On Amendment 3 regarding discard reduction, I have been working on a separate initiative.
On Amendment 10, the chapter rightly refers to a limitation of fishing effort.
On Amendment 11, I can reconsider the base line for the calculation of kilowatt days.
On Amendment 18, for legal reasons I cannot accept the deletion of the reference to the decision-making procedure.
On Amendment 17, I can accept the principle of effort transfers, subject to a correction factor reflecting the importance of cod catches in different sectors.
On Amendment 7, I accept that, for stocks in very high-risk situations, a limit of 15% on TAC increases should apply.
On Amendment 15, the proposal concerning ring-fencing of capacity was too restrictive and could prevent reorganisation of the activities of fishing fleets.
On Amendment 12, the text of the proposed Article 8a, paragraph 3, was indeed confusing, and we will be redrafting it to make it clearer.
On Amendment 8, I accept the inclusion of a reference to seal mortality as an example, and of considerations of climate change on cod when a review of the plan is made.
We are nearly one month removed from the vote on Amendment One in North Carolina, and only days removed from the official certification by the state that made the amendment official.
The law enforcement opponents, primarily represented by the Florida Sheriffs Associationn, are offering one-sided scare tactics to garner "no" votes on Amendment 2. They are focusing on perceived loopholes to emphasize their claim that the Amendment is poorly written.
