2011/0364(COD) | [ParlTrack]

Changes: 2023/08/03links.National_parliaments.url, events.docs, docs.docs.url, 2021/12/18events.type, events.docs, events, docs.docs.url, 2020/01/19docs.body, committees, events.docs.url, docs.docs.url, 2019/07/06council, procedure.other_consulted_institutions, otherinst, procedure.instrument, events, procedure.dossier_of_the_committee, activities, procedure.final.url, procedure.subject, committees, docs, other, procedure.Mandatory_consultation_of_other_institutions, commission, procedure.summary, 2015/11/04activities.docs.celexid, 2015/11/04activities.docs.celexid, links.European_Commission.title

View current state | View Changes for this date

Procedure completed

2011/0364(COD) Fish stock conservation: removal of fins of sharks on board vessels

Role	Committee	Rapporteur	Shadows
Opinion	ENVI	ZANONI Andrea (ALDE)
Lead	PECH	PATRÃO NEVES Maria do Céu (PPE)	ARSENIS Kriton (S&D), DAVIES Chris (ALDE), ROMEVA I RUEDA Raül (Verts/ALE), STEVENSON Struan (ECR)

Lead committee dossier: PECH/7/07848
Legal Basis TFEU 043-p2

Subjects

3.15.01 Fish stocks, conservation of fishery resources

Links

Activites

2013/06/29 Final act published in Official Journal
- Regulation 2013/605
- OJ L 181 29.06.2013, p. 0001
2013/06/12 Final act signed
2013/06/12 End of procedure in Parliament
#3244
2013/06/06 Council Meeting
2013/06/06 Act adopted by Council after Parliament's 1st reading
2012/11/22 Results of vote in Parliament
- Results of vote in Parliament
- T7-0449/2012 summary
  
  The European Parliament adopted by 566 votes to 47, with 16 abstentions, a legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 on the removal of fins of sharks on board vessels. Parliament’s position at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure amends the Commission proposal as follows: A necessary element of the Union’s marine ecosystem: Parliament underlines that shark fins do not constitute a traditional ingredient of the European diet, but sharks do constitute a necessary element of the Union’s marine ecosystem. Therefore, their management and conservation, as well as, in general, the promotion of a sustainably managed fishing sector for the benefit of the environment and of the people working in the sector, should be the priority. A new recital stresses that current scientific knowledge, based on the examination of shark catch rates, generally indicates that many stocks of sharks are under serious threat, although the situation is not the same for all of the species or even for the same species in different maritime zones. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), more than 25 % of all pelagic shark species, of which over 50 % are large oceanic-pelagic sharks, are threatened. On-board storage of shark fins: Members want to do away with the derogations to the European ban on removing shark fins and throwing their carcasses over board. The amended text stipulates that to facilitate on board storage, shark fins may be partially sliced through and folded against the carcass but that they must not be removed from the carcass before landing. Reports: where fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State catch, retain on-board , tranship or land sharks, the flag Member State shall, in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) Nº 1224/2009 establishing a community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) Nº 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) Nº 1224/2009, send to the Commission, annually, by 1 May at the latest, a comprehensive report on the implementation of this Regulation during the previous year. The report shall describe the monitoring of compliance with the Regulation of vessels in the Union and non-Union waters, and the enforcement measures taken by Member States in cases of non-compliance. In particular, the following information shall be provided: · the number, date and place of inspections carried out; · the number and nature of cases of non-compliance detected, including a full identification of the vessel(s) involved and the penalty applied for each case of non-compliance; · the total landings by species (weight/number) and by port.
2012/11/21 Debate in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament
2012/10/01 Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
- A7-0295/2012 summary
  
  The Committee on Fisheries adopted the report by Maria do Céu PATRÃO NEVES (EPP, PT) on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 on the removal of fins of sharks on board vessels. The parliamentary committee recommends that the European Parliament’s position at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should be to amend the Commission proposal as follows: A necessary element of the Union’s marine ecosystem: Members wish to underline that shark fins do not constitute a traditional ingredient of the European diet, but sharks do constitute a necessary element of the Union’s marine ecosystem. Therefore, their management and conservation, as well as in general, the promotion of a sustainably managed fishing sector for the benefit of the environment and of the people working in the sector, should be the priority. Special fishing permit: this is defined as a prior fishing authorisation issued and managed in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy. The text has been recovered from the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 and altered following the two main options of this report, i.e. to strengthen control and to narrow the present derogation. On-board storage of shark fins: to facilitate on board storage, shark fins may be partially sliced through and folded against the carcass or, in the cases indicated in Article 4 (derogations), completely removed from the carcasses. According to Members, completely removing the fins from the carcasses can save room on board, working hours, and also fuel because vessels have a longer autonomy at sea. Reports: where fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State catch, retain on-board, tranship or land sharks, the flag Member State shall send to the Commission, annually, by 1 May at the latest, a comprehensive annual report on the implementation of this Regulation during the previous year. The report shall describe the monitoring of compliance with the Regulation of vessels in the EU and non-EU waters, and the enforcement measures taken by Member States in cases of noncompliance. In particular, the following information shall be provided: the number, date and place of inspections carried out; the number and nature of cases of noncompliance detected, including a full identification of the vessel(s) involved and the penalty applied for each case of noncompliance; the total landings by species (weight/number) and by port.
2012/09/19 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
#3155
2012/03/19 Council Meeting
- 3155 summary
  
  The Council adopted a general approach supporting the landing of all sharks with their fins attached, as proposed by the Commission (doc 6719/2/12). The Council will now await the European Parliament's position at first reading before formalising its own position.
2011/11/30 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2011/11/21 Legislative proposal published
- COM(2011)0798 summary
  
  PURPOSE: to amend Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 on the removal of fins of sharks on board vessels in order to ensure proper management and conservation of shark stocks. PROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council. BACKGROUND: Council Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 on the removal of fins of sharks on board vessels establishes a general prohibition to the practice of 'shark finning', whereby the fins are removed from sharks, with the remainder of the shark being discarded at sea. In recent years, some shark populations have been severely targeted and put under serious threat as a result of a dramatic increase in demand for shark products, fins in particular. The EU has made several international commitments to protect sharks, in line with the Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, and in particular under the International Plan of Action on Sharks (IPOA-Sharks)adopted by the FAO in 1999. The FAO IPOA was the basis for the 2009 Commission Communication on a European Community Action Plan for the Conservation and Management of Sharks, whereby the Union committed itself to adopt all necessary measures for the conservation of sharks and to minimize waste and discards from shark catches. IMPACT ASSESSMENT: the European Commission held a public consultation of stakeholders and the general public, between 2010 and 2011, in order to gather information on the most appropriate manner in which Council Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 should be amended. The results of the consultation show that the 'fins-remain-attached' approach is regarded as the preferred option. LEGAL BASIS: Article 43 (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). CONTENT: Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 allows Member States to issue special fishing permits allowing processing on board, whereby shark fins can be removed from the bodies. In order to ensure the correspondence between the weight of fins and bodies, a 'fin-to-carcass' weight ratio is established. However, given that such processing takes place on board vessels, fins and bodies can be landed in different ports. Inspectors must rely on logbook records to determine whether or not the fin allowance has been respected. In such cases, and given the varying levels of control and enforcement in ports around the world where such landings take place, 'shark finning' can and does occur, and is often difficult to detect, let alone prove in legal proceedings. Under these circumstances, the collection of data (e.g. species identification, population structure) underpinning scientific advice for the establishment of fisheries management and conservation measures is hampered. The Scientific, Technical, and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) acknowledges the problem of shark finning and calls for its eradication without exemption, and advises that all elasmobranch species should be landed with fins /wings attached. Regional Fisheries Management Organisations are increasingly addressing the issue of shark finning and their scientific bodies are showing preference for the landing of sharks with their fins naturally attached to the body. Therefore, in order to ensure proper management and conservation of shark stocks, it is appropriate to amend Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003. BUDGETARY IMPACT: the proposal has no impact on the EU’s budget.
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/', 'title': 'Maritime Affairs and Fisheries'}, DAMANAKI Maria

Documents

Legislative proposal published: COM(2011)0798
Debate in Council: 3155
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A7-0295/2012
Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T7-0449/2012
: Regulation 2013/605
: OJ L 181 29.06.2013, p. 0001

Amendments	Dossier
20	2011/0364(COD) 2012/03/08 ENVI 8 amendments... Amendment 11 # Claudiu Ciprian TĂNĂSESCU Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 (2) Fish belonging to the taxon Elasmobranchii, which includ~~ing~~es sharks, skates ~~and ray~~, rays and similar species are generally very vulnerable to ~~over~~exploitation due to their life -cycle characteristics of slow growth, late maturity and small number of young. INon-sustainable shark fishing has endangered the balance of marine ecosystems and, in recent years, some shark populations have been severely targeted and put under serious threat as a result of a dramatic increase in demand for shark products, fins in particular. Growing demand for shark fin preparations and the high price they fetch have also led to an increase in illegal fishing. Amendment 12 # Kartika Tamara LIOTARD Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 (2) Fish belonging to the taxon Elasmobranchii, including sharks, skates and rays are generally very vulnerable to overexploitation due to their life cycle characteristics of slow growth, late maturity and small number of young. In recent years, some shark populations have been severely targeted by vessels flying the flag of a Member State or third countries in maritime waters under the sovereignty or the jurisdiction of Member States or in other maritime waters and put under serious threat as a result of a dramatic increase in demand for shark products, fins in particular. Amendment 13 # Kartika Tamara LIOTARD Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 a (new) (2a) Shark fins do not constitute a traditional ingredient of the European diet, but sharks do constitute a necessary element of the EU's marine ecosystem; therefore, their management and conservation, as well as in general the promotion of a sustainably managed fishing sector for the benefit of the environment and of the people working in the sector, should be the priority. Amendment 14 # Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN Proposal for a regulation Recital 3 (3) Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 allows Member States to issue special fishing permits allowing processing on board, whereby shark fins can be removed from the bodies. In order to ensure the correspondence between the weight of fins and bodies, a ‘'fin-to-carcass’' ratio is established~~, however~~. However, the ratio is theoretical, because it is based on the weight ratio of shark fins to whole sharks, while sharks are usually landed 'dressed' (i.e., gutted and beheaded). Therefore, shark fins and carcasses cannot be directly compared against the ratio, and monitoring must rely on species-specific conversion factors, complicating enforcement. The ratio is also higher than the average fin-to-carcass weight for some species (e.g., shortfin mako, Isurus oxyrinchus). Furthermore, following processing operations, fins and bodies can be landed in different ports. ~~In such cases~~For these reasons, the use of the ratio becomes ineffective and gives scope for shark finning to occur. Under these circumstances, the collection of data, e.g.; species identification, populations structure, underpinning scientific advice for the establishment of fisheries management and conservation measures, is hampered. Amendment 15 # Daciana Octavia SÂRBU Proposal for a regulation Recital 3 (3) Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 allows Member States to issue special fishing permits allowing processing on board, whereby shark fins can be removed from the bodies. In order to ensure the correspondence between the weight of fins and bodies, a ‘fin-to-carcass’ ratio is established, however, following processing operations, fins and bodies can be landed in different ports. In such cases the use of the ratio becomes ineffective and gives scope for shark finning to occur. Under these circumstances, the collection of data, e.g; species identification, populations structure, underpinning scientific advice for the establishment of fisheries conservation measures, isas well as the enforcement of the regulation and punishment for non-compliance, are hampered. Amendment 16 # Kartika Tamara LIOTARD Proposal for a regulation Recital 3 a (new) (3a) The EU Member States are very concerned about environmental issues and the EU aspires to be one of the leaders in the conservation of ecosystems; however, the current EU legislation concerning the species belonging to the Elasmobranchii taxon is not as strong as in other countries and is insufficient to ensure the sustainable management and the conservation of those species, due to the high fin-to-carcass ratio, the lack of quotas for many species and the existing derogations. Amendment 17 # Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN Proposal for a regulation Recital 6 (6) Regional Fisheries Management Organisations are increasingly addressing the issue of shark finning and their scientific bodies are showing preference for the landing of sharks with their fins naturally attached to the body, noting that this is the best way to prevent finning, and will facilitate the collection of data needed for stock assessments. Amendment 18 # Corinne LEPAGE Proposal for a regulation Recital 7 (7) In 2010-2011, as part of the required impact assessment exercise, the European Commission held a public consultation in order to gather information on the most appropriate manner in which Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 should be amended. The results of the consultation show that the 'fins-remain-attached' approach is regarded as the preferred option. The conclusion of the impact assessment is that the Regulation should be amended so that all sharks must be landed with their fins still attached. It is necessary and appropriate for the achievement of the basic objective of the conservation of shark stocks, and in view of the outcome of the public consultation, to amend Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 accordingly; source: PE-483.835 2012/07/25 PECH 12 amendments... Amendment 16 # Julie GIRLING Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 (2) Fish belonging to the taxon Elasmobranchii, including sharks, skates and rays are generally very vulnerable to overexploitation due to their life cycle characteristics of slow growth, late maturity and small number of young. In recent years, some shark populations have been severely targeted, including by EU flagged vessels operating in EU and non- EU waters, and put under serious threat as a result of a dramatic increase in demand for shark products,fins in particular. Amendment 17 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 a (new) (2a) Current scientific knowledge, based on the examination of shark catch rates, indicates that many stocks of sharks are under serious threat. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), more than 25 % of all pelagic shark species, of which over 50 % are large oceanic-pelagic sharks, are threatened. In recent years, the capture, retention, transhipment, or landing of a growing number of shark species has been prohibited under Union law or in the framework of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, including of sharks whose fins are highly valuable in trade. Amendment 18 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 b (new) (2b) Blue shark (Priconace glauca) and shortfin mako (Isuras oxyrinchus), classified by the IUCN as "near- threatened" and "vulnerable" respectively, are currently the predominant species captured by the European fleet, with blue shark accounting for circa 70 % of the total of reported shark landings. Other species, however, including hammerhead and silky sharks, are also subject to capture in EU and non-EU waters and contribute to the economic viability of fisheries. Amendment 19 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Recital 3 (3) Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 allows Member States to issue special fishing permits allowing processing on board, whereby shark fins can be removed from the bodies. In order to ensure the correspondence between the weight of fins and bodies, a ‘'fin-to-carcass’' ratio is established~~, however, following processing ope~~. Serious control and enforcement difficulties occur with the use of 'fin-to-carcass' ratio systems. Such systems do not eliminate the practi~~ons, f~~ce of high-gradinsg and ~~bodies can be landed in different ports. In such cas~~, due to differences in fin cutting techniques and variability of the fin size and weight of different shark species, the ~~use of the ratio becomes ineffective and gives scope for shark finning to occur~~y could allow finning to occur without being detected. Following processing operations, fins and bodies can be landed in different ports. Under these circumstances, the collection of data, e.g;. species identification, populations structure, underpinning scientific advice for the establishment of fisheries conservation and management measures, is hampered. Amendment 20 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Recital 6 (6) Regional Fisheries Management Organisations are increasingly addressing the issue of shark finning and their scientific bodies are showing preference for the landing of sharks with their fins naturally attached to the body. The annual Resolutions on sustainable fisheries issued by United Nations General Assembly since 2007, the 2008 IUCN's Global Policy against shark finning and the 2010 meeting of the Fish Stocks Agreement Review Conference have called upon nations to take measures to require that all sharks be landed with their fins naturally attached. Amendment 21 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Recital 7 (7) InThe 201~~0-2011, as part of the required i~~1 Impact aAssessment ~~exercise,~~conducted by the European Commission held a public consultation in order to gather information on the most appropriate manner in which Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 should be amended. The conclusion of the impact assessment is that the Regulation shconcluded that abolishing special fishing permits would, where operators are compliant, have no significant negative economic impact and, where fleets are compliant, have no significant negative social impact. That impact assessment also concluded that abolishing special fishing permits would be ~~amend~~expected sto tha~~t all sharks must be landed with their fins still attached. It is necessary and appropriate for the achievement of the basic objectiv~~ve a positive impact on shark conservation in the mid to long term; facilitate and significantly simplify control and enforcement and virtually eliminate uncertainty with regard to compliance; significantly enhance data collection. It would also simplify rules and their implementation. The impact assessment, based on the outcome of the public cons~~erv~~ultation ~~of shark stocks, and in view of the outcome of the public consultation,~~held by the European Commission in 2010-2011, and after taking into account the number of infractions reported since 2003, recommends that all sharks must be landed with their fins still attached. It is therefore necessary and appropriate to amend Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 accordingly;. Amendment 22 # Maria do Céu PATRÃO NEVES Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 3 Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 Article 4 (3) Article 4 is ~~deleted.~~ replaced by the following: "Article 4 Derogation and associated conditions 1. By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and (1a), and subject to paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this Article, vessels which hold a special fishing permit may be allowed to completely remove shark fins from dead sharks on board, retaining them together with the carcasses of those sharks from which they were removed. Such fins and carcasses shall always be kept together, and shall be transhipped and/or landed together in the same port. 2. Such a special fishing permit shall only be issued to freezer fishing vessels, where their capacity to use all parts of sharks has been demonstrated, where a traceability system is in operation, making it possible to establish that the landed fins correspond to the carcasses of sharks being landed (by counting numbers of shark trunks and fins, such as first dorsal or caudal), where those freezer fishing vessels have established a contract with an independent body to control each landing of sharks in all ports where local authorities are unable to ensure due control and where the need for the separate processing on board of shark fins and the remaining parts of sharks has been justified. 3. It shall be prohibited to discard at sea the remaining parts of sharks after removal of the shark fins, except those parts resulting from basic processing operations, such as beheading, gutting and skinning. 4. The weight of the fins that are retained on board and transhipped or landed together with the carcasses shall never exceed the theoretical weight of the fins that would correspond to the remaining parts of sharks retained on board, transhipped or landed. 5. For the purpose of controlling the application of paragraph 4, the theoretical correspondence between weights of fins and bodies shall be established by Member States, taking into account the type of fishery, the species composition and the type of processing and storage. In no case shall the theoretical weight of the fins exceed 6 % of the live weight of the shark catch, or 14 % of the dressed weight of the shark catch." Amendment 23 # Maria do Céu PATRÃO NEVES Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 3a (new) (3) In Article 4 ~~is deleted~~the following paragraph is added: 5a. Spatial-temporal fishery closures should be established, aiming to protect shark spawning, promoting and improving recruitment, and protecting aggregations of juveniles in determined areas or periods. Amendment 24 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 5 2003/1185/EC Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Where fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State catch, retain on -board, tranship or land sharks, the flag Member State shall, in accordance with Regulations (EC) Nº 1224/2009 establishing a community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy and (EU) Nº 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the above regulation, send to the Commission, by 1 May at the latest, a comprehensive annual report on the implementation of this Regulation during the previous year. The report shall describe the monitoring of compliance with the Regulation of vessels ~~with~~in the ~~Regulation~~EU and non-EU waters, and the enforcement measures taken by Member States in cases of non-compliance. In particular, the following information shall be provided: Amendment 25 # Jim HIGGINS Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 5 Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part 1. Where fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State catch, retain on board, tranship or land sharks, the flag Member State shall send to the Commission annually, by 1 May at the latest, a comprehensive annual report on the implementation of this Regulation during the previous year. The report shall describe the monitoring of compliance of vessels with the Regulation, and the enforcement measures taken by Member States in cases of non-compliance. In particular, the following information shall be provided: Amendment 26 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 5 2003/1185/EC Article 6 – paragraph 1 – The number and nature of cases of non- compliance detected, including a full identification of the vessel(s) involved and the penalty applied for each case of non- compliance. Amendment 27 # Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 5 2003/1185/EC Article 6 – paragraph 1 – indent 3a (new) - the total landings by species (weight/number) and by port; source: PE-494.505

Amendments

Dossier

2011/0364(COD)

2012/03/08 ENVI 8 amendments...

Amendment 11 #

Claudiu Ciprian TĂNĂSESCU

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Fish belonging to the taxon Elasmobranchii, which includ~~ing~~es sharks, skates ~~and ray~~, rays and similar species are generally very vulnerable to ~~over~~exploitation due to their life -cycle characteristics of slow growth, late maturity and small number of young. INon-sustainable shark fishing has endangered the balance of marine ecosystems and, in recent years, some shark populations have been severely targeted and put under serious threat as a result of a dramatic increase in demand for shark products, fins in particular. Growing demand for shark fin preparations and the high price they fetch have also led to an increase in illegal fishing.

Amendment 12 #

Kartika Tamara LIOTARD

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Fish belonging to the taxon Elasmobranchii, including sharks, skates and rays are generally very vulnerable to overexploitation due to their life cycle characteristics of slow growth, late maturity and small number of young. In recent years, some shark populations have been severely targeted by vessels flying the flag of a Member State or third countries in maritime waters under the sovereignty or the jurisdiction of Member States or in other maritime waters and put under serious threat as a result of a dramatic increase in demand for shark products, fins in particular.

Amendment 13 #

Kartika Tamara LIOTARD

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Shark fins do not constitute a traditional ingredient of the European diet, but sharks do constitute a necessary element of the EU's marine ecosystem; therefore, their management and conservation, as well as in general the promotion of a sustainably managed fishing sector for the benefit of the environment and of the people working in the sector, should be the priority.

Amendment 14 #

Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 allows Member States to issue special fishing permits allowing processing on board, whereby shark fins can be removed from the bodies. In order to ensure the correspondence between the weight of fins and bodies, a ‘'fin-to-carcass’' ratio is established~~, however~~. However, the ratio is theoretical, because it is based on the weight ratio of shark fins to whole sharks, while sharks are usually landed 'dressed' (i.e., gutted and beheaded). Therefore, shark fins and carcasses cannot be directly compared against the ratio, and monitoring must rely on species-specific conversion factors, complicating enforcement. The ratio is also higher than the average fin-to-carcass weight for some species (e.g., shortfin mako, Isurus oxyrinchus). Furthermore, following processing operations, fins and bodies can be landed in different ports. ~~In such cases~~For these reasons, the use of the ratio becomes ineffective and gives scope for shark finning to occur. Under these circumstances, the collection of data, e.g.; species identification, populations structure, underpinning scientific advice for the establishment of fisheries management and conservation measures, is hampered.

Amendment 15 #

Daciana Octavia SÂRBU

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

Amendment 16 #

Kartika Tamara LIOTARD

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) The EU Member States are very concerned about environmental issues and the EU aspires to be one of the leaders in the conservation of ecosystems; however, the current EU legislation concerning the species belonging to the Elasmobranchii taxon is not as strong as in other countries and is insufficient to ensure the sustainable management and the conservation of those species, due to the high fin-to-carcass ratio, the lack of quotas for many species and the existing derogations.

Amendment 17 #

Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Regional Fisheries Management Organisations are increasingly addressing the issue of shark finning and their scientific bodies are showing preference for the landing of sharks with their fins naturally attached to the body, noting that this is the best way to prevent finning, and will facilitate the collection of data needed for stock assessments.

Amendment 18 #

Corinne LEPAGE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) In 2010-2011, as part of the required impact assessment exercise, the European Commission held a public consultation in order to gather information on the most appropriate manner in which Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 should be amended. The results of the consultation show that the 'fins-remain-attached' approach is regarded as the preferred option. The conclusion of the impact assessment is that the Regulation should be amended so that all sharks must be landed with their fins still attached. It is necessary and appropriate for the achievement of the basic objective of the conservation of shark stocks, and in view of the outcome of the public consultation, to amend Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 accordingly;

source: PE-483.835

2012/07/25 PECH 12 amendments...

Amendment 16 #

Julie GIRLING

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Fish belonging to the taxon Elasmobranchii, including sharks, skates and rays are generally very vulnerable to overexploitation due to their life cycle characteristics of slow growth, late maturity and small number of young. In recent years, some shark populations have been severely targeted, including by EU flagged vessels operating in EU and non- EU waters, and put under serious threat as a result of a dramatic increase in demand for shark products,fins in particular.

Amendment 17 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Current scientific knowledge, based on the examination of shark catch rates, indicates that many stocks of sharks are under serious threat. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), more than 25 % of all pelagic shark species, of which over 50 % are large oceanic-pelagic sharks, are threatened. In recent years, the capture, retention, transhipment, or landing of a growing number of shark species has been prohibited under Union law or in the framework of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, including of sharks whose fins are highly valuable in trade.

Amendment 18 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 b (new)

(2b) Blue shark (Priconace glauca) and shortfin mako (Isuras oxyrinchus), classified by the IUCN as "near- threatened" and "vulnerable" respectively, are currently the predominant species captured by the European fleet, with blue shark accounting for circa 70 % of the total of reported shark landings. Other species, however, including hammerhead and silky sharks, are also subject to capture in EU and non-EU waters and contribute to the economic viability of fisheries.

Amendment 19 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 allows Member States to issue special fishing permits allowing processing on board, whereby shark fins can be removed from the bodies. In order to ensure the correspondence between the weight of fins and bodies, a ‘'fin-to-carcass’' ratio is established~~, however, following processing ope~~. Serious control and enforcement difficulties occur with the use of 'fin-to-carcass' ratio systems. Such systems do not eliminate the practi~~ons, f~~ce of high-gradinsg and ~~bodies can be landed in different ports. In such cas~~, due to differences in fin cutting techniques and variability of the fin size and weight of different shark species, the ~~use of the ratio becomes ineffective and gives scope for shark finning to occur~~y could allow finning to occur without being detected. Following processing operations, fins and bodies can be landed in different ports. Under these circumstances, the collection of data, e.g;. species identification, populations structure, underpinning scientific advice for the establishment of fisheries conservation and management measures, is hampered.

Amendment 20 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Regional Fisheries Management Organisations are increasingly addressing the issue of shark finning and their scientific bodies are showing preference for the landing of sharks with their fins naturally attached to the body. The annual Resolutions on sustainable fisheries issued by United Nations General Assembly since 2007, the 2008 IUCN's Global Policy against shark finning and the 2010 meeting of the Fish Stocks Agreement Review Conference have called upon nations to take measures to require that all sharks be landed with their fins naturally attached.

Amendment 21 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) InThe 201~~0-2011, as part of the required i~~1 Impact aAssessment ~~exercise,~~conducted by the European Commission held a public consultation in order to gather information on the most appropriate manner in which Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 should be amended. The conclusion of the impact assessment is that the Regulation shconcluded that abolishing special fishing permits would, where operators are compliant, have no significant negative economic impact and, where fleets are compliant, have no significant negative social impact. That impact assessment also concluded that abolishing special fishing permits would be ~~amend~~expected sto tha~~t all sharks must be landed with their fins still attached. It is necessary and appropriate for the achievement of the basic objectiv~~ve a positive impact on shark conservation in the mid to long term; facilitate and significantly simplify control and enforcement and virtually eliminate uncertainty with regard to compliance; significantly enhance data collection. It would also simplify rules and their implementation. The impact assessment, based on the outcome of the public cons~~erv~~ultation ~~of shark stocks, and in view of the outcome of the public consultation,~~held by the European Commission in 2010-2011, and after taking into account the number of infractions reported since 2003, recommends that all sharks must be landed with their fins still attached. It is therefore necessary and appropriate to amend Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 accordingly;.

Amendment 22 #

Maria do Céu PATRÃO NEVES

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 3

Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003
Article 4

(3) Article 4 is ~~deleted.~~ replaced by the following: "Article 4 Derogation and associated conditions 1. By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and (1a), and subject to paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this Article, vessels which hold a special fishing permit may be allowed to completely remove shark fins from dead sharks on board, retaining them together with the carcasses of those sharks from which they were removed. Such fins and carcasses shall always be kept together, and shall be transhipped and/or landed together in the same port. 2. Such a special fishing permit shall only be issued to freezer fishing vessels, where their capacity to use all parts of sharks has been demonstrated, where a traceability system is in operation, making it possible to establish that the landed fins correspond to the carcasses of sharks being landed (by counting numbers of shark trunks and fins, such as first dorsal or caudal), where those freezer fishing vessels have established a contract with an independent body to control each landing of sharks in all ports where local authorities are unable to ensure due control and where the need for the separate processing on board of shark fins and the remaining parts of sharks has been justified. 3. It shall be prohibited to discard at sea the remaining parts of sharks after removal of the shark fins, except those parts resulting from basic processing operations, such as beheading, gutting and skinning. 4. The weight of the fins that are retained on board and transhipped or landed together with the carcasses shall never exceed the theoretical weight of the fins that would correspond to the remaining parts of sharks retained on board, transhipped or landed. 5. For the purpose of controlling the application of paragraph 4, the theoretical correspondence between weights of fins and bodies shall be established by Member States, taking into account the type of fishery, the species composition and the type of processing and storage. In no case shall the theoretical weight of the fins exceed 6 % of the live weight of the shark catch, or 14 % of the dressed weight of the shark catch."

Amendment 23 #

Maria do Céu PATRÃO NEVES

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 3a (new)

(3) In Article 4 ~~is deleted~~the following paragraph is added: 5a. Spatial-temporal fishery closures should be established, aiming to protect shark spawning, promoting and improving recruitment, and protecting aggregations of juveniles in determined areas or periods.

Amendment 24 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5

2003/1185/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. Where fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State catch, retain on -board, tranship or land sharks, the flag Member State shall, in accordance with Regulations (EC) Nº 1224/2009 establishing a community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy and (EU) Nº 404/2011 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the above regulation, send to the Commission, by 1 May at the latest, a comprehensive annual report on the implementation of this Regulation during the previous year. The report shall describe the monitoring of compliance with the Regulation of vessels ~~with~~in the ~~Regulation~~EU and non-EU waters, and the enforcement measures taken by Member States in cases of non-compliance. In particular, the following information shall be provided:

Amendment 25 #

Jim HIGGINS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5

Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Where fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State catch, retain on board, tranship or land sharks, the flag Member State shall send to the Commission annually, by 1 May at the latest, a comprehensive annual report on the implementation of this Regulation during the previous year. The report shall describe the monitoring of compliance of vessels with the Regulation, and the enforcement measures taken by Member States in cases of non-compliance. In particular, the following information shall be provided:

Amendment 26 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5

2003/1185/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

– The number and nature of cases of non- compliance detected, including a full identification of the vessel(s) involved and the penalty applied for each case of non- compliance.

Amendment 27 #

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5

2003/1185/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – indent 3a (new)

- the total landings by species (weight/number) and by port;

source: PE-494.505

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

2015-11-04Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/0/docs/0/celexid	CELEX:52011PC0798:EN
links/European Commission/title	Old PreLex New EUR-Lex

2014-11-09Show (5) Changes

activities	date: 2011-11-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=798 title: COM(2011)0798 type: Legislative proposal published celexid: CELEX:52011PC0798:EN body: EC type: Legislative proposal published commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/ title: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Commissioner: DAMANAKI Maria date: 2011-11-30T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2012-01-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: ALDE name: ZANONI Andrea body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ARSENIS Kriton group: ALDE name: DAVIES Chris group: Verts/ALE name: ROMEVA I RUEDA Raül group: ECR name: STEVENSON Struan responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: PPE name: PATRÃO NEVES Maria do Céu body: CSL meeting_id: 3155 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3155*&MEET_DATE=19/03/2012 type: Debate in Council title: 3155 council: Agriculture and Fisheries date: 2012-03-19T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting date: 2012-09-19T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2012-01-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: ALDE name: ZANONI Andrea body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ARSENIS Kriton group: ALDE name: DAVIES Chris group: Verts/ALE name: ROMEVA I RUEDA Raül group: ECR name: STEVENSON Struan responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: PPE name: PATRÃO NEVES Maria do Céu body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-295&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title: A7-0295/2012 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2012-01-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: ALDE name: ZANONI Andrea body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ARSENIS Kriton group: ALDE name: DAVIES Chris group: Verts/ALE name: ROMEVA I RUEDA Raül group: ECR name: STEVENSON Struan responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: PPE name: PATRÃO NEVES Maria do Céu date: 2012-10-01T00:00:00 date: 2012-11-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20121121&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament date: 2012-11-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=22033&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-449 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0449/2012 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament date: 2013-06-06T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) meeting_id: 3244 date: 2013-06-06T00:00:00 body: EP/CSL type: Act adopted by Council after Parliament's 1st reading date: 2013-06-12T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Final act signed date: 2013-06-12T00:00:00 body: EP type: End of procedure in Parliament date: 2013-06-29T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32013R0605 title: Regulation 2013/605 url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2013:181:TOC title: OJ L 181 29.06.2013, p. 0001
committees	body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2012-01-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: ALDE name: ZANONI Andrea body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: ARSENIS Kriton group: ALDE name: DAVIES Chris group: Verts/ALE name: ROMEVA I RUEDA Raül group: ECR name: STEVENSON Struan responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-12-20T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: PPE name: PATRÃO NEVES Maria do Céu
links	National parliaments url: http://www.ipex.eu/IPEXL-WEB/dossier/dossier.do?code=COD&year=2011&number=0364&appLng=EN title: IPEX European Commission url: http://ec.europa.eu/prelex/liste_resultats.cfm?CL=en&ReqId=0&DocType=COD&DocYear=2011&DocNum=0364 title: PreLex
other	body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Former Council configuration body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/ title: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries commissioner: DAMANAKI Maria
procedure	dossier_of_the_committee PECH/7/07848 Mandatory consultation of other institutions Economic and Social Committee reference 2011/0364(COD) subtype Legislation legal_basis Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 043-p2 stage_reached Procedure completed summary Amending Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003 instrument Regulation title Fish stock conservation: removal of fins of sharks on board vessels type COD - Ordinary legislative procedure (ex-codecision procedure) final url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32013R0605 title: Regulation 2013/605 subject 3.15.01 Fish stocks, conservation of fishery resources

Activites

Documents

History

ParlTrack - 2011-2024