Activities of Ska KELLER related to 2023/2030(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1100/2007 establishing measures for the recovery of the stock of European eel
Amendments (29)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
Citation 10 a (new)
– having regard to the European Commission proposal of 22 June 2022 for a regulation on nature restoration ((COM(2022) 304 final),
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 b (new)
Citation 10 b (new)
– Having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 9 June 2021 on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (2020/2273(INI)),
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Eel Regulation lays down amongst others an obligation for Member States to develop national Eel Management Plans (EMP), with a uniform action targetobjective and an internationally coordinated, triannual monitoring and evaluation process, as well as obligations to reduce fishing effort;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas distributed control under central coordination is a feature of the Eel Regulation; whereas eel stock management is too complex for a one- size-fits-all approach; whereas the Eel Regulation gives flexibility to Member States to adjust their national EMPs to local circumstances and national priorities to the extent that does not undermine the objective of stock recovery;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the Commission evaluated whether the Eel Regulation was fit for purpose in 2020, concluding that it was relevant and fit for purpose, while adding that further ambition was needed to implement the Regulation with a greater focus on non-fisheries related measures; whereas the Commission noted that despite progress in reducing fishing effort and a concerted attempt to develop a pan- EU management framework, the status of the European eel remains critical;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas the European eel is listed as ‘critically endangered’ under the IUCN Red List; whereas the recovery of the stock is still far from certain; whereas it is widely recognised that the recovery of the European eel will take many decades, given the long life-span of the species;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Ib. whereas the Commission proposal for a nature restoration law proposed the restoration of the natural connectivity of rivers and natural functions of the related floodplains, including the objective of restoring at least 25 000 km of rivers into free-flowing rivers in the Union by 2030;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)
Recital I c (new)
Ic. whereas the European Parliament requested in its 2021 resolution the inclusion in the nature restoration plans for the restoration of at least 25 000 km of free-flowing rivers in the EU through the removal of barriers and the restoration of floodplains;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to makeintain the Eel Regulation as the core policy for eel protection once againthe recovery of eel stocks, ensuring a holistic and coherent approach; reiterates that the Eel Regulation was found to be fit for purpose by the Commission evaluation of 2020; is of the opinion that better implementation of the Eel Regulation and additional actions by Member States are needed;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reaffirms the Eel Regulation’s objective of the recovery of the eel stock to 40 % compared to pristine conditions and its main aim of reducing mortality so as to allow for this recovery; advises that it is essential to focus on the short-term achievable mortality target in order to reach the long-term biomass objective; highlights the fact that ‘pristine conditions’ can be hard to define; points out that the 40 % target is likely to be unachievable because of habitat losses, but that it is the standard for deriving the mortality reduction targetpoints out that in order to reach the 40 % target, habitat loss needs to be addressed;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that the decline in stock recruitment for glass and yellow eel has halted since the adoption of the Eel Regulation, indicating that the Eel Regulation is showing positive preliminary results, but but remains since several years below any limit reference points; highlights that recovery will be a long- term process over several decades, which means that continued monitoring and action will be necessary;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that managing the eel stock is too complex for a one-sided marine- oriented approach; highlights the fact that in addition to focusing on annual fishing opportunities does notother important factors should be taken into account important factors such as migration barriers, habitat quality and illegal catches and trade; underlines that the Eel Regulation is holistic and comprehensive, captures both the marine and freshwater life stages of the eel and addresses both fisheries and non- fisheries impacts; points out, in addition, that non- fisheries impacts may be bigger than the fisheries impacts and that far too little attention has been given thus far to non-fishery anthropogenic mortalities; is of the opinion that measures taken outside of the context of the Eel Regulation undermine the coherence of adopted policy; deplores, therefore, Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 of 30 January 2023 fixing for 2023 the fishing oppshould be given more attention; recalls that the most recent ICES advises for 2023 zero catches in all habitats for both recreational and commercial catches including catches of glass eels for restocking and aquaculture, that all non-fisheries related anthropogenic mortunalities for certain fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, as well as fixing for 2023 and 2024 such fishing opportunities for certain deep-sea fish stocks, restricting eel fisheries with a 6-month closing periodshould be zero, and that the quantity and quality of eel habitats should be restored including restoring connectivity and the physical, chemical, and biological properties of the habitats;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls for an evaluation by ICES of the Eel Management Plans regarding their conformity with the precautionary approach, in line with the objectives of the CFP;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls, therefore, for the creation of an eel-specific advisory councilgroup with representatives from the Member States and, the fishing sector, recreational fishers, water managers, hydro-power companies, conservationistsivil society and other relevant parties, ensuring full and balanced representation of all relevant stakeholders; suggests that this advisory council should be tasked with advising the Commission on the implementation of the Eel Regulation, providing feedback to Member States on their EMPs, exchanging information between the different parties and evaluating the progress on implementation at national and European level;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes, in this regard, that the Commission’s intention to establish an expert group, as announc highlighted in its action plan on marine ecosystems, with the aim of bringing together fisheries and infrastructure experts from the national ministries; asks the Commission to take the above suggestions on board when setting up this expert group; portance and urgency to improve conservation for critically endangered species that are commercially fished, such as the European eel, and to take a comprehensive approach covering different policies for their management and conservation;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Regrets the fact that only one Member State has submitted an updated EMP for approval since the adoption of the Eel Regulation; urges the Member States to regularly update their EMPs, based on the best available scientific knowledge and advice; encourages the Member States to put concrete targets and intermediate deadlines in their updated EMPs; stresses that the recovery of the eel is a long-term process that requires continuous effort and that a one-time management plan will not be sufficient;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Regrets the fact that the number of Member States adhering to the reporting requirement under Article 9(1) of the Eel Regulation has declined over the years; reminds the Member States of their obligations under Article 9(1); highlights the fact that it is vital to gather as much information and data as possible in order to be able to take appropriate measures; highlights that a lack of data does not prevent Member States to act;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Welcomes the measures taken at the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) to improve eel management and research in the Mediterranean;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights the important role that eel fisheries play in society, with eel fishing being both a socio-economic activity and a cultural, centuries-old tradition; considers that eel fishing has reduced significantly in the past decade but the state of the stock remains critical; calls on the Commission and the Member States to refrain as much as possible from placing further restrictions on fisheries; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’, while a full closure of fisheries could lead to more illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishingmonitor existing fishing restrictions and to propose further actions where necessary, based on the best available scientific advice; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians of the sea; points out that eel fisheries carry out a small-scale, artisanal activity and are often located in remote areas, where fishers play an important environmental and social role;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Expresses its hope that where further restrictions on fisheries might be necessary, this is done in the context of the national EMPs and not in the form of ad hoc Council decisions, and based on prior socio-economic impact assessmentsbased on the best available scientific advice, and with appropriate compensation measures in line with EMFAF provisions for fishers affected by closures, especially the small- scale sector;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Reaffirms that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; is of the viewhighlights that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking; highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an intconsidered as a short to medium term measure that should be phased out as natural recruitment and water course connectivity improves; highlights that restocking is not a consernvational level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level; is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2-3 % of all glass eels); stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking measure and should not be used as a replacement for adequate protection and conservation measures; recalls that the most recent ICES advises in for 2023 zero catches including catches of glass eels for restocking and aquaculture;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Member States to give flexibility to fishers in determining the most suitable periods to fish, which can differ per country; encourages the Member States, in this regard, to consider, in consultation with fishers, the use of quota systems, in order to keep fishing at responsible levels; highlights that one of the advantages of a quota system would be that it enables fishers to choose to fish at times when it is commercially interesting to do so, while limiting catches to a responsible levelkeep fishing at responsible levels in line with the best available scientific advice; adds that this could contribute to preventing overfishing;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines that there are fish- friendly alternatives on the market to make water pumps and hydro-power stations passable for fish; calls on the Member States to make fish safety and welfare a mandatory requirement for new installations and for old ones when they are replaced; points out that a common methodology might be needed in order to determine and certify when pumps can be considered fish friendly; highlights that the existing Royal Netherlands Standardisation Institute (NEN) standard 87759 in the Netherlands could serve as an example; _________________ 9 NEN 8775:2020+C1:2022 nl.
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Encourages the Member States to continue with trap and transferassisted migration projects as a temporary solution for silver eel escapement, in case structural solutions are not possible in the short term;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. EncouraUrges the Member States also to take measures against other anthropogenic mortality factors, such as pollution and parasites, especially from agricultural fertilizers, and parasites, and effects of climate change; recalls that as a part of the Farm to Fork strategy, Member States should reduce nutrient losses by at least 50% by 2030; urges Member States to address gaps and lags in environmental legislation; highlights further to address quarantine rules for glass eels to prevent the spread of parasites during restocking;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Highlights the fact that improved transparency and traceability for caught glass eels is an important way of combating IUU practices and that certification schemes based on independent verifications and internationally agreed standards are an important tool to ensure the legality of catches; calls on the Member States to make public their restocking plans so that illegal trade flows of glass eels can be better identified and targeted;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls that much is unknown about the eel, including its spawning process and the exact reasons for the stock decline; calls, therefore, for more scientific research, with sufficient funding and human resources, into the status of the stockeel population and the reasons for its decline; suggests that research should also look into pollutants as well as the effects of climate change, for example in the Gulf Stream to and from the Sargasso Sea;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Points out that there is a disconnect between the implementation of the Eel Regulation and the ICES annual advice on fishing opportunities, should be harmonised since the latter is based on the glass eel trendand yellow eel recuitment and not on the escapement of silver eel (40 % target); calls for this to be harmonisedhighlights the need to improve recuitment data including on international level;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission and the, relevant Member States and contracting parties to have an ambitious and realisticscience-based General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean management plan for eel; believes that it is highly desirable for this plan to be aligned with the Eel Regulation;