DOCSLIB.ORG

Implementation of the Current EU Fisheries Control System by Member States (2014-19)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Implementation of the Current EU Fisheries Control System by Member States (2014-19) STUDY Requested by the PECH committee Implementation of the current EU fisheries control system by Member States (2014-19) Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies Directorate-General for Internal Policies PE 652.205 - July 2020 EN RESEARCH FOR PECH COMMITTEE Implementation of the current EU fisheries control system by Member States (2014-19) Abstract This study assesses the implementation of the current EU fisheries control system by Member States. It focuses on the application of national infringement procedures, sanctions and the point system for serious infringements from 2014 to 2019. The research shows results based on interviews and survey replies by 17 out of 22 coastal Member States and it presents case studies for the following seven countries: Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania and Spain. This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Fisheries. AUTHORS Blomeyer & Sanz: Margarita SANZ, Kim STOBBERUP, Roland BLOMEYER Research administrator: Marcus BREUER Project and publication assistance: Mariana VÁCLAVOVÁ Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies, European Parliament LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE PUBLISHER To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to updates on our work for the PECH Committee please write to: [email protected] Manuscript completed in July 2020 © European Union, 2020 This document is available on the internet in summary with option to download the full text at: https://bit.ly/2zmeRka This document is available on the internet at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/es/document.html?reference=IPOL_STU(282020)2965220 5 Further information on research for PECH by the Policy Department is available at: https://research4committees.blog/PECH/ Follow us on Twitter: @PolicyPECH Please use the following reference to cite this study: Sanz, M., Stobberup, K., Blomeyer, R., 2020, Research for PECH Committee – Implementation of the current EU fisheries control system by Member States (2014-19), European Parliament, Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies, Brussels Please use the following reference for in-text citations: Sanz, Stobberup and Blomeyer (2020) DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. © Cover image used under licence from Shutterstock.com 4 Implementation of the current EU fisheries control system by Member States (2014-19) CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 5 LIST OF TABLES 7 LIST OF FIGURES 10 LIST OF BOXES 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11 1. INTRODUCTION 17 1.1. Research objectives 17 1.2. Methodology 17 1.3. Study structure 18 2. BACKGROUND 19 2.1. Legal framework for the EU fisheries control system 19 2.2. Revision of the EU Fisheries Control Regulation 20 2.3. Feedback from the stakeholders 21 3. INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURES 23 3.1. Overview of the infringement procedures 23 3.2. Competent authorities for sanctions and controls 24 3.3. Average length of infringement procedures 25 4. EU OVERVIEW: CONTROLS AND SANCTIONS IMPOSED 27 4.1. Identified infringements and sanctions imposed by type of infringement 27 4.2. Minimum and maximum sanctions laid down in the law 32 4.3. Sanctions imposed 33 5. PENALTIES AND POINT SYSTEM 37 5.1. EU overview: penalties by law in each Member State 37 5.2. Point system for serious infringements 38 6. CASE STUDIES 47 6.1. Case study summaries 47 6.2. Denmark 52 6.3. France 67 6.4. Germany 100 6.5. Ireland 112 6.6. Italy 132 3 IPOL | Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies 6.7. Lithuania 154 6.8. Spain 171 7. RECOMMENDATIONS 185 7.1. Point System 185 7.2. Controls 185 REFERENCES 189 ANNEX I – STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS 201 ANNEX II – QUESTIONNAIRE TO THE MEMBER STATE 203 4 Implementation of the current EU fisheries control system by Member States (2014-19) LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS BBND Bazinis bausmių ir nuobaudų dydis Minimal threshold for fines (Lithuania) BLE Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung Federal Office for Agriculture and Food (Germany) CCNP Centro controllo nazionale pesca National centre for fisheries control (Italy) CCTV Closed-circuit television CEGs Control Expert Groups CFP Common Fisheries Policy CNSP Centre National de Surveillance de la Pêche National Fisheries Monitoring Centre (France) CRPM Code Rural et de la Pêche Maritime Rural and Maritime Fishing Code (France) CSO Civil Society Organisation CSP Centres de Surveillance de la Pêche Fisheries Monitoring Centres (France) DIRM Direction Inter-régionale de la Mer Inter-regional Directorate of the Sea (France) DKK Danish Krone DPMA Direction des Pêches Maritimes et de l’Aquaculture Directorate of Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture (France) DRMs Directions de la Mer Directorates for the Sea (France) ECA European Court of Auditors EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EFCA European Fisheries Control Agency 5 IPOL | Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies EUR Euro FIT Fishery Information Technology GU Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana Official Journal of the Italian Republic IUU Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported Fishing JDP Joint-deployment plan JORF Journal Officiel de la République Française Official Journal of the French Republic LEI Romanian Lev MIPAAF Ministero delle Politiche Agricole, Alimentari e Forestali Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forest Policies (Italy) NEAFC North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission PECH European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries Pe.M.Acq. Direzione Generale della Pesca Marittima e dell'Acquacoltura Directorate General of Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture (Italy) REM Remote Electronic Monitoring SEK Swedish Krona SFMJA Sea Fisheries Maritime Jurisdiction Act 2006 (Ireland) SFPA Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority SGCI Subdirección General de Control e Inspección Vice Directorate General of Control and Inspection (Spain) SIPE Sistema de Información Pesquera Española Spanish Fisheries Information System TAC Total Allowable Catch 6 Implementation of the current EU fisheries control system by Member States (2014-19) LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Systems of infringements procedures in national law (2020) 23 Table 2: Competent authorities for sanctions and controls in the EU 24 Table 3: Average length or time range of infringement procedures 26 Table 4: Number of infringements per type of infringement and per Member State (2014 – 2019) 30 Table 5: Economic sanctions for serious infringements 32 Table 6: Cases of sanctions applied per type of infringement and per Member State (2014 – 2019) 36 Table 7: Penalties imposed in the EU Member States 38 Table 8: Legislation implementing the penalty point system 40 Table 9: Cases where points were attributed per Member State and per type of infringement (2014 – 2019) 45 Table 10: Landings and inspections with respective coverage carried out in port and at sea (2014-2018) (Denmark) 62 Table 11: Number of serious infringements detected, and sanctions applied (2014-2019) (Denmark) 66 Table 12: Summary of serious infringements, points and fines (France) 73 Table 13: Conditions for application of the point system (France) 74 Table 14: Number of controls per type (2014-2017) (France) 81 Table 15: Percentage of controls per type (2014-2017) (France) 81 Table 16: Trends in types of controls (2014-2017) (France) 82 Table 17: Number of controls per type (2017-2018) (Metropolitan France) 82 Table 18: Number of controls according to CNSP (2014-2016) (France) 83 Table 19: Number of infringements identified and sanctions applied (2017) (France) 86 Table 20. Number of infringements identified and sanctions (2018) (France) 88 Table 21: Common types of infringements, Eastern Channel & North Sea region (2015-2019) (France) 90 Table 22: Economic sanctions, Eastern Channel & North Sea region (2015-2019) (France) 90 Table 23: Licences suspensions, Eastern Channel & North Sea region (2015-2019) (France) 91 Table 24: Infringements per type of control, Eastern Channel & North Sea region (2015-2019) (France) 91 Table 25: Points assigned per number of serious infringements, Eastern Channel & North Sea region (2015-19) (France) 92 Table 26: Common types of infringements, South Atlantic region (2016) (France) 93 Table 27: Infringements per type of control, South Atlantic region (2016) (France) 93 Table 28: Sanctions, South Atlantic region (2016) (France) 94 Table 29: Points per number of serious infringements, South Atlantic region (2016) (France) 94 7 IPOL | Policy Department for Structural and Cohesion Policies Table 30: Infringements identified, Mediterranean Sea region (2014-2017) (France) 95 Table 31: Sanctions, Mediterranean Sea region (2014-2017) (France) 96 Table 32: Points per type and number of serious infringements, Mediterranean Sea region (2016-2020) (France) 97 Table 33: Points per year and number of serious infringements, Mediterranean Sea region (2016-19) (France) 98 Table 34: Sanctions indicators, Northern Atlantic-& Western Channel region (2015-2018) (France) 98 Table 35: Major amendments to implement CFP regulations (Germany) 100 Table 36: Serious infringement points and minimum fine (Germany) 101 Table 37: Percentage of controlled fishing trips in relation to the total number of fishing trips (2016-2018) (Germany) 105 Table 38: Coverage of fishing trips by sea controls in the area of responsibility of the federal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Smart Border Management: Indian Coastal and Maritime Security
    Contents Foreword p2/ Preface p3/ Overview p4/ Current initiatives p12/ Challenges and way forward p25/ International examples p28/Sources p32/ Glossary p36/ FICCI Security Department p38 Smart border management: Indian coastal and maritime security September 2017 www.pwc.in Dr Sanjaya Baru Secretary General Foreword 1 FICCI India’s long coastline presents a variety of security challenges including illegal landing of arms and explosives at isolated spots on the coast, infiltration/ex-filtration of anti-national elements, use of the sea and off shore islands for criminal activities, and smuggling of consumer and intermediate goods through sea routes. Absence of physical barriers on the coast and presence of vital industrial and defence installations near the coast also enhance the vulnerability of the coasts to illegal cross-border activities. In addition, the Indian Ocean Region is of strategic importance to India’s security. A substantial part of India’s external trade and energy supplies pass through this region. The security of India’s island territories, in particular, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, remains an important priority. Drug trafficking, sea-piracy and other clandestine activities such as gun running are emerging as new challenges to security management in the Indian Ocean region. FICCI believes that industry has the technological capability to implement border management solutions. The government could consider exploring integrated solutions provided by industry for strengthening coastal security of the country. The FICCI-PwC report on ‘Smart border management: Indian coastal and maritime security’ highlights the initiatives being taken by the Central and state governments to strengthen coastal security measures in the country.
    [Show full text]
  • The French White Paper on Defence and National Security (2008) 3
    FRENCH DEFENCE 2009 Texts and exercises by Philippe Rostaing : 1. French Defence Organization 2. French Defence Policy : the French White Paper on Defence and National Security (2008) 3. The French Army 4. The French Air Force 5. The French Navy 6. The French Gendarmerie 7. Intelligence and the French Intelligence Community Update : March 2009 1 1. French Defence Organization Read this text carefully. You will then be able to do the following exercises : President of the French Republic Prime Minister Defence Minister Armed Forces Chief of Staff Army Chief Air Force Navy Chief Gendarmerie of Staff Chief of of Staff Director- Staff General 1. The Constitution of October 4th,1958, gives the President of the French Republic the position of Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces (Article 15). In his capacity as guarantor of national independence, territorial integrity and treaty compliance (Article 5), he alone may decide to commit nuclear forces. Within specific councils under his authority (the Council of Ministers, the Defence Council), the President defines national defence policies and makes decisions in defence matters. He is responsible for appointing senior civilian and military officials (Article 13). 2. The French government determines and executes national policies and thus may use armed force (Article 20). The Prime Minister has responsibility for national defence. He implements the decisions made by the President and is supported by the General Secretariat for National Defence (SGDN) in charge of interdepartmental defence coordination. 3. The Defence Minister has authority over the Ministry of Defence and executes military defence policies. He reports directly to the Prime Minister.
    [Show full text]
  • Anniversary Publication
    Ten Years of Europol 1999-2009 TEN YEARS OF EUROPOL, 1999-2009 Europol Corporate Communications P.O. Box 90850 2509 LW The Hague The Netherlands www.europol.europa.eu © European Police OfÞ ce, 2009 All rights reserved. Reproduction in any form or by any means is allowed only with the prior permission of Europol Editor: Agnieszka Biegaj Text: Andy Brown Photographs: Europol (Zoran Lesic, Bo Pallavicini, Max Schmits, Marcin Skowronek, Europol archives); EU Member States’ Law Enforcement Authorities; European Commission; European Council; Participants of the Europol Photo Competition 2009: Kristian Berlin, Devid Camerlynck, Janusz Gajdas, Jean-François Guiot, Lasse Iversen, Robert Kralj, Tomasz Kurczynski, Antte Lauhamaa, Florin Lazau, Andrzej Mitura, Peter Pobeska, Pawel Ostaszewski, Jorgen Steen, Georges Vandezande Special thanks to all the photographers, EU Member States’ Law Enforcement Authorities and Europol Liaison Bureaux for their contributions 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 7 I. Birth of an Idea, 1991-1998 11 1. Ideas behind Europol: Tackling International Crime 11 2. Maastricht Treaty: the ‘Founding Article’ 12 3. First Step: the Europol Drugs Unit 12 4. The Hague: a Fitting Location 13 5. Formal Status: the Europol Convention 14 6. European Union: New Members and a New Treaty 15 II. The First Years, 1999-2004 21 1. Facing the Challenges: Stabilisation and Consolidation 21 2. Changing Priorities, Flexible Organisation 24 3. Information Exchange and Intelligence Analysis: Core Business 27 4. The Hague Programme: Positioning Europol at the Centre of EU Law Enforcement Cooperation 34 5. Casting the Net Wider: Cooperation Agreements with Third States and Organisations 36 6. Europol’s Most Important Asset: the Staff and the ELO Network 37 III.
    [Show full text]
  • AREA No. 1 Pas-De-Calais Capes and Strait of Dover
    AREA no. 1 Pas-de-Calais Capes and Strait of Dover Vocation: Prevalence of maritime shipping, challenges with maritime curityse and port infrastructure and marine renewable energy. The need to sustain marine fishing activity, the zone’s aquaculture potential, as well as marine aggregates, while at the same time allowing growing tourism activity. Safeguarding migration corridors and key habitats. Illustrative map of the major ecological and socioeconomic issues I. Presentation of the zone Associated ecological area: Sector 1: Southern North Sea and Strait of Dover Area 2: Picardy Estuaries and the Opal Sea Associated water mass: FRAC01 BELGIAN BORDER TO THE MALO BREAKWATERS FRAC02 MALO BREAKWATERS TO THE EAST OF GRIS NEZ CAPE FRAC03 GRIS NEZ CAPE TO SLACK FRAT02 PORT OF BOULOGNE FRAT03 PORT OF CALAIS FRAT04 PORT OF DUNKIRK AND INTERTIDAL ZONE TO THE BREAKWATER Broadly, in terms of identified ecological challenges, the Strait of Dover is a bottleneck where the North Sea and the English Channel meet. This ecological unit has particular hydrographic conditions; there are many sandbanks in the area, including subaqueous dunes formed by swells and currents. The poorly sorted sands on the coastal fringe are characterised by high densities of invertebrates, including molluscs and bivalves. As an area of high plankton production, this productive environment provides an abundant and diversified food supply for epifauna and forage species. As well as being an important feeding area for top predators, the strait also has a high concentration of cod, is a nursery area for whiting, plaice and sole and a spawning area for herring. Porpoises concentrate in the area during winter due to the abundance of prey species and the sandbanks are popular resting places for grey seals (the largest colony in France).
    [Show full text]
  • SPC Tested This New Beacon from Argos, the MAR GE/T
    INFORMATION BULLE tin Number 5 - May 2009 SPC tested this new beacon from In this issue ... Argos, the MAR GE/T • Fisherman and safety awareness at sea ....................................................p.3 nother year has gone by since the last Sea Safety Bul- • The deadliest catch and sea safety letin was distributed. Readers may remember in the education in Alaska ............................p.7 last issue that we borrowed a few things from friends A around the Pacific. In this issue we also depend heavily • SPC’s Nearshore Fisheries Development & on the inspiration and guidance of others. In other words, we Training Section tests new Argos portable have once again borrowed relevant and timely material on sea beacon for small fishing boats ...........p.9 safety from our friends and neighbors – from as far away as • Transmitter MAR-GE/T .......................p.9 Italy and Alaska to our closest neighbors, Australia and New Zealand. Thank you to all who provided materials to us. • Tales inspire EPIRB ............................p.11 • Liferafts and their release The first Safety Feature in this issue, which discusses the risks mechanisms .......................................p.12 of fishing boats colliding with large trading ships, comes from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, and although it is • The FAO Expert Consultation on best aimed at Australian fishermen, the information and guidelines practices for safety at sea ..................p.14 are relevant to anyone who goes to sea, whether in a fishing • Fishing safely .........................................p. boat or a pleasure boat. The risk of being run down by a tanker or container ship is real, especially for small boats that operate • Safety for Fishermen web in shipping lanes during times of reduced visibility.
    [Show full text]
  • JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Second Report on the Implementation of the EU Maritime Security Strategy Action Plan
    Council of the European Union Brussels, 15 June 2017 (OR. en) 10398/17 POLGEN 94 POLMAR 23 POLMIL 74 CSDP/PSDC 341 COMAR 27 AGRI 337 ENV 626 JAI 606 PECHE 257 TRANS 287 COVER NOTE From: Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director date of receipt: 15 June 2017 To: Mr Jeppe TRANHOLM-MIKKELSEN, Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union No. Cion doc.: SWD(2016) 238 final Subject: JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Second report on the implementation of the EU Maritime Security Strategy Action Plan Delegations will find attached document SWD(2016) 238 final. Encl.: SWD(2016) 238 final 10398/17 GIP 1B EN HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION FOR EUROPEAN FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND COMMISSION SECURITY POLICY Brussels, 14.6.2017 SWD(2016) 238 final JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Second report on the implementation of the EU Maritime Security Strategy Action Plan EN EN Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. 3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Focus area 1 — Maritime information sharing initiatives ....................................................................... 7 i) Progress made, as reported by Member States .......................................................................... 7 ii) Latest developments involving the EEAS, EDA and the Commission .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Navies, Coast Guards, the Maritime Community and International Stability
    March 2017 Policy Brief NAVIES, COAST GUARDS, THE MARITIME COMMUNITY AND INTERNATIONAL STABILITY Editors: Ian Bowers Collin Koh FOREWORD The maritime security environment in East Asia is a policy priority for both private and state actors. The strategic and economic importance of the sea ensures that its stability is of primary concern. Yet competing visions of how stability should be achieved and what a new ‘status-quo’ looks like has created uncertainty and competition. Naval forces in the region are growing as littoral states seek to ensure their interests at sea are met. Concurrently, many of the same states have looked to maritime law enforcement agencies to supplement their maritime security capabilities. Through cases studies of littoral states in Asia and beyond this policy brief examines how states in the region have integrated maritime law enforcement agencies into their existing maritime security architecture and how successful these efforts have been. This Policy Brief also determines how maritime stability is impacted by these developments and how it can be maintained in this hybrid maritime operating environment. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. List of Abbreviations i Introduction iv Key Findings viii Setting the Scene The Maritime Environment in the Western Pacific 2 Liu Qing The Battle that Never Was: Northern Waters during the Cold War 6 Tør Ivar Strømmen The Maritime Industries as Stakeholders? 10 James Goldrick Southeast Asia’s Naval Shipbuilding Industry: The Challenges Ahead 13 Richard A. Bitzinger Small Navies and International
    [Show full text]
  • Download Report
    SOLACE GLOBAL MARITIME MONTHLY APRIL/MAY 2019 MARITIME MARITIME SUMMARY • April/May 2019 Solace Global Maritime Summary INDIAN OCEAN MARITIME PIRACY ARMED CONFLICT TERRORISM HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH 21 Apr: Attempted Attack The biggest story in the region in the past weeks has been the attack on four vessels off the coast of Fujairah port, United Arab Emirates. It remains unclear who carried out what is being termed as an act of sabotage; with no claims of responsibility forthcoming at the time of writing. To read more, see our Maritime brief at: https://www.solaceglobal.com/news/2019/05/14/fujairah-maritime-brief/ The incident was followed by an alleged drone attack on Saudi Arabian oil and gas infrastructure. As a result, there has been an increase in tension in the region which have coincided with the deployment of a US carrier group. The United States had been planning to deploy a carrier battle group and a bomber group to the Middle East prior to these incidents with the deployments, according to the US intelligence service, a reaction to ‘the increased Iranian threat against US interests.’ At this time, it is unclear exactly when the carrier group will arrive in the region or what the exact composition of the fleet will be. The deployment also comes after the Iranian Revolutionary Guard allegedly managed to capture drone footage of an American aircraft carrier, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency. The footage shows the USS Dwight D Eisenhower with numerous Contact: +44 ( 0 ) 1202 308 810 SOLACEGLOBAL.COM Page 1 MARITIME MARITIME SUMMARY • April/May 2019 aircraft on the carrier’s deck.
    [Show full text]
  • Eu Pre-Accession Funds for Border Management in Turkey: Preparing for Membership Or Safeguarding Eu External Borders?
    EU PRE-ACCESSION FUNDS FOR BORDER MANAGEMENT IN TURKEY: PREPARING FOR MEMBERSHIP OR SAFEGUARDING EU EXTERNAL BORDERS? A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY BAHAR DİKİLİTAŞ IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EUROPEAN STUDIES SEPTEMBER 2019 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Yaşar Kondakçı Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özgehan Şenyuva Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. Assoc. Prof. Başak Zeynep Alpan Supervisor Examining Committee Members Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özlem Kaygusuz (Ankara Uni., UI) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Başak Zeynep Alpan (METU, ADM) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Şerif Onur Bahçecik (METU, IR) PLAGIA iii RISM I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Bahar Dikilitaş Signature : iii ABSTRACT EU PRE-ACCESSION FUNDS FOR BORDER MANAGEMENT IN TURKEY: PREPARING FOR MEMBERSHIP OR SAFEGUARDING EU EXTERNAL BORDERS? Dikilitaş, Bahar Ms. Department of European Studies Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Başak Zeynep Alpan September 2019, 140 pages As a candidate country, Turkey has been supported by Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) funds since 2007 in its gradual alignment with the EU acquis, standards and policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Management Report for Bumphead Parrotfish (Bolbometopon
    Management Report for Bumphead Parrotfish (Bolbometopon muricatum) Status Review under the Endangered Species Act: Existing Regulatory Mechanisms (per Endangered Species Act § 4(a)(1)(D), 16 U.S.C. § 1533(a)(1)(D)) and Conservation Efforts (per Endangered Species Act § 4(b)(1)(A), 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(1)(A)) September 2012 Bumphead parrotfish for sale in market, Aceh, Indonesia (photo provided by Crispen Wilson) Pacific Islands Regional Office National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Department of Commerce Executive Summary Introduction On January 4, 2010, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) received a petition from WildEarth Guardians to list bumphead parrotfish (Bolbometopon muricatum) as either threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In response, NMFS issued a 90-day finding (75 Fed. Reg.16713 (Apr. 2, 2010)), wherein the petition was determined to contain substantial information indicating that listing the species may be warranted. Thus, NMFS initiated a comprehensive status review of bumphead parrotfish, which was completed jointly by our Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC) and Pacific Islands Regional Office (PIRO). PIFSC established a Bumphead Parrotfish Biological Review Team (BRT) to complete a biological report on the status of the species and threats to the species (hereafter “BRT Report”, cited as Kobayashi et al. 2011). PIRO staff completed this report on management activities affecting the species across its range, including existing regulatory mechanisms and non- regulatory conservation efforts (hereafter “Management Report”). The BRT Report and Management Report together constitute the comprehensive bumphead parrotfish status review. The process for determining whether a species should be listed as threatened or endangered is based upon the best scientific and commercial data available and is described in sections 4(a)(1) and 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Molto Agitato Italy and Mediterranean Security
    SUMMER 2019 MOLTO AGITATO ITALY AND MEDITERRANEAN SECURITY REPORT This report is part of Friends of Europe’s Peace, Security and Defence programme. Written by Paul Taylor, it brings together the views of scholars, policymakers and senior defence and security stakeholders. Unless otherwise indicated, this report reflects the writer’s understanding of the views expressed by the interviewees and participants of survey. The author and the participants contributed in their personal capacities, and their views do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions they represent, or of Friends of Europe and its board of trustees, members or partners. Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted, provided that full credit is given to Friends of Europe and that any such reproduction, whether in whole or in part, is not sold unless incorporated in other works. The Peace, Security and Defence programme is supported by the United States government. SUMMER 2019 MOLTO AGITATO ITALY AND MEDITERRANEAN SECURITY REPORT The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. Publisher: Geert Cami Author: Paul Taylor Publication Director: Nathalie Furrer Programme Manager: Antonia Erlandsson Programme Executive: Patrick Vandewalle Programme Assistant: Elena Saenz Feehan Editors: Robert Arenella, Arnaud Bodet, Eleanor Doorley, Angela Pauly Designer: Elza Lőw © Friends of Europe - June 2019 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Paul Taylor is a Paris-based journalist who writes the "Europe at Large" column for POLITICO.
    [Show full text]
  • Emploi De La Gendarmerie Nationale En Opérations Extérieures
    Résumé DIA-3.22_GEND-OPEX(2013) Centre interarmées 1. La gendarmerie nationale est une force armée investie d’une mission de police. L’article 1 de la loi du 3 août 2009 relative à la gendarmerie nationale stipule que « l’ensemble de ses de concepts, missions, civiles et militaires, s’exécute sur toute l’étendue du territoire national, hors de celui-ci en application des engagements internationaux de la France, ainsi qu’aux armées ». de doctrines et La gendarmerie nationale a pleinement vocation à s’engager au profit du CEMA dès lors d’expérimentations que les caractéristiques du théâtre justifient l’emploi de capacités complémentaires à celles traditionnellement recensées au sein des armées. 2. La DIA s’attache à rappeler les principes généraux et fondements justifiant le déploiement d’une composante fonctionnelle gendarmerie en OPEX (chapitre 1). 3. À des fins pédagogiques, les principes généraux prévalant sur un théâtre d’opérations, notamment en ce qui concerne la chaîne et les responsabilités de commandement sont évoquées. Au regard de ces règles, l’intégration de la composante gendarmerie dans une force interarmées est mise en perspective afin d’identifier les aspects particuliers justifiés par la nature intrinsèque d’une telle entité (chapitre 2). 4. Enfin, l’emploi de la gendarmerie nationale en opérations extérieures est abordé dans le détail à travers un prisme basé sur les attributions traditionnelles des sections d’un état- major (chapitre 3). Cette grille de lecture permet de mettre en parallèle les principaux textes doctrinaux de références et les capacités particulières de la gendarmerie en propre ou en appui de la force.
    [Show full text]