The State must do more to ensure that less nitrogen ends up in nature reserves, the court in The Hague has ruled. The ruling is likely to have major consequences for farmers, including in Drenthe.
Because it is included in the law, the State must ensure that on December 31, 2030, no more nitrogen is deposited in half of the nitrogen-sensitive nature than that nature can handle. This must be done, despite the fact that the goals for 2025 are no longer achievable.
The judge also wants the State to give priority to the most vulnerable nature, such as the Drents-Friese Wold. The judge attaches a penalty of 10 million euros to this order. Greenpeace filed the case against the State and was proven right on many points.
It is clear to the court that the government has been doing too little for years to stop the decline of nature reserves. Of the nitrogen that is harmful to nature that is emitted in the Netherlands, 79 percent comes from agriculture, the court states. Now that the State is forced to take measures against emissions, farms will be looked at.
“It is yet another downer,” says Dirk Bruins, chairman of agricultural organization LTO Noord. “We were already stuck and this will be the superlative of getting stuck if we stick to this.” He hopes that the State will appeal. Even in the event of an appeal, the State must take measures in the meantime.
LTO Noord advocates a change in the law. As far as LTO is concerned, the KDW is being adjusted, which is the Critical Deposition Value that indicates how much nitrogen a particular nature reserve can handle. “The goals have been set so high. In a country like the Netherlands where we want to live, produce and recreate, that standard is not achievable,” says Bruins.
The Drenthe Nature and Environment Federation looks at this differently. Director Reinder Hoekstra calls the goals feasible. “So let’s get started,” he says. According to Hoekstra, the measures taken in the past have had an effect and there are plans to take further steps. “The province has plans, but a national approach is also needed.”
The current cabinet swept the national plans of the previous cabinet off the table: the National Rural Area Program (NPLG) and the transition fund of more than 24 billion euros. The court sees this as a clear ‘step backwards’.
The Drenthe approach was linked to the national approach. The province of Drenthe previously said it would wait and see what The Hague does, but in the meantime it would work on reducing nitrogen emissions. But provincial policy alone does not work. “Provinces have limited options to reduce emissions, because the sources are often located outside the provincial border or even the national border.”
LTO announces actions, but focuses mainly on influencing the network. “There is no point in protesting against a judicial decision,” says Bruins. “We are studying the ruling and will see what can be changed. We will certainly submit this to politicians and the cabinet.”
“We don’t want to run away. Protecting nature is also important to us,” says Bruins. In his opinion, space must be found so that investing in more sustainable technologies is also possible. “Because the future is so uncertain, financing and licensing are at a standstill. If you want to invest in cleaner methods, that is not possible now.”
NMF Drenthe also sees this bottleneck. “Perhaps LTO should come to an agricultural agreement with financing. A social agreement is necessary,” says Hoekstra. He urges the minister to hurry. “By the end of 2025, we must know what is needed in the coming years and how this will be initiated. Provide an approach that is convincing, then Greenpeace will not have a chance in court.”