Eksempler på brug af Use of driftnets på Engelsk og deres oversættelser til Dansk
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
-
Medicine
-
Financial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Official/political
-
Computer
Article 11 Restrictions on the use of driftnets.
We ask that the use of driftnets be banned in general, irrespective of area.
There we have a total ban on the use of driftnets.
In 1991 the Council banned the use of driftnets longer than 2.5 kilometres in all regions except the Baltic Sea.
There are weighty arguments for banning the use of driftnets.
The Commission is very concerned about the use of driftnets in Community waters, as referred to by the honourable Member.
The use of driftnets brings with it two negative consequences. First of all there is the problem that when driftnets are used the species to be caught cannot be selected.
Has the time not come to end the use of driftnets in fishing?
The proposal does, however, permit the continued use of driftnets of up to 2.5km in length until the end of 1997. and the use of driftnets of up to 5km for the albacorc tuna fleet and up to 21km in the Baltic Sea until the end of 1994.
In December 1993 France and Ireland requested a fresh exemption for the use of driftnets exceeding 2.5 km in length.
Pending the adoption by the CouncU of a proposal to prohibit the use of driftnets or to limit theh use to specific fisheries and areas, the current rules contained in Council Regulation(EEC) No 345/92 must be applied.
In February 1996 the US Court of International Trade recognized that there was clear evidence that Italy was infringing UN resolutions on the use of driftnets limiting their maximum length to 2.5 km.
A report on the enforcement of Community legislation concerning the use of driftnets in 1995 in the NE Atlantic and the Mediterranean(2) has been communicated to the European Parliament.
It is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure effective control, inspection and enforcement of the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy,which include a prohibition on the use of driftnets targeting highly migratory species.
As the honourable Member will be aware, the current legislation on the use of driftnets prohibiting the use of nets over 2.5 kilometres long in Community waters was adopted by the Council in 1992.
So we in the Liberal Group are, by a majority, in favour of approving the proposal included in the report approved by the Committee on Fisheries,we are in favour of an urgent ban of the use of driftnets, especially for tuna fishing.
It should therefore not be confused with the 1998 prohibition on the use of driftnets because of cetacean by-catch and which, in the Atlantic area of interest, applies only to the catching of tuna and some tuna-like species.
Technical measures can include minimum mesh sizes, minimum size of fish, restrictions on the use of certain types of vessels fishing for certain species during certain periods and in certain geographical areas,restrictions on the use of driftnets etc.
In its report on the enforcement of the use of driftnets(3) the Commission drew attention to the fact that the obligation to attach such nets to vessels using them was not being complied with and that this practice constituted a danger to other vessels.
Even if we have to make a distinction between the fishing problems in the North Pacific, the South Pacific, the North Atlantic, the South Atlantic, the Baltic Sea, the Mediterranean and within the twelve-mile limits,the fact remains that, basically, the use of driftnets is disastrous everywhere.
With regard to the reference made by the honourable Member to the use of driftnets, the Commission should clarify that the salmon driftnet fishery within the Irish 12-mile limit is not covered by the 1998 ban on the use of driftnets for highly migratory species such as tuna.
In order to defend its interests and values, and those of other communities and countries, the EU must find a way, within its own institutions and within the international bodies concerned, to achieve an immediate andappropriate prohibition on the use of driftnets, and at the same time come up with the necessary effective control measures.
With regard to the specific case cited in the honourable Member's question, the Commission has intervened withthe French authorities in order to ensure that the rules governing the use of driftnets, as laid down in Council Regulation(EEC) No 345/92, are correctly applied by their nationals and that any evidence, forwarded to the French authorities substantiating alleged unlawful use of driftnets be taken into consideration in their investigations.
The Commission therefore proposes a two-pronged approach: first,a short-term step designed to tackle bycatches by immediately restricting the use of driftnets in the Baltic and phasing them out completely by January 2007, and establishing the mandatory use of acoustic devices on gill nets.
The Commission adopts a communication and a proposal for a Regulation on the use of large driftnets by Community vessels* point 1.2.129.
Commission communication on the use of large driftnets by Community vessels; pro posal for a Council Regulation amending for the sixteenth time Regulation(EEC) No 3094/86 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources.
In the fisheries sector, it adopted a communication on the use of large drift nets*■ point 1.2.129.
In November 1991, Armement Islais, which used driftnets of some 7 km in length for tuna fishing in the North East Atlantic cancelled that order because of the adoption by the Council of Regulation No 345/92.