Ref. Ares(2018)4088522 - 02/08/2018
Ref. Ares(2019)2387732 - 04/04/2019
To:
Cc:
CLARK Helene (MARE);
(MARE);
(MARE);
(MARE);
(MARE); MARE C1
Subject:
On behalf of Ms Clark: letter to members of NWW group
Dear members of the North Western Waters group,
I refer to my letter of 24 July to the Chair of the group, with copy to you all, presenting
the Commission's assessment of the various elements of your Joint Recommendation.
Following some of the comments already exchanged in the group, I wish to underline
that this assessment has been based on a DG MARE collective and thorough analysis,
not only on the STEFC recommendation, but also on the specific context of your
fisheries. We have received, as could be expected with the entry into force of the full
landing obligation in 2019, a high number of requests for derogations, and have been
keen to ensure a coherent approach between all sea basins, as well as fair treatment of
all groups.
As you will have noticed, the Commission accepted most of your requests for high
survivability, including some with low survivability rates, such as some of the requests
for plaice caught with beam trawls or for the majority of skates and rays. It should be
clear that such derogations are exceptional and could only be justified as temporary,
pending further information, or pending further measures to be taken to increase
selectivity. Progress with these will need to be closely monitored over the months to
come. We have also accepted the extended de minimis exemptions for whiting in 7d.
This level of acceptance is certainly a reflection of the serious work done in your Group.
There are however a few requests which, if included in the Delegated Act, would risk
jeopardising the whole inter-institutional adoption process, which as you know, involves
both the Council and the European Parliament. The combined de minimis requests for
gadoids and pelagic species are examples where the STEFC assessment is clearly not
supportive. The requests for de minimis for whiting and haddock in the Irish Sea are
other examples where STECF was not supportive. Accepting the exemption for plaice in
the BT2 for three years with the very low survival rate is also such a case, which is why
we suggest a shorter time period.
Let me however clarify that the Commission’s approach should not be seen as cherry
picking, but as an approach which takes into account the Basic Regulation and the need
to have a positive assessment by the STECF. Where this is not the case we have to ask
the MS Group to revise their JR.
We strongly advise that the Group withdraws these controversial requests, in order to
increase the chances of having a Delegated Act in force at the beginning of 2019. The
Group can of course submit a separate Joint recommendation for some of the excluded
exemptions if and when it considers that it is able to provide a stronger justification.
or myself are at your disposal
should you wish to discuss how to proceed.
Best regards
Hélène Clark