend to avoid fishing in OWFs even if access is permitted because of the risk of accidental damage, snagging and loss of fishing gear, and that consequently the fear of potential exposure to prosecution is a source of concern that hinders co- existence;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. States that maritime spatial planning must play a key role, by distinguishing each maritime area with regard to its own characteristics (Baltic Sea, North Sea,Channel, Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea) and has to put greater emphasis on the assessment of achieving co-location options, which is of the utmost importance in achieving a win- win situation for both sustainable fisheries and the offshore energy sector and including the effective participation of fisheries in the decision making process (as opposed to the overly vague notions of “consultation” and “observers”), the satisfaction of commitments made and the prior resolution of usage conflicts;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Highlights the importance to vehicle investments on research and development of tidal energy conversion systems, which could have a less damaging impact on economical, social and envirnomental aspects
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Notes that further EU legislation might beis required in casegiven that evidence suggests that Member States’ maritime spatial planning does not guarantee the fair inclusion of fisheries;