2023/2030(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)

– having regard to the European Commission proposal of 22 June 2022 for a regulation on nature restoration ((COM(2022) 304 final),

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas the European eel is listed as ‘critically endangered’ under the IUCN Red List; whereas the recovery of the stock is still far from certain; whereas it is widely recognised that the recovery of the European eel will take many decades, given the long life-span of the species;

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Points out that ~~there is a disconnect between~~ the implementation of the Eel Regulation and the ICES annual advice on fishing opportunities, should be harmonised since the latter is based on the glass eel ~~trend~~and yellow eel recuitment and not on the escapement of silver eel (40 % target); ~~calls for this to be harmonised~~highlights the need to improve recuitment data including on international level;

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Points out that there is a disconnect between the implementation of the Eel Regulation and the ICES annual advice on fishing opportunities, since the latter is based on the glass eel and yellow eel recruitment trends and not on the escapement of silver eel (40 % target); calls for this to be harmonised;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Stresses that data collection, monitoring and reporting should be harmonised and standardised so that data can be compared; recommends that ~~commercial and recreational fishers~~fishers, where appropriate, should be involved in the collection and analysis of data;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Encourages the Member States to put in place more transboundary EMPs, where appropriate; highlights the importance of the Commission to support and facilitate such work by the Member States;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Calls on the Commission and the relevant Member States ~~to have an ambitious and realistic~~, in the context of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean ~~management plan for eel; believes that it is highly desirable for this plan to~~, to have an ambitious and realistic approach to the multiannual management plan for the European eel; highlights that this multiannual management plan should be aligned with the Eel Regulation;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Calls on the Commission ~~and the~~, relevant Member States and contracting parties to have an ambitious and ~~realistic~~science-based General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean management plan for eel; believes that it is highly desirable for this plan to be aligned with the Eel Regulation;

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Calls on the Commission ~~and the relevant Member States to have~~to work for an ambitious and realistic General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean management plan for eel; believes that it is highly desirable for this plan to be aligned with the Eel Regulation;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)

Ib. whereas the Commission proposal for a nature restoration law proposed the restoration of the natural connectivity of rivers and natural functions of the related floodplains, including the objective of restoring at least 25 000 km of rivers into free-flowing rivers in the Union by 2030;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I c (new)

Ic. whereas the European Parliament requested in its 2021 resolution the inclusion in the nature restoration plans for the restoration of at least 25 000 km of free-flowing rivers in the EU through the removal of barriers and the restoration of floodplains;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make full use of the Eel Regulation as the core policy for eel ~~protection once again~~management, ensuring a holistic and coherent approach~~; reiterate~~ which also includes fully implementing measures in other relevant areas outside of fisheries; recalls that the Eel Regulation was found to be fit for purpose by the Commission evaluation of 2020; is of the opinion that better implementation of the Eel Regulation and additional actions by Member States are needed;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to makeintain the Eel Regulation as the core policy for ~~eel protection once again~~the recovery of eel stocks, ensuring a holistic and coherent approach; reiterates that the Eel Regulation was found to be fit for purpose by the Commission evaluation of 2020; is of the opinion that better implementation of the Eel Regulation and additional actions by Member States are needed;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ~~make the Eel Regulation the core policy for eel protection once again,~~ ensur~~ing~~e a holistic and coherent approach of the Eel Regulation; reiterates that the Eel Regulation was found to be fit for purpose by the Commission evaluation of 2020; nevertheless, is of the opinion that better implementation of the Eel Regulation and additional actions by Member States are needed;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes with concern that the European eel remains classified as a Critically Endangered species with a declining population trend on the IUCN red list; expresses its full support for all conservation and protection measures necessary to restore eel populations; highlights the ICES advise to reduce eel catches to zero; is worried that, despite imposing a partial closure, eel fisheries have still been permitted in 2023, which has been further endangering the species;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Reaffirms the Eel Regulation’s objective of the recovery of the eel stock to 40 % compared to pristine conditions and its main aim of reducing mortality so as to allow for this recovery; advises that it is essential to focus on the short-term achievable mortality target in order to reach the long-term biomass objective; highlights the fact that ‘pristine conditions’ can be hard to define; ~~points out that the 40 % target is likely to be unachievable because of habitat losses, but that it is the standard for deriving the mortality reduction target;~~

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Reaffirms the Eel Regulation’s objective of the recovery of the eel stock to 40 % compared to pristine conditions and its main aim of reducing mortality so as to allow for this recovery; advises that it is essential to focus on the short-term achievable mortality target in order to reach the long-term biomass objective; highlights the fact that ‘pristine conditions’ can be hard to define; points out that the 40 % target is likely to be unachievable because of habitat losses, but that it is the standard for deriving the mortality reduction targetpoints out that in order to reach the 40 % target, habitat loss needs to be addressed;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Reaffirms the Eel Regulation’s objective of the recovery of the eel stock to 40 % compared to pristine conditions and its main aim of reducing mortality ~~so as~~ to allow ~~for this~~the recovery of the species; advises that it is essential to focus on the short-term achievable mortality target in order to reach the long-term biomass objective; highlights the fact that ‘pristine conditions’ can be hard to define; points out that the 40 % target is likely to be unachievable because of habitat losses, but that it is the standard for deriving the mortality reduction target;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 b (new)

– Having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 9 June 2021 on the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030: Bringing nature back into our lives (2020/2273(INI)),

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that ~~the decline in stock has halted since the adoption of the Eel Regulation, indicating that the Eel Regulation is showing positive preliminary results, but that recovery~~despite the adoption of the Eel Regulation 16 years ago, according to the latest ICES assessment the status of European Eel remains critical, with eel recruitment remaining at a very low level and populations sizes considered likely to be wiell be ~~a long-term process over several decades;~~ low potential biological limit reference points; calls on the Commission and on the Member States to take additional measures, such as a full closure of eel fisheries as adviced by ICES.

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that some data shows that the decline in stocks in some areas has halted since the adoption of the Eel Regulation, indicating that the Eel Regulation is showing some positive preliminary results, ~~but that~~however to a large extent the decrees in the stocks are still persisting and thus consequently recovery will be a long- term process over several decades;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the decline in stock recruitment for glass and yellow eel has halted since the adoption of the Eel Regulation~~, indicating that the Eel Regulation is showing positive preliminary results, but~~ but remains since several years below any limit reference points; highlights that recovery will be a long- term process over several decades, which means that continued monitoring and action will be necessary;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Highlights that the proposed measures by the Eel Regulation have a limited and uneven effect due to differences in fishing patterns among each Member State; stresses that the Member States need to strengthen national measures, in order to ensure a comprehensive approach of the Regulation;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that managing the eel stock is too complex for a one-sided marine- oriented approach; ~~highlights the fact that focusing on annual fishing opportunities does not take into account important factors such as migration barriers, habitat quality and illegal catches and trade;~~ underlines that the Eel Regulation is holistic and comprehensive, captures both the marine and freshwater life stages of the eel and addresses both fisheries and non- fisheries impacts; points out, in addition, that non-fisheries impacts may be bigger than the fisheries impacts and that far too little attention has been given thus far to non-fishery anthropogenic mortalities; is of the opinion that measures taken outside of the context of the Eel Regulation undermine the coherence of adopted policy; deplores, therefore, Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 of 30 January 2023 fixing for 2023 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, as well as fixing for 2023 and 2024 such fishing opportunities for certain deep-sea fish stocks, restricting eel fisheries with a 6-month closing period, therefore considers to be crucial to tackle other threats to the European eel population, such as habitat loss, pollution and migration barriers;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that managing the eel stock is too complex for a one-sided marine- oriented approach; highlights the ~~fact that focusing on annual fishing opportunities does not take into account~~importance of following the best available scientific catch advices, in particular in the case of eel, as according to ICES fisheries make up for more than 50% of anthropogenic eel mortality in 29 of 62 Eel Management Units, where data for fishing and hydropower mortality was reported; stresses the importance of also addressing important factors such as migration barriers, habitat quality and illegal catches and trade; underlines that the Eel Regulation ~~is holistic and comprehensive,~~ captures both the marine and freshwater life stages of the eel and addresses both fisheries and non- fisheries impacts; points out, in addition, that non-fisheries impacts may be bigger than the fisheries impacts and that far too little attention has been given thus far to non-fishery anthropogenic mortalities; is of the opinion thatbut acknowledges that further measures ~~taken~~ outside of the context of the Eel Regulation undermine the coherence of adopted policy; deplores, therefore, Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 of 30 January 2023 fixing for 2023 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, as well as fixing for 2023 and 2024 such fishing opportunities for certain deep-sea fish stocks, restricting eel fisheries with a 6-month closing periodmay be necessary in order to restore eel populations;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that managing the eel stock is too complex for a one-sided marine- oriented approach; highlights the fact that ~~foc~~using on annual fishing opportunities ~~does not~~is a very ill-suited measure to properly take into account important factors such as migration barriers, habitat quality and illegal catches and trade; underlines that the Eel Regulation is holistic and comprehensive, captures both the marine and freshwater life stages of the eel and addresses both fisheries and non- fisheries impacts; points out, in addition, that non- fisheries impacts ~~may be bigger than the fisheries impacts an~~should be fully taken into account, based on an ecosystem based approach; is concerned that far too little attention has been given thus far to non-fishery anthropogenic mortalities; is of the opinion that measures taken outside of the context of the Eel Regulation undermine the coherence of adopted policy; deplores, therefore, the non- holistic approach taken in, Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 of 30 January 2023 fixing for 2023 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, as well as fixing for 2023 and 2024 such fishing opportunities for certain deep- sea fish stocks, restricting eel fisheries with a 6-month closing period, without a full package of measures ensuring proper management measures as well as the appropriate support to the affected fisheries;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that managing the eel stock is ~~too~~ complex ~~for a one-sided marine- oriented approach~~; highlights the fact that in addition to focusing on annual fishing opportunities ~~does not~~other important factors should be taken into account ~~important factors~~ such as migration barriers, habitat quality and illegal catches and trade; underlines that the Eel Regulation is holistic and comprehensive, captures both the marine and freshwater life stages of the eel and addresses both fisheries and non- fisheries impacts; points out, in addition, that non- fisheries impacts may be bigger than the fisheries impacts and that far too little attention has been given thus far to non-fishery anthropogenic mortalities; is of the opinion that measures taken outside of the context of the Eel Regulation undermine the coherence of adopted policy; deplores, therefore, Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 of 30 January 2023 fixing for 2023 the fishing oppshould be given more attention; recalls that the most recent ICES advises for 2023 zero catches in all habitats for both recreational and commercial catches including catches of glass eels for restocking and aquaculture, that all non-fisheries related anthropogenic mortunalities for certain fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non-Union waters, as well as fixing for 2023 and 2024 such fishing opportunities for certain deep-sea fish stocks, restricting eel fisheries with a 6-month closing periodshould be zero, and that the quantity and quality of eel habitats should be restored including restoring connectivity and the physical, chemical, and biological properties of the habitats;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Is of the opinion that measures taken outside of the context of the Eel Regulation may undermine the coherence of the regulation; highlights that the Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 of 30 January 20231a, implements a restriction of a 6-month closing period for the eel fisheries; _________________ 1a Council Regulation (EU) 2023/194 of 30 January 2023 fixing for 2023 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks, applicable in Union waters and, for Union fishing vessels, in certain non- Union waters, as well as fixing for 2023 and 2024 such fishing opportunities for certain deep-sea fish stocks

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Observes that there is no feedback mechanism ensuring follow-up action and regular policy updates by the Member States in the Eel Regulation; ~~deplore~~highlights the fact that the ICES advice of 2012, 2018 and 2021, post-evaluating the national implementation of the Eel Regulation, has not been put into practice sufficiently;

Amendment 3 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)

– Having regard to the report of 2022 issued by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) on the workshop for the Technical evaluation of EU Member States' Progress Reports for submission in 2021 (WKEMP3);

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for an evaluation of the Eel Management Plans by ICES for their conformity with the precautionary approach, to increase coherence with the overarching objectives for the Common Fisheries Policy (Regulation (EU) 1380/2013, Article 2)

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for an evaluation by ICES of the Eel Management Plans regarding their conformity with the precautionary approach, in line with the objectives of the CFP;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for the creation of an eel-specific advisory council with representatives from the Member States and the fishing sector, recreational fishers, water managers, hydro-power companies, conservationists and other relevant parties; suggests that this advisory council should be tasked with advising the Commission on the implementation of the Eel Regulation, providing feedback to Member States on their EMPs, exchanging information between the different parties and evaluating the progress on implementation at national and European level;deleted

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for the creation of an eel-specific advisory ~~council~~group with representatives from the Member States ~~and~~, the fishing sector, recreational fishers, water managers, hydro-power companies, c~~onservationists~~ivil society and other relevant parties, ensuring full and balanced representation of all relevant stakeholders; suggests that this advisory council should be tasked with advising the Commission on the implementation of the Eel Regulation, providing feedback to Member States on their EMPs, exchanging information between the different parties and evaluating the progress on implementation at national and European level;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for the creation of an eel-specific advisory council with representatives from the ~~Member States and the~~ fishing sector, recreational fishers, water managers, hydro-power companies, conservationists and other relevant parties; s~~uggest~~tresses that thise advisory council ~~should be tasked with~~main task is advising the Commission on the implementation of the Eel Regulation, providing feedback to Member States on their EMPs, exchanging information between the different parties and evaluating the progress on implementation at national and European level;

Amendment 35 #

Asger CHRISTENSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for the creation of an eel-specific ~~advisory council~~group with representatives from the Member States and the fishing sector, recreational fishers, water managers, hydro-power companies, conservationists and other relevant parties; suggests that this ~~advisory council~~body should be tasked with advising the Commission on the implementation of the Eel Regulation, providing feedback to Member States on their EMPs, exchanging information between the different parties and evaluating the progress on implementation at national and European level;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for the creation of an eel-specific ~~advisory council~~transboundary group with representatives from the Member States and the fishing sector, recreational fishers, water managers, hydro-power companies, conservationists and other relevant parties; suggests that this ~~advisory council~~group should be tasked with advising the Commission on the implementation of the Eel Regulation, providing feedback to Member States on their EMPs, exchanging information between the different parties and evaluating the progress on implementation at national and European level;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls, therefore, for the creation of an eel-specific advisory council with representatives from the Member States and the fishing sector, recreational fishers, water managers, hydro-power companies~~, conservationists and other~~ and all relevant ~~partie~~actors; suggests that this advisory council should be tasked with advising the Commission on the implementation of the Eel Regulation, providing feedback to Member States on their EMPs, exchanging information between the different parties and evaluating the progress on implementation at national and European level;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes, in this regard, the Commission’s intention to establish an expert group, as announced in its action plan on marine ecosystems, with the aim of bringing together fisheries and infrastructure experts from the national ministries; asks the Commission ~~to take the above suggestions on board~~and the Member States to support and push to the above suggestions and take them into account when setting up this expert group;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes, in this regard, that the Commission~~’s intention to establish an expert group, as announc~~ highlighted in its action plan on marine ecosystems~~, with~~ the aim ~~of bringing together fisheries and infrastructure experts from the national ministries; asks the Commission to take the above suggestions on board when setting up this expert group;~~ portance and urgency to improve conservation for critically endangered species that are commercially fished, such as the European eel, and to take a comprehensive approach covering different policies for their management and conservation;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the Eel Regulation lays down amongst others an obligation for Member States to develop national Eel Management Plans (EMP), with a uniform ~~action target~~objective and an internationally coordinated, triannual monitoring and evaluation process, as well as obligations to reduce fishing effort;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Regrets the fact that only one Member State has submitted an updated EMP for approval since the adoption of the Eel Regulation; u~~Urges the Member States to regularly update their EMPs, based on the best available knowledge and advice; encourages the Member States to put concrete targets and intermediate deadlines in their updated EMPs; stresses that the recovery of the eel is a long-term process that requires continuous effort and that a one-time management plan will not be sufficient;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Regrets the fact that only one Member State has submitted an updated EMP for approval since the adoption of the Eel Regulation; urges the Member States to regularly update their EMPs, based on the best available scientific knowledge and advice; encourages the Member States to put concrete targets and intermediate deadlines in their updated EMPs; stresses that the recovery of the eel is a long-term process that requires continuous effort and that a one-time management plan will not be sufficient;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Regrets the fact that only one Member State has submitted an updated EMP for approval since the adoption of the Eel Regulation; urges the Member States to regularly update their EMPs, based on the best available knowledge and advice; ~~encourages~~calls on the Member States to put concrete targets and intermediate deadlines in their updated EMPs; stresses that the recovery of the eel is a long-term process that requires continuous effort and that a one- time management plan will not be sufficient;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Highlights that there is a delay in the implementation of the Regulation and there is an incomplete reporting of eel data; Regrets the fact that the number of Member States adhering to the reporting requirement under Article 9(1) of the Eel Regulation has declined over the years; reminds the Member States of their obligations under Article 9(1); highlights the fact that it is vital to ~~gather~~have as much information and data as possible ~~in order to be able to take appropriate~~, to ensure the most updated scientific advices in order to be able to decide, implement and evaluate the most appropriate management measures;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Regrets the fact that the number of Member States adhering to the reporting requirement under Article 9(1) of the Eel Regulation has declined over the years; reminds the Member States of the~~ir obligations under Article 9(1)~~ importance of fulfilling their obligations in this regard; highlights the fact that it is vital to gather as much information and data as possible in order to be able to take appropriate measures;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Regrets the fact that the number of Member States adhering to the reporting requirement under Article 9(1) of the Eel Regulation has declined over the years; reminds the Member States of their obligations under Article 9(1); highlights the fact that it is vital to gather as much information and data as possible ~~in order to be able to take appropriate measures~~; highlights that a lack of data does not prevent Member States to act;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Welcomes the measures taken at the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) to improve eel management and research in the Mediterranean;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Highlight~~Underlines the importantce of the role ~~that~~of eel fisheries ~~play~~ in society, with eel fishing being both a socio-economic activity and a cultural, centuries-old tradition; considers that eel fishing has reduced significantly in the past decade; calls on the Commission and the Member States to refrain as much as possible from placing further restrictions on fisheries; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’, while a full closure of fisheries could lead to more illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; points out that fishers are being made aware of eel stock management and conservation; underlines the need to identify all other factors behind the decline in eel stocks, such as land-based pollution, climatic variations or poaching; points out that eel fisheries carry out a small-scale, artisanal activity and are often located in remote areas, where fishers play an important environmental and social role;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights the important role that eel fisheries play ~~in society~~within their local communities, with eel fishing being both a socio-economic activity and a cultural, centuries-old tradition; ~~consider~~notes that eel fishing has reduced significantly in the past decade; calls on the Commission and the Member States to refrain as much as possible from placing further restrictions on fisheries~~; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’, while~~ and when needed to ensure that appropriate compensation and support are provided; underlines that fishers have an important role to play in gathering data and being ‘eyes and ears’ in relation the daily activities at Sea; points out the risk that a full closure of fisheries could lead to more illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; points out that eel fisheries carry out a small-scale, artisanal activity and are often located in rural and remote areas, where fishers play an important economic, environmental and social role;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights the important role that eel fisheries play in society, with eel fishing being both a socio-economic activity and a cultural, centuries-old tradition; considers that eel fishing has reduced significantly in the past decade; calls on the Commission and the Member States to refrain as much as possible from placing further restrictions on fisheries; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’, while a full closure of fisheries could lead to more illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing;underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’ in our seas and rivers; and points out that eel fisheries, is mainly carry out aby small-scale, and artisanal ~~activity and are often located~~fishers, often in remote areas, where fishers play an important environmental and social role;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

~~C. whereas only the Netherlands has submitted updated EMPs for approval, namely in 2011 and again in 2018;~~deleted

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights the important role that eel ~~fisheries play in society, with eel fishing being both a socio-economic activity and a cultural, centuries-old tradition~~play in ecosystems as well as their intrinsic value; considers that eel fishing has reduced significantly in the past decade; calls on the Commission and the Member States to refrain as much as possible from placing further restrictions on fisheries; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’, while a full closure of fisheries could lead to more illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; points out that eel fisheries carry out a small-scale, artisanal activity and are often located in remote areas, where fishers play an important environmental and social roletain fisheries restrictions as well as other measures as long as needed to ensure healthy eel populations; Highlights that it is scientifically well-established that in marine systems, fishing has had the most impact on biodiversity (target species, non-target species and habitats) in the past 50 years alongside other significant drivers of biodiversity loss; points out that eel fisheries carry out a small-scale, artisanal activity and are often located in remote areas, where fishers play an important social role; reminds that globally small-scale fisheries account for more than 90 per cent of commercial fishers and nearly half of global fish catch;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights the important role that eel fisheries play in society, with eel fishing being both a socio-economic activity and a cultural, centuries-old tradition; considers that eel fishing has reduced significantly in the past decade; calls on the Commission and the Member States to refrain as much as possible from placing further restrictions on fisheries; underlines that fishers and recreational fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’, while a full closure of fisheries could lead to more illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing; points out that eel fisheries carry out a small-scale, artisanal activity and are often located in remote areas, where fishers play an important environmental and social role;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Highlights the important role that eel fisheries play in society, with eel fishing being both a socio-economic activity and a cultural, centuries-old tradition; considers that eel fishing has reduced significantly in the past decade but the state of the stock remains critical; calls on the Commission and the Member States to refrain as much as possible from placing further restrictions on fisheries; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians and ‘eyes and ears’, while a full closure of fisheries could lead to more illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishingmonitor existing fishing restrictions and to propose further actions where necessary, based on the best available scientific advice; underlines that fishers have an important role to play as guardians of the sea; points out that eel fisheries carry out a small-scale, artisanal activity and are often located in remote areas, where fishers play an important environmental and social role;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Expresses its hope that where further restrictions on fisheries might be necessary, this is done in a holistic way, preferably in the context of the national EMPs and not in the form of ad hoc Council decisions, ~~and based on prior socio-economic impact assessments;~~ regardless they must all be based on the best scientific advice and on a prior socio-economic impact assessments; urges therefore the Member States to more actively use and update the EMPs in order to avoid ad hoc Council decisions;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Expresses its hope that where further restrictions on fisheries might be necessary, this is done ~~in the context of the national EMPs and not in the form of ad hoc Council decisions, and based on prior socio-economic impact assessments~~based on the best available scientific advice, and with appropriate compensation measures in line with EMFAF provisions for fishers affected by closures, especially the small- scale sector;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Exp~~Stresses ~~its hope that where~~that if further restrictions on eel fisheries ~~might be~~are deemed necessary, ~~this is~~it should be done in the context of the national EMPs and not in the form of ad hoc Council decisions, and ~~based on prior~~the decisions should take into account prior environmental and socio-economic impact assessments;

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Reaffirms that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; is of the view that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking; highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an international level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level; is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2-3 % of all glass eels); stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking;, therefore:

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Reaffirms that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; ~~is of the view~~highlights that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking; highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an intconsidered as a short to medium term measure that should be phased out as natural recruitment and water course connectivity improves; highlights that restocking is not a consernvational level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level; is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2-3 % of all glass eels); stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking measure and should not be used as a replacement for adequate protection and conservation measures; recalls that the most recent ICES advises in for 2023 zero catches including catches of glass eels for restocking and aquaculture;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Reaffirms that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; is of the view that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking; highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an international level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level; is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2-3 % of all glass eels); ~~stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking;~~

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Reaffirms that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; is of the view that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking, including with EMFAF support; highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an international level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level, mainly on the fish biodiversity; is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2-3 % of all glass eels); stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas ~~only the Netherlands has submitted updated EMPs for approval, namely in 2011 and again in 2018~~Member States are taking action and are implementing their EMPs in different ways based on their national administrative tradition; whereas more action is needed in terms of implementing measures and, where necessary, updating their EMPs;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Reaffirms that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; is of the view that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking; highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an international level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local and regional level; is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2- 3 % of all glass eels); stresses that legal glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Reaffirms that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; is of the view that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls, in this regard, on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking; highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an international level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level; is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2- 3 % of all glass eels); stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. ~~Reaffirm~~Notes that restocking is one of the recovery measures listed under Article 2(8) of the Eel Regulation; ~~is of the view that restocking is a necessary measure until the problem of migration barriers is solved adequately; calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking;~~ highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at ~~an intern~~populational level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level; ~~is of the opin~~notes that the Commission evaluation questioned thate long-term use of restocking ias a ~~way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches~~conservation measure given its uncertain contribution to spawner escapement and subsequent recruitment, as well as the risks involved, and should be phased out if natural recruitment and spawner escapement improves; points out, furthermore, that at least 60% of glass eel catches should be used for restocking ~~are~~under the eel regulati~~vely low (2-3 % of all glass eels); stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking~~on but this target was only reached in 2014; stresses that the ICES advice for 2023 includes a zero catch of all life stages including glass eels for restocking and aquaculture;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – point a (new)

(a) calls on the Member States to continue the practice of restocking;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – point b (new)

(b) highlights the fact that, although the contribution of restocking to stock recovery at an international level cannot be ascertained, it can have positive effects at local level;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – point c (new)

(c) is of the opinion that restocking is a way of spreading and limiting risks for the recovery of the stock, considering the increasing drought that is causing problems in rivers throughout Europe; points out, furthermore, that catches for restocking are relatively low (2-3 % of all glass eels);

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – point d (new)

(d) stresses that glass eel catches are crucial for the European aquaculture sector and recognises the important role of aquaculture in restocking;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Member States to give flexibility to fishers in determining the most suitable periods to fish, which can differ per country; encourages the Member States, in this regard, to consider, in consultation with fishers, the use of quota systems, in order to keep fishing at responsible levels; highlights that one of the advantages of a quota system would be that it enables fishers to choose to fish at times when it is commercially interesting to do so, while limiting catches to a responsible level; adds that this could contribute to preventing overfishing;deleted

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Member States to give flexibility to fishers in determining the most suitable periods to fish, which can differ per country; encourages the Member States, in this regard, to consider, in consultation with fishers, the use of quota systems, in order to keep fishing at responsible levels; highlights that one of the advantages of a quota system would be that it enables fishers to choose to fish at times when it is commercially interesting to do so, while limiting catches to a responsible levelkeep fishing at responsible levels in line with the best available scientific advice; adds that this could contribute to preventing overfishing;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Calls on~~Encourages the Member States to give flexibility to fishers in determining the most suitable periods to fish, which can differ per country; encourages the Member States, in this regard, to consider, in consultation with fishers, the use of quota systems, in order to keep fishing at responsible levels; highlights that one of the advantages of a quota system would be that it enables fishers to choose to fish at times when it is commercially interesting to do so, while limitin the context of the EMPs and in consultation with fishers, to determine the most suitable periods to fish, considering the necessity to keep fishing cat~~ches to a~~ responsible level~~; adds that this could contribute to preventing overfishing~~s;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas distributed control under central coordination is a feature of the Eel Regulation; ~~whereas eel stock management is too complex for a one- size-fits-all approach;~~ whereas the Eel Regulation gives flexibility to Member States to adjust their national EMPs to local circumstances and national priorities to the extent that does not undermine the objective of stock recovery;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Member States to give flexibility to fishers in determining the most suitable periods to fish, which can differ per country; encourages the Member States nonetheless, in this regard, to opt for fishing periods that are coordinated with neighbouring Member States and to consider, in consultation with fishers, the use of quota systems, in order to keep fishing at responsible levels; highlights that one of the advantages of a quota system would be that it enables fishers to choose to fish at times when it is commercially interesting to do so, while limiting catches to a responsible level; adds that this could contribute to preventing overfishing;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Member States to give flexibility to fishers in determining the most suitable periods to fish, which can differ per country; encourages the Member States, in this regard, to consider, in consultation with fishers, the use of quota systems, in order to keep fishing at responsible levels; highlights that one of the advantages of a quota system would be that it enables fishers to choose to fish at times when it is commercially interesting to do so, while limiting catches to a responsible level; ~~adds that this could contribute to preventing overfishing;~~

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Member States, within the extent possible, to give flexibility to fishers in determining the most suitable periods to fish, which can differ per country; encourages the Member States, in this regard, to consider, in consultation with fishers, the use of quota systems, in order to keep fishing at responsible levels; highlights that one of the advantages of a quota system would be that it enables fishers to choose to fish at times when it is commercially interesting to do so, while limiting catches to a responsible level; adds that this could contribute to preventing overfishing;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Member States to remove obsolete dams and other barriers ~~as a matter of urgency;~~ , or create solutions that allow species migration as a matter of urgency, in accordance to Nature Restoration Law agreement and within the objectives stablished in the Biodiversity Strategy part of the European Green Deal;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Member States to remove obsolete dams and other barriers as a matter of urgency so as to secure migration routes;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Underlines that there are fish- friendly alternatives on the market to make water pumps and hydro-power stations passable for fish; calls on the Member States to make fish safety a mandatory requirement for new installations and for old ones when they are replaced; calls for considering this requirement to be mandatory at the EU level by revising the Eel regulation; points out that a common methodology might be needed in order to determine and certify when pumps can be considered fish friendly; highlights that the existing Royal Netherlands Standardisation Institute (NEN) standard 87759 in the Netherlands could serve as an example; the appropriate measures and possible motivation incentives for energy plant owners could be further discussed and explored within the eel-specific group. _________________ 9 NEN 8775:2020+C1:2022 nl.

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Underlines that there are fish- friendly alternatives on the market to make water pumps and hydro-power stations passable for fish; calls on the Member States to make fish safety a mandatory requirement for new installations and for old ones when they are replaced; points out that a common methodology might be needed in order to determine and certify when pumps can be considered fish friendly; highlights that the existing Royal Netherlands Standardisation Institute (NEN) standard 87759 in the Netherlands could serve as an example; _________________ 9 NEN 8775:2020+C1:2022 nl.could facilitate the deployment of infrastructure that will certify when pumps can be considered fish friendly;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Underlines that there are fish- friendly alternatives on the market to make water pumps and hydro-power stations passable for fish; calls on the Member States to make fish safety and welfare a mandatory requirement for new installations and for old ones when they are replaced; points out that a common methodology might be needed in order to determine and certify when pumps can be considered fish friendly; highlights that the existing Royal Netherlands Standardisation Institute (NEN) standard 87759 in the Netherlands could serve as an example; _________________ 9 NEN 8775:2020+C1:2022 nl.

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Encourages the Member States to continue with trap and ~~transfer~~assisted migration projects as a temporary solution for silver eel escapement, in case structural solutions are not possible in the short term;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas~~, according to the 2019 Poseidon report, 18 out of 19 Member States reported in 2012; whereas,~~ reporting by Member States has often been incomplete and non- standardised; according to the 2019 Poseidon report,: 148 out of 19 Member States reported in 20152; ~~whereas, according to the 2019 Poseidon report,~~14 out of 19 Member States reported in 2015; 15 out of 19 Member States reported in 2018; whereas, according to the ICES (2022), only 13 out of 19 Member States reported in 2021; ~~whereas reporting by Member States has often been incomplete and non-standardised;~~

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Highlights the fact that migration measures should be implemented in a coordinated way, with a view to other barriers upstream or downstream along the same migration route; stresses that the timing of the closures shall be based on the best available scientific information for each geographical area and should be ensured that the closures cover the peak migration period;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Highlights the fact that migration measures should be implemented in a coordinated way, and on a transnational basis, with a view to other barriers upstream or downstream along the same migration route;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. ~~Encoura~~Urges the Member States also to take measures against other anthropogenic mortality factors, such as pollution ~~and parasites~~, especially from agricultural fertilizers, and parasites, and effects of climate change; recalls that as a part of the Farm to Fork strategy, Member States should reduce nutrient losses by at least 50% by 2030; urges Member States to address gaps and lags in environmental legislation; highlights further to address quarantine rules for glass eels to prevent the spread of parasites during restocking;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. ENotes that eel fisheries in marine waters in some parts of the EU only accounts for around 3% of eel mortality; encourages the Member States also to take measures against other anthropogenic mortality factors, ~~such as pollution and parasite~~which some reports say accounts for up to 49% of mortality rate; highlights in this regard the need for proper management of other species affecting the eel population, such as cormorants and another fish predators;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. ~~Encourages the Member States also to take measures against other anthropogenic mortality factors, such as pollution and parasite~~Notes that eel fisheries in marine waters in some parts of the EU only accounts for around 3% of eel mortality; encourages the Member States also to take measures against other anthropogenic mortality factors, which some reports say accounts for up to 49% of mortality rate; highlights in this regard the need for proper management of other species affecting the eel population, such as cormorants;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Encourages the Member States also to take measures against other ~~anthropogenic~~ mortality factors, such as pollution ~~and parasite~~, parasites and predators;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Encourages the Member States ~~also~~to study thouroughly and to take measures against other eel anthropogenic mortality factors~~, such as pollution and parasites~~;

Amendment 87 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Recognises the importance of civil society organisations and for individuals engaging in recreational fisheries activities, including conservation projects; notes that these activities plays an important part in the social cohesion of local and rural communities;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Underlines that IUU fishing and illegal trade continue to present a significant problem; commends the current successes of law enforcement and stresses the importance of preventing further trafficking, including by customs authorities; stresses that more checks on and monitoring of the Eel Regulation are needed;

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Underlines that IUU fishing and illegal trade continues to ~~present~~be a significant problem; commends the current successes of law enforcement and stresses the importance of preventing further trafficking; stresses that more checks on and monitoring of the Eel Regulation are needed;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the Commission evaluated whether the Eel Regulation was fit for purpose in 2020, concluding that it was relevant and fit for purpose, while adding that further ambition was needed to implement the Regulation with a greater focus on non-fisheries related measures; whereas the Commission noted that despite progress in reducing fishing effort and a concerted attempt to develop a pan- EU management framework, the status of the European eel remains critical;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for better coordination of customs, police and environmental authorities in and between the Member States as well as further cooperation with third countries, as well as exchange of data; calls on the Member States to continue to invest in the expertise and capacity of law enforcement;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for better coordination of customs, police ~~and~~, environmental and scientific authorities in and between the Member States, as well as exchange of data; calls on the Member States to continue to invest in the expertise and capacity of law enforcement;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for better coordination of customs, police, fisheries control and environmental authorities in and between the Member States, as well as exchange of data; calls on the Member States to continue to invest in the expertise and capacity of law enforcement;

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Highlights the fact that improved transparency and traceability for caught glass eels is an important way of combating IUU practices and that certification schemes based on independent verifications and internationally agreed standards are an important tool to ensure the legality of catches; calls on the Member States to make public their restocking plans so that illegal trade flows of glass eels can be better identified and targeted;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Highlights the fact that improved transparency and traceability for caught glass eels is an important way of combating IUU practices ~~and that certification schemes are an important tool to ensure the legality of catches~~; calls on the Member States to make public their restocking plans so that illegal trade flows of glass eels can be better identified and targeted;

Amendment 95 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Highlights the fact that improved transparency and traceability for caught glass eels is an important way of combating IUU practices and that certification schemes such as the SEG Standard are an important tool to ensure the legality of catches; calls on the Member States to make public their restocking plans so that illegal trade flows of glass eels can be better identified and targeted;

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls on the Member States to swiftly implement the recently approved Fisheries Control Regulation that impose truly dissuasive sanctions~~; calls for the~~ and harmonis~~ation of~~e financial fines between Member States;

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Recalls that much is unknown about the eel, including its spawning process and the exact reasons for the stock decline; calls, therefore, for more scientific research, with sufficient funding and human resources, into the status of the stock and the reasons for its decline; suggests that research should also look into the effects of climat~~e change, for example in the Gulf Stream to and from the Sargasso Sea;~~ic variations, land- based pollution and destabilisation of the sector caused by global speculation.

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Recalls that much is unknown about the eel~~, including its spawning process and the exact reasons for the stock decline~~; calls, therefore, for more scientific research, with sufficient funding and human resources, into the status of ~~the stock~~eel population and the reasons for its decline; suggests that research should also look into pollutants as well as the effects of climate change, for example in the Gulf Stream to and from the Sargasso Sea;

Amendment 99 #