Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-04-Speech-2-265"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2006-04-04"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Infotund (küsimused Euroopa Komisjonile)⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060404.23.2-265"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-04-04-Speech-2-266⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Joe Borg⁶
lpv:spoken text	". Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of the hake fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@en⁴
lpv:translated text	"Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@cs¹ "Fru Miguélez Ramos' spørgsmål om forbud mod fiskeri med bundtrawl nord og vest for Storbritannien og Irland kommer efter en række skriftlige forespørgsler om samme emne fra hende og fra fru Fraga Estévez og hr. Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. Forbuddet, der trådte i kraft den 1. februar 2006, blev indført i den forordning om TAC og kvoter, som Rådet vedtog i december 2005. Det blev foreslået som reaktion på rapporten om DEEPNET-undersøgelsen, hvor den mulige skade, som den type fiskeri kan forvolde på dybvandshajer og andre arter, blev påpeget. DEEPNET-rapporten blev udarbejdet af velanskrevne videnskabelige organisationer i Irland, Det Forenede Kongerige og Norge og blev derfor taget alvorligt af Kommissionen. Parallelt med forbuddet i EF-farvande vedtog Kommissionen for Fiskeriet i det Nordøstlige Atlanterhav på sit årsmøde i november 2005 et tilsvarende forbud mod bundtrawl i sit regulerede område fra den 1. februar 2006. Jeg vil allerførst forsikre Dem for, at dette forbud er tænkt som en midlertidig foranstaltning som følge af alvorlig bekymring over nogle af deltagernes praksis i den type fiskeri og navnlig over følgerne af en sådan praksis for sårbare arter som dybvandshajer. Disse arter er i en så ringe forfatning, og deres antal er så længe om at blive genoprettet, når det først er gået ned, at Kommissionen er nødt til at reagere meget hurtigt uden at vente på endelig videnskabelig rådgivning fra Den Videnskabelige, Tekniske og Økonomiske Komité for Fiskeri (STECF). Forbuddet var oprindeligt tænkt som en nødforanstaltning i september, men blev udsat til Rådet i december, for at der kunne være tid til høringer. Desværre blev der ikke stillet nogen konkrete forslag til alternative foranstaltninger tids nok til, at de kunne inddrages i det forslag, som Rådet drøftede i december. Jeg er godt klar over, at størstedelen af de fiskere, der anvender den slags redskaber, optræder ansvarsbevidst, og at det er et mindretal, der giver anledning til bekymring. Derfor vil jeg gerne indføre foranstaltninger til regulering af fiskeri med bundtrawl hurtigt muligt. Kommissionen har allerede fået nogen feedback om mulige fremgangsmåder, navnlig fra Det Regionale Rådgivende Råd for de nordvestlige farvande, som foreslår en tidligere genåbning for fiskeri af kulmule og et begrænset antal fartøjer, der deltager i havtaske- og dybhavsfiskeriet med observatørdækning. Kommissionens tjenestegrene mødes med Det Regionale Rådgivende Råd for de nordvestlige farvande og forskere fredag den 7. april 2006, hvor vi vil drøfte de muligheder. Afhængigt af resultatet af det møde kunne der udarbejdes et forslag om begrænset fiskeri under et observatørprogram i maj 2006. De data, der bliver indsamlet gennem et sådant program, kan dernæst stilles til rådighed for STECF, som skal behandle spørgsmålet i slutningen af juni eller begyndelsen af juli. De geografiske grænser for forbuddet blev bestemt af det område, som DEEPNET-undersøgelsen omfatter. Jeg er klar over, at der kan være tilsvarende problemer i andre områder, men vi har for øjeblikket ingen oplysninger, der berettiger til en udvidelse af det forbudte område. Det er en anden grund til, at der hurtigst muligt skal indføres effektiv lovgivning, som gælder i alle områder. Forbuddet er desværre dømt til at skabe økonomiske vanskeligheder for de berørte flåder. Der er ikke påtænkt nogen overgangsforanstaltninger for at mildne virkningerne af forbuddet, men jeg vil opfordre medlemsstaterne til fuldt ud at gøre brug af de muligheder, der allerede eksisterer for midlertidigt ophør med aktiviteter under det finansielle instrument til udvikling af fiskeriet, for at hjælpe de hårdest ramte."@da² ". Die von Frau Miguélez Ramos gestellte Frage zum Verbot des Einsatzes von Stellnetzen in den Gewässern nördlich und westlich von Großbritannien und Irland schließt sich einer Reihe von schriftlichen Fragen an, die sie, Frau Fraga Estévez und Herr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna zum gleichen Thema gestellt haben. Das Verbot, das am 1. Februar 2006 in Kraft trat, wurde durch die auf der Ratstagung im Dezember 2005 beschlossene Verordnung über zulässige Gesamtfangmengen (TAC) und Quoten eingeführt. Es wurde als Reaktion auf den Bericht zur DEEPNET-Untersuchung vorgeschlagen, die auf die potenziellen Schäden verwies, welche diese Form der Fischereitätigkeit Tiefseehaien und anderen Arten zufügen kann. Der DEEPNET-Bericht war von seriösen Organisationen in Irland, dem Vereinigten Königreich und Norwegen erarbeitet worden, und die Kommission nahm ihn daher ernst. Parallel zum Verbot in Gemeinschaftsgewässern beschloss die Kommission für Fischerei im Nordostatlantik auf ihrer Jahrestagung im November 2005 mit Wirkung vom 1. Februar 2006 ein identisches Verbot für verankerte Stellnetze in ihrem Regelungsbereich. Ich möchte Ihnen erstens versichern, dass das Verbot als Übergangsmaßnahme gedacht ist und wir damit auf ernste Bedenken bezüglich der Praktiken einiger Anwender derartiger Methoden und insbesondere bezüglich der Auswirkungen derartiger Praktiken auf gefährdete Arten wie Tiefseehaie reagiert haben. Diese Arten befinden sich in einem derart schlechten Zustand, und ihre Erholung wird, haben die Bestände erst einmal drastisch abgenommen, so lange dauern, dass die Kommission sehr schnell reagieren musste und nicht die endgültigen wissenschaftlichen Empfehlungen des wissenschaftlich-technischen und wirtschaftlichen Fischereiausschusses (STECF) abwarten konnte. Das Verbot war ursprünglich als Sofortmaßnahme im September geplant, wurde aber auf die Ratstagung im Dezember verschoben, um Zeit für Konsultationen zu haben. Leider wurden nicht rechtzeitig Vorschläge für Alternativmaßnahmen unterbreitet, die in den auf der Ratstagung im Dezember diskutierten Vorschläge hätten aufgenommen werden können. Mir ist klar, dass die meisten Fischer, die derartige Geräte benutzen, verantwortungsbewusst damit umgehen und dass das Verhalten einer Minderheit Anlass zur Sorge ist. Aus diesem Grunde möchte ich zum frühestmöglichen Zeitpunkt Maßnahmen zur Regelung der Fischerei mit Stellnetzen einführen. Der Kommission liegen bereits erste Reaktionen auf ein mögliches Vorgehen vor, und zwar vor allem vom regionalen Beirat für die nordwestlichen Gewässer, der vorschlägt, die Seehechtfischerei vorzeitig wieder zuzulassen und den Fang von Seeteufel und die Tiefseefischerei in begrenztem Umfang und unter Kontrolle durch Beobachter zu gestatten. Die Dienststellen der Kommission werden am Freitag, dem 7. April 2006, mit Vertretern des regionalen Beirats für die nordwestlichen Gewässer und Wissenschaftlern zusammenkommen, um diese Möglichkeiten zu erörtern. Je nach Ergebnis könnte im Mai 2006 ein Vorschlag vorgelegt werden, um eine begrenzte Fischerei unter Aufsicht von Beobachtern zu gestatten. Die im Rahmen des Beobachterprogramms gesammelten Daten könnten dem STECF zur Verfügung gestellt werden, der sich Ende Juni oder Anfang Juli mit dieser Frage beschäftigen wird. Die geografischen Grenzen für das Verbot richten sich nach dem in der DEEPNET-Studie untersuchten Bereich. Mir ist klar, dass es möglicherweise auch in anderen Gebieten ähnliche Probleme gibt, aber uns liegen derzeit keine Informationen vor, die eine Ausweitung des Verbots auf andere Gebiete rechtfertigen würden. Das ist ein weiterer Grund dafür, baldmöglichst effektive Regelungen, die für alle Gebiete gelten, einzuführen. Leider ist das Verbot zwangsläufig mit wirtschaftlichen Schwierigkeiten für die betroffenen Flotten verbunden. Es sind keine Übergangsmaßnahmen zur Linderung der Auswirkungen des Verbots geplant, aber ich möchte den Mitgliedstaaten nahe legen, die Möglichkeiten voll auszuschöpfen, die das Finanzinstrument zur Ausrichtung der Fischerei für die zeitweilige Einstellung von Aktivitäten bereits vorsieht, um den am stärksten Betroffenen zu helfen."@de⁹ "Η ερώτηση της κ. Miguélez Ramos όσον αφορά την απαγόρευση της χρήσης στάσιμων απλαδιών βυθού στα βόρεια και δυτικά της Βρετανίας και της Ιρλανδίας έπεται αρκετών γραπτών ερωτήσεων για το ίδιο θέμα από την ίδια και από την κ. Fraga Estévez και τον κ. Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. Η απαγόρευση, η οποία τέθηκε σε ισχύ την 1η Φεβρουαρίου 2006, εισήχθη στον κανονισμό σχετικά με το σύνολο επιτρεπόμενων αλιευμάτων και τις ποσοστώσεις που εγκρίθηκε από το Συμβούλιο τον Δεκέμβριο του 2005. Προτάθηκε κατόπιν της έκθεσης της έρευνας DEEPNET, η οποία υπογράμμισε την πιθανή ζημία που δύναται να προκαλέσει η εν λόγω αλιεία στους καρχαρίες βαθέων υδάτων και τα άλλα είδη. Η έκθεση DEEPNET εκπονήθηκε από έγκυρες επιστημονικούς οργανισμούς στην Ιρλανδία, το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο και τη Νορβηγία, και συνεπώς ελήφθη σοβαρά υπόψη από την Επιτροπή. Παράλληλα με την απαγόρευση στα κοινοτικά ύδατα, η Επιτροπή Αλιείας Βορειοανατολικού Ατλαντικού, στην ετήσια συνεδρίασή της τον Νοέμβριο του 2005, ενέκρινε πανομοιότυπη απαγόρευση για τα στάσιμα απλάδια βυθού στην περιοχή ευθύνης της από την 1η Φεβρουαρίου 2006. Πρώτον, θα ήθελα να σας διαβεβαιώσω ότι αυτή η απαγόρευση αποτελεί προσωρινό μέτρο σε απάντηση στις σοβαρές ανησυχίες σχετικά με τις πρακτικές ορισμένων συμμετεχόντων στην εν λόγω αλιεία και ιδίως σχετικά με τον αντίκτυπο αυτών των πρακτικών σε ευάλωτα είδη όπως οι καρχαρίες βαθέων υδάτων. Τα είδη αυτά είναι σε τόσο άσχημη κατάσταση και χρειάζονται τόσο χρόνο προκειμένου να ανακτήσουν τον αριθμό τους που μειώθηκε κάποτε, ώστε η Επιτροπή πρέπει να αντιδράσει πολύ γρήγορα χωρίς να περιμένει οριστική επιστημονική γνωμοδότηση από την Επιστημονική, Τεχνική και Οικονομική Επιτροπή Αλιείας. Η απαγόρευση εξετάστηκε αρχικά ως έκτακτο μέτρο τον Σεπτέμβριο, παρατάθηκε όμως έως το Συμβούλιο του Δεκεμβρίου, προκειμένου να δοθεί χρόνος για διαβουλεύσεις. Δυστυχώς, δεν υποβλήθηκαν εγκαίρως συγκεκριμένες προτάσεις για εναλλακτικά μέτρα προκειμένου να συμπεριληφθούν στην πρόταση που θα συζητείτο στο Συμβούλιο τον Δεκέμβριο. Γνωρίζω ότι οι περισσότεροι αλιείς που χρησιμοποιούν τέτοιον εξοπλισμό συμπεριφέρονται υπεύθυνα και ότι η μειονότητα προκαλεί ανησυχία. Για αυτόν τον λόγο, θα ήθελα να προτείνω μέτρα για τη ρύθμιση των στάσιμων απλαδιών βυθού το συντομότερο δυνατόν. Η Επιτροπή έχει ήδη ορισμένες πληροφορίες για πιθανές προσεγγίσεις, ιδίως από το Περιφερειακό Γνωμοδοτικό Συμβούλιο των Βορειοδυτικών Θαλασσών, το οποίο προτείνει να ξαναρχίσει συντομότερα η αλιεία του μερλούκιου και να περιοριστεί ο αριθμός των σκαφών που συμμετέχουν στην αλιεία πεσκαντρίτσας και την αλιεία βαθέων υδάτων με κάλυψη από παρατηρητές. Οι υπηρεσίες της Επιτροπής θα συναντηθούν με το Περιφερειακό Γνωμοδοτικό Συμβούλιο Βορειοδυτικών Θαλασσών και με επιστήμονες την Παρασκευή, στις 7 Απριλίου 2006, όπου θα συζητήσουμε αυτές τις δυνατότητες. Αναλόγως με την έκβαση της συνάντησης, μπορεί να υποβληθεί πρόταση προκειμένου να επιτραπεί περιορισμένη αλιεία στο πλαίσιο προγράμματος με παρατηρητές τον Μάιο του 2006. Τα δεδομένα που θα συλλεγούν από ένα τέτοιο πρόγραμμα θα μπορούν εν συνεχεία να διατεθούν στην Επιστημονική, Τεχνική και Οικονομική Επιτροπή Αλιείας, η οποία θα εξετάσει το θέμα στα τέλη Ιουνίου ή τις αρχές Ιουλίου. Τα γεωγραφικά όρια της απαγόρευσης καθορίστηκαν από την κάλυψη της μελέτης DEEPNET. Γνωρίζω ότι ενδέχεται να υπάρξουν παρεμφερή προβλήματα σε άλλους τομείς, αλλά επί του παρόντος δεν διαθέτουμε πληροφορίες που θα δικαιολογούσαν τη διεύρυνση της περιοχής απαγόρευσης. Αυτό συνιστά έναν ακόμη λόγο για την εισαγωγή αποτελεσματικής νομοθεσίας η οποία θα εφαρμόζεται σε όλους τους τομείς μόλις αυτό καταστεί εφικτό. Δυστυχώς, η απαγόρευση αναπόφευκτα ότι θα δημιουργήσει οικονομικές δυσκολίες στους εμπλεκόμενους στόλους. Δεν έχουν προγραμματιστεί μεταβατικά μέτρα για τον μετριασμό των επιπτώσεων της απαγόρευσης, θα προέτρεπα όμως τα κράτη μέλη να επωφεληθούν πλήρως των δυνατοτήτων που είναι ήδη διαθέσιμες για την προσωρινή παύση των δραστηριοτήτων σύμφωνα με το χρηματοδοτικό μέσο προσανατολισμού της αλιείας προκειμένου να παρασχεθεί βοήθεια σε όσους έχουν πληγεί σοβαρότερα."@el¹⁰ ". La pregunta de la señora Miguélez Ramos sobre la veda del uso de artes de enmalle de fondo en el norte y oeste de Gran Bretaña e Irlanda sigue a varias preguntas formuladas por escrito sobre la misma cuestión por ella misma y por la señora Fraga Estévez y el señor Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. La prohibición, que tuvo efecto el 1 de febrero de 2006, se introdujo en el Reglamento de TAC y cuotas y se adoptó en el Consejo en diciembre de 2005. Se propuso en respuesta al informe de la investigación DEEPNET, que destacaba el daño potencial que esas pesquerías podrían estar causando a los tiburones de aguas profundas y otras especies. El informe DEEPNET lo realizaron acreditadas organizaciones científicas de Irlanda, el Reino Unido y Noruega, así que la Comisión lo consideró seriamente. Paralelamente a la prohibición en aguas comunitarias, en su reunión anual de noviembre de 2005 la Comisión de la Pesca del Atlántico Nordeste adoptó una prohibición idéntica de redes de enmalle de fondo en su zona jurisdiccional a partir del 1 de febrero de 2006. En primer lugar, quisiera tranquilizarles en el sentido de que esta prohibición pretende ser una medida temporal en respuesta a serias preocupaciones sobre las prácticas de algunos partícipes de esas pesquerías y en particular sobre el impacto de esas prácticas en especies como los tiburones de aguas profundas. Estas especies se hallan en un estado tan deplorable y tardan tanto en recuperar su número una vez que han sido mermadas, que la Comisión tiene que reaccionar muy rápidamente sin esperar a un dictamen científico definitivo del Comisión Científico, Técnico y Económico de la Pesca (CCTEP). La prohibición estaba prevista originalmente como una medida de emergencia en septiembre, pero se aplazó hasta el Consejo de diciembre para que diera tiempo a las consultas. Por desgracia, no se presentaron a tiempo propuestas concretas de medidas alternativas para su inclusión en la propuesta debatida en el Consejo en diciembre. Sé que la mayoría de los pescadores que usan esas artes actúan responsablemente y que es una minoría la que causa preocupación. Por esa razón, quisiera introducir medidas encaminadas a regular la actividad de las redes de enmalle de fondo en la primera oportunidad. La Comisión ha recibido ya alguna información sobre posibles enfoques, especialmente del Consejo Consultivo Regional de las Aguas del Noroeste, que propone una rápida reapertura de la pesca de merluza y un número limitado de barcos que participen en la pesca de rape y de aguas profundas con presencia de observadores. Los servicios de la Comisión se reunirán con el Consejo Consultivo Regional de las Aguas del Noroeste y con científicos el viernes, 7 de abril de 2006, donde debatiremos estas posibilidades. En función del resultado de esa reunión se podría hacer una propuesta para permitir una pesca limitada con arreglo a un programa de observación en mayo de 2006. Los datos recogidos por un programa semejante podrían estar entonces disponibles para la CCTEP, que abordará esta cuestión a finales de junio o comienzos de julio. Los límites geográficos de la prohibición se fijaron en el informe del estudio DEEPNET. Sé que puede haber problemas similares en otras zonas, pero actualmente no tenemos información que justifique que la ampliación de la zona de veda. Esta es otra razón para establecer una legislación efectiva aplicable a todas las zonas tan pronto como sea factible. Por desgracia, la prohibición tiene que crear dificultades económicas a las flotas afectadas. No se han planeado medidas de transición para mitigar los efectos de la prohibición, pero yo animaría a los Estados miembros a que hicieran uso de las posibilidades que ya están disponibles para el cese temporal de actividades, con arreglo al Instrumento Financiero de Orientación de la Pesca, para ayudar a los más gravemente afectados."@es²⁰ "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@et⁵ "Jäsen Miguélez Ramosin kysymys koskee pohjaan ankkuroitujen verkkojen kieltämistä Yhdistyneen kuningaskunnan ja Irlannin pohjoisilla ja läntisillä merialueilla. Se on jatkoa useille hänen sekä jäsenten Fraga Estévezin ja Varela Suanzes-Carpegnan samasta aiheesta esittämille kirjallisille kysymyksille. Kielto, joka tuli voimaan 1. helmikuuta 2006, otettiin käyttöön suurimpia sallittuja saaliita ja kiintiöitä koskevalla asetuksella, jonka neuvosto antoi joulukuussa 2005. Kielto perustui DEEPNET-tutkimuksesta laadittuun selvitykseen, jossa korostettiin pohjaverkkokalastuksen syvänmeren haille ja muille lajeille mahdollisesti aiheuttamaa vahinkoa. DEEPNET-selvityksen laativat Irlannin, Yhdistyneen kuningaskunnan ja Norjan tunnetut tiedejärjestöt, ja siksi komissio suhtautuikin siihen vakavasti. Samaan aikaan, kun yhteisön vesialueita koskeva kielto hyväksyttiin, Koillis-Atlantin kalastuskomissio hyväksyi marraskuussa 2005 pitämässään vuosikokouksessa omalla sääntelyalueellaan samanlaisen pohjaverkkokalastusta koskevan kiellon 1. helmikuuta 2006 lähtien. Ensinnäkin haluan vakuuttaa teille, että kiellon on tarkoitus olla väliaikainen toimenpide, jolla vastataan vakavaan huoleen, joka koskee joidenkin pohjaverkkokalastusta harjoittavien tahojen pyyntimenetelmiä ja etenkin näiden menetelmien vaikutuksia haavoittuviin lajeihin, kuten syvänmeren haihin. Syvänmeren hain tilanne on erittäin huono, ja haikantaa on erittäin vaikea elvyttää sen huvettua, joten komission on toimittava pikaisesti. Se ei voi odottaa tieteellis-teknis-taloudellisen kalastuskomitean (STECF) lopullisia tieteellisiä neuvoja. Kieltoa harkittiin alun perin syyskuussa hätätoimenpiteenä, mutta sen toteuttamista lykättiin neuvoston joulukuun kokouksen yli, jotta asiasta ehdittäisiin järjestää kuuleminen. Valitettavasti vaihtoehtoisista toimenpiteitä koskevia käytännön ehdotuksia ei esitetty riittävän ajoissa, jotta ne olisi voitu sisällyttää neuvoston joulukuisessa kokouksessa käsiteltyyn ehdotukseen. Olen tietoinen siitä, että useimmat pohjaan ankkuroituja verkkoja käyttävät kalastajat toimivat vastuullisesti ja että ongelmia aiheuttaa vain pieni vähemmistö. Siksi haluaisin saada pohjaverkkokalastusta sääntelevät toimenpiteet voimaan mahdollisimman pian. Komissio on saanut jo jonkin verran palautetta mahdollisista toimintatavoista, etenkin luoteisten vesialueiden neuvoa-antavalta toimikunnalta. Se ehdottaa, että kummeliturskan kalastus sallittaisiin aikaisemmassa vaiheessa ja että merikrotin kalastusta ja pohjaverkkokalastusta harjoittavien alusten määrää rajoitettaisiin ja aluksille otettaisiin tarkkailijat. Komission yksiköt tapaavat luoteisten vesialueiden neuvoa-antavan toimikunnan ja tutkijoita perjantaina 7. huhtikuuta 2006 keskustellakseen näistä mahdollisuuksista. Jos kokouksessa niin päätetään, ehdotus tarkkaan rajoitetun kalastustoiminnan sallimisesta tarkkailijaohjelman yhteydessä voitaisiin tehdä toukokuussa 2006. Ohjelman avulla kerätyt tiedot voitaisiin toimittaa STECF:lle, joka käsittelee aihetta kesäkuun lopulla tai heinäkuun alussa. Kieltoalueen maantieteelliset rajat määriteltiin DEEPNET-tutkimuksessa käsitellyn alueen mukaisesti. Olen tietoinen siitä, että samankaltaisia ongelmia voi olla muillakin alueilla, mutta meillä ei tällä hetkellä ole käytettävissämme tietoja, joiden perusteella kieltoaluetta olisi perusteltua laajentaa. Tämä on yksi syy siihen, että vaikuttavaa lainsäädäntöä on ryhdyttävä soveltamaan kaikilla alueilla mahdollisimman pian. Valitettavasti kielto aiheuttaa väistämättä taloudellisia ongelmia niille kalastuslaivastoille, joita kielto koskee. Kiellon vaikutusten lieventämiseksi ei ole suunnitteilla väliaikaisia toimenpiteitä, mutta kehotan jäsenvaltioita käyttämään hyväkseen kaikkia jo nyt tarjolla olevia kalatalouden ohjauksen rahoitusvälineen tukimahdollisuuksia, jotka liittyvät toiminnan väliaikaiseen keskeyttämiseen. Niillä voidaan auttaa toimista eniten kärsiviä."@fi⁷ "La question de Mme Miguélez Ramos sur l’interdiction d’utiliser des filets maillants de fond au nord et à l’ouest de la Grande-Bretagne et de l’Irlande fait suite à toute une série de questions écrites sur le même sujet, posées par elle-même ainsi que par Mme Fraga Estévez et par M. Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. L’interdiction, qui est entrée en vigueur le 1er février 2006, a été introduite dans le règlement sur les TAC et les quotas adopté par le Conseil en décembre 2005. Elle a été proposée en vue de répondre au rapport d’enquête DEEPNET, qui mettait en lumière les dégâts potentiels que ces types de pêche pourraient causer aux requins d’eau profonde et à d’autres espèces. Le rapport DEEPNET a été rédigé par des organisations scientifiques réputées en Irlande, au Royaume-Uni et en Norvège et a donc été pris au sérieux par la Commission. Parallèlement à l’interdiction dans les eaux communautaires, à l’occasion de sa réunion annuelle en novembre 2005, la Commission des pêches de l’Atlantique du Nord-Est a adopté une mesure identique visant l’interdiction des filets maillants de fond dans les eaux de sa juridiction à compter du 1er février 2006. Avant toute chose, je tiens à vous assurer que cette interdiction se veut provisoire et vise à répondre à de sérieuses préoccupations quant aux pratiques de certains participants à ces types de pêche et, en particulier, quant à l’impact de ces pratiques sur des espèces vulnérables telles que le requin d’eau profonde. Ces espèces se trouvent dans un état si déplorable et prennent tellement de temps à reconstituer leurs populations appauvries que la Commission se devait de réagir au plus vite sans attendre l’avis scientifique définitif du Comité scientifique, technique et économique de la pêche (CSTEP). Au départ, l’interdiction a été envisagée en tant que mesure d’urgence au mois de septembre, mais a été reportée jusqu’au Conseil de décembre pour laisser le temps aux consultations. Malheureusement, aucune mesure alternative n’a été suggérée à temps pour pouvoir être incluse à la proposition discutée au Conseil en décembre. J’ai conscience que la majeure partie des pêcheurs qui utilisent ces engins se comportent de façon responsable et que seule une minorité pose problème. Voilà pourquoi je souhaite introduire dans les plus brefs délais des mesures visant à réglementer l’activité des filets maillants de fond. La Commission a déjà reçu des informations sur les approches possibles, notamment du conseil consultatif régional pour les eaux occidentales septentrionales, qui propose une réouverture précoce de la pêche au merlu et un nombre limité de navires participant à la pêche à la baudroie et à la pêche en eau profonde, avec des observateurs à leur bord. Les services de la Commission rencontreront le conseil consultatif régional pour les eaux occidentales septentrionales et d’autres scientifiques le vendredi 7 avril 2006, où nous discuterons de ces possibilités. En fonction de l’issue de cette rencontre, une proposition visant à autoriser une pêche limitée dans le cadre d’un programme d’observation pourrait être avancée en mai 2006. Les informations collectées par ce programme pourraient être transmises au CSTEP, qui se penchera sur la question fin juin ou début juillet. Les limites géographiques de l’interdiction ont été déterminées en fonction du territoire couvert par l’étude DEEPNET. Je suis conscient que des problèmes similaires peuvent se poser dans d’autres zones, mais nous ne disposons pour l’instant d’aucune information qui justifierait l’élargissement de la zone d’interdiction. C’est aussi pour cette raison qu’il est nécessaire d’introduire une législation effective dans toutes les zones dès que possible. Hélas, cette interdiction ne manquera pas d’entraîner des difficultés économiques pour les flottes concernées. Aucune mesure transitoire destinée à atténuer les effets de l’interdiction n’est prévue, mais j’encourage les États membres à tirer pleinement profit des possibilités qui sont déjà disponibles pour la cessation temporaire des activités dans le cadre de l’instrument financier d’orientation de la pêche afin d’aider ceux qui sont le plus touchés."@fr⁸ "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@hu¹¹ "L’interrogazione dell’onorevole Miguélez Ramos sul divieto di utilizzare reti da posta fissa al largo delle coste settentrionali e occidentali del Regno Unito e dell’Irlanda fa seguito a una serie di interrogazioni scritte sulla stessa questione formulate da lei, dalla sua collega Fraga Estévez e dall’onorevole Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. Il divieto, entrato in vigore il 1° febbraio 2006, è stato introdotto nel regolamento TAC e contingenti adottato dal Consiglio nel dicembre 2005. E’ stato proposto in seguito allo studio condotto nella relazione DEEPNET, che ha evidenziato i danni potenziali che questo tipo di pesca può causare a squali di acque profonde e altre specie. La relazione DEEPNET è stata redatta da rispettabili organizzazioni scientifiche di Irlanda, Regno Unito e Norvegia, ed è quindi stata tenuta in seria considerazione dalla Commissione. Al divieto nelle acque comunitarie ha fatto contemporaneamente seguito quello adottato dalla Commissione per la pesca nell’Atlantico nordorientale, che nella sua riunione annuale del novembre 2005 ha analogamente proibito l’impiego di reti da posta fisse nella propria zona di regolamentazione a partire dal 1° febbraio 2006. Innanzi tutto, vorrei rassicurarvi sul fatto che il divieto è stato adottato quale misura transitoria in risposta alle gravi preoccupazioni suscitate dalle pratiche di alcuni partecipanti a questo tipo di pesca e in particolare dall’impatto di tali pratiche su specie vulnerabili come gli squali di acque profonde. Le condizioni preoccupanti in cui versano queste specie e i lunghi tempi richiesti per la ricostituzione dei loro hanno indotto la Commissione a reagire molto rapidamente, senza attendere il parere scientifico definitivo del comitato scientifico, tecnico ed economico per la pesca (CSTEP). Il divieto era stato originariamente proposto come misura di emergenza a settembre, ma la sua adozione era stata rinviata al Consiglio di dicembre per consentire lo svolgimento di consultazioni. Purtroppo, nessuna proposta concreta per l’adozione di misure alternative è pervenuta in tempo utile a permetterne l’inclusione nella proposta discussa dal Consiglio a dicembre. So che la maggior parte dei pescatori che utilizza questo tipo di reti si comporta in maniera responsabile e che è solo una minima parte di loro a destare preoccupazione. Per questo motivo, intendo introdurre quanto prima misure che disciplinino le attività di pesca con reti da posta fisse. La Commissione ha già ricevuto alcuni riscontri sui possibili approcci da adottare, in particolare dal Consiglio consultivo regionale per le acque nordoccidentali, che propone una riapertura anticipata della pesca del nasello e la partecipazione di un numero limitato di pescherecci alla pesca della rana pescatrice e di specie di acque profonde con la presenza di osservatori. Venerdì 7 aprile 2006 i servizi della Commissione si riuniranno con il Consiglio consultivo regionale per le acque nordoccidentali e alcuni rappresentanti del mondo scientifico e in quell’occasione discuteranno di tali possibilità. In base all’esito di questa riunione, nel maggio 2006 potrebbe essere formulata una proposta volta a consentire una pesca limitata nel quadro di un programma di osservatori. I dati raccolti da tale programma potranno poi essere messi a disposizione del comitato scientifico, tecnico ed economico per la pesca, che affronterà la questione alla fine di giugno o all’inizio di luglio. I limiti geografici del divieto sono stati determinati dalla zona esaminata dalla relazione DEEPNET. So che problemi simili potrebbero essere presenti anche in altre aree, ma attualmente non disponiamo di informazioni che giustifichino un allargamento dell’area del divieto. Anche per questo motivo occorre introdurre quanto prima una legislazione applicabile in tutte le aree. Purtroppo, il divieto creerà inevitabilmente difficoltà economiche alle flotte interessate. Non sono previste misure transitorie volte a mitigare gli effetti del divieto, ma invito gli Stati membri a sfruttare appieno le possibilità esistenti per la temporanea cessazione delle attività nel quadro dello strumento finanziario di orientamento della pesca, volto ad aiutare i soggetti più duramente colpiti."@it¹² "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@lt¹⁴ "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@lv¹³ "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@mt¹⁵ "De vraag van mevrouw Miguélez Ramos over het verbod op het gebruik van geankerde kieuwnetten ten noorden en westen van Groot-Brittannië en Ierland volgt op een aantal schriftelijke vragen over hetzelfde onderwerp van haar hand en van mevrouw Fraga Estévez en de heer Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. Het verbod dat op 1 februari 2006 in werking trad, werd opgenomen in de TAC- en quotaverordening die in december 2005 door de Raad werd goedgekeurd. Het verbod werd voorgesteld als reactie op het verslag van het DEEPNET-onderzoek, waarin werd aangegeven dat deze vorm van visserij mogelijk schade kan berokkenen aan diepzeehaaien en andere soorten. Het DEEPNET-verslag werd opgesteld door goed bekend staande wetenschappelijke organisaties in Ierland, het Verenigd Koninkrijk en Noorwegen en werd daarom door de Commissie serieus genomen. Gelijktijdig met het verbod in de Gemeenschapswateren stelde de Visserijcommissie voor het noordoostelijk deel van de Atlantische Oceaan (NEAFC) per 1 februari 2006 in haar gereglementeerd gebied een identiek verbod in op het gebruik van geankerde kieuwnetten. Ten eerste kan ik u verzekeren dat dit verbod bedoeld is als een tijdelijke maatregel. Het verbod is ingesteld omdat er grote zorg bestaat over de praktijken van sommige vissers en vooral over de gevolgen van zulke praktijken voor kwetsbare soorten als diepzeehaaien. Het staat er met deze soorten heel slecht voor en eenmaal geminimaliseerd herstelt de populatie zich erg langzaam. De Commissie moet dus heel snel reageren. Zij heeft geen tijd om het definitieve wetenschappelijke advies van het Wetenschappelijk, Technisch en Economisch Comité voor de Visserij (WTECV) af te wachten. Oorspronkelijk was het verbod bedoeld als een noodmaatregel in september. Uiteindelijk werd het pas in december door de Raad ingesteld zodat daarvoor nog overleg kon plaatsvinden. Helaas werden er niet op tijd concrete suggesties gedaan voor alternatieve maatregelen, waardoor deze niet konden worden opgenomen in het voorstel dat in december in de Raad werd besproken. Ik ben mij ervan bewust dat de meeste vissers die zulk vistuig gebruiken, zich verantwoordelijk gedragen en dat een minderheid voor problemen zorgt. Daarom wil ik graag maatregelen invoeren om de activiteit van geankerde kieuwnetten zo spoedig mogelijk te reguleren. De Commissie heeft reeds enige feedback op de door haar voorgestelde mogelijke benaderingen gekregen, vooral van de Regionale Adviesraad voor de noordwestelijke wateren. De Adviesraad oppert om de bevissing van heek weer eerder toe te staan dan gepland en om het aantal vaartuigen voor het vangen van zeeduivel en de diepzeevisserij te beperken, met inzet van waarnemers. De diensten van de Commissie vergaderen op 7 april 2006 met de Regionale Adviesraad voor de noordwestelijke wateren en met wetenschappers. Bij die gelegenheid zullen we deze mogelijkheden bespreken. Afhankelijk van de uitkomsten van die bijeenkomst kan in mei 2006 worden voorgesteld om beperkte bevissing onder het toeziend oog van waarnemers toe te staan. De door de waarnemers verzamelde gegevens kunnen vervolgens ter beschikking worden gesteld van het WTECV, dat dit onderwerp eind juni of begin juli zal behandelen. De geografische grenzen van het verbod werden vastgesteld door het bereik van het DEEPNET-onderzoek. Ik ben mij ervan bewust dat zich in andere gebieden soortgelijke problemen kunnen voordoen, maar momenteel is er geen informatie voorhanden die een uitbreiding van het verbod tot andere gebieden zou rechtvaardigen. Dat is nog een reden om in alle gebieden zo snel mogelijk doeltreffende wetgeving toe te passen. Helaas zal het verbod voor de betreffende vissersvloten tot economische problemen leiden. Er zijn geen overgangsmaatregelen gepland om de gevolgen van het verbod te verzachten. Ik wil de lidstaten echter aanmoedigen om de mogelijkheden die reeds krachtens het Financieringsinstrument voor de oriëntatie van de visserij voor de tijdelijke stillegging van activiteiten beschikbaar zijn, volledig te benutten. Op die manier kunnen de mensen die het zwaarst getroffen zijn, worden geholpen."@nl³ "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@pl¹⁶ "A pergunta da senhora deputada Miguélez Ramos sobre a proibição das redes de emalhar de fundo a Norte e a Oeste do Reino Unido e na Irlanda vem no seguimento de uma série de perguntas apresentadas por escrito, pela senhora deputada, pela senhora deputada Fraga Estévez e pelo senhor deputado Varela Suanzes-Carpegna, sobre o mesmo assunto. A proibição que entrou em vigor a 1 de Fevereiro de 2006, foi introduzida no Regulamento relativo aos TAC e quotas que foi aprovado no Conselho em Dezembro de 2005. Foi proposto, em resposta ao relatório dos investigadores envolvidos no projecto DEEPNET, que salientou o potencial perigo que essas pescas poderiam causar aos tubarões de águas profundas e a outras espécies. O Relatório DEEPNET foi elaborado por organizações científicas de renome na Irlanda, no Reino Unido e na Noruega e, como tal, foi levado a sério pela Comissão. Paralelamente à proibição nas águas comunitárias, na sua reunião anual de Novembro de 2005, a Comissão para as Pescas do Atlântico Nordeste aprovou uma proibição idêntica de redes de emalhar de fundo na sua Área de Regulamentação, com efeitos a partir de 1 de Fevereiro de 2006. Em primeiro lugar, gostaria de lhe garantir que esta proibição pretende ser uma medida transitória, em resposta a preocupações graves relacionadas com as práticas de alguns participantes nessas pescas e, em especial, com o impacto dessas práticas em espécies vulneráveis como os tubarões de águas profundas. O estado em que se encontram essas espécies é tal forma pobre e é tão morosa a recuperação das suas unidades populacionais, uma vez destruídas, que a Comissão tem de reagir com grande rapidez, sem esperar pelo parecer científico definitivo do Comité Científico, Técnico e Económico das Pescas (CCTEP). A proibição foi originalmente considerada como uma medida de emergência, em Setembro, mas adiou-se até ao Conselho de Dezembro para dar tempo a que se procedesse a consultas. Infelizmente, não foram apresentadas sugestões concretas para medidas alternativas a tempo de serem incluídas na proposta discutida no Conselho, em Dezembro. Estou ciente de que a maioria dos pescadores que usam essas artes de pesca têm um comportamento responsável e que é uma minoria que suscita preocupações. Por essa razão, gostaria de introduzir medidas para regulamentar as actividades de pesca com redes de emalhar de fundo na primeira oportunidade que surgir. A Comissão já recebeu algum sobre possíveis abordagens, especialmente do Conselho Consultivo Regional das Águas Norte Ocidentais, que sugere uma reabertura antecipada da pesca da pescada, bem como um número limitado de navios que participam nas actividades de pesca de alto mar e do tamboril, com a cobertura de um observador. Os serviços da Comissão encontrar-se-ão com o Conselho Consultivo Regional das Águas Norte Ocidentais na Sexta-feira, 7 de Abril de 2006, altura em que discutiremos essas possibilidades. Dependendo do resultado dessa reunião, poderá ser feita uma proposta em Maio de 2006, com o objectivo de permitir uma actividade de pesca limitada sob um programa de observação. Os dados recolhidos por esse programa poderão então ser disponibilizados ao CCTEP, que se debruçará sobre a questão nos finais de Junho, princípios de Julho. Os limites geográficos da proibição foram determinados pela cobertura do estudo DEEPNET. Tenho conhecimento de que poderá haver problemas semelhantes noutras áreas, mas, actualmente, não dispomos de informação que justifique um alargamento da área de proibição. Essa é uma outra razão para introduzir uma legislação eficaz, aplicável em todas as áreas, tão depressa quanto possível. Infelizmente, a proibição irá necessariamente criar dificuldades económicas para as frotas em causa. Não foram previstas medidas transitórias para atenuar os efeitos da proibição, mas, pessoalmente, encorajaria os Estados-Membros a fazer pleno uso das possibilidades que já existem para a cessação temporária de actividades ao abrigo do Instrumento Financeiro de Orientação da Pesca a fim de ajudar os que foram mais gravemente afectados."@pt¹⁷ "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@sk¹⁸ "Mrs Miguélez Ramos’ question concerning the ban on the use of deepwater fixed gillnets to the north and west of Britain and Ireland follows a number of written questions on the same subject from her and from Mrs Fraga Estévez and Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. The ban, which took effect on 1 February 2006, was introduced in the TAC and Quota Regulation that was adopted at the Council in December 2005. It was proposed in response to the report of the DEEPNET investigation, which highlighted the potential damage that those fisheries may be causing to deepwater sharks and other species. The DEEPNET Report was carried out by reputable scientific organisations in Ireland, the United Kingdom and Norway, and so was taken seriously by the Commission. In parallel to the prohibition in Community waters, at its annual meeting in November 2005, the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission adopted an identical prohibition of deep-sea gillnets in its regulatory area from 1 February 2006. First, I should like to reassure you that this ban is intended as a temporary measure in response to serious concerns about the practices of some of the participants in such fisheries and in particular about the impact of those practices on vulnerable species such as deep-sea sharks. Those species are in such a poor state and take so long to recover their numbers once depleted that the Commission has to react very quickly without waiting for definitive scientific advice from the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). The prohibition was originally envisaged as an emergency measure in September but deferred until the December Council to give time for consultations. Unfortunately, no concrete suggestions for alternative measures were presented in time for inclusion in the proposal discussed at the Council in December. I am aware that most of the fishermen using such gear behave responsibly and that it is a minority who are causing concern. For that reason, I would like to introduce measures to regulate the activity of deep-sea gillnets at the earliest opportunity. The Commission has already had some feedback on possible approaches, especially from the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council, which suggests an earlier reopening of The Hague fishery and a limited number of vessels participating in the monkfish and deep-sea fisheries with observer coverage. The Commission services will meet with the North-Western Waters Regional Advisory Council and scientists on Friday, 7 April 2006, where we will discuss those possibilities. Depending on the outcome of that meeting, a proposal to allow a limited fishery under an observer programme could be made in May 2006. The data collected by such a programme could then be made available to the STECF, which will address the issue in late June or early July. The geographical limits of the prohibition were determined by the coverage of the DEEPNET study. I am aware that there may be similar problems in other areas, but we currently have no information that would justify enlarging the area of the prohibition. That is another reason for bringing in effective legislation applicable in all areas as soon as practicable. Unfortunately, the prohibition is bound to create economic difficulties for the fleets concerned. No transitional measures to mitigate the effects of the ban have been planned, but I would encourage Member States to make full use of the possibilities that are already available for the temporary cessation of activities under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance to help those most severely affected."@sl¹⁹ ". Rosa Miguélez Ramos fråga om förbudet mot användning av bottensatta drivnät norr och väster om Storbritannien och Irland är en av ett antal skriftliga frågor på samma ämne som har inlämnats av henne samt Carmen Fraga Estévez och Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna. Förbudet, som trädde i kraft den 1 februari 2006, infördes i TAC- och kvotförordningen, som antogs vid rådets möte i december 2005. Det lades fram som svar på rapporten från Deepnet-undersökningen, som belyste den eventuella skada som detta fiske kan förorsaka när det gäller djuphavshajar och andra arter. Deepnet-rapporten utfördes av ansedda vetenskapliga organisationer i Irland, Förenade kungariket och Norge, och togs därför på allvar av kommissionen. Parallellt med förbudet i gemenskapsvatten, antog Nordostatlantiska fiskerikommissionen vid sitt årsmöte i november 2005 ett likalydande förbud mot bottensatta drivnät inom sitt regleringsområde, gällande från och med den 1 februari 2006. För det första skulle jag vilja försäkra er om att detta förbud är avsett som en tillfällig åtgärd för att möta den stora oron för de rutiner som tillämpas av vissa av aktörerna vid sådant fiske och i synnerhet för den inverkan som dessa rutiner har på sårbara arter som djuphavshajar. Dessa arter befinner sig i ett verkligt bedrövligt tillstånd, och det tar mycket lång tid att återställa deras bestånd när det en gång har utarmats att kommissionen måste agera mycket snabbt utan att vänta på slutgiltiga vetenskapliga rekommendationer från Vetenskapliga, tekniska och ekonomiska kommittén för fiskerinäringen (STECF). Förbudet var ursprungligen att betrakta som en brådskande åtgärd i september, men sköts upp till rådets möte i december för att ge tid till samråd. Tyvärr lades inga konkreta förslag om alternativa åtgärder fram i tid för att kunna tas med i det förslag som diskuterades vid rådets möte i december. Jag är medveten om att de flesta fiskare som använder denna typ av utrustning gör det med ansvar, och att det är en minoritet som vållar oro. Av den anledningen skulle jag vilja införa åtgärder för att reglera verksamheten med bottensatta drivnät så fort tillfälle ges. Kommissionen har redan fått ett visst gensvar på möjliga tillvägagångssätt, särskilt från den regionala rådgivande nämnden för nordvästliga vatten, som föreslår ett tidigarelagt återupptagande av kummelfisket, och att ett begränsat antal fartyg deltar i fiske av marulk och djuphavsfiske med observatörstäckning. Kommissionens enheter kommer att möta den regionala rådgivande nämnden för nordvästliga vatten och forskare på fredag, den 7 april 2006, då vi kommer att diskutera dessa möjligheter. Beroende på resultaten från detta möte skulle ett förslag som tillåter begränsat fiske inom ramen för ett observatörsprogram kunna läggas fram i maj 2006. De uppgifter som samlas in genom ett sådant program skulle sedan kunna göras tillgängliga för STECF, som kommer att ta upp frågan senare i juni eller juli. De geografiska gränserna för förbudet fastställdes med ledning av den utförliga behandlingen i Deepnet-studien. Jag är medveten om att det kan förekomma liknande problem i andra områden, men för närvarande har vi inga uppgifter som skulle kunna rättfärdiga att förbudsområdet utvidgas. Detta är ytterligare ett skäl för att ta fram effektiv lagstiftning som kan tillämpas på alla områden så snart som möjligt. Förbudet kommer tyvärr att skapa ekonomiska svårigheter för de berörda flottorna. Det har inte planerats för några övergångsåtgärder för att mildra effekterna av förbudet, men jag skulle vilja uppmuntra medlemsstaterna att till fullo utnyttja de möjligheter som redan finns tillgängliga för tillfällig nedläggning av verksamheten inom ramen för Fonden för fiskets utveckling för att hjälpa dem som drabbas hårdast."@sv²¹
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Joe Borg,"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4} "Member of the Commission"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,11,13,4} "feedback"¹⁷ "stock"¹²