The Provincial Executive of the province of Drenthe has made a careless and poorly substantiated decision in the case surrounding a nitrogen deal in the municipality of Westerveld. That’s what the judge rules. According to the judge, the province should have paid more attention to the possible damage to nature.
Vermilion Energy is drilling for gas in several places in the municipality of Westerveld. Nitrogen is released during the construction and production surrounding gas extraction, which the company must compensate. The company fell under the construction exemption until 2022, after which the company had to look for another form of compensation.
The gas extraction company took several measures and, among other things, concluded an agreement with a farmer who wanted to temporarily lend the nitrogen rights from his company in Vledderveen to Vermilion, also known as ‘leasing’.
The province initially did not give permission for this. On paper it seemed like a smart solution, but in practice it would not solve the nitrogen problem because there had been no cows in the stable on site for almost ten years.
They were therefore also called ‘dormant nitrogen rights’ and lending these rights would actually provide more nitrogen in the area. The province would rather see the farmer permanently withdraw his nitrogen rights from the market.
Ultimately, the provincial government changed tack and gave the farmer the green light to lease his nitrogen rights, on the grounds that it is actually the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture to approve the construction of Vermilion. Moreover, they said that the plan would not have major consequences for nature. A decision that Milieudefensie found inimitable and subsequently went to court.
The judge concludes that Milieudefensie is right and states that the Province does indeed provide insufficient substantiation as to why it agreed to the construction.
The judge also calls the decision careless and contrary to the Nature Management Act (Wnb). The Province went too far by ruling out consequences for nature too quickly and should have taken into account the fact that the dairy farm had not been in use for several years.
In addition, the judge is critical of the course of events. While the province was still considering its decision, activities at the drilling site have already been carried out by Vermilion. The Ministry of Agriculture had the responsibility to monitor this. The judge emphasizes that without a nature permit from the province it is prohibited to realize a project that could have consequences for the Natura 2000 areas.
The Ministry of Agriculture previously also spoke of a ‘violation’ that it was aware of. The ministry said that it had confronted Vermilion Energy about its conduct, but had not intervened because, according to the ministry, there was a prospect of legalization.
The Province will have to make another decision about the nitrogen construction. Without a nature permit from the Province, Vermilion will still have to compensate for the nitrogen in another way.