Activities of Anna DEPARNAY-GRUNENBERG related to 2020/2273(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (debate)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives
Amendments (60)
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that agricultural productivity and resilience depend on biodiversity to guarantee the long-term sustainability of our food systems; underlines, furthermore, that muchconsiderable amounts of the biodiversity across Europe hasd been created by farming and its survival is dependent on the continued activemaintained by low- input traditional farming systems and in many cases, survival of many species is dependent on the continued sustainable, low impact, low intensity management of farmland;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. It is undeniable, based on a vast body of scientific evidence, including recently the UN's IPBES meta-study on biodiversity and ecosystem services1a, that certain contemporary farming practices of course also contribute highly significantly to habitat loss, and local species extinctions, including of agro-ecosystems and species beneficial to farming, leading to ecosystem simplification, loss of ecosystem functions and ecosystem collapse. Recognises therefore the urgent need to change the destructive status quo which imperils lives, livelihoods and health; _________________ 1a IPBES, "Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services" 2019. www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/inline/file s/ipbes_global_assessment_report_summa ry_for_policymakers.pdf
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that cascading effect of landscape simplification leads to lower crop production through, in particular, reduced both pollinator and natural enemy richness1a; reiterates that replacement of natural enemy population by use of insecticides exacerbates further the problem of reduced pollination, which is a direct component of crop production; Calls for a holistic approach in order to safeguard ecosystem services through measures leading to increased landscape heterogeneity; _________________ 1aM. Dainese, E. A. Martin, M. A. Aizen, M. Albrecht, I. Bartomeus, R. Bommarco, L. G. Carvalheiro, R. Chaplin-Kramer, V. Gagic, L. A. Garibaldi, J. Ghazoul, H. Grab, M. Jonsson, D. S. Karp, C. M. Kennedy, D. Kleijn, C. Kremen, D. A. Landis, D. K. Letourneau, L. Marini, K. Poveda, R. Rader, H. G. Smith, T. Tscharntke, G. K. S. Andersson, I. Badenhausser, S. Baensch, A. D. M. Bezerra, F. J. J. A. Bianchi, V. Boreux, V. Bretagnolle, B. Caballero-Lopez, P. Cavigliasso, A. Ćetković, N. P. Chacoff, A. Classen, S. Cusser, F.D. da Silva e Silva, G. A. deGroot, J.H. Dudenhöffer, J. Ekroos, T. Fijen, P. Franck, B. M. Freitas, M. P. D. Garratt, C. Gratton, J. Hipólito, A. Holzschuh, L. Hunt, A. L. Iverson, S. Jha, T. Keasar, T. N. Kim,M. Kishinevsky, B. K. Klatt, A.-M. Klein, K.M. Krewenka, S. Krishnan, A. E. Larsen, C. Lavigne, H. Liere, B. Maas, R. E. Mallinger, E. Martinez Pachon, A. Martínez-Salinas, T. D. Meehan, M. G. E. Mitchell, G. A. R. Molina, M. Nesper, L. Nilsson, M. E. O’Rourke,M. K. Peters,M. Plećaš, S. G. Potts, D. d. L. Ramos, J. A. Rosenheim, M. Rundlöf, A. Rusch, A. Sáez, J. Scheper, M. Schleuning, J. M. Schmack, A. R. Sciligo, C. Seymour, D. A. Stanley, R. Stewart, J. C. Stout, L. Sutter,M. B. Takada, H. Taki, G. Tamburini, M. Tschumi, B. F. Viana, C. Westphal, B. K. Willcox, S. D. Wratten, A. Yoshioka, C. Zaragoza-Trello, W. Zhang, Y. Zou, I. Steffan-Dewenter, A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax0121 (2019).
Amendment 38 #
2. Welcomes, and insists on maintaining, the high level of ambition of the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 in seeking to halt and reverse biodiversity loss in the EU; considers that this level of ambition encourages policy action at all levels and promotes the development and mainstreaming of research and innovative solutions to tackle biodiversity loss; stresses that the continuous decline in farmland biodiversity including on a landscape scale is a reality and that bold action is needed to counteract this trend;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Regrets the fact that the EU’s biodiversity strategy to 2020 had not set measurable targets for agriculture, making it difficult to assess progress and the performance of EU-funded actions; recalls that poor coordination between EU policies and strategies dealing with biodiversity has led to failure to address the decline in genetic diversity 1a ;Calls on the Commission to follow the ECA's recommendations and to build on these lessons learned in the Biodiversity strategy 2030; _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocI tem.aspx?did=%7bB5A7E9DE-C42E- 4C1D-A5D2-03CA1FADE6F8%7d
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that after the ideals and good intentions announced in the Green Deal, there must be consequent follow-up in implementation, notably also in the common agricultural policy, which has a highly significant impact on biodiversity as it governs land use not only in the EU but also beyond;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes that EU agriculture, food and industry also drive biodiversity crashes and ecosystem collapse globally through direct and indirect land use change, especially through imported soya used for animal feed and palm oil used for biofuels and food, that both cause massive tropical and subtropical deforestation and habitat conversion;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Notes the alarming increase in domesticated animals kept for our food, principally chickens, pigs & cows, during the Anthropocene; notes the distribution of planetary vertebrate biomass is now dominated by humans (one third and rising) and their domesticated food animals (livestock at almost two thirds, rising), versus wild animals (1-4%, rapidly shrinking)1a; notes that since 1970 human and dependent food animal species populations have almost doubled while wild vertebrate populations have more than halved1b and that 70% of all birds are now chickens and other poultry while only 30% are wild1b; notes that these global trends in biodiversity loss correlate with expansion of intensive agriculture, and conversion of habitats and resident biodiversity being replaced by food animals kept for human consumption; _________________ 1aSmil, Vaclav. (2011). Harvesting the Biosphere: The Human Impact. Population and development review. 37. 613-36. 10.1111/j.1728- 4457.2011.00450.x. See also The biomass distribution on Earth, Y.M.Bar-On, R.Phillips, R.Milo in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jun 2018, 115 (25) 6506-6511 1b+96% increase, vs. -60% decrease; Collen, B. et al. Monitoring Change in Vertebrate Abundance: the Living Planet Index. Conservation Biology 23, 317-327 (2009); WWF/Zoological Society London, The Living Planet Index database, (2018); UN Population division 2018.
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Recognises the role of EU meat production in the global biodiversity crash. Notes the need, within the Green deal strategies, to limit livestock production to within our EU carrying capacity, based on grazing and home- grown fodder, without polluting our waters, soils and air, or driving deforestation and habitat conversion outside the EU. Considers this a blind spot of the Green Deal and its strategies: a reluctance to challenge the extractive model of trade based upon deforestation and exploitation and conversion of other tropical and subtropical habitats that are the repositories of most of the world's biodiversity, in order to feed an animal population that is too large for European consumers to eat or European resources to sustain, in order to export to third country markets using dumping practices;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Calls for the effective implementation of the long overdue EU protein strategy, principally through incorporation into the CAP national Strategic Plans, in particular to reduce dependency on forest destroying soya imported for animal feed, originating from tropical and subtropical areas; Calls upon the Member States and Commission to ensure its inclusion therein. Notes the importance of home grown leguminous crops grown in rotation, and also matching livestock populations and densities to local carrying capacities, and a shift to grazing pasture and also temporary grasslands and herbaceous arable leys enriched with sown legumes;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)
Paragraph 2 f (new)
2f. In general calls for the application of due diligence and for products of deforestation not to be allowed access to the EU market;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises the strong link with the Farm to Fork strategy and the need for a holistic approach to the food system; calls on the Commission to establish an evidence-based evaluation of the implementation of the strategy’s measures and targets, in particular of the individual and cumulative impacts on the social and economic sustainability of agriculture in the EU, long term food security and prices, and the potential risks of displacing biodiversity losses abroad by the replacement of local agricultural production with imports; the cost of inaction and a continuation of the status quo, including effects on global ecosystem functioning and life support; notes that the potential risks of displacing biodiversity losses abroad by the replacement of local agricultural production with imports pre-supposes that high biodiversity systems are less productive, whereas numerous peer- reviewed scientific and economic studies show this is not the case and that low artificial input, high-biodiversity agroecological systems are equally productive as conventional systems in nearly 2/3 of cases, if not more productive1a, but are often also more profitable1b; stresses the need to look at the long term regarding both resource use and food security; _________________ 1aMeta-study review by Tamburini et. al, 2020. “Agricultural diversification promotes multiple ecosystem services without compromising yield.” Science Advances; They reviewed 98 meta- analyses based on 5160 original studies, comprising 41,946 comparisons between diversified and simplified practices. In 63% of cases, agroecology boosted biodiversity without any cost to yields, and in many cases, yields actually increased. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aba1715 https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6 /45/eaba1715 1bMeta-study /review by J.D. van der Ploeg et al, 2019. "The economic potential of agroecology: Empirical evidence from Europe", Journal of Rural Studies, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.09. 003
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to promote the use of pasture and pastoral habitats, including wooded pastures and other agroforestry systems, as a critical precondition for creating nesting substrates for pollinators, birds and mammals, and in synergy with maintenance of high nature value grassland communities confined to grazing and traditional forms of extensive farming;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines that land use change is a significant driver of the transmission and emergence of infectious diseases. Land use change is cited as the cause of over 30% of emerging infectious diseases, and correlates significantly with the emergence of novel zoonoses globally1a; notes further that in the last 30 years there have been over 50 zoonotic disease cross-over events; _________________ 1aIPBES “Workshop report on Biodiversity and Pandemics”, 2020. https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2020- 12/IPBES%20Workshop%20on%20Biodi versity%20and%20Pandemics%20Report _0.pdf
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Notes the IDDRI study1a on the feasibility of transitioning to agro-ecology in Europe in terms of food production, which found that under an agro- ecological system, European farms would be able to produce enough food to feed its 2050 population and also maintain some export capacity; notes that the FAO also underlines that biodiversity contributes to food security and nutrition in many ways1b, including by enabling food to be produced in a wide range of environments, helping to maintain the stability of food supplies through the year and through shocks such as droughts and pest outbreaks, supplying a wide variety of nutritionally diverse foods and contributing to the supply of water and fuel used in food preparation; _________________ 1aIDDRI “An Agroecological Europe in 2050: multifunctional agriculture for healthy eating”, 2018. 1bFAO “Biodiversity for food and agriculture: Contributing to food security and sustainability in a changing world”, 2011.
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Expresses concern over plans and projects of intensive animal feeding operations in various Member States; considers that traditional extensive animal farming is being threatened by intensive form of production which the Common Agricultural policy helps make profitable to the detriment of biodiversity and wider environment; calls for all policy instruments coherently working towards support of the traditional European cultural landscape of the extensive production supporting biodiversity and phasing out support to intensive production units;
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. CStresses that biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse are an existential threat to the survival of many species including humans; considers that biodiversity conservation is a key societal goal, requiring a broad and inclusive debate, and the effective participation of everyone in society, in particular those more affected by the measures, such as the world's poor and most vulnerable populations, those dependent on biodiversity for their livelihoods, and the EU farming community, while at the sameo are being asked to implement positive change for the common good; Notes the need to benefiting from theirfarmers' knowledge and experience, and creating a sense of ownership, vital for the successful implementation of the strategyto mainstream the many success stories that are a win-win-win for biodiversity, society and farmers' profits; notes also the need in creating a sense of custodianship for nature and biodiversity, especially where it helps farmers' productivity, and ownership over the implementation of the strategy, which is vital for it to be successful;
Amendment 127 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the key role of the common agricultural policy (CAP) in protecting and promoting farmland biodiversity; underlines the potential of the green architecture components of the CAP in promoting and providing incentives for the transition to more sustainable agricultural systems for producing food and maintaining high nature value farmland; considers that Member States must ensure the timely development and uptake of actions which contribute to enhancing the delivery and potential of biodiversity benefits in line with the required level of ambitionset effective baselines for sustainability and biodiversity when defining their conditionality standards, and ensure the ambitious and timely development and uptake of interventions, in particular eco-schemes and agri- environmental-climate measures in rural development, which would contribute to enhancing the delivery and potential of biodiversity benefits in line with the required level of ambition; Calls on the Commission to play its role effectively when assessing the design and following up the implementation of the Member States' strategic plans through ambitious targets and milestones; notes the need for using a sufficient and effective set of indicators to measure performance of the CAP in stemming and reversing the biodiversity crash, and to measure impact on the ground and in the waters;
Amendment 145 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Relies on the CAP reform to incorporate Green Deal strategy targets, and for CAP funds to be used wisely to actually benefit biodiversity and climate, by investing public funds into interventions proven to be effective for the transition to environmental sustainability; notes with urgency that this is the last chance mandate for turning around the biodiversity crash and the chaos of runaway climate change; recalls that greening efforts failed due to retrofitting during CAP reform negotiations of those greening requirement to actions already being done, resulting in no net positive change in an entire programming period. Is concerned that if citizens' decades-long demands for effective change towards sustainability are yet again ignored, and another programming period of massive expenditure again yields no results in starting to positively impact biodiversity and climate, then the calls for cutting the CAP expenditure may escalate; recalls the concerns of the Court of Auditors for the new delivery model and of the risk of no effective change for biodiversity and climate and also for tracking that expenditure in the CAP, without dilution by e.g. irrelevant animal welfare interventions with no link to biodiversity or climate; reminds the Commission of its responsibility to check the likely effectiveness of new and adapted interventions originally intended for this purpose, notably eco-schemes in the new delivery model;
Amendment 150 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Notes that the CAP has been failing to promote the positive correlation between the production and selective enhancement of functional biodiversity; highlights that provision of ecosystem services by fauna requires an agricultural plot to offer a non-toxic environment and suitable habitat for all the life stages of target organisms, for nesting, breeding and foraging;
Amendment 152 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Amendment 153 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Amendment 154 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5f. Underlines that the rural development programmes have greater biodiversity potential than direct payments; calls on the Member States to use high-impact measures such as result- based schemes, as opposed to the less demanding and less beneficial (“light green”) ones 1a. _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocI tem.aspx?did=%7bB5A7E9DE-C42E- 4C1D-A5D2-03CA1FADE6F8%7d
Amendment 172 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the importance of maintaining and restoring high-diversity landscape features in agricultural landscapes for their value in terms of biodiversity, pollinators and the natural biological control of pests; calls on the Member States to develop the necessary measures under their CAP Strategic Plans to promote non-productive areas andhigh biodiversity ecological infrastructure and landscape features with the aim of achieving an area of at least 1025% of high diversity areas beneficial for biodiversity at farm level and at local, regional and national level, promoting interconnectivity between habitats and thereby maximising the potential for biodiversity;
Amendment 181 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recalls the need for ecological infrastructure in agricultural landscapes, as refugia for biodiversity or "space for nature"; notes the multiple benefits of this approach and recalls it is not "taking out" land "set aside" for "non- productive" use, as it actually increases productivity of the whole system by boosting populations of beneficial species like natural predators of pests, pollinators, topsoil creating communities, etc.; notes that in order to achieve maximum agroecological efficiency, any such ecological focus areas should be established on the same area over the years in order to allow biodiversity to accumulate;
Amendment 187 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls for holistic approach when adopting measures supporting pollinators; notes that support directed merely towards honeybees e.g. based on number of beehives, is alone absolutely insufficient in halting decline in pollinators, as well is ineffective to sustain pollination ecosystem service as honey bee only supplements, rather than substitutes for, pollination provided by different groups of insect species1a, including solitary bees, butterflies, hoverflies and beetles; Calls on Member States to include in their draft Strategic Plans a broad array of measures targeting various groups of pollinators; _________________ 1aLucas A. Garibaldi at al, 2013: Wild Pollinators Enhance Fruit Set of Crops Regardless of Honey Bee Abundance
Amendment 211 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Welcomes the Commission setting a target for the development of land under certified organic farming by 2030, but calls for this target to be set at 30%, notably in order to match the Commission’s ambitions for a global reduction in pesticide use and risk;
Amendment 213 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Highlights the need for a parallel development of the entire organic food chain in order to allow for local processing and distribution of the Union organic production; calls for a revision of public procurement legislation, including a mandatory inclusion of a minimum of 30% organic ingredients in meals served in schools and other public institutions, in order to encourage organic and local food production and to promote more healthy diets by creating a food environment that enables consumers to make the healthy choice;
Amendment 214 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Notes that Member states will contribute differently to these Union-wide targets depending on the level of development of their organic sector and therefore calls for the definition of national targets; highlights that these targets will not be met without a strong financial support, solid training programmes and advisory services; calls on member states to shape their CAP strategic plans in consequence and the Commission to make sure these strategic plans are up to the task;
Amendment 215 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Notes that organic farming is an entire production system, made up of individual techniques. While adapting these to the CAP's eco-schemes and subsequent adoption by farmers of the individual agroecological techniques is extremely positive and represents stepping stones to more sustainable and, where applied appropriately and in the right combination, more profitable production, calls on the Commission to monitor appropriately the success in achieving the organic farming target;
Amendment 216 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Notes the enormous contribution of living soils to global biodiversity, given the range and enormous numbers of species resident in them; notes the strong link between a living, healthy, biodiverse soil and the productivity and profitability of farms and their resilience to climate change. For example, droughts do not effect so strongly crops with long tap roots embedded in deep topsoils built by soil communities, with fungal mycorrhizal associations sourcing water and nutrients for the crop plants; flooding impacts living and biodiverse soil much less due to better aeration and drainage provided by soil macro-biota; living, biodiverse soils are less susceptible to leaching and erosion as fungi and bacteria glue the soil particles together; notes that a constant vegetation cover is therefore essential to keep soil biota alive, in addition to the protection offered against physical erosion of soil by wind, rain, sun; notes the important by-product of living soils is in particular the carbon sinking function of humification, the creation of humus and therefore topsoil - inputs are plant organic matter and surface vegetation: plants exude sugars and proteins from their roots to feed the entire soil community, among which topsoil building microorganisms build long-chain hydrocarbons, coating the mineral soil particles, so creating the biggest, albeit temporary, carbon store after oceans;
Amendment 217 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)
Paragraph 7 f (new)
7f. Notes the alarmingly degraded state of Europe's and the world's soils; notes the negative impacts on soil communities and biodiversity and their functions building soil and protecting plants (via mycorrhiza), including firstly their sterilisation due to collateral damage by regular field and landscape level application of pesticides intended to kill pests on crop plants; notes secondly the negative impact of synthetic fertilisers as salts on soil communities, in addition to oversupply of nutrients impoverishing plant community composition via out- competition, the eutrophication of surface waters, and fish kills via toxic algal blooms; notes further that synthetic fertilisers only elicit a growth response in plant communities when the soil is sterile or severely impoverished of soil life; notes thirdly impacts due to management such as leaving soil bare of vegetation cover; in addition notes the impact of microplastics on soil biodiversity and accumulation in food chain; notes the urgent need to correct these factors leading to death and erosion of soils. Therefore considers it is essential that any policy measure, for example in the CAP, should seek to resolve those concerns and rather promote conditions for life in the soil. These concerns should also be satisfied in the taxonomy regulation;
Amendment 223 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Underlines the importance of sustainabledemonstrating nature based forest management for the health and longevity of forest ecosystems and the preservation of the multifunctional role of forests, including training of forest owners, maintenance of existing forest habitats, local awareness-raising projects and public participation processes, with continuous afforestation and reforestation programmes; highlights the potential of agroforestry to improve and boost ecosystem services and farmland biodiversity, while enhancing farm productivity and farmer profits, and in longer cycles of up to 30 years or more;
Amendment 238 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Emphasises that achieving the EU’s goals for environment, climate and biodiversity will never be possible without healthy forests; encourages therefore actions to increase forest cover with trees that are appropriate for local conditions and ecosystems, especially avoiding exotic species that sustain far less local biodiversity; stresses that subsequent new forest must not have negative impacts on existing biodiversity or on carbon sinks, especially avoiding planting on wetlands and peatlands and also high-biodiversity pasture and other high nature value land; stresses that protection, reforestation and afforestation, with location and environment appropriate tree species, should be the focus of any future EU Forest strategy;
Amendment 246 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Highlights that EU targets are needed to achieve the restoration of degraded forests so as to recover their full ecological functionalities; notes that close-to-nature management practices are the most able to achieve these goals; recalls that different types of cutting have different impacts on forests’ soil quality and conservation status; considers that clear-cutting of large areas is by far the most damaging method, since it removes much of the organic matter and roots from the soil, causes the release of soil carbon and significantly damages the complex structure of the forest and its dependent ecosystems, as well as creating massive nutrient surges leading to fish kills due to intense soil erosion over large parcels and often steep gradients;
Amendment 248 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Amendment 250 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Underlines that in 2017, only 26% of forest species and 15% of the forest habitats were found to be in favourable conservation status in the EU, without any trend towards improvement; calls on the Commission to propose an overarching legislation on the ecological status of the EU ecosystems, including all forests, and to set up a target of 30% of EU protected forest with a favourable ecological status by 2030; recognises the role of biodiversity in ensuring that forest ecosystems remain healthy and resilient; highlights the importance of the Natura 2000 sites; notes, however, that sufficient financial resources are needed to manage such areas and to achieve enforcement; calls therefore for an appropriate increase in the LIFE budget;
Amendment 251 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Stresses that utilisation of forest resources in number of areas reaches unsustainable levels and hampers both climate and biodiversity goals as well the provision services of forests managed for wood production; underlines that increased levels of harvest lead to increase in harvested area1a, threatening ecosystems which have had primarily other function, e.g. drinking water sources protection, flood or avalanche prevention, nature protection, research, reindeer-herding or recreation; _________________ 1a Ceccherini, G., Duveiller, G., Grassi, G. et al. Abrupt increase in harvested forest area over Europe after 2015. Nature 583, 72–77 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2438-y
Amendment 254 #
8d. Recalls the difference between natural, biodiverse, old-growth forest and uniform, species-impoverished forestry plantations, often monocultures of genetically similar and/or exotic species that support far less biodiversity than natives; notes further the need to incorporate high biodiversity, especially genetic diversity, in planting considerations, as this spreads risk of pest and disease attack; notes that large trees and intact, older forests provide essential habitat that is missing from younger, managed forests; stresses therefore the need to protect old growth forests in the EU; notes that there is no EU definition of old growth forests and calls on the Commission to introduce such a definition in the future EU Forest Strategy;
Amendment 257 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8e. Points out that the 3 billion trees target should not become a driver for replacing existing old-growth and biodiverse forest with species- impoverished new forestry plantations, as this would be counter-productive to the overall objective; considers that urban and peri-urban areas, including former industrial and rehabilitated land would particularly be suited for this, as well as agricultural land especially under agro- forestry and mixed use that delivers environmental protection synergies, creating corridors using biodiverse field boundaries and connecting nature rich areas; similarly points out that afforestation of high nature value sites and carbon sinks should be avoided; recalls that the forestry strategy should fall under the Green Deal's biodiversity strategy and that these need to be fully aligned and coherent;
Amendment 260 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 f (new)
Paragraph 8 f (new)
8f. Notes that biodiversity is acquired over the years, therefore recalls the benefits to biodiversity in allowing trees to mature longer, also the importance of leaving older stands and especially allowing old native trees to survive in the forestry matrix; notes the importance of multi-species stands and promoting proforestation in managed forests; recalls that older trees and decomposition processes in older forests themselves support a whole range of species, therefore these should be included in the biodiversity strategy;
Amendment 261 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 f (new)
Paragraph 8 f (new)
8f. Considers that support to afforestation initiatives should be focusing on holistic approaches taking into account also local economic and social conditions and local communities and favouring resilient mixed and healthy forests;
Amendment 262 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 g (new)
Paragraph 8 g (new)
8g. Notes the absence of any definition on sustainable management, and welcomes the Commission's efforts to define management criteria; notes that the FOREST EUROPE process has failed to deliver objective and demonstrable EU sustainable forest management criteria that would be implemented in managed forests in the EU and that current undefined SFM approaches have not been able to prevent problematic and intensive forest management in the EU; stresses that conservation status of forest habitats and species covered by EU nature legislation show no significant signs of improvement1a; _________________ 1a https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/st ate-of-nature-in-the-eu-2020.
Amendment 263 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 h (new)
Paragraph 8 h (new)
8h. Underlines that due to climate change, natural disturbances such as droughts, floods, storms, pest infestations, erosion and fires will occur more frequently, causing damage to forests in the EU; emphasises, in this context, the need to better prevent such events by making forests more resilient, for example through dynamic climate adaptation, a more nature-based management and by offering better support mechanisms for affected areas and properties so they can be restored; notes that monocultural single species plantations are far less resilient to pests and diseases as well as to drought and fires and should thus not be supported by EU funds; stresses the crucial importance of the CAP and forestry measures in implementing the EU Forest Strategy but regrets the low number of member states making use of these measures. Encourages the continuity of forestry measures under the 2021-2027 CAP, with a particular focus on supporting the transition to more sustainable practices fostering biodiversity like continuous cover and close-to-nature management practices; highlights the need for other easily accessible, well- coordinated and relevant EU funding mechanisms;
Amendment 264 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the importance of the impact of plant protection products and tools for the stability of agricultural production and the sustainability of farmers’ incomes; considers that, although progress has been made, shamefully little progress has been made, either on behalf of DGs AGRI, SANTE or the Sustainable Use of Pesticides directive's MS National Action Plans, which were already a decade late, constituting a shared policy fail by those actors; notes that pesticide use has actually increased in that wasted time; stresses with urgency that a substantial reduction in the use and risks of chemical pesticides is both needed for biodiversity to survive, and also has been demanded for decades by EU citizens who consume the resulting food (Eurostat); stresses the key role of integrated pest management and other agroecological approaches and techniques in reducing pesticide use and dependency, and urges the Member States to ensure it is applied and its implementation is assessed systematically; stresses that farmers need a bigger toolbox of crop protection solutions and methods, as well as bolstered training and advisory systems; cautions the Commission and MS that waiting another decade for affirmative action is not a viable policy option as this mandate is the last chance window for action to avert the most destructive climate change and most damaging biodiversity collapses;
Amendment 284 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Highlights that record keeping of how much of each substance is used on each crop over time is already required in most private supply contracts, and yet conditionality under CAP has only required minimal issues (legality of active substance in EU, safe storage and equipment), since 2003 and remains unchanged; notes that with modern, accessible and ubiquitous technology (e.g. smartphones), such record keeping is easily done and will facilitate pesticide use reduction as well as enabling monitoring of success;
Amendment 285 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Expresses concerns over substantial use of emergency application of knowingly harmful substances, including neonicotinoids; stresses that it is important that restrictions and bans be accompanied by support, expert advice and knowledge transfer on use of alternatives and above all on improved practice mitigating the propagation of pest material and making use of natural predators where possible, including creation of habitats for useful fauna;
Amendment 295 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes that the traditional and outdated chemical pesticide approach is flawed because it is a biological inevitability that pest species, by definition rapidly reproducing, quickly evolve resistance to the active substance, leading to a chemical arms race in which the farmers and biodiversity are the big losers; notes further that resistance has been rising and making pesticide use even less effective over the decades due to systematic and repeated application of too much product, over too large areas. Notes that to avoid biodiversity crashes and pest resistance, a hierarchy of action should be followed, in line with the 8 principles of IPM found in annex III to the Directive 2009/128/EC on Sustainable use of pesticides, whereby chemical pesticides are only used as a last resort after a series of practices that are alternatives to chemical pesticides, and whole field or whole landscape applications that wipe out entire ecological communities of agricultural biodiversity are avoided : (a) structural or cultural control: avoiding large-scale monocultures that only attract pests; using smaller, diverse parcels, using longer crop rotations to break up pests' reproductive cycles; biologically diverse planting e.g. multi-cropping (poly- cultural plantings), under sowing with cover crops, stale bed techniques, etc.; (b) physical and mechanical control: shallow ploughing, inter alia not to disturb the weed seed bank, adapted spring-loaded machinery to weed between and within rows as is used in organic farming, flame or steam weeding, etc; (c) biological control: encouraging or introducing natural predators, including birds, insects, including parasitoids, also nematodes, fungi, etc. In a species rich system these will automatically regulate pest populations as no one species becomes dominant. Beneficial species can be attracted to the system using ecological infrastructure such as wild flower strips (GAEC 9/EFA, Eco-schemes or agri- environmental measures in rural development); (d) low risk pesticides or natural products, used sparingly and targeted to places and times where the pest is present (e.g. those listed in annex to the organic regulation); (e) as a last resort chemical pesticides, used sparingly and targeted to occurrence of pests, never using blanket application. If the preceding steps are respected, the need to use these will be greatly reduced. This is in line with the "many small hammers" principle used in agroecological approaches that rely on building up functional biodiversity and beneficial species to regulate pest populations, rather than resorting regularly to a chemical "bomb" that actually makes the system more susceptible to subsequent pest attack;
Amendment 298 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Welcomes moves to establish a Toxic-Free Future and so calls for a 70% reduction in the use of pesticides by 2030; welcomes interim targets of reducing pesticide use by 30-50% by 2025, with a view to phasing out chemical pesticides by 2035, as called for in the European citizens' initiative1a; _________________ 1aECI Save bees and farmers: Towards a bee-friendly agriculture for a healthy environment, https://europa.eu/citizens- initiative/initiatives/details/2019/000016_e n
Amendment 299 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Highlights the role that beneficial species play in the agro-ecosystem, notably for pest control but also pollination, plant and soil protection, etc., and that mainstream agro-ecosystems are typically impoverished of natural predator control species, as a consequence of pesticide use, thus locking farmers into a cycle of increased pesticide use; notes the economic and environmental benefits of breaking free of this input dependency cycle by using agroecological techniques, and the need for knowledge sharing, especially peer-to-peer exchanges, and training;
Amendment 300 #
9e. Notes that the widespread and systemic use of wide spectrum pesticides, especially whole field or landscape level applications, knocks out populations of beneficial species as well as the intended target pest species. This leaves the agro- ecosystem susceptible to the next pest attack, either from the same pest species or another one, which the beneficial predators would have otherwise been able to deal with. Notes also that in addition to insecticides having this population effect on beneficial species, the wide-scale use of broad spectrum herbicides such as glyphosate also damages these insect predators because they also rely on pollen from wildflowers within the fields and in field margins for their nutrition;
Amendment 301 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 f (new)
Paragraph 9 f (new)
Amendment 302 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 g (new)
Paragraph 9 g (new)
Amendment 303 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 h (new)
Paragraph 9 h (new)
9h. Notes the failure of the regulatory framework to consider inevitable non- target impacts of pesticides including airborne and waterborne drift, resilience in soils and wider ecosystem effects, notably on pollinators and other insects beneficial to farming like predators of pests; notes the 27-year dataset illustrating the "insect Armageddon"1a, whereby 75% winged insects have become regionally extinct across Germany, even in nature reserves where no pesticides were directly applied for agricultural purposes; _________________ 1aMore than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas, Hallmann et al, 2017. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id =10.1371/journal.pone.0185809
Amendment 304 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Regrets the factSounds the alarm for long term global and continental food security that agricultural production is being increasingly concentrated in a limited range offew agricultural crops, and within those, varieties and genotypes with little genetic variation; underlines that preserving genetic variability in all its components is crucial to promoting the diversity and richness of agricultural ecosystems and to the preservation of local genetic resources, in particular as a repository of solutions to help in facing the environmental challenges that lie ahead. Notes the importance of preserving cultivars and old varieties especially as they can thrive in less than optimal conditions; notes further that although seed vaults and repositories have their place, the most cost-effective way of preserving these genes and traits is in the field; such participative breeding e.g. seed saving and seed sharing, allow to rapidly and cheaply breed/ evolve domesticated species around challenges like climate change, water scarcity or excess, where farming communities remain in control of the selection process, and ensure traits tailored to changing local conditions.
Amendment 305 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Regrets the fact that agricultural production is being increasingly concentrated in a limited range of agricultural crops, varieties and genotypes; underlines that preserving genetic variability in all its components is crucial to promoting the diversity and richness of agricultural ecosystems and to the preservation of local genetic resources, in particular as a repository of solutions to help in facing the environmental challenges that lie ahead.; welcomes that the Commission is considering1a the revision of marketing rules for traditional crop varieties in order to contribute to their conservation and sustainable use, and its intention to take measures to facilitate the registration of seed varieties, including for organic farming, and to ensure easier market access for traditional and locally adapted varieties. _________________ 1a Biodiversity Strategy for 2030
Amendment 319 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Notes in this context that high- biodiversity & high genetic diversity farming approaches such as agroecology are an effective way of spreading risk of crop failure or pest attack, as clones and very similar phenotypes are equally susceptible to the same shocks and pressures, such as pests and diseases, especially in the uniform and monocultural landscapes often found in agriculture - e.g. Xylella fastidiosa attacking monocultures of genetic clones of olive trees.
Amendment 326 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Underlines that changes in land use, the expansion and intensification of agriculture, and the unsustainable trade and consumption of wildlife are key drivers of biodiversity loss and increase contacts between wildlife, farm animals, pathogens and people, which create the conditions for emerging infectious diseases.
Amendment 328 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Notes that fur production, which involves the confinement of thousands of undomesticated animals of a similar genotype in close proximity to one another under chronically stressful conditions can significantly compromise animal welfare and increases their susceptibility to infectious diseases including zoonoses, as has occurred with COVID-19 in mink.
Amendment 332 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 d (new)
Paragraph 10 d (new)