[ad_1]
VIEW
Debaters: Authorities work counterproductively – as if the bird was threatened
This is an article of debate. It is the author who represents the opinions expressed in the text, not Aftonbladet.
Photo: TT
The islands where the group settles dies and the trees, vegetation and surrounding waters are destroyed, write EU parliamentarians Fredrick Federley and Nils Torvalds.
The Baltic Sea is incredible. With its islands, copper and cut, it has always played a central role for Sweden and Finland. But the Baltic Sea is extremely sensitive to its fractured waters and unfortunately needs much help.
Today, several fish stocks are in poor condition. In recent years, fishermen have noted the drop in catches and many catches show signs of heavy sting and bumps. Predatory fish have become less numerous and at the same time, there is an imbalance between planktonic fish, such as spikes and spikes.
The emergency situation in the Baltic Sea requires rapid, powerful but lasting measures. Eutrophication and overfishing are issues we have been working on for a long time.
We have been striving for long-term, sustainable fishing quotas, both to protect fish stocks and to ensure a profitable fishery in the long term.
But what the European Union and the national authorities have long sought to do is a major threat to sustainable fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and this problem is exposed.
The bark continues to grow and eat a lot of fish, which distances other natural seabirds. Splashing can endanger the entire ecosystem, adversely affect professional fishing, and the willingness and opportunity of people to live and work in the archipelago.
The islands where the cliff sits dies and the trees, vegetation and surrounding waters are destroyed. Splashing islands and islets alienate the archipelago of both archipelagos and tourists. At present, there is already sufficient evidence of the serious damage caused by bouquets at various locations in the Baltic Sea. The burden of proof should no longer be on the professional fisherman.
The EU has to a certain extent eased the rules on protection hunting, but basically these changes are only cosmetic. The fundamental problem is still not solved. National interpretations of the Habitats Directive and the EU Habitats Directive are still rigid and do not take into account possible exceptions to the EU rules.
The junction is extremely viable in Finland and Sweden, despite the fact that the Swedish and Finnish national authorities continue to be counter-productive, as if this invasive bird were threatened. In Finland, hunting is prohibited and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency wrongly considers the seal as an endangered species.
When the European Commission does not dare to clarify or propose amendments to the Nature and Habitats Directive and the national authorities do not want to take the issue seriously, we do what we can and follow up the proposals of the European Parliament which could at least reduce the impact of the joint.
Inshore and small-scale fishing is today a nutrition increasingly difficult to fight for its survival. Therefore, it is important to be able to compensate fishermen who are economically disadvantaged by the seal.
Several experts believe that for the living environments of the archipelago and for a livelier stock of perch and herring gasel, the cormorant population should be reduced to about one third of the current population.
Therefore, we also wish to open ourselves to ensure that a hedge cover can benefit from a financial compensation from the European Fund for the Sea and Fisheries.
Together, we are working to rescue the Baltic Sea from the current destructive invasion of the joint. If we can, then everyone should be a winner.
Fredrick Federley, European Parliament, Center Party,
Nils TorvaldsEU Parliamentarians, Swedish People's Party (Finland)
Join the debate and comment on the article
– I like Aftonbladet Debatt on Facebook.
Here's how to write an article of debate 0:33
Source link
