On the EU Action Plan: protecting and restoring marine ecosystems for sustainable and resilient fisheries
A-9-2023-0437
Committee on Fisheries · Rapporteur: Niclas Herbst
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
Parliament's resolution responds to the Commission's EU Action Plan on protecting and restoring marine ecosystems for sustainable and resilient fisheries. It welcomes progress by the fisheries sector but says the action plan lacks coherence with food security, stakeholder consultation and impact assessment.¶¶¶ It calls for a balanced, ecosystem-based approach to marine protected areas and bottom contacting gears, with fishers involved in design and management, and for measures to follow the ordinary legislative procedure with genuine impact assessments.¶¶¶ It asks for financial support and compensation through the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund for fleets transitioning to more selective techniques, and for scientific research and data collection on marine ecosystems.¶ On eels, it says the Eel Regulation should remain the core policy, calls for an eel-specific expert group and urges Member States to update management plans and meet reporting obligations.¶¶ It calls for reciprocity in international agreements, support for developing countries and mirroring of restrictions on imported products, noting the EU imports 70 % of the fish it consumes.¶¶¶
Committee position. The Committee on Fisheries proposes a resolution that welcomes progress by the fisheries sector but criticises the action plan for lacking coherence, stakeholder consultation and impact assessment. It calls for a balanced approach to marine protected areas and bottom trawling, financial support for the sector, and the Eel Regulation as the core policy for eels.¶¶¶
Key points
- Praises the EU fisheries sector's efforts and progress, but says the ocean is affected by overfishing, climate change, acidification, invasive alien species and pollution beyond fishers' control.¶
- Says the action plan lacks coherence with food security and strategic autonomy, should use an integrated ecosystem-based approach, and did not sufficiently consider rising prices, the social dimension of the Common Fisheries Policy or economic growth.¶
- Regrets the lack of real stakeholder consultation and that proportionality is not properly taken into account in Commission proposals.¶
- Says the action plan should be consistent with Common Fisheries Policy objectives on environmental sustainability, economic, social and employment benefits, food supply and use of fishing opportunities.¶
- Calls for financial support for scientific studies and data collection, and for compensation and incentives through the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund to help fleets transition to more selective techniques and mitigate socioeconomic impacts.¶
- Reiterates the objectives of protecting at least 30 % and strictly protecting at least 10 % of EU seas by 2030.¶
- Calls for a balanced approach to marine protected areas that reflects each area's conservation objectives and traditional activities, and for fishers to take part in their designation and management.¶¶
- Says restrictions on bottom contacting gears must consider available resources, fishers' experience, vessel redistribution and working conditions, and should be regulated primarily under the Technical Measures Regulation.¶¶
- Says the Eel Regulation should remain the core policy for eel management and recovery, and expresses concern about the six-month closing period introduced by Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 without proper consultation or compensation.¶¶
- Calls for an eel-specific expert group and urges Member States to update eel management plans and meet reporting obligations.¶
- Calls on the Commission and Member States to conduct studies before new or reformed regulations, and says measures should follow the ordinary legislative procedure with genuine impact assessments and stakeholder involvement.¶¶
- Calls for reciprocity in international agreements, support for developing countries on ocean management and transparency, and mirroring of restrictions on imported products to ensure a level playing field.¶¶¶
Who is affected
- EU fishing fleets and fishers, especially those most affected by restrictions, who would receive support and compensation for transitioning to more selective techniques.¶
- Coastal communities and small-scale artisanal fisheries, whose participation in marine protected area design and management is called for.¶¶
- Member States, which are urged to implement protective measures, update eel management plans and conduct studies.¶¶¶
- Developing countries, particularly in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific, which would receive capacity building and financing for ocean and coastal management.¶
- Non-EU countries and their fleets, whose products would face mirrored restrictions and which are called on to address activities detrimental to ocean protection.¶¶
Figures and deadlines
- at least 30 % of EU seas to be protected by 2030¶
- at least 10 % of EU seas to be strictly protected by 2030
- 87 areas in EU waters of the north-east Atlantic where all bottom fishing gear is prohibited¶
- 16 419 km2 total area covered by the 87 areas
- 17 % of the area between 400 and 800 metres deep where bottom fishing gear is not allowed
- around 90 measures in the action plan¶
- 70 % of the fish consumed in the EU is imported¶
- mobile bottom gear catches account for 25 % of total European catches¶
Legal basis: Article 39 and Article 5 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union¶