· Web viewA.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors subscribe to the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain,

AM_Com_NonLegOpinion

European Parliament

2019-2024

{PECH}Committee on Fisheries

2020/2273(INI)

{27/01/2021}27.1.2021

AMENDMENTS

1 - 208

Draft opinion

Gabriel Mato

(PE657.275v01-00)

EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives

(2020/2273(INI))

AM_Com_NonLegOpinion

Amendment1

Clara Aguilera, Manuel Pizarro, Nicolás González Casares, Carmen Avram, Predrag Fred Matić, Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital A

Draft opinion

Amendment

A.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors subscribe to the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain, including labour rights and animal health and welfare, and provide high-quality seafood products, thus playing a fundamental role in food security and nutritional wellbeing to an ever increasing population; whereas by restricting fishing, a number of UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are jeopardised;

A.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors subscribe to high standards which, however, are in need of revision and improvement in order to ensure environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain, including labour rights and animal health and welfare, and provide high-quality seafood products, thus playing a fundamental role in food security and nutritional wellbeing to the population; whereas it is therefore of utmost importance to achieve a fishing model that reflects a balance between the three fundamental dimensions (environmental, social and economic) put forward by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 objectives;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment2

Pierre Karleskind, Catherine Chabaud, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Draft opinion

Recital A

Draft opinion

Amendment


A.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors subscribe to among the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain, including labour rights and animal health and welfare, and provide high-quality seafood products, thus playing a fundamental role in food security and nutritional wellbeing to an ever increasing population; whereas it is therefore important to manage fisheries sustainably and to respect our international sustainability commitments, in particular the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs);

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment3

Benoît Biteau

{Greens/EFA}on behalf of the Greens/EFA Group

Draft opinion

Recital A

Draft opinion

Amendment


A.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors need to subscribe to the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain, including labour rights and to a lesser extent animal health and welfare, and provide high-quality seafood products, thus playing a fundamental role in food security in the European Union and to a smaller extent to the nutritional wellbeing to an ever increasing population; whereas by restricting the most destructive fishing techniques, several UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) can be aligned;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment4

Anja Hazekamp

Draft opinion

Recital A

Draft opinion

Amendment


A.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors subscribe to the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain, including labour rights and animal health and welfare and provide high-quality seafood products, thus playing a fundamental role in food security and nutritional wellbeing to an ever increasing population; whereas the EU should further prioritise the achievement of all UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), but failed to meet important targets set out in SDG Goal 14, such as ending overfishing by 2020;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment5

Annalisa Tardino, Rosanna Conte, Massimo Casanova, Valentino Grant

Draft opinion

Recital A

Draft opinion

Amendment


A.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors subscribe to the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain, including labour rights and animal health and welfare, and provide high-quality seafood products, thus playing a fundamental role in food security and nutritional wellbeing to an ever increasing population; whereas by restricting fishing, a number of UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and two pillars of the CFP, namely social and economic sustainability, are jeopardised;

Or. {IT}it

Amendment6

Manuel Pizarro, Isabel Carvalhais, Clara Aguilera, Ivo Hristov, Carmen Avram

Draft opinion

Recital A

Draft opinion

Amendment


A.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors evolve in order to meet with the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain, including labour rights and animal health and welfare, and provide high-quality seafood products, thus playing a fundamental role in food security and nutritional wellbeing to an increasing population; whereas by the lack of consideration of fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors, several of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) may be impossible to achieve;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment7

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital А a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Аа.whereas many of the seas bordering on Member States also border on third countries to which Community law does not apply and/or where there is no specific policy for the management of fisheries stocks or quotas;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment8

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital А b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ab.whereas the ecosystems and biodiversity of seas and oceans are closely interlinked and depend on the waters and ecosystems of the rivers that flow into them;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment9

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital А c (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ac.whereas certain seas, such as the Black Sea, are semi-enclosed and there is little exchange of matter between them and other seas/oceans, which heightens the need to control the pollution generated by various human activities;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment10

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital А d (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ad.whereas a whole range of activities affect water quality and the biodiversity of water bodies, and their cumulative effects may only be seen after a number of years;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment11

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital А e (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ae.whereas EU waters are home to critically-endangered endemic species such as cetaceans; whereas some of these species feed on species of interest to the fishing industry;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment12

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital А f (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Аf.whereas a number of invasive alien species have settled permanently in EU waters; whereas some of these species (such as the veined whelk (Rapana venosa)) are predators with no natural enemies;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment13

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital А g (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ag.whereas in the EU there are different traditions when it comes to the consumption of fish and non-fish products, with certain species being eaten in certain places while there is no tradition of this in others; whereas future policy documents must reflect these differences when addressing the interdependence between biodiversity and economic activities;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment14


Draft opinion

Recital B

Draft opinion

Amendment

B.whereas EU fishers and fish farmers play an essential role across the Union and must continue providing social and economic support to many coastal and inland communities;

B.Whereas EU fishers and fish farmers play an essential role across the Union and must continue to contribute to and participate in the development of policies that ensure the environmental, economic and social sustainability they need to continue providing social and economic support to many coastal and inland communities;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment15


Draft opinion

Recital B

Draft opinion

Amendment


B.whereas EU fishers and fish farmers play an essential role across the Union in safeguarding territorial identity, cultural traditions, food security, jobs and incomes and must continue providing social and economic support to many coastal, riparian, island, inland and lakeside communities;

Or. {IT}it

Amendment16

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Recital B

Draft opinion

Amendment


B.whereas EU fishers and fish farmers play an essential role across the Union and must continue providing social and economic support to many coastal and inland communities while adhering to Union environmental legislation;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment17


Draft opinion

Recital B

Draft opinion

Amendment


B.whereas EU fishers and fish farmers play an essential role across the Union providing healthy foods of high nutritional value, but also a fundamental social and economic support to many coastal and inland communities;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment18

Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Recital B a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ba.whereas fishing is a longstanding family tradition in some communities, but one that may nevertheless be discontinued or disappear if the right balance is not found between requirements and rules on the one hand and sourcing food through small-scale fishing on the other;

Or. {BG}bg

Amendment19


Draft opinion

Recital C

Draft opinion

Amendment

C.whereas fishers, guardians of the sea, are present on a daily basis, alert the authorities whenever they see any environmental degradation and are taking steps to conserve the marine environment;

C.whereas fishers are more than explorers of sea resources, are present on a daily basis, from coastal and inland areas to the high seas, being, in several occasions, the first to identify environmental accidents or degradation and alerting the authorities; fishers participate and contribute to avoid environmental degradation and are taking steps to conserve the marine environment, they should be seen as the guardians of the sea;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment20

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Recital C

Draft opinion

Amendment


C.whereas fishers, guardians of the sea, are present on a daily basis, ought to alert the authorities whenever they see any environmental degradation and are ideally taking further steps to conserve the marine environment;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment21

Anja Hazekamp

Draft opinion

Recital C

Draft opinion

Amendment


C.whereas fishers are present on a daily basis, alert the authorities whenever they see any environmental degradation and are taking steps to conserve the marine environment;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment22

Carmen Avram, Manuel Pizarro, Ivo Hristov, Michal Wiezik, Tudor Ciuhodaru, Rovana Plumb, Adrian-Dragoş Benea, Isabel Carvalhais

Draft opinion

Recital C a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ca.Whereas the degradation of habitats and disruption of migration corridors by, for example, river modifications and dams, overexploitation for their caviar and meat, as well as pollution have driven sturgeons to the brink of extinction; whereas the drastic decrease of the number of spawners, associated with the population decline, trigger the failure of the natural reproduction, reducing the chance of the few remaining males and females to meet and spawn;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment23


Draft opinion

Recital C a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Ca.whereas the outermost regions (OR) account for 70% of European biodiversity;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment24

Carmen Avram, Manuel Pizarro, Ivo Hristov, Michal Wiezik, Tudor Ciuhodaru, Adrian-Dragoş Benea, Rovana Plumb, Isabel Carvalhais

Draft opinion

Recital C b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Cb.Whereas the data held by the research institutes indicate that the populations of sturgeon species are fragmented, missing certain generations, and the species of sturgeon natural reproduction is deficient, the number of adults migrating to the Danube for reproduction is extremely low and the species sturgeon is on the verge of extinction;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment25

Anja Hazekamp

Draft opinion

Recital D

Draft opinion

Amendment

D.whereas the EU Biodiversity Strategy does not take into account at all that there have been considerable improvements in EU fish populations; whereas in the north-east Atlantic there has been a 50 % increase in the number of fish at sea in only 10 years and overfishing in the EU is at an all-time low, whereas almost 100 % of the landings from EU-regulated stocks come from stocks fished at the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels;

D.whereas the EU Biodiversity Strategy does not take into account at all that there have been considerable improvements in EU fish populations; whereas in the north-east Atlantic there has been a 50 % increase in the number of fish at sea in only 10 years and overfishing in the EU is at an all-time low, whereas almost 100 % of the landings from EU-regulated stocks come from stocks fished at the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels; whereas still around 38 % of stocks in the North-East Atlantic and around 92 % of stocks that are scientifically assessed in the Mediterranean and Black Seas are overexploited, meaning exploited above maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels, according to the STECF, despite the legal requirement to stop overfishing by 2020; whereas 62,5 % of stocks in the Mediterranean and Black Seas were overexploited in 2017, according to the FAO 2020 SOFIA report;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment26


Draft opinion

Recital D

Draft opinion

Amendment


D.whereas the EU Biodiversity Strategy should take into account the considerable improvements in fish populations in some of the EU's seas; whereas they should serve as an example, such as in the north-east Atlantic where there has been a 50 % increase in the number of fish at sea in only 10 years and overfishing in the EU is at an all-time low, whereas we are mindful of the need for the latter to be eliminated altogether and whereas we must ensure that 100 % of the landings from EU-regulated stocks come from stocks fished at the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment27

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Recital D

Draft opinion

Amendment


D.whereas due to the implementation of improved management measures in the north-east Atlantic there has been a 50 % increase in the number of fish at sea in only 10 years and overfishing in the EU is at an all-time low, whereas almost 100 % of the landings from EU-regulated stocks for which the respective scientific assessments are available come from stocks fished at the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels, whereas in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea fish stocks remain overexploited;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment28


Draft opinion

Recital D

Draft opinion

Amendment


D.whereas the EU Biodiversity Strategy should take into account improvements in EU fish populations resulting from the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP); whereas in the north-east Atlantic there has been a 50 % increase in the number of fish at sea in only 10 years and overfishing in the EU is at an all-time low, whereas almost 100 % of the landings from EU-regulated stocks in the Atlantic come from stocks fished consistent with maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment29


Draft opinion

Recital D

Draft opinion

Amendment


D.whereas the EU Biodiversity Strategy must take into account the considerable improvements in EU fish populations; whereas in the north-east Atlantic there has been a 50 % increase in fish biomass in only 10 years and overfishing in the EU is at an all-time low; whereas the share of landings from EU-regulated stocks which come from stocks fished at the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) levels is at an all-time high;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment30


Draft opinion

Recital D a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Da.whereas despite the improvement of sustainability verified in the exploitation of marine resources in some sea basins, there are still areas that present worrying situations, in particular the Mediterranean Sea; this sea has the highest percentage of marine protected areas in the European Seas, but at the same time it is the one that presents the greatest concerns about the general state of its resources, habitats and biodiversity;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment31


Draft opinion

Recital D a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Da.whereas the European Union has set itself some ambitious targets under the Common Fisheries Policy, revised in 2013, and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive; whereas, over and beyond the progress made in achieving MSY in some European basins, measures are still needed in order to achieve the overall objectives of good environmental status for waters;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment32


Draft opinion

Recital D a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Da.whereas marine biodiversity is seriously endangered, as highlighted in the 2019 IPBES Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Fifth Global Biodiversity Outlook (GBO-5) and the IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment33

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Recital D a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Da.whereas scientific studies on the subject have raised concerns about the long-term negative impact that certain techniques used by fisheries, such as bottom-contacting gear and fish aggregating devices (FADs), have on stocks, ocean biodiversity and the marine environment;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment34


Draft opinion

Recital D a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Da.Whereas the EU Green Deal and Nature policy documents provide new opportunities and measures to better integrate environmental aspects in the sectorial policies, restore species and habitats and promote environmental friendlier investments;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment35


Draft opinion

Recital D b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Db.whereas the report of the European Environment Agency entitled 'Marine Messages II' and published in May 2020 warns of the current state of degradation of the European marine environment and the need to rapidly restore our marine ecosystems by addressing the impact of human activities on the marine environment;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment36


Draft opinion

Recital D b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Db.whereas scientific studies on the subject have raised concerns about the long-term negative impact on fishing populations, ocean biodiversity and in the marine environment of the use of certain fishing techniques;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment37

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Recital D b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Db.whereas light pollution alter the natural night lighting levels for humans, animals and plants, thus negatively affecting biodiversity in the sea and deep sea, lakes, inland waterways and coastal areas;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment38


Draft opinion

Recital D c (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Dc.whereas the European Court of Auditors' Special Report 26/2020 entitled 'Marine environment: EU protection is wide but not deep' states that although a framework is in place to protect the marine environment, EU actions have not led to sufficient protection of ecosystems and habitats and that current marine protected areas provide only limited protection;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment39


Draft opinion

Recital D d (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Dd.having regard to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and in particular to Aichi Biodiversity Target 11;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment40


Draft opinion

Recital D e (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

De.whereas the target of ensuring that at least 30% of all marine habitats are protected by 2030 should be established at the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP 15) to the Convention on Biological Diversity in 2021;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment41


Draft opinion

Subheading 1

Draft opinion

Amendment

Protected areas and targets

Implementation of the Strategy targets

Or. {EN}en

Amendment42


Draft opinion

Subheading 1

Draft opinion

Amendment

Protected areas and targets

Strategy and its objectives

Or. {ES}es

Amendment43


Draft opinion

Paragraph -1 (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

-1.Welcomes the fact that fisheries are included in the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030. Bringing nature back into our lives; stresses the need for fisheries, aquaculture and marine issues to be an integral part of the global framework for biodiversity in the Union.

Or. {ES}es

Amendment44


Draft opinion

Paragraph -1 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

-1a.Stresses the importance of ensuring coordination and mutual support between all Green Deal initiatives, and between EU and Member States’ objectives regarding, inter alia, food security, climate change, marine natural resources, and sustainable fisheries management;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment45


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1

Draft opinion

Amendment

1.Recalls that effectively managed fished populations are more productive than non-fished ones; stresses, therefore, the fact that, in certain cases, closing fishing areas might not be compatible with social welfare and economic prosperity – essential components of sustainability – and with the SDGs on food security and poverty alleviation;

deleted

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment46


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1

Draft opinion

Amendment


1.Recalls that sustainably managed fished populations are more productive in the long run; stresses, therefore, that in order to avoid the closure of fishing areas that may jeopardise social welfare and economic prosperity – essential components of the sustainability of coastal populations – the ecosystem conditions required by each fishing basin must be guaranteed so as to enable fisheries resources to be maintained or even progressively increased over time;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment47

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1

Draft opinion

Amendment


1.Recalls that effectively managed fished populations are often more productive than non-fished ones; stresses, therefore, the fact that, in certain cases, closing fishing areas can be compatible with social welfare and economic prosperity – essential components of sustainability – and with the SDGs on food security and poverty alleviation, emphasises that international scientific studies clearly indicate that protected areas provide spawning grounds and shelter for juveniles, and that the cost of non-action could be much higher;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment48


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1

Draft opinion

Amendment


1.Recalls that, according to FAO1a, it is becoming increasingly clear that intensively managed fisheries have seen increases in average stock biomass, with many reaching or maintaining biologically sustainable levels, while fisheries with less-developed management systems are in poor shape;

_________________

1a FAO (2020), The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020 - Sustainability in action, Rome.

Or. {EN}en

Amendment49

Anja Hazekamp

Draft opinion

Paragraph 1

Draft opinion

Amendment


1.Highlights that, when successful, Marine Protected Area's (MP's) offer large socio-economic benefits, especially for coastal communities and the fisheries and tourism sector, and that MPAs can perform key ecological functions for the reproduction of fish stocks (providing spawning grounds and nurseries) and improve their resilience;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment50


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1a.Emphasises that managing protected marine areas in a manner consistent with the needs of the fishers who traditionally operate in the areas concerned is more efficient and brings benefits for biodiversity;

Or. {IT}it

Amendment51


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1a.Welcomes the establishment of an EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, setting ambitious targets; shares the view that urgent action is needed to preserve and restore biodiversity;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment52

Peter van Dalen

Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1a.Stresses that fishermen's acceptance of marine protected areas is key to these areas' success; stresses that fishermen must be involved in the preparation and management of protected areas.

Or. {EN}en

Amendment53


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1b.Points out that the need to preserve and restore biodiversity concerns the land, sea and oceans equally; calls, therefore, for the link between land and sea to be highlighted within the strategy, since what happens on land has an impact on what happens at sea, particularly as regards the health of marine stocks and ecosystems;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment54


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1b.Emphasises the importance of managing MPAs on the basis of integrated policies which focus on both the sea and coastlines, monitoring areas of particular natural importance or interest and, at the same time, protecting and safeguarding in a sustainable manner the economic and social fabric of the territories in question;

Or. {IT}it

Amendment55


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 c (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1c.Regrets that greater attention is not paid to fisheries and aquaculture in the Commission's communication on the strategy; calls for fisheries and aquaculture to occupy their rightful place in the measures that are to follow the communication;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment56


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 d (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1d.Calls for special attention to be paid to ORs and their specific features in the biodiversity strategy, given that these regions account for 70% of European biodiversity;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment57


Draft opinion

Paragraph 1 e (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

1e.Welcomes the goal that at least 25 000 km of watercourses should become free-flowing once again by 2030 in order, for example, to facilitate the passage of migratory fish or improve the flow of water and sediment, thereby helping to improve the quality of coastal water bodies;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment58


Draft opinion

Paragraph 2

Draft opinion

Amendment

2.Stresses that marine protected areas (MPAs) are a tool, not an objective per se; underlines the fact that setting a protection objective through the means of a conservation figure (i.e. a percentage) is irrelevant, since the most important thing is to ensure that the established protection zones truly cover an area with an ecological value that needs to be protected;

2.Stresses that marine protected areas (MPAs) are an important management tool for the restauration and protection of habitats and species with known positive impact in fishing activities, inside and nearby of those MPAs; Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)1b underlines the fact that besides the importance of setting protection objectives through the means of a conservation figure (i.e. a percentage), it is also important to establish MPAs covering representative areas with ecological representation value and connected to others, as well as to wider seascapes that are equitably and effectively managed;

_________________

1b Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2020) Global Biodiversity Outlook 5. Montreal

Or. {EN}en

Amendment59


Draft opinion

Paragraph 2

Draft opinion

Amendment


2.Welcomes the ambitious targets concerning 30% marine protected areas (MPAs) and 10% strictly protected areas; stresses that MPAs are a tool, not an objective per se; insists that the establishment of marine protected and strictly protected areas should be based on scientific criteria and should be carried out in cooperation with all stakeholders, in particular with professional and recreational fishers; stresses the importance of establishing coherent MPA networks; points out that the protection of marine areas does not always mean that activities have to cease altogether;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment60


Draft opinion

Paragraph 2

Draft opinion

Amendment


2.Stresses that marine protected areas (MPAs) are an essential tool for curbing the current loss of biodiversity in the marine environment and for its restoration, since the most important thing is to ensure that the established protection zones cover the areas of high ecological value which must be protected; stresses that in order to establish such areas, socio-economic impact studies and compensatory solutions for the coastal population concerned are a prerequisite, but recalls that less than 1% of marine areas currently enjoy strict protection in the EU;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment61

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 2

Draft opinion

Amendment


2.Stresses that marine protected areas (MPAs) are a useful and effective tool; underlines the fact that setting a protection objective through the means of a conservation figure (i.e. a percentage) should be based on the best available scientific advice, since the most important objective is to ensure that the established protection zones are fully implemented and truly cover an sufficiently large area with an ecological value that needs to be protected;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment62

Anja Hazekamp

Draft opinion

Paragraph 2

Draft opinion

Amendment


2.Welcomes the Commission’s proposal, in its 2030 biodiversity strategy, to have at least 30 % of sea area in the EU protected, including through fish stock recovery areas, as provided for under the CFP, and areas where the most destructive fishing techniques and economic activities are restricted;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment63

Nicolás González Casares, Clara Aguilera

Draft opinion

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

2a.Stresses that, while their primary objective is to protect and restore marine biological diversity, marine protected areas also have an impact on fisheries; highlights that, according to recent studies1a, protected marine areas tend to increase catches in overexploited fisheries and to decrease catches in well-managed fisheries and in those which are underfished compared to the maximum sustainable yields;

_________________

1a 'A global network of marine protected areas for food', Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, November 10, 2020

Or. {ES}es

Amendment64


Draft opinion

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

2a.Emphasises the fact that, the implementation of MPAs with strictly restricted or closed fishing areas might have immediately social and economic negative impacts in fishing sector and local communities, that difficult the acceptance of this management tools; the negative impact in the social and economic pillars, of three PCP sustainability pillars, can have immediate direct impact in the SDGs goals, like SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger);

Or. {EN}en

Amendment65

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

2a.Highlights that, when successful, marine protected areas offer large socio-economic benefits, especially for coastal communities and the fisheries and tourism sector, and that MPAs can perform key ecological functions for the reproduction of fish stocks (providing spawning grounds and nurseries) and improve their resilience;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment66


Draft opinion

Paragraph 3

Draft opinion

Amendment

3.Points out that setting abstract, arbitrary, rigid, unrealistic and non-achievable numerical targets undermines good legislation and the credibility of lawmakers;

deleted

Or. {ES}es

Amendment67


Draft opinion

Paragraph 3

Draft opinion

Amendment


deleted

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment68


Draft opinion

Paragraph 3

Draft opinion

Amendment


deleted

Or. {EN}en

Amendment69

Annie Schreijer-Pierik

Draft opinion

Paragraph 3

Draft opinion

Amendment


3.Points out that setting abstract, arbitrary, rigid, unrealistic and non-achievable numerical targets undermines good legislation and the credibility of lawmakers, and could undermine the objectives of the Biodiversity Strategy, given that a large portion of MPAs in the EU are considered to lack effective management and equitability creating a dangerous illusion of protection (Milieu et al, 2016);

Or. {EN}en

Amendment70

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 3

Draft opinion

Amendment


3.Points out that setting numerical targets based on the best available scientific advice are an example of good legislation and the credibility of lawmakers

Or. {EN}en

Amendment71


Draft opinion

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

3a.Considers fundamental that the implementation of any MPA should be based in the best available scientific knowledge, associated with a propped specific impact assessment and in close coordination with local authorities, communities and stakeholders;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment72


Draft opinion

Paragraph 4

Draft opinion

Amendment

4.Considers that strengthening and efficiently implementing existing closed areas would be much more efficient and meaningful;

4.Considers strengthening and efficiently implementing existing closed areas to be an urgent necessity; calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish, as a matter of urgency, specific management plans for these areas, defining clear conservation objectives and measures for their control, based on an integrated approach, developed on the basis of methods and techniques that enable the active participation of affected parties in these coastal communities, such as the fisheries sector, the scientific community and social and environmental organisations, so that they can actively engage in the co-management of these areas;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment73


Draft opinion

Paragraph 4

Draft opinion

Amendment


4.Considers extremely urgent strengthening and efficiently implementing existing marine protected areas; calls on the Member States to stablish and truly implement management plans for all MPAs, including it monitoring, surveillance and effective control; stresses that only proper governance of this areas would contribute for their objectives;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment74


Draft opinion

Paragraph 4

Draft opinion

Amendment


4.Considers that strengthening and efficiently implementing existing closed areas or, where necessary, stepping up checks in those areas, would be much more efficient and meaningful;

Or. {IT}it

Amendment75

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 4

Draft opinion

Amendment


4.Considers that in addition to expanding protected areas, the strengthening and to efficiently implement existing closed areas remains effective, necessary and meaningful;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment76

Annie Schreijer-Pierik

Draft opinion

Paragraph 4

Draft opinion

Amendment


4.Considers that strengthening and efficiently implementing existing closed areas would be much more efficient and meaningful than establishing new MPAs;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment77


Draft opinion

Paragraph 4

Draft opinion

Amendment


4.Considers that, in parallel, existing MPAs should be strengthened and efficiently implemented;

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment78

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

4a.Urges Member States to expedite the development and submission of Joint Recommendations for the management of fisheries in their marine protected areas under Article 11 of the Common Fisheries Policy; Calls on the Commission to follow scientific advice when assessing proposals and to systematically reject inadequate measures, including the use of destructive fishing gears inside marine protected areas;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment79

Carmen Avram, Manuel Pizarro, Ivo Hristov, Isabel Carvalhais

Draft opinion

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

4a.Notes with concern that some man-made wetlands are under a constant pressure by the improper management of certain protected species of birds and mammals, such as Great Cormorant, herons or otters, which are seriously damaging the aquaculture farms bringing the farmers on the edge of abandoning the activity and thus leading to more damage on the overall biodiversity;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment80


Draft opinion

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

4a.Highlights that, when successfully implemented, MPAs offer socio-economic benefits, especially for coastal communities, the fisheries and other sectors like tourism; stresses that MPAs perform key ecological functions for the reproduction of marine species and protection of habitats and improve their resilience to climate change;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment81


Draft opinion

Paragraph 5

Draft opinion

Amendment

5.Stresses the importance of including in the EU Biodiversity Strategy ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ provided for by the Convention on Biological Diversity1 ; considers that these ‘other measures’ sometimes offer a higher level of protection than those provided for by an MPA;

5.Stresses the importance of including in the EU Biodiversity Strategy ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ provided for by the CBD Decision CBD/COP/DEC/14/81, governed and managed in ways that achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in situ conservation of biodiversity, with associated ecosystem functions and services and where applicable, cultural, spiritual, socio-economic, and other locally relevant values;

_________________

_________________

1 https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-14/cop-14-dec-08-en.pdf


Or. {EN}en

Amendment82


Draft opinion

Paragraph 5

Draft opinion

Amendment


5.Stresses the importance of including in the EU Biodiversity Strategy ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ provided for by the Convention on Biological Diversity1 ; considers that these ‘other measures’ sometimes offer a higher level of protection than those provided for by an MPA; calls on the Commission to examine the effectiveness of these ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’;

_________________

_________________



Or. {FR}fr

Amendment83

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 5

Draft opinion

Amendment


5.Stresses the importance of including in the EU Biodiversity Strategy ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ provided for by the Convention on Biological Diversity1 ; as well as measures to counter the negative effects of noise and light pollution on marine biodiversity;

_________________

_________________



Or. {EN}en

Amendment84

Carmen Avram, Manuel Pizarro, Ivo Hristov, Isabel Carvalhais

Draft opinion

Paragraph 5 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

5a.Acknowledges that fish farming and seafood aquaculture generate the lowest carbon footprint in the animal husbandry sector; encourages thus that the Biodiversity Strategy should recognize, support and promote environmental friendly management practices developed by farmers;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment85

Carmen Avram, Manuel Pizarro, Ivo Hristov, Tudor Ciuhodaru, Adrian-Dragoş Benea, Rovana Plumb, Isabel Carvalhais

Draft opinion

Paragraph 5 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

5b.Calls on the Commission to urgently and temporarily transfer the sturgeons from Annex V to Annex II or even Annex I to Habitats Directive 92/43 / EEC, until scientifically determined that wild stock of sturgeons are no longer red listed under the IUCN list;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment86


Draft opinion

Subheading 2

Draft opinion

Amendment

No-take zones

deleted

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment87

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Subheading 2

Draft opinion

Amendment

No-take zones

deleted

Or. {EN}en

Amendment88


Draft opinion

Subheading 2 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Stresses the emergency to establish “fish stock recovery areas” (or “no take zones”) in the Black Sea, to allow the recovery of the wild populations of sturgeons, as such areas were proven beneficial both for biodiversity conservation and for fishery management;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment89


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6

Draft opinion

Amendment

6.Points out that establishing protection zones does not have to be incompatible with the practice of activities, including extractive ones, as long as they do not compromise the values of those protected areas and provided that they are established under scientific advice and that there is adequate management and control;

deleted

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment90


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6

Draft opinion

Amendment


6.Points out that establishing no-take zones is essential to ensure the protection of the restocking and breeding areas of many species essential for biodiversity, such as marine cetaceans, which in certain cases do not have to be incompatible with the practice of sustainable tourism activities, as long as they do not compromise the values of those protected areas and provided that they are established under scientific advice and that there is adequate management and control, but that they can bring great alternative benefits to coastal areas, as well as serving as important sites for education and research on marine biodiversity; points out the need for new areas created under this strategy to be included in the Natura 2000 framework and, where appropriate, supplemented by additional designations by the Member States;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment91


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6

Draft opinion

Amendment


6.Points out that establishing strictly protected areas does not have to be incompatible with the practice of non-extractive activities, as long as they do not compromise the values of those protected areas and provided that they are designed and established under best scientific advice, with high stakeholder participation, and that there is adequate management, monitoring, surveillance and control;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment92

Anja Hazekamp

Draft opinion

Paragraph 6

Draft opinion

Amendment


6.Stresses that all MPA's should be considered as no-take zones, which benefit from a high level of protection by prohibiting fishing activities, in particular the most destructive fishing techniques such as bottom-contacting gear, and other extractive activities inside these areas.

Or. {EN}en

Amendment93


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

6a.Considers that no-take zones can, and should, be used as Ocean Literacy sites improving marine and environmental awareness of local communities and visiting population; stresses that non-extractive uses of no-take zones can play a major role in the surveillance and even monitoring of the area with the participation of visitors in Citizen Science actions and programmes;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment94

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Subheading 2 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

No take zones

Or. {EN}en

Amendment95

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

6a.Emphasises the importance and usefulness of no-take zones where all catches and economic activities are banned;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment96

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

6b.Calls on the Commission, in its implementation of an ecosystem approach to fisheries management, to continue to support plans to improve selectivity and the survival of non-target species, to reduce the impact of fisheries on marine ecosystems, and to take into account the results of studies showing the detrimental impact that certain practices have on stocks, ocean biodiversity and marine environments by strongly limiting their use;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment97

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6 c (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

6c.Welcomes that 10% of European waters will benefit from a high level of protection, including areas where all catches and all economic activities are prohibited (no-take zones);

Or. {EN}en

Amendment98

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Subheading 2 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

Deep seabed mining

Or. {EN}en

Amendment99

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6 d (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

6d.Stresses that the deep sea is home to the greatest diversity of species and ecosystems on Earth, provides critical environmental goods and services, including long-term carbon sequestration, and is characterized by environmental conditions that make it highly vulnerable to human disturbance; scientists have warned that deep seabed mining will cause biodiversity loss, both by destroying seabed life where mining would take place, with little prospect of recovery, and by generating plumes, light, toxins and noise that could impact both benthic and mesopelagic marine life far beyond actual mining sites; and the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development calls for protection of the ocean, building resilience and restoration of degraded ecosystems and sustainable consumption and production of resources.

Or. {EN}en

Amendment100

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6 e (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

6e.Calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish a moratorium in EU waters and to support an international moratorium on deep seabed mining, to refrain from adopting regulations for deep-sea mineral exploitation including by the International Seabed Authority, to cease subsidising licences for mineral prospecting and extraction in areas beyond national jurisdiction, to cease funding for the development of seabed mining technology; and to not issue exploitation or new exploration contracts including for mining national continental shelves unless and until the environmental, social and economic risks are comprehensively understood; deep seabed mining can be managed to prevent the loss of marine biodiversity, ensure the resilience of and prevent degradation of marine ecosystems; the free, prior, informed consent from potentially affected communities is obtained; efforts to develop circular economies and better materials resource use are underway; and the reform of the structure and functioning of the International Seabed Authority to ensure a transparent, accountable, inclusive and environmentally responsible decision-making is achieved.

Or. {EN}en

Amendment101


Draft opinion

Paragraph 6 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

6b.Recognises the difficulties associated to the compatibilization of different uses of the sea and conflicts managements between some uses of space including recreational and leisure activities; highlights that technology is in constant evolution and, as consequence, all activities also evolves, being necessary consider spatial planning as evolutionary;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment102

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 7

Draft opinion

Amendment

7.Stresses the importance of proper and inclusive spatial planning, which takes sufficiently into account the sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture, pointing to the need for allocating space to existing and new fishing grounds and aquaculture farms;

7.Stresses the importance of proper and inclusive spatial planning, which takes sufficiently into account the sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture as well as the status and sensitivity of habitats, pointing to the need for a transparent and participate mechanism following the Marine Spatial Planning Directive for allocating space to all economic stakeholders;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment103


Draft opinion

Paragraph 7

Draft opinion

Amendment


7.Stresses the importance of proper and inclusive spatial planning, which takes sufficiently into account the sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture, giving priority to the most vulnerable and socially disadvantaged and pointing to the need for allocating space to existing and new fishing grounds and aquaculture farms;

Or. {IT}it

Amendment104


Draft opinion

Paragraph 7

Draft opinion

Amendment


7.Stresses the importance of proper and inclusive spatial planning, which takes sufficiently into account the environmental, social and economic sustainable development of fisheries and aquaculture, pointing to the need for allocating space to existing and new fishing grounds and aquaculture farms;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment105


Draft opinion

Paragraph 7 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

7a.Recalls the need to consider all other blue economy activities in spatial planning, in particular recreational and leisure activities; stresses the need to avoid banning entire sectors from marine protected areas; in the case of fishing, calls on the Commission to distinguish different types of fishing gear and to take into account fishing effort and specific impact, to determine which activity should, or not, be restricted; underlines that some fishing activities, such as small-scale or recreational fisheries, can be very selective and even non-extractive;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment106


Draft opinion

Paragraph 7 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

7a.Urges the Commission and the Member States, given the expected expansion of renewable energy at sea, to boost scientific research on the impact of energy solutions such as ocean energy, offshore wind farms or solar panels farms at an environmental level — notably on their impact on biodiversity — and at a socio-economic level;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment107


Draft opinion

Paragraph 7 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

7b.Recognise the need to implement an action plan to conserve fisheries resources and protect marine ecosystems, considering the urgency of reversing biodiversity losses; therefore, considers necessary the implementation of additional and complementary measures to the CFP framework;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment108

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 8

Draft opinion

Amendment

8.Recalls that the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) provides for a robust regulatory framework with sophisticated tools, which has set down the dates of publication of specific reports: the Commission is to report to Parliament and to the Council on the functioning of the CFP by 31 December 2022;

8.Recalls that the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) provides for a robust regulatory framework with sophisticated tools, which has set down the dates of publication of specific reports: the Commission is to report to Parliament and to the Council on the functioning of the CFP by 31 December 2022; recalls that Article 8 of the CFP on Fish Stock Recovery Areas has not been implemented as of today;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment109


Draft opinion

Paragraph 8

Draft opinion

Amendment

8.Recalls that the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) provides for a robust regulatory framework with sophisticated tools, which has set down the dates of publication of specific reports: the Commission is to report to Parliament and to the Council on the functioning of the CFP by 31 December 2022;

8.Recalls that CFP provides a robust regulatory framework with sophisticated tools, which has set down the dates of publication of specific reports: the Commission is to report to Parliament and to the Council on the functioning of the CFP by 31 December 2022;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment110

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 9

Draft opinion

Amendment

9.Recalls that, according to the new Technical Measures Regulation2 , the Commission must submit a report to Parliament and the Council by 31 December 2020, and that only in cases where there is evidence that the objectives and targets have not been met, the Commission may propose measures;

9.Recalls that, according to the new Technical Measures Regulation[1] that covers the taking and landing of fisheries resources as well as the operation of fishing gear and the interaction of fishing activities with marine ecosystems, the Commission must submit a report to Parliament and the Council by 31 December 2020;

_________________

2 OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 105.

Or. {EN}en

Amendment111


Draft opinion

Paragraph 9

Draft opinion

Amendment


9.Recalls also that, according to the new Technical Measures Regulation2 , the Commission must submit a report to Parliament and the Council by 31 December 2020, and that in cases where there is evidence that the objectives and targets have not been met, the Commission may propose measures;

_________________

_________________

2 OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 105.

2 OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 105.

Or. {EN}en

Amendment112


Draft opinion

Paragraph 9

Draft opinion

Amendment


9.Recalls that, according to the new Technical Measures Regulation2 , the Commission must submit a report to Parliament and the Council by 31 December 2020, and that in cases where there is evidence that the objectives and targets have not been met, the Commission may propose measures;

_________________

_________________

2 OJ L 198/105, 25.7.2019.

2 OJ L 198/105, 25.7.2019.

Or. {ES}es

Amendment113


Draft opinion

Paragraph 9

Draft opinion

Amendment


9.Recalls that, according to the new Technical Measures Regulation2, the Commission must submit a report to Parliament and the Council on the progress made by Member States on fishing gear selectivity and by-catch reductions;

_________________

_________________

2 OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 105

2 OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 105

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment114


Draft opinion

Paragraph 9 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

9a.Urges Member States to take action to strengthen the ex-situ conservation of sturgeons in special facilities, resume supportive stocking programs with native juvenile sturgeons and launch studies assessing the percentage of adult fish returning for spawning;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment115


Draft opinion

Paragraph 10

Draft opinion

Amendment

10.Calls on therefore the Commission to wait for the abovementioned reports before proposing an action plan;

deleted

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment116

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 10

Draft opinion

Amendment


deleted

Or. {EN}en

Amendment117

Manuel Pizarro, Isabel Carvalhais, Clara Aguilera, Ivo Hristov

Draft opinion

Paragraph 10

Draft opinion

Amendment


deleted

Or. {EN}en

Amendment118


Draft opinion

Paragraph 10

Draft opinion

Amendment


10.Calls therefore on the Commission to draw up an action plan in order to be able to act to prevent further degradation of biodiversity;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment119


Draft opinion

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

10a.Recalls the importance of proper and diligent implementation of the Control Regulation, the reform of which is to be adopted soon and which will promote the protection of marine biodiversity in European seas;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment120


Draft opinion

Paragraph 10 b (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

10b.Stresses the importance of continuing to implement a zero-tolerance policy towards illegal, unregulated and undocumented fishing, and of promoting sustainable fishing by combating overfishing and by-catches of endangered species as well as other species;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment121


Draft opinion

Paragraph 10 c (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

10c.Calls for third countries, in particular neighbouring countries, to be required to monitor the fishery resources in their waters in an equivalent manner in order to ensure a healthy ecosystem in marine habitats that do not depend on artificial man-made borders;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment122


Draft opinion

Subheading 5

Draft opinion

Amendment

Discriminatory treatment

deleted

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment123


Draft opinion

Subheading 5

Draft opinion

Amendment


Fisheries sector fair treatment

Or. {EN}en

Amendment124


Draft opinion

Subheading 5

Draft opinion

Amendment


Fair treatment

Or. {ES}es

Amendment125


Draft opinion

Paragraph 11

Draft opinion

Amendment

11.Expresses its deep regret over the obvious discriminatory treatment of fisheries compared to that of agriculture; welcomes the fact the proposed strategy outlines that ‘the progress towards the targets will be under constant review, and adjustment if needed, to mitigate against undue impact on biodiversity, food security and farmers’ competitiveness’; notes, however, that this sentence, which is a necessary safety net, is clearly discriminatory since it fails to mention fishers and aquaculture producers;

deleted

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment126

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Paragraph 11

Draft opinion

Amendment


11.Highlights that apart from fisheries also other anthropogenic impacts such as from agriculture, IUU fishing, maritime transport, offshore oil and gas drilling, submarine pipelines and pollution caused by industrial, urban and plastic waste have a detrimental impact on the marine environment; urges to address all such impact in a holistic manner; welcomes the fact the proposed strategy outlines that ‘the progress towards the targets will be under constant review, and adjustment if needed, to mitigate against undue impact on biodiversity, food security and farmers’ competitiveness’; notes, however, that this sentence, which is a necessary safety net, is clearly discriminatory since it fails to mention fishers and aquaculture producers;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment127


Draft opinion

Paragraph 11

Draft opinion

Amendment


11.Expresses its deep regret over the obvious discriminatory treatment of fisheries compared to that of agriculture; welcomes the fact the proposed strategy outlines that ‘the progress towards the targets will be under constant review, and adjustment if needed, to mitigate against undue impact on biodiversity, food security and farmers’ competitiveness’; notes, however, that this sentence, which is a necessary safety net, is clearly discriminatory since it fails to mention fishers and aquaculture producers; notes, further, that individual operators have suffered discriminatory treatment compared to that of farmers as regards access to specific forms of financial support;

Or. {IT}it

Amendment128


Draft opinion

Paragraph 11

Draft opinion

Amendment


11.Expresses the need to a fair treatment of fisheries sector compared to other activities; welcomes the fact the proposed strategy outlines that ‘the progress towards the targets will be under constant review, and adjustment if needed, to mitigate against undue impact on biodiversity, food security and farmers’ competitiveness’; notes, however, that this sentence, which is a necessary safety net, should treat at the same level of importance fishers and aquaculture producers by referring them;

Or. {EN}en

Amendment129


Draft opinion

Paragraph 11

Draft opinion

Amendment


11.Expresses the need for fair treatment of fisheries compared to other sectors such as agriculture; welcomes the fact the proposed strategy outlines that ‘the progress towards the targets will be under constant review, and adjustment if needed, to mitigate against undue impact on biodiversity, food security and farmers’ competitiveness’; notes, however, that this sentence, which is a necessary safety net, should equally mention fishers and aquaculture producers;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment130


Draft opinion

Paragraph 11 a (new)

Draft opinion

Amendment

11a.Expresses the need to accord the fisheries sector the importance it justly deserves in order to guarantee in all cases the socio-economic sustainability of all people affected by the transformation processes of the marine environment required to guarantee the biodiversity indices needed by the various ecosystems to remain healthy and to continue to provide the environmental services resulting from natural processes, including, where necessary, the promotion of new alternatives that the blue economy will offer to fishing communities and the associated training processes that they may require;

Or. {ES}es

Amendment131


Draft opinion

Subheading 6

Draft opinion

Amendment

Fisheries: the source of all evil?

deleted

Or. {EN}en

Amendment132

Benoît Biteau


Draft opinion

Subheading 6

Draft opinion

Amendment


deleted

Or. {EN}en

Amendment133


Draft opinion

Subheading 6

Draft opinion

Amendment


An ecosystem approach to the CFP

Or. {FR}fr

Amendment134


Draft opinion

Paragraph 12

Draft opinion

Amendment

12.Strongly denounces the excessive focus on fishing and its connection with the failure to achieve the good ecological status in marine ecosystems and the lack of consideration given to other sources of pressure and degradation, such as oil, gas, dredging or shipping;

deleted

Or. {EN}en

Amendment135


Draft opinion

Paragraph 12

Draft opinion

Amendment

12.Strongly denounces the excessive focus on fishing and its connection with the failure to achieve the good ecological status in marine ecosystems and the lack of consideration given to other sources of pressure and degradation, such as oil, gas, dredging or shipping;

12.Strongly denounces the fact that fishing is primarily blamed for the failure to achieve the good ecological status in marine ecosystems when, according to the United Nations, up to 80% of all global marine pollution originates from land-based sources, posing a threat to marine life in general, but especially in coastal waters and in areas with high biological productivity; recalls that these pollutants include agricultural run-off, pesticides, chemical residues, cleaning agents, products derived from oil, gas, mining waste, litter, waste water, dredging and shipping;

Documents

· Web viewA.whereas EU fishing, aquaculture and processing sectors subscribe to the highest standards of environmental and social sustainability throughout the entire value chain,