Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-05-Speech-3-366"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20070905.25.3-366"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"As a general comment on the fundamental points contained in the report under discussion, which is of crucial importance for the fisheries sector, we think it is relevant to point out the differences in the long- and short-term application of the principle of sustainability in fisheries. That is, the long-term plans aim to define objectives or themes to achieve a stable situation to be reached after a relatively long period, whereas short-term measures are based on proposals drawn up annually in order to rectify, in a short period of time, the fishing mortality rate until the level proposed as a long-term objective is reached. As regards the long-term objective for fisheries the principal objective laid down in Johannesburg might be accepted – that of obtaining the maximum sustainable catch of fish stocks. However, it is important to stress that, in order to formulate the maximum sustainable yield objective, it is essential to apply scientific analysis to determine the fishing mortality rate that guarantees the maximum catch which the fisheries resources can provide in a sustainable manner. For that it is essential to take account of the natural characteristics of each fisheries resource, as well as to know the nature and type of fishing methods. To assess the fishing level that is appropriate for the long-term objective, it is necessary to check the forecasts drawn up by scientists, which implies that these forecasts must be based on reliable information, that they will be adopted by managers and accepted and obeyed by fishermen, always safeguarding, and I want to stress the always, the socio-economic situation of the fisheries sector and of the fishing communities. In practice, the aim is to estimate the long-term catches and the corresponding fishing mortality rates. For that we need to select a criterion for sustainability and determine the level of fishing that produces the maximum sustainable catch level. This is where the real debate begins. Different values have been proposed for fishing mortality rates for the long-term management of stocks in the Member States’ exclusive economic zones. Various scientists think it is preferable to set F0.1 as the fishing mortality rate rather than, for example, FMSY, which they regard as less appropriate. It should be noted that FMSY, which is the fishing mortality rate, should not be confused with MSY, which is the catch level. Finally, I agree that it is essential for the sustainability measures to be accompanied by an evaluation of the socio-economic consequences and costs entailed in implementing them."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph