WRITTEN QUESTION P-0839/01 by Anders Wijkman (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Mühlenberger Loch.
Date: 2001-03-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, Hamburg, air transport, environmental protection, lake, protected area, transport infrastructure

C 261 E/206

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

At the current rate the project will clearly take many years to complete, assuming that the requisite funds
are available. The Commission is not at this stage able to say exactly how long the project will take,
however.

No similar projects have been undertaken in other Member States, since they have each for many years
possessed a land register compiled on widely differing bases using very different techniques.

(2001/C 261 E/234)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0839/01

by Anders Wijkman (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 March 2001)

Subject: M(cid:252)hlenberger Loch

The M(cid:252)hlenberger Loch, near Hamburg, Germany, the largest freshwater tidal mudflat in the European
Union, is designated a Natura 2000 site under (a) Council Directive 79/409/EEC (1) on the conservation of
wild birds and (b) Council Directive 92/43/EEC (2) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild
fauna and flora.

Is it true that the German Federal Chancellor wrote a letter dated 15 March 2000 to the President of the
Commission, requesting as a matter of urgency that the Commission give its approval to the proposed
Airbus project involving developments liable to damage the ecological status of the M(cid:252)hlenberger Loch?

Is it true that, shortly after the arrival of this letter, the Commission lifted its objections to development of
the site based on Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive?

Is the Commission entirely satisfied that all the requirements under Article 6(4) specific to a priority
habitat have been fulfilled?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2001)

In case of certain plans or projects, which have according to a nature assessment pursuant to Article 6(3)
of Directive 92/43/EEC (1) (Habitats Directive) negative implications for a Natura 2000 site (i.e. significant
adverse effects in view of the site(cid:146)s conservation objectives), the plan or project concerned may despite of
the negative result be carried out only under the following conditions set out in Article 6(4) of the
Directive, which are resumed as follows:

a) Absence of alternative solutions.

b)

Existence of imperative reasons of overriding public interest, i.e. in case the site hosts priority natural
habitat types and/or priority species, those interests must be related to human health or public safety
considerations, to beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment, or, further to
an opinion of the Commission, to other imperative reasons of overriding public interest.

c) Need to take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure the overall coherence of Natura 2000

and to inform the Commission thereof.

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/207

Since the project was according to the technical assessment i.a. likely to significantly affect the priority
plant species Oenanthe conioides of Annex II of the Habitats Directive, Germany asked by letter of
25 October 1999 for an opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive.

The Commission has accepted that there were no feasible alternatives for the project and that there was
indeed an overriding public interest due to the European economic importance of this project being an
asset in the highly competitive international market of airliner production.

After having examined the fulfilment of the conditions set out in Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive and
having received in particular the assurance from Germany that more sites for this species Oenanthe
conioides would be proposed in 2000, the Commission was satisfied that the provisions of Article 6(4) of
the Habitats Directive (see above) had been respected by Germany and therefore granted a favourable
opinion on 19 April 2000.

The Commission confirms having received inter alia a letter from the German Chancellor of 15 March
2000.

(1) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

(2001/C 261 E/235)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0842/01

by JosØ PomØs Ruiz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 March 2001)

Subject: Complaint No 2000/421 SG(2000) A/15164/3

On 2 December 1998, two Spanish lorries carrying 250 pigs each the property of the livestock firm
Biurrum S.L., were on their way to the Caso slaughterhouse in Malveira (Portugal) when they were
intercepted at Aguas de Moura by a group of thirty or forty individuals, some of them masked, carrying
fire arms or other weapons. The lorries were seized and then pushed, fully loaded, down an embankment,
causing the loss of all the livestock and the destruction of the vehicles.

In the wake of a lengthy procedure which initiated over two years ago, and which has still produced no
results despite Portuguese Government repudiation of the events, what measures has the Commission
taken in view of Complaint No 2000/4241 SG(2000) A/15164/3 lodged on 17 November 2000 against
the Portuguese Republic, for violation of Community law in respect of the freedom of movement of
goods?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 April 2001)

The Commission has examined Complaint No 2000/4241 concerning the violence committed by private
individuals on 2 December 1998, which caused substantial damage to vehicles transporting live animals
and the loss of a large number of animals, as well as the difficulties encountered in obtaining compensa-
tion for the damage incurred.

In line with the condemnation expressed by the Portuguese authorities themselves, the Commission wishes
to stress that it has always condemned violence by private individuals against the principle of free
movement of goods.