WRITTEN QUESTION P-0952/00

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(22 March 2000)

Subject: Schloen shooting range

Reports from the local citizens' action group and the Bündnis 90/Grünen group in the district (Kreis) of Mütitz indicate that the Land government has so far failed to take effective action to halt the Schloen shooting range project (24 stands). According to a study carried out by the University of Greifswald for the municipality of Schloen and in the opinion of the Vice-President of the Nature Conservation Federation (NABU), Professor Succow, the area concerned is the habitat of an extremely wide range of species, including priority species, which means that its designation as an FFH or EU bird conservation area would be justified. This has also been put to the Land government through the Association for Nature and Environmental Protection Germany (BUND).

1. Is the Commission aware that the notified FFH protected area designations by Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania have thus been incomplete?

2. Does the Commission agree that this designation as a protected area within the meaning of the EC bird protection directive needs to be undertaken and notification as an FFH area given without delay?

3. Is the Commission aware that, although the appropriate ministry knows of the adverse consequences (including the abandonment of a sea eagle's nest, a breeding ground for cranes and a colony of corncrakes and the sustained disturbance of movements of migratory birds between the Mütitz National Park and the Torgelower/Varchentin Lakes area), it is not giving the municipality of Schloen enough support in preventing the construction of the shooting range?

4. Is the Commission aware that a number of other, ecologically safe sites for the project have been proposed to the shooting club, but have always been rejected?

5. Is the Commission aware that the authorising agency has made serious errors in the authorising procedure and that these have not yet been duly corrected?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 2000)

The Commission considers that there is a lack of sufficient Natura 2000 sites under Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(1) not only in Mecklenburg Vorpommern, but also more generally in Germany. As a result the Commission brought the matter before the Court of justice already one year ago and it awaits the judgement.

Likewise, there is a legal action against Germany for its failure to classify sufficient areas under Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds(2). The Commission has decided to bring this matter too before the Court of justice.

The Commission does not have the necessary information to establish if the area at Schloen qualifies for inclusion in Natura 2000. Nor is it able to answer the specific questions concerning this project in or close to Schloen, when no detailed information is presented.

If there is evidence to show that there is an infringement of European law the Honourable Member is invited to provide more detailed information pursuant to the provisions of Directive 92/43/EEC or Directive 79/409/EEC. That would include an evaluation of the importance of the site for different species and habitats of Community interest in accordance with the requirements of the directives. As regards the

project, the significant effect on the site would have to be established as well as the existence of specific alternative solutions. Furthermore, information would be needed on the geographical location, delimitation and Natura 2000 value, compensation measures already foreseen, and other details that are of importance to investigate the case.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.