This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS  ROME 002001 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR OES/O BALTON AND OES/OMC TINKHAM 
STATE ALSO FOR EUR/WE, COMMERCE FOR NOAA/NMFS/IA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EFIS SENV PHSA ETRD IT FAO
SUBJECT:  LETTER TO ITALIAN OFFICIAL ON DRIFTNETS 
 
REF:  A) STATE 100593 (NOTAL) B) ROME 1174 (NOTAL) 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED - PROTECT ACCORDINGLY 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  On June 7, Emboffs delivered letter in 
ref (A) to Paolo Scarpa Bonazza Buora, the Italian Under 
Secretary of Agriculture responsible for Fisheries.  Scarpa 
 
SIPDIS 
emphasized that as of 2002, the GOI had "solved and 
stopped" the driftnet problem, and strongly opposed any 
illegal activities still going on.  Scarpa asked his 
subordinates to explain the technical content of an April 
ministerial decree that was recently struck down by the TAR 
(Administrative court).  He asserted that NGOs that had 
brought suit against the government's decree had 
"misunderstood" it.  In response to a request in OES/O DAS 
Balton's letter, he instructed his subordinates to provide 
Emboffs with data on 2004 enforcement activities as soon as 
possible.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  (U) On June 7, Minister-Counselor for Agricultural 
Affairs and Counselor for EST Affairs delivered reftel (A) 
letter from OES/O DAS David Balton to Paolo Scarpa Bonazza 
Buora, the Italian Under Secretary of Agriculture 
responsible for fisheries.  Elisabetta Giannoccari 
(Fisheries Deputy Director) and Claudio Teso from Scarpa's 
office, also attended the meeting.  Scarpa Bonazza 
emphasized that he was very familiar with the driftnet 
problem and confirmed that he was the person in his 
Department responsible for the issue.  The U/S underlined 
that as of 2002, the GOI had "solved and stopped" the 
driftnet problem, and strongly opposed the "still-present 
but impossible-to-eradicate" illegal activities.  Scarpa 
also mentioned that the GOI is working with the General 
Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) to ban 
the use of driftnets in the Mediterranean by non-EU 
countries.  He noted that the GOI condemns the fact that 
driftnets are still allowed - until 2008 - in the Baltic 
Sea. 
 
¶3. (U) Scarpa discussed the GOI's April decree (see 
paragraph 4), and noted that several NGOs opposed it. He 
confirmed that on June 2, the administrative court of the 
Lazio Region (TAR) suspended the decree until June 20, 
pending a final decision.  Scarpa instructed Giannoccari to 
provide the Embassy with the 2004 (and 2005) enforcement 
data requested in the Department's letter by June 15. 
COMMENT:  Since Port Captaincies no longer collect 
driftnet-only enforcement statistics, we believe it will 
take longer for the Embassy to receive the data.  END 
COMMENT. 
 
¶4. (SBU) Giannoccari explained the technical content of 
the April 2005 decree signed by Scarpa and strongly opposed 
by the NGOs.  Giannoccari emphasized that the ministerial 
decree was not/not related to driftnets, but just to 
gillnets, which are still allowed by the EU and differ from 
driftnets because they are anchored.  The decree provided 
for the use of a new gillnet, which is "only slightly 
different" from the usual one, since it is "as high as 20 
meters instead of 4 meters".  Moreover, this net can be 
used beyond the 3 miles - but within the 12 miles 
territorial zone - and only around the Italian "smaller 
islands" during the period of April 15 - July 31, 2005. 
The extension to 12 miles instead of 3 was justified by the 
fact that it is impossible to catch pelagic fish very close 
to the coasts, because there is too much summer tourist 
boat traffic.   COMMENT:  At the end of the meeting, Scarpa 
tried to justify the decree, stating that the fishermen in 
these small islands are the ones who have traditionally 
used driftnets, and now that the EU has banned them, they 
feel they are disadvantaged when they see boats from non-EU 
countries (e.g. Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria) using them in 
the nearby international waters.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶5. (SBU)  COMMENT:  The "catch" in the April decree is that 
it is practically impossible to anchor the gillnets in deep 
waters, such as those around the Italian small islands of 
volcanic origin.  Thus the gillnets, at 5-kilometers long 
 
and 20-meters high, bear a strong resemblance to illegal 
driftnets.  It is also important to note that the gillnets 
were authorized in national waters only.  We believe that 
the suspension of the ministerial decree by the TAR - and 
hopefully a final decision to reject it - should make 
enforcement easier.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶6.  (U) On June 4 and 5, a few days after the court 
suspended the decree, the local Sicilian press reported 
enforcement actions by the Customs Police against illegal 
driftnets.  One account mentioned that the police caught a 
boat near the Eolic Islands, seized the net, administered a 
1000-euro fine, and reported the boat's owner to the 
magistrates for committing fraud against both the GOI and 
the EU.  The article did not mention if the incident 
occurred in international waters or not. 
 
SEMBLER 
 
 
NNNN 
	2005ROME02001 - Classification: UNCLASSIFIED