title: RÈGLEMENT (CE) N° 2564/97 DE LA COMMISSION du 18 décembre 1997 fixant les restitutions applicables à l'exportation des produits transformés à base de céréales et de riz

eurovoc_concepts:
cereal product
export refund
rice


title: Entschließung des Rates vom 18. Dezember 1997 zur Festlegung der Prioritäten für die Zusammenarbeit im Bereich Justiz und Inneres für den Zeitraum vom 1. Januar 1998 bis zum Inkrafttreten des Vertrags von Amsterdam

eurovoc_concepts: judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU

formats: html pdf print

text: 15. 1. 98 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften C 11/1 (In Anwendung von Titel VI des Vertrags über die Europäische Union erlassene Rechtsakte) ENTSCHLIESSUNG DES RATES vom 18. Dezember 1997 zur Festlegung der Prioritäten für die Zusammenarbeit im Bereich Justiz und Inneres für den Zeitraum vom 1. Januar 1998 bis zum Inkrafttreten des Vertrags von Amsterdam (98/C 11/01) DER RAT DER EUROPÄISCHEN UNION — NIMMT FOLGENDE ENTSCHLIESSUNG AN: angesichts der Aufforderung des Europäischen Rates, seine Arbeiten bezüglich der Zusammenarbeit im Bereich Justiz und Inneres gemäß Titel VI des Vertrags über die Europäische Union zu strukturieren und zu diesem Zweck die Tätigkeiten zu bestimmen, die zur Erreichung der vom Europäischen Rat in Madrid (15. und 16. De- zember 1995), Florenz (21. und 22. Juni 1996), Dublin (13. und 14. Dezember 1996) und Amsterdam (16. und 17. Juni 1997) festgelegten Ziele vorrangig durchgeführt werden müssen; unter Bekräftigung seines Bestrebens, Freiheit, Sicherheit und Gerechtigkeit in der Europäischen Union gemäß den Grundsätzen der Rechtsstaatlichkeit durch die Entwick- lung einer engen Zusammenarbeit zwischen den Mitglied- staaten im Bereich Justiz und Inneres zu fördern: unter Hinweis darauf, daß diese Prioritäten unter Berück- sichtigung der Beschlüsse überprüft werden könnten, die im Rahmen der Vorbereitung des Inkrafttretens des am 2. Oktober 1997 unterzeichneten Vertrags von Amster- dam (1) gefaßt werden; im Hinblick auf die Entschließung des Rates vom 14. Oktober 1996 zur Festlegung der Prioritäten für die Zusammenarbeit im Bereich Justiz und Inneres für den Zeitraum vom 1. Juli 1996 bis zum 30. Juni 1998 (2), insbesondere Abschnitt IV; nach Prüfung der Auffassungen des Europäischen Parla- ments (3) im Anschluß an eine Anhörung durch den Vorsitz gemäß Artikel K. 6 des Vertrags über die Euro- päische Union, (1) ABl. C 340 vom 10. 11. 1997, S. 1. (2) ABl. C 319 vom 26. 10. 1996, S. 1. (3) Stellungnahme vom 20. November 1997 (ABl. C 371 vom I. Der Rat beabsichtigt, sich bei der Verfolgung der vom Europäischen Rat festgelegten Ziele in der Zeit vom 1. Januar 1998 bis zum Inkrafttreten des Vertrags von Amsterdam vorrangig auf folgende Themen zu konzentrieren: 1. Bekämpfung des Terrorismus: a) Intensivierung der Zusammenarbeit zwi- schen den Mitgliedstaaten; b) Aktualisierung des Dokuments über die terroristische Bedrohung; c) Aktualisierung des Verzeichnisses der Fach- stellen für Terrorismusbekämpfung. 2. Bekämpfung der organisierten Kriminalität: Durchführung des vom Europäischen Rat in Amsterdam (16. -17. Juni 1997) gebilligten Aktionsplans zur Bekämpfung der organisier- ten Kriminalität gemäß dem darin vorgesehe- nen Zeitplan und den darin vorgesehenen Modalitäten (4). 3. Drogenbekämpfung a) Umsetzung des vom Europäischen Rat in Madrid am 15. und 16. Dezember 1995 angenommenen Berichts der Drogensach- verständigen und der Empfehlungen des Europäischen Rates von Dublin (13. -14. Dezember 1996) und Amsterdam (16. -17. Juni 1997) sowohl auf gerichtlicher und 8. 12. 1997). (4) ABl. C 251 vom 15. 8. 1997. S. 1. C 11/2 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 15. 1. 98 polizeilicher Ebene als auch im Zollwesen, insbesondere im Bereich der Angebotsredu- zierung und der internationalen Zusam- menarbeit; b) Durchführung des Aktionsplans zur Dro- genbekämpfung in der Karibik und der Empfehlungen des Europäischen Rates von Dublin für Lateinamerika; c) Durchführung der laufenden Initiative be- treffend Mittelasien und Rußland sowie Einleitung ähnlicher Arbeiten in bezug auf die Ukraine; d) Durchführung der Gemeinsamen Maß- nahme vom 17. Dezember 1996 betreffend die Angleichung der Rechtsvorschriften und der Verfahren der Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union zur Bekämpfung der Drogenabhängigkeit und zur Verhütung und Bekämpfung des illegalen Drogenhan- dels (1); e) Durchführung der Gemeinsamen Maß- nahme betreffend synthetische Drogen. 4. Verbesserung der polizeilichen Zusammen- arbeit und der Zollzusammenarbeit: a) Durchführung des Europol-Übereinkom- mens (Durchführungsbestimmungen, Com- putersystem); b) Aus- und Fortbildung der Polizei, insbeson- dere Festlegung eines europäischen Lehr- plans; anhand der von der Vereinigung europäischer Polizeiakademien (VEPA) er- stellten Bestandsaufnahme so weit wie möglich Koordinierung der Unterstützung für die Polizei der MOEL, um Doppelar- beiten zu vermeiden; c) verstärkte technische Zusammenarbeit, ins- besondere Überwachung des Telekommu- nikationsverkehrs und Vereinheitlichung der Normen für den Funkverkehr, Zusam- menarbeit der kriminalwissenschaftlichen Institute, Zusammenarbeit der Nationalen Kriminalpolizeilichen Informationsstellen; d) strategisches Aktionsprogramm für den Zoll; e) gemeinsame Zollüberwachungsaktionen an den Außengrenzen; f) Bekämpfung der Nachahmung, der uner- laubten Herstellung von Vervielfältigungs- stücken oder Nachbildungen und des ille- galen Handels mit Kunstwerken; g) Risikoanalyse im Bereich Zoll. (1) ABl. L 342 vom 31. 12. 1996, S. 6. 5. Verbesserung der justitiellen Zusammen- arbeit: 5. 1. in Zivilsachen a) Fertigstellung des Entwurfs eines Über- einkommens „Brüssel II“ (Ehesachen und Sorgerecht); b) europäischer Vollstreckungstitel; c) Koordinierung zwischen den Mitglied- staaten betreffend die Überarbeitung des Brüsseler Übereinkommens von 1968 und des Lugano-Übereinkom- mens von 1980; d) Aufnahme der Beratungen über die Erforderlichkeit und die Möglichkeit der Ausarbeitung eines Übereinkom- mens über das auf außervertragliche Schuldverhältnisse anzuwendende Recht (Rom II); e) Vorbereitung des Beitritts der beitritts- willigen Staaten zum Lugano-Überein- kommen von 1980; f) Handbuch betreffend die Durchfüh- rung des Übereinkommens über die Übermittlung gerichtlicher und außer- gerichtlicher Schriftstücke in Zivil- und Handelssachen (entsprechend der An- zahl der Ratifikationen des Überein- kommens); g) Prüfung der künftigen justitiellen Zu- sammenarbeit in Zivilsachen im Hin- blick auf den Vertrag von Amster- dam; 5. 2. in Strafsachen a) Entwurf eines Übereinkommens über die Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen; b) Entwurf eines Übereinkommens über die Vollstreckung von Entscheidungen über den Entzug der Fahrerlaubnis; 5. 3. in Zivil- und Strafsachen a) Durchführung der Gemeinsamen Maß- nahme betreffend Verbindungsrichter/ -staatsanwälte und Einrichtung eines Europäischen Justitiellen Netzes; b) Untersuchung der Modalitäten für die Verwirklichung des Raumes der Frei- heit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts, der in dem Vertrag von Amsterdam vorge- sehen ist, und Festlegung der für die Verwirklichung dieses Raumes erfor- derlichen Bedingungen; c) erläuternde Berichte zu den angenom- menen Übereinkommen; 15. 1. 98 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften C 11/3 d) Analyse und gegebenenfalls Anpassung der bestehenden Instrumente über son- stige Formen der justitiellen Zusam- menarbeit, 6. Verbesserung der Zusammenarbeit Bereichen Einwanderung und Asyl: in den a) Durchführung des Dubliner Übereinkom- mens und Untersuchung der Möglichkeit des Abschlusses von Parallelübereinkom- men zum Dubliner Übereinkommen; b) Angleichung der nationalen Asylverfahren; n) Vorschlag für ein Übereinkommen über Vorschriften für die Zulassung von Staats- angehörigen dritter Länder in die Mitglied- staaten der Europäischen Union; o) Unterstützungsprogramm für Flüchtlinge. 7. Verstärkung der Personenkontrollen an den Außengrenzen: a) Entwurf eines Übereinkommens über das Überschreiten der Außengrenzen und Durchführungsmaßnahmen; b) verstärkte operative Zusammenarbeit der Kontrollbehörden an den Außengrenzen; c) Arbeiten im Bereich der Harmonisierung der Visumpolitik. 8. Bekämpfung von Rassismus und Fremden- c) Angleichung der Aufnahmebedingungen feindlichkeit: für Asylbewerber; d) Entwicklung des Eurodac-Systems (Über- einkommen und technische Spezifikatio- nen); e) Prüfung der Rechtsstellung von Staatsange- hörigen dritter Länder, die sich rechtmäßig im Hoheitsgebiet der Mitgliedstaaten auf- halten: f) Entwurf einer Gemeinsamen Maßnahme betreffend den vorübergehenden Schutz von Vertriebenen und Prüfung der Proble- matik der Lastenverteilung: g) Prüfung der Formen des ersatzweisen Schutzes (De-facto-Schutz und Aufenthalts- genehmigung aus humanitären Gründen); h) Verstärkung der Maßnahmen zur Bekämp- fung der illegalen Einwanderung, insbeson- dere der Schleuserkriminalität, und der ille- galen Beschäftigung; i) Verbesserung des Informationsaustauschs und der Zusammenarbeit mit den Her- kunftsländern; II. j) Verbesserung der Zusammenarbeit bei der Rückführung illegaler Einwanderer; Rück- übernahmeprobleme; k) gefälschte Dokumente: Entwicklung eines einheitlichen Systems der Bildarchivierung und -übermittlung; praktische Zusammen- arbeit; l) Prüfung der Problematik der Familienzu- sammenführung; m) Bekämpfung von Scheinehen; Fortsetzung der Arbeiten sowohl auf justitiel- ler Ebene (Folgemaßnahmen zur Gemeinsa- men Maßnahme zur Bekämpfung von Rassis- mus und Fremdenfeindlichkeit) als auch auf polizeilicher Ebene (polizeiliche Aus- und Fortbildung). 9. Bekämpfung der Korruption und des Betrugs zu Lasten der finanziellen Interessen der Gemeinschaft: a) Durchführung der Mitteilung der Kommis- sion an den Rat und das Europäische Par- lament über eine Politik der Union zur Bekämpfung der Korruption; b) Prüfung der Modalitäten zur wirksameren Bekämpfung von Betrug zu Lasten der finanziellen Interessen der Gemeinschaft. 10. Horizontale Maßnahmen: a) Verbrechensverhütung: Folgemaßnahmen zu den verschiedenen Seminaren und Kon- ferenzen; b) Bekämpfung des Menschenhandels; c) Bekämpfung der Verwendung der neuen Technologien zu kriminellen Zwecken und Einsatz dieser Technologien zur Bekämp- fung der Kriminalität. Im Hinblick auf die Vorbereitung des Inkrafttretens des Vertrags von Amsterdam werden sich die Arbeiten des Rates insbesondere darauf erstrecken, den Schengen-Besitzstand in den Rahmen der Euro- päischen Union (Artikel 3, 4 und 6 und des Proto- kolls im Anhang zum Vertrag von Amsterdam) einzubeziehen. Der Rat beauftragt den Vorsitz, in enger Zusammenarbeit mit der Kommission schon jetzt die erforderlichen Kontakte mit dem Vorsitz des Schengener Exekutivausschusses aufzunehmen, um sicherzustellen, daß die jeweiligen Arbeitspro- gramme aufeinander abgestimmt werden, bis der Schengen-Besitzstand entsprechend den in dieser Entschließung festgelegten Prioritäten in den Rah- men der Europäischen Union einbezogen worden ist. C 11/4 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 15. 1. 98 Außerdem wird der Rat damit beginnen, Überle- gungen zu den Arbeitsstrukturen in Verbindung mit dem Raum der Freiheit, der Sicherheit und des Rechts anzustellen, die mit Inkrafttreten des Ver- trags von Amsterdam eingerichtet sein müssen. Tätigkeiten des Rates bezüglich der Zusammen- arbeit im Bereich Justiz und Inneres mit sonstigen Drittländern, insbesondere im Rahmen des Transat- lantischen Dialogs, sind Gegenstand eines oder mehrerer gesonderter Arbeitsprogramme. III. Zur Unterstützung der in Abschnitt I aufgeführten vorrangigen Tätigkeiten fördert der Rat den Aus- tausch von Beamten sowie Richtern und Staatsan- wälten zwischen den Mitgliedstaaten und — gege- benenfalls durch Bewilligung einer Gemeinschafts- finanzierung — die Veranstaltung von Seminaren und Konferenzen sowie die Ausarbeitung von Aus- bildungsprogrammen. IV. Der Rat wird sich bemühen, den Standpunkt der Mitgliedstaaten in den internationalen Organisatio- nen und auf internationalen Konferenzen — wann immer dies möglich ist — zu koordinieren, wenn diese sich mit einem Bereich befassen, der mit den in Abschnitt I festgelegten Prioritäten im Zusam- menhang steht. V. Der Rat wird bei der Festlegung seiner Prioritäten und bei der Gestaltung seiner Arbeiten die Heran- führungsstrategie im Hinblick auf die Erweiterung der Union im Lichte der Leitlinien des Europäi- schen Rates berücksichtigen. In diesem Zusammen- hang wird insbesondere ein Heranführungspakt ausgearbeitet werden, wie er in dem vom Europäi- schen Rat in Amsterdam gebilligten Bericht der Hochrangigen Gruppe über die Bekämpfung der organisierten Kriminalität angesprochen ist. Die VI. Der Rat kontrolliert schließlich regelmäßig die Anwendung der im Rahmen des Titels VI des Vertrags über die Europäische Union angenomme- nen Instrumente durch die Mitgliedstaaten. VII. Unbeschadet des in Artikel K. 3 Absatz 2 des Ver- trags über die Europäische Union vorgesehenen Initiativrechts der Mitgliedstaaten und der Kommis- sion berät der Rat über das Programm auf Vor- schlag des durch Artikel K. 4 Absatz 1 dieses Ver- trags eingesetzten Ausschusses grundsätzlich zu Beginn jeder Präsidentenschaft. VIII. Dieses Programm wird vom Rat rechtzeitig überar- beitet. Er bestimmt dabei, welche Tätigkeiten von der Prioritätenliste zu streichen sind, weil sie entwe- der bereits erfolgreich abgeschlossen wurden oder ihre kurzfristige Verwirklichung nicht möglich oder nicht mehr vorrangig ist und welche anderen Tätig- keiten als prioritär anzusehen sind und in das Programm aufgenommen werden müssen. IX. Diese Entschließung ersetzt die Entschließung des Rates vom 14. Oktober 1996. Sie wird im Amts- blatt veröffentlicht


title: Regolamento (CE) n. 114/98 del Consiglio del 18 dicembre 1997 relativo alla conclusione del protocollo che fissa le possibilità di pesca e la compensazione finanziaria previste nell'accordo tra la Comunità economica europea e il governo della Repubblica della Guinea equatoriale sulla pesca al largo della Guinea equatoriale, per il periodo compreso tra il 1o luglio 1997 e il 30 giugno 2000

eurovoc_concepts:
EU Member State
Guinea
authorised catch
fishing agreement
fishing area
protocol to an agreement

text: 17. 1. 98 ‹ IT ‹ Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee L 11/1 I (Atti per i quali la pubblicazione è una condizione di applicabilità) REGOLAMENTO (CE) N. 114/98 DEL CONSIGLIO del 18 dicembre 1997 relativo alla conclusione del protocollo che fissa le possibilità di pesca e la compensazione finanziaria previste nell’accordo tra la Comunità economica europea e il governo della Repubblica della Guinea equatoriale sulla pesca al largo della Guinea equatoriale, per il periodo compreso tra il 1o luglio 1997 e il 30 giugno 2000 IL CONSIGLIO DELL’UNIONE EUROPEA, in visto il trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea, particolare l’articolo 43, in collegamento con l’articolo 228, paragrafo 2, prima frase e paragrafo 3, primo comma, vista la proposta della Commissione, visto il parere del Parlamento europeo (1), considerando che, a norma dell’accordo tra la Comunità economica europea ed il governo della Repubblica della Guinea equatoriale sulla pesca al largo della costa della Guinea equatoriale (2), le due parti hanno condotto nego- ziati per definire le modifiche o i nuovi elementi da intro- durre in detto accordo alla fine del periodo di applica- zione del protocollo allo stesso allegato; considerando che, in seguito a tali negoziati, il 25 giugno 1997 è stato siglato un nuovo protocollo che fissa le possi- bilità di pesca e la compensazione finanziaria previste il periodo compreso tra il nell’accordo succitato per 1o luglio 1997 e il 30 giugno 2000; considerando che risponde all’interesse della Comunità approvare questo protocollo, HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO: Articolo 1 È approvato, a nome della Comunità, il protocollo che fissa le possibilità di pesca e la compensazione finanziaria previste nell’accordo tra la Comunità economica europea ed il governo della Repubblica della Guinea equatoriale sulla pesca al largo della costa della Guinea equatoriale, per luglio 1997 e il 30 giugno 2000. il periodo compreso tra il 1o (1) GU C 371 dell’8. 12. 1997. (2) GU L 188 del 16. 7. 1984, pag. 2. Accordo modificato dall’ac- cordo approvato con il regolamento (CEE) n. 252/87 (GU L 29 del 30. 1. 1987, pag. 3). Il testo del protocollo è accluso al presente regolamen- to (3). Articolo 2 Le possibilità di pesca fissate nel protocollo sono ripartite tra gli Stati membri secondo il seguente criterio: — tonniere congelatrici a circuizione: Francia: 19 unità, Spagna: 10 unità, Italia: 1 unità; — pescherecci con palangari di superficie: Spagna: 25 unità, Portogallo: 5 unità; — tonniere con lenze a canna: Francia: 8 unità. Se le domande di licenza di tali Stati membri non esauri- la scono le possibilità di pesca fissate nel protocollo, le prendere Commissione domande di licenza di altri Stati membri. in considerazione può Articolo 3 Il presidente del Consiglio è autorizzato a designare le persone abilitate a firmare il protocollo allo scopo di impegnare la Comunità. Articolo 4 Il presente regolamento entra in vigore il terzo giorno successivo alla pubblicazione nella Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee. (3) Vedi pagina 33 della presente Gazzetta ufficiale. L 11/2 ‹ IT ‹ Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 17. 1. 98 Il presente regolamento è obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile in ciascuno degli Stati membri. Fatto a Bruxelles, addì 18 dicembre 1997. Per il Consiglio Il presidente F. BODEN


title: REGULAMENTO (CE) Nº 2561/97 DA COMISSÃO de 18 de Dezembro de 1997 que fixa a restituição máxima à exportação de trigo mole no âmbito do concurso referido no Regulamento (CE) nº 1339/97

eurovoc_concepts:
award of contract
common wheat
export refund


title: International Agreement in the form of an Agreed Minute between the European Community and the United States of America on humane trapping standards - Standards for the humane trapping of specified terrestrial and semi- aquatic mammals

eurovoc_concepts:
United States
agreement (EU)
animal welfare
bilateral agreement
hides and furskins industry
hunting
hunting regulations
international standard
protection of animals

formats: fmx4 html pdf print xhtml

text: L 219/26 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities 7. 8. 98 AGREED MINUTE 1. In the course of the negotiations of the Agreement described in paragraph 8 below to develop a common framework for describing and evaluating progress towards the use of more humane traps and trapping methods, the Representatives of the European Community and of the United States of America acknowledge that the following understanding has been reached. 2. The European Community and the United States of America consider that the Standards annexed to this Understanding provide such a common framework and a basis for co- operation on the further development and implementation by their respective competent authorities of the Standards. 3. Underscoring that it does not by its endorsement intend to alter the distribution of authority within the United States for regulation of the use of traps and trapping methods, the United States of America endorses the annexed Standards as providing such a common framework for implementation by its competent authorities, for the humane trapping of specified terres- trial or semi-aquatic mammals. 4. The European Community and the United States of America intend to encourage and support research, development, monitoring and training programs by their respective author- ities that promote the use and application of traps and trapping methods for the humane treatment of such mammals. They both recognise the need to re-evaluate and update the standards annexed to this understanding as new technical and scientific information and data become available based on such programs. 5. The European Community and the United States of America further intend to encourage their competent authorities to monitor and report on progress towards implementation of the standards annexed to this understanding. 6. The European Community and the United States of America recognise that nothing in this understanding affects their rights and obligations under the Marrakesh Agreement estab- lishing the World Trade Organisation. 7. The European Community and the United States of America state their intention to consult with each other, at the request of either of them, on any matter concerning this under- standing or the annexed standards with a view to finding a mutually acceptable solution. 8. Wherever the term ‘the Agreement’ is used in the annexed Standards, it is understood to the European mean the Agreement on Humane Trapping Standards between Canada, Community and the Russian Federation. 7. 8. 98 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities L 219/27 Done at Brussels this eighteenth day of December 1997, in duplicate, in the English language. For the European Community For the United States of America L 219/28 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities 7. 8. 98 ANNEX STANDARDS FOR THE HUMANE TRAPPING OF SPECIFIED TERRESTRIAL AND SEMI- AQUATIC MAMMALS PART I: THE STANDARDS 1. 1. 1. AIMS, PRINCIPLES AND GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS OF THE STANDARDS Aims The aim of the standards is to ensure a sufficient level of welfare of trapped animals, and to further improve this welfare. 1. 2. Principles 1. 2. 1. 1. 2. 2. 1. 2. 3. In the evaluation of whether or not a trapping method is humane, the welfare of a trapped animal must be assessed. The principle for deciding that a trapping method is humane is that it meets the threshold require- ments in sections 2 and 3. It is assumed in setting the standards that traps should be selective, efficient and in compliance with the relevant requirements for human safety of each Party. 1. 3. General considerations 1. 3. 1. Welfare of animals is indicated by measures of the extent of ease or difficulty in their coping with the environment and the extent of failure to cope with their environment. Since animals vary in the methods that they use to try to cope with their environment, a range of measures should be used when assessing their welfare. Indicators of welfare of trapped animals include those of physiology, injury and behaviour. Since some of these indicators have not been studied for a variety of species, further scientific studies will be necessary to set thresholds under these standards, as appropriate. Although welfare can vary widely, the term ‘humane’ is used only for those trapping methods where the welfare of the animals concerned is maintained at a sufficient level, although it is acknowledged that in certain situations with killing traps there will be a short period of time during which the level of welfare may be poor. 1. 3. 2. The thresholds established in the standards for the certification of traps include: (a) for restraining traps: the level of indicators beyond which the welfare of trapped animals is considered poor; and (b) for killing traps: the time to unconsciousness and insensibility and the maintenance of this state until death of the animal. 1. 3. 3. Notwithstanding that the trapping methods must meet the requirements of sections 2. 4 and 3. 4, consideration should be given to continuing the improvement of the design and setting of traps, in particular to: (a) improving the welfare of animals trapped in restraining traps during the period of restraint; (b) producing rapid onset of unconsciousness and insensibility of animals trapped in killing traps; and (c) minimizing the capture of non-target animals. 2. REQUIREMENTS FOR RESTRAINING TRAPPING METHODS 2. 1. Definition ‘Restraining trapping methods’ means traps designed and set with the intention of not killing the trapped animal, but restraining its movements to such an extent that a human can make direct contact with it. 7. 8. 98 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities L 219/29 2. 2. Parameters 2. 2. 1. In the evaluation of whether or not a restraining trapping method meets these Standards the welfare of an animal that is trapped must be assessed. 2. 2. 2. The parameters must include indicators of behaviour and injury listed in paragraphs 2. 3. 1 and 2. 3. 2. 2. 2. 3. The magnitude of responses for each of those parameters must be assessed. 2. 3. Indicators 2. 3. 1. Behavioural indicators recognised as indicators of poor welfare in trapped wild animals are: (a) self-directed biting leading to severe injury (self-mutilation); (b) excessive immobility and unresponsiveness. 2. 3. 2. Injuries recognised as indicators of poor welfare in trapped wild animals are: (a) fracture; (b) joint luxation proximal to the carpus or tarsus; (c) severance of a tendon or ligament; (d) major periosteal abrasion; (e) severe external haemorrhage or haemorrhage into an internal cavity; (f) major skeletal muscle degeneration; (g) limb ischemia; (h) fracture of a permanent tooth exposing pulp cavity; (i) ocular damage including corneal laceration; (j) spinal cord injury; (k) severe internal organ damage; (l) myocardial degeneration; (m) amputation; (n) death. 2. 4. Thresholds A restraining trapping method would meet the Standards if: (a) the number of specimens of the same target species from which the data are derived is at least 20; and (b) at least 80 per cent of these animals show none of the indicators listed in paragraphs 2. 3. 1 and 2. 3. 2. 3. REQUIREMENTS FOR KILLING TRAPPING METHODS 3. 1. Definition ‘Killing trapping methods’ means traps designed and set with the intention of killing a trapped animal of the target species. 3. 2. Parameters 3. 2. 1. The time of occurrence of unconsciousness and insensibility produced by the killing technique must be determined and the maintenance of this state until death must be checked (i. e. , until heart function has ceased irreversibly). 3. 2. 2. Unconsciousness and insensibility must be monitored by checking corneal and palpebral reflexes or any other scientifically proven suitable substitute parameter (1). (1) In cases where further tests are necessary to determine if the trapping method meets the standards, additional electro- encephalogram (EEG), visual evoked response (VER), and sound evoked response (SER) measurements may be made. L 219/30 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities 7. 8. 98 3. 3. Indicators and time limits Time limit to loss of corneal and palpebral reflexes Species 45 seconds 120 seconds Mustela erminea Martes americana Martes zibellina Martes martes 300 seconds (1) all other species set out in paragraph 4. 1. (1) The committee will evaluate the time limit at the three-year review referred to in Article 9(b), where data warrant such action, to adapt the time limit requirement on a species-by-species basis, with a view to lowering the 300 second time limit to 180 seconds, and to define a reasonable time-frame for implementation. 3. 4. Thresholds A killing trapping method would meet the Standards if: (a) the number of specimens of the same target species from which the data are derived is at least 12; and (b) at least 80 per cent of these animals are unconscious and insensible within the time limit, and remain in this state until death. PART II: LIST OF SPECIES AND IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 4. LIST OF SPECIES REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 3 OF THE AGREEMENT AND THE IMPLE- MENTATION SCHEDULE 4. 1. Species list The Standards apply to the following species: Common name: Coyote Wolf Beaver (North American) Beaver (European) Bobcat Otter (North American) Otter (European) Lynx (North American) Lynx (European) Marten Fisher Sable Pine Marten Badger (European) Ermine Raccoon dog Muskrat Raccoon Badger (North American) Species Canis latrans Canis lupus Castor canadensis Castor fiber Felis rufus Lutra canadensis Lutra lutra Lynx canadensis Lynx lynx Martes americana Martes pennanti Martes zibellina Martes martes Meles meles Mustela erminea Nyctereutes procyonoides Ondatra zibethicus Procyon lotor Taxidea taxus Additional species will be included in the future as appropriate. 7. 8. 98 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities L 219/31 4. 2. Implementation schedule (1) 4. 2. 1. Trapping methods are tested to demonstrate their conformity with these Standards by the com- petent authorities within: (a) for restraining trapping methods, three to five years after the entry into force of the Agreement, depending on the testing priorities and availability of testing facilities; and (b) for killing trapping methods, five years after the entry into force of the Agreement. 4. 2. 2. Within three years after the end of the periods referred to in 4. 2. 1, the use of traps that are not in accordance with these Standards are phased out by the respective competent authorities. 4. 2. 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 4. 2. 2, where a competent authority determines that the results of trap testing do not support the conformity of traps with the Standards for specific species or under specific environmental conditions, a competent authority may continue to permit the use of traps on an interim basis while research continues to identify replacement traps. In such cases, prior notification should be given between the European Community and the United States of the traps to be authorized for interim use and the status of the research program. In cases in which this paragraph applies with respect to trapping in the United States, the competent author- ities in the United States should transmit such information to the Government of the United States for transmission to the European Community. 4. 2. 4. In addition to paragraph 4. 2. 3, and notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 4. 2. 2, derogations may be granted by a competent authority on a case-by-case basis consistent with the objectives of the Standards, for any of the following purposes: (a) the interests of public health or safety; (b) protection of public or private property; (c) purposes of research, education and protection of the environment, including repopulation, reintroduction, breeding or for the protection of flora and fauna; (d) using traditional wooden traps essential for preserving cultural heritage of indigenous commu- nities. Where implementing this paragraph, prior written notification of such derogations, along with their reasons and conditions, should be given by the European Community or the United States. In the case of the United States, the competent authorities should give such written notification to the Government of the United States for transmission to the European Community, along with their reason and conditions. 4. 2. 5. Consultations on the subjects referred to in paragraphs 4. 2. 3 and 4. 2. 4 should be held pursuant to paragraph 7 of the Agreed Minute at the request of either the European Community or the United States of America. PART III: GUIDELINES 5. GUIDELINES FOR THE TESTING OF TRAPS AND RESEARCH ON THE ONGOING DEVELOPMENT OF TRAPPING METHODS To ensure accuracy and reliability, and to demonstrate that trapping methods fulfil the require- ments set out in the Standards, studies for testing those trapping methods should follow the general principles of good experimental practices. In the event that testing procedures are established under the framework of ISO, the International Organisation for Standardisation, and that such procedures are relevant for the assessment of the conformity of trapping methods with some or all the requirements of the Standards, the ISO pro- cedures shall be used as appropriate. 5. 1. General guidelines 5. 1. 1. Tests should be performed according to comprehensive study protocols. 5. 1. 2. The functioning of the trap mechanism should be tested. (1) Authority to regulate traps and trapping methods for the taking in the United States of the specified terrestrial or semi- aquatic mammals resides primarily in the state and tribal authorities. L 219/32 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities 7. 8. 98 5. 1. 3. 5. 1. 4. Testing of traps in the field should be carried out in particular for the assessment of selectivity. This test can also be used to collect data on capture efficiency and user safety. Restraining traps should be tested in a compound, in particular to evaluate behavioral and physio- logical parameters. Killing traps should be tested in a compound, in particular to identify uncon- sciousness. 5. 1. 5. In the field tests, traps should be checked daily. 5. 1. 6. The effectiveness of the killing traps to render the target animal unconscious and kill it should be tested on conscious, mobile animals, by laboratory or compound and field measurements. The ability of the trap to strike the target animal at vital locations should be evaluated. 5. 1. 7. The order of testing procedures may be varied to ensure the most effective evaluation of the traps to be tested. 5. 1. 8. Traps should not expose the operator to undue hazard under normal use. 5. 1. 9. If appropriate, a broader range of measures should be checked when testing traps. Field testing should include studies of the effects of trapping on both target and non-target species. 5. 2. Study situation 5. 2. 1. 5. 2. 2. 5. 2. 3. The trap should be set and used according to the best advice from manufacturers or others on how to do so. For compound testing, a compound should be used that provides a suitable environment for the animals of the target species to move freely, hide and show most normal behavior. It should be possible to set traps and monitor trapped animals. The trap should be set so that video and sound recording can be made of the whole trapping episode. For field testing, sites should be selected that are representative of those that will be used in prac- tice. Since the selectivity of the trap and any possible adverse effects of the trap on non-target species are important reasons for field testing, sites for field testing may need to be chosen in different habitats where different non-target species are likely to be encountered. Pictures of each trap and its set and of the general environment should be taken. The trap identification number should be made a part of the photographic record before and after a strike. 5. 3. Study personnel 5. 3. 1. Test personnel should be appropriately qualified and trained. 5. 3. 2. Among the test personnel there should be at least one person experienced in the use of the traps, and capable of trapping the animals used in the test and at least one person experienced in each of the methods of welfare assessment for restraining traps and in methods of assessing uncon- sciousness for killing traps. For example, the assessment of behavioral responses to trapping and of aversiveness should be done in particular by a trained person who is familiar with the interpreta- tion of such data. 5. 4. Animals to be used in trap testing 5. 4. 1. 5. 4. 2. Compound test animals should be in good health and representative of those that are likely to be caught in the wild. The animals used should not have prior trapping experience of the trap being tested. Prior to the testing of traps, animals should be housed in appropriate conditions and provided with adequate food and water. Animals should not be housed in a manner that might in itself result in poor welfare. 5. 4. 3. Animals should be acclimatised to the testing compound prior to the start of the test. 7. 8. 98 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities L 219/33 5. 5. Observations 5. 5. 1. Behavior 5. 5. 1. 1. Behavioral observations should be made by a trained person, particularly in reference to the know- ledge of the ethology of the species. 5. 5. 1. 2. Aversiveness can be assessed by trapping the animal in a readily recognised situation, then re-exposing the animal to the trap in the appropriate situation and evaluating its behavior. 5. 5. 1. 3. Care should be taken to distinguish responses to additional stimuli from responses to the trap or the situation. 5. 5. 2. Physiology 5. 5. 2. 1. Some animals should be fitted with telemetric recorders (e. g. , to record heart rate, respiratory rate) before testing. Such fitting should occur long enough before trapping for the animal to recover from any disturbance caused by having been fitted with such recorders. 5. 5. 2. 2. All precautions should be taken to limit inadequate or biased observations and parameters, espe- cially those due to human interference when sampling. 5. 5. 2. 3. When biological sampling (e. g. , of blood, urine, saliva) is performed, it should be done at times relevant to the trapping event and the time-dependent considerations of the parameter being evalu- ated. Control data from animals kept elsewhere in good conditions and for different activities, base- line data before the trapping event occurs, and some reference data after extreme stimulations (e. g. , a challenge test with adrenocorticotrophic hormone) should also be collected. 5. 5. 2. 4. All biological samples should be taken and stored according to the best knowledge to ensure conservation before analysis. 5. 5. 2. 5. Analytical methods used should be validated. 5. 5. 2. 6. For killing traps, when neurological examinations using reflexes (such as pain or eyes) are performed in combination with the measurement of an EEG and/or VERs or SERs, they should be done by an expert, to provide relevant information concerning the consciousness of the animal or the effectiveness of the killing technique. 5. 5. 2. 7. When the animals are not unconscious and insensible within the time described in the test protocol, they should be killed in a humane way. 5. 5. 3. Injuries and pathology 5. 5. 3. 1. Each test animal should be carefully examined so as to assess any injury. Radiographic examination should be conducted to confirm possible fractures. 5. 5. 3. 2. Further detailed pathological examination of dead animals should be carried out. Post-mortem examination should be performed in accordance with accepted veterinary examination practices by an experienced veterinarian. 5. 5. 3. 3. The affected organs or/and regions should be examined macroscopically, and histologically if appropriate. 5. 6. Report 5. 6. 1. The study report should contain all relevant information about the experimental design, materials and methods, and results, in particular: (a) the technical description of the trap design including construction material; (b) manufacturers’ instructions for use; (c) the description of the test situation; (d) weather conditions, in particular temperature and snow depth; (e) (f) (g) the test personnel; the number of animals and traps tested; the total number of captured target and non-target animals of each species, and their relative abundance expressed as rare, common or abundant in that area; L 219/34 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities 7. 8. 98 (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) selectivity; details of any evidence that the trap was activated and injured an animal that was not caught; behavioral observations; values of each physiological parameter measured and methodologies; description of injuries and post-mortem examinations; time to loss of consciousness and sensibility; and statistical analyses. 7. 8. 98 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities L 219/35 Side letter Brussels, 18 December 1997. Dear. , As you know, representatives of the European Community and the United States of America today signed an Agreed Minute related to humane trapping standards. With respect to that Agreed Minute, I am pleased to inform you of the following: As reflected in the Agreed Minute, authority to regulate traps and trapping methods for the taking in the United States of terrestrial or semi-aquatic mammals resides primarily in the State and tribal authorities. As a result of our discussions on these issues, representatives of the com- petent authorities in the United States have advised that they have intensified their efforts to identify more humane traps and already a fifty-State initiative, in cooperation with several Fed- eral agencies, has begun to develop best management practices (BMPs) for traps and trapping methods. Best management practices involve a practice or combination of practices that are identified to be the most effective and practicable (technically, economically and socially) means to reduce or prevent problems associated with an activity. Representatives of the competent authorities in the United States have advised that BMPs for traps and trapping methods will be based upon the latest technical and scientific information and data. Representatives of the competent authorities in the United States have advised that best manage- ment practices for traps and trapping methods in the United States will be developed based upon the standards annexed to the Agreed Minute. I am particularly pleased to inform you that the programme that is being undertaken by the US competent authorities is not limited to the nineteen species listed in the standards annexed to the Agreed Minute, but is being applied to the additional ten fur-bearing species commercially trapped in the United States. These species are the mink, red fox, grey fox, Arctic fox, swift fox, nutria, opposum, skunk, bassarisk and wolverine. This constitutes an important further step undertaken by the competent authorities in the United States designed to improve animal welfare, a step which we believe has not been matched by any other country or in any international agreement. Additionally, representatives of the competent authorities in the United States have indicated that, pursuant to the standards annexed to the Agreed Minute, with respect to the Mustela ermina and the Ondatra zibethicus, the use of all jaw-type leghold restraining traps is being phased out within four years of the entry into force of the Agreement on Humane Trapping Standards between Canada, the European Community and the Russian Federation. These two species encompass over 2,2 million animals trapped every year in the United States and rep- resent typically 50 % of all animals listed in the standards trapped annually in this country. With respect to the trapping of other species described in the Standards, the above-referenced authorities have advised that, pursuant to the Standards annexed to the Agreed Minute, the use of conventional steel-jawed leghold restraining traps is being phased out within six years of the entry into force of the Agreement on Humane Trapping Standards between Canada, the Euro- pean Community and the Russian Federation. I trust that the foregoing provides sufficient clarification with respect to the situation in the United States. The competent authorities in the United States anticipate and welcome continued cooperation in this area with the European Community and other interested parties. Sincerely, Donald B. KURSCH Chargé d’affaires a. i. L 219/36 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities 7. 8. 98 Side letter Brussels, 18 December 1997 Dear. , As you know, our delegations recently completed negotiation of an Agreed Minute on humane trapping standards. I am writing this letter to memorialise an understanding we reached on the meaning and application of the Agreed Minute and its attached standards. Paragraph 6 of the Agreed Minute provides that ‘the United States of America and the European Community recognise that nothing in this understanding affects their rights and obligations under the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation’. In the course of developing this language we decided that it was not necessary to add to the end of this paragraph the phrase ‘nor constitutes a waiver of any such rights’ and that neither government would cite such non-inclusion in any dispute or proceeding that might relate to this paragraph. If you concur in the statement described above, I would appreciate your confirmation in a letter or reply. Thank you for your continuing attention to this matter. Sincerely Donald B. KURSCH Chargé d’affaires a. i. 7. 8. 98 ‹ EN ‹ Official Journal of the European Communities L 219/37 Side letter Brussels, 18 December 1997 Dear. , Thank you for your letter memorialising the understanding we reached on the meaning and application of the Agreed Minute and its attached standards. In response to it, we would like to confirm that in the course of developing the language of para- graph 6 of the Agreed Minute, we decided that it was not necessary to add to the end of this paragraph the phrase ‘nor constitutes a waiver of any such rights’ and that neither government would cite such non-inclusion in any dispute or proceeding that might relate to this paragraph. Sincerely Johannes Friedrich BESELER Director-General of the Directorate-General for External Economic Relations of the Commission of the European Communities Jean-Jacques KASEL Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, Chairman of the Permanent Representatives Committee