WRITTEN QUESTION E-3210/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 November 2001)

Subject: Conflict between extending the port of Rotterdam with a second Maasvlakte in the North Sea and application of the bird directive

1. Is the Commission aware that, in the 1960s, on the south side of the mouth of the Rhine to the west of Rotterdam the natural dune coastline, including the De Beer nature reserve with its wealth of birds and the adjacent shallow area of the North Sea, were replaced by the Maasvlakte, which comprises a port and industrial area, given over to oil reservoirs, electricity production and container transhipment, and an adjoining depot for polluted port sludge?

2. Is the Commission aware that plans are now under way to construct a second Maasvlakte, measuring in the first instance 500 to 1 000 hectares, by depositing 450 million cubic metres of sea sand, in the sea to the west of the present Maasvlakte, to assist the further development of the Rotterdam main port?

3. What impact does the Commission expect the second Maasvlakte to have on the flora, fauna and landscape development of the adjoining nature reserve in the dunes of the former Voorne island and the courses of the outlets in the Voordelta running to the sea, and what changes may be expected because of this?

4. Are you aware that, not only have there been objections in recent years by nature protection organisations, economic interests are now also at stake because the Dutch fishermen's association has invoked the European bird directive as an argument against the second Maasvlakte?

5. Do you believe it is possible in this case to provide real compensation for the loss of natural assets along the sea coast in order to comply with the bird directive and, if so, what is required? Will demands for compensation be satisfied by the plan to establish a nature reserve that is completely different in character 30 km inland to the south of Rotterdam on the young marine clay land in the polders between the villages of Rhoon and Barendrecht?

6. How will it be decided whether the second Maasvlakte is contrary to or compatible with the bird directive and what impact will this have on the continuation of this project?

Source: Rotterdams Dagblad, 20 October 2001.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 February 2002)

The Commission is aware that the Maasvlakte project, started in 1964, extended the harbour of Rotterdam into the sea by land reclamation of aproximately 2 000 hectares (ha) south of Hoek van Holland. The Commission notes that, at that time, no Community legislation on the protection of nature existed.

The Dutch authorities have notified the Commission that they have plans to construct a Maasvlakte 2 of approximately 1 000 hectares west of the present Maasvlakte, which is part of a major development scheme, called Project Mainport Rotterdam (PMR), to enable further development of the Rotterdam port.

The Dutch authorities have informed the Commission that they intend to request an opinion in the sense of Article 6 (4) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(1) and have also provided the Commission with a number of studies concerning the impact on Natura 2000 sites and compensation proposals for loss of natural values expected to occur by the building of the Maasvlakte 2.

The Commission has received various documents and studies on potential loss of natural values which may result from the land reclamation component of PMR and on potential alternative nature development schemes to compensate for these losses from Dutch conservation non-governmental organisations (NGO's), academic sources and the national association of fishermen.

The Commission is currently examining the above mentioned scientific and technical documentation.

The Commission will take a position on this matter in the light of the available evidence.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.