On Schiermonnikoog, the Natuurmonumenten signs were the final straw: ‘They manage the area, they don’t own it’

“There they are: the criminals of Schiermonnikoog!”

A passer-by points to two brothers in their thirties drinking a beer on a terrace in the middle of the village, their windbreakers zipped up against the rising late summer wind. They happily wave to the calling man as a bunch of tourists watch the interaction in amazement.

“That’s how it goes on an island with a thousand inhabitants,” says one of the brothers, who do not want their name in the newspaper for privacy reasons. And indeed: the whole of Schiermonnikoog seems to know about the red-handed, somewhere in the dunes shortly before midnight on Saturday 26 August.

Patrolling agents caught the two removing 28 access signs, which manager Natuurmonumenten had placed on the borders of the protected nature reserve of Schiermonnikoog in June. The brothers spent the rest of that night on the mainland – in a police cell in Leeuwarden.

On the border between village and dune, the ‘terrain signs’ serve to indicate what is and what is not allowed in the vulnerable nature, as in all areas managed by Natuurmonumenten. For example, it says that dogs must be kept on a leash and that large groups are only allowed under certain conditions.

The signs arouse annoyance among many islanders, partly because the stated access rules are perceived as pedantic. But the residents are mainly concerned about the lack of consultation in the placement of the signage. As a result, the signs have become the large, yellow symbol for tensions that have been going on for years between the Schiermonnikogers and Natuurmonumenten, the organization that manages all the nature reserve outside the village centre.

Visual environmental pollution

Islanders don’t have to think long about what they think of the signs. According to the manageress of the Villa Schier holiday homes, they are too yellow. According to a gourmand lady at the fishmonger on the edge of the village, they are too big and according to the bartender of eatery Het Oude Boothuis, there are about forty pieces, especially too many.

On Schiermonnikoog there is resistance to the signage, which is also experienced as patronizing. Not for the first time: early 2002 There was already a fuss on the island about site signs from Natuurmonumenten, after which the municipality had them removed. Natuurmonumenten points out in a report published in response to the recent commotion declaration that administrators are required by law to “apparently” make the access rules clear.

There is consensus among islanders: the signs are pedantic, too big, too yellow and there are too many

‘Visual environmental pollution’ is what island resident and former Dutch teacher Ardie Noorman (68) thinks of that apparentness. On the basis of a piece of paper lying on his dining table, he compares the size of the plates with those of Staatsbosbeheer, which hang on other Wadden Islands. But according to him, the main thing is something else, namely the fact that the signs suddenly appeared at the beginning of this summer, without announcement or prior consultation – according to Noorman, this is typical of the “feudal way” in which Natuurmonumenten implements some measures in the nature reserve. .

Noorman was there when Schiermonnikoog became a national park in 1989 and Natuurmonumenten was assigned management. “And he also says he remembers what the agreement with the islanders was: there would be an organization that would facilitate consultation between different parties with interests on the island.”

Gentlemen’s agreement

This ‘consultation body’, which includes the municipality, Rijkswaterstaat and Natuurmonumenten, was also set up in that first year and has met twice a year ever since. Noorman himself was on it for years as an island representative of the bird watch. According to him, the problem is that Natuurmonumenten does not discuss many interventions in the nature reserve at the consultation meetings. And with that the administrator would not comply with what many islanders believe is a gentlemen’s agreement used to be.

As a result, the annoyances have been piling up in recent years, says born and raised islander Agnes van Dijk (66). In her garden she counts the grievances on her fingers. There was no consultation about cutting down a row of old pines at camping Seedune. There was no consultation about the disappearance of rubbish bins in the dunes. And there was no consultation about the appearance of electric fencing around the goats, which were placed without consultation.

The current chairman of the consultation body Lutz Jacobi (PvdA) agrees that “interpretation differences” exist about which measures should be discussed during the meetings. Each national park in the Netherlands has a consultative body, whose task has been set out to ‘strive for mutual coordination of all plans and activities that are important for the design and management’. But which plan and which activity is important enough?

“It is clear that many residents now do not feel heard,” says Jacobi. When she took on the chairmanship of the body for the second time six months ago, she immediately noticed that the relations between the islanders and Natuurmonumenten are ‘worrying’.

Additional tax

Yet there are more than just dissonances. Many residents start their speech about Natuurmonumenten by pointing around, a show don’t tell that the island is beautiful. Only, more often than not, a “but…” follows.

This is also the case in the conservatory of Hotel Van der Werff, where the daily musical chairs take place just after breakfast. The tourists trickle out the door, onto their bikes and into the dunes, while a group of islanders pour into the taproom for cups of filter coffee.

At the ‘old men’s table’ it is mainly about one rule mentioned on the boards, which seems to go against the Schiermonnikoog sense of freedom. That written permission must be requested for activities in the nature reserve with more than twenty people. Even if it concerns a non-commercial activity, financial compensation is sometimes required for this ‘area permit’.

“They are the manager of the area, not the owner,” says Jan-Willem Smaling (71). Throughout the conversation he talks about “Natural defects”, which he says commercializes the island.

Where, according to Natuurmonumenten, the contribution is necessary for the conservation of the nature reserves, islanders such as Smaling experience this as an extra burden, because Natuurmonumenten receives a subsidy from the government.

Playful action

Wanted: dead or alive is the ironic caption of a photo of the brothers that the islanders send to each other the week after their arrest, including the nightly trip ‘to shore’.

The brothers say they have now returned the signs “including screws” to Natuurmonumenten. They indicate that they have been promised that the charges for theft will be dropped.

At the ‘old men’s table’ in the taproom of Hotel Van der Werff, the rules seem to run counter to the sense of freedom

They were already planning to send it back anyway, they say. The brothers wanted to start a dialogue with Natuurmonumenten with a ‘playful action’.

Their action seems to have had an effect. Natuurmonumenten says it wants to respond to the unrest and the accusations “at the table” with the islanders. And this is not in the media. Mayor Ineke Van Gent (GroenLinks) confirms that talks are planned with the main management of the manager.

The signs will not be put back in the near future, says Van Gent. “We should talk to each other first.”

Also read this article: Six tons for a small fisherman’s house: houses on ‘Schier’ are too expensive for islanders

A version of this article also appeared in the September 5, 2023 issue.