Land con­sol­i­da­tion in the nation­al park now — on the basis of law and order!
(25.03.2010)

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

I would like to draw your atten­tion to the answer of the Bran­den­burg state gov­ern­ment to the small ques­tion no. 149 by MP Dieter Dom­brows­ki, envi­ron­men­tal pol­i­cy spokesman for the CDU par­lia­men­tary group, (Land­tag print­ed mat­ter 5/401 of Feb­ru­ary 10, 2010). The answer is quite illuminating.

In sum­ma­ry, it can be said that the state of Bran­den­burg “in the process area of cor­po­rate land con­sol­i­da­tion Low­er Oder­tal” has a total of around 3,480 hectares accord­ing to the cur­rent land reg­is­ter. For a fur­ther 435 hectares, pri­vate own­ers have signed land waiv­er dec­la­ra­tions in favor of the state of Bran­den­burg. In addi­tion, the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment will trans­fer 940 hectares from the nation­al nat­ur­al her­itage to the state of Bran­den­burg free of charge if it under­takes to use these areas as wilder­ness devel­op­ment areas. In addi­tion, the admin­is­tra­tion is pur­su­ing a very inten­sive, if not to say aggres­sive, land acqui­si­tion pol­i­cy, so that it will buy up more land in the next few years. In addi­tion, the munic­i­pal­i­ties and the Fed­er­al Repub­lic of Ger­many also have very sub­stan­tial land hold­ings in the pro­ce­dur­al area.

As a result, it can be stat­ed that the pub­lic sec­tor, even the state of Bran­den­burg alone, has far more land than it needs in order to be able to allo­cate all planned and des­ig­nat­ed total reserves (Zones Ia and Ib, a total of over 5,000 ha) to itself. It has also com­mit­ted itself to this in its order res­o­lu­tion for the restruc­tur­ing of the com­pa­ny floor of Decem­ber 2000.

In the appli­ca­tion to ini­ti­ate a com­pa­ny land con­sol­i­da­tion in accor­dance with Sec­tion 87, Para. 4 Land Con­sol­i­da­tion Act (Flur­bG) of the Min­istry of the Inte­ri­or as expro­pri­a­tion author­i­ty of Jan­u­ary 19, 2000 states: “Pro­tec­tion zone I is a total reser­va­tion. It should be at the full dis­pos­al of the com­pa­ny exe­cut­ing agency. There­fore, a trans­fer of own­er­ship to the com­pa­ny own­er is nec­es­sary, because there any eco­nom­ic use is exclud­ed. ” A lit­tle lat­er it says: “The devel­op­er (com­pa­ny with­in the mean­ing of Sec­tion 87 Flur­bG) is the State of Bran­den­burg, rep­re­sent­ed by the Min­istry of Agri­cul­ture, Envi­ron­men­tal Pro­tec­tion and Region­al Plan­ning of the State of Bran­den­burg. This is rep­re­sent­ed by its minister. ”

In fact, noth­ing has hap­pened in the 10 years since the com­pa­ny floor was reor­ga­nized. New roads were only built in the nation­al park area at a cost of millions.

Our nature con­ser­va­tion asso­ci­a­tion demands noth­ing more and noth­ing less from the Bran­den­burg state gov­ern­ment than that also in Bran­den­burg pro­ceed accord­ing to law, that is: The Bran­den­burg state gov­ern­ment must also adhere to its own orders. Instead, as the answer also shows, the gov­ern­ment does not want to assign its own, suf­fi­cient­ly exten­sive land hold­ings to total reserves, but rather the areas of a pri­vate asso­ci­a­tion. She wants to equate the pri­vate nature con­ser­va­tion asso­ci­a­tion with the com­pa­ny spon­sor­ing the state of Bran­den­burg, what­ev­er that means. The legal basis on which she plans this remains her secret. It should be revealed here: There is no legal basis. Here only the wish is the father of the thought.

Our nature con­ser­va­tion asso­ci­a­tion by no means insists that the state of Bran­den­burg assign all total reserves (zone Ia and Ib) to itself in accor­dance with the legal sit­u­a­tion. Our nature con­ser­va­tion asso­ci­a­tion has already acquired over 2,000 hectares in Zones Ia and Ib and would also be pre­pared to keep them accord­ing to the size of the area if there was a bind­ing agree­ment with the state on the dis­tri­b­u­tion of the area before­hand. This far-reach­ing com­pro­mise offer, which goes well beyond the legal sit­u­a­tion, should final­ly be accept­ed if the state of Bran­den­burg actu­al­ly wants to devel­op its only nation­al park into an inter­na­tion­al­ly rec­og­nized one. Unnec­es­sary legal dis­putes in court only lead to years of delays and to a defeat of the state gov­ern­ment that is already fore­see­able today, by no means the first in this dis­pute. But for the sake of the good cause, despite the clear legal sit­u­a­tion, we rely on an under­stand­ing and a com­pro­mise. But that always takes two.

Thomas Berg
CEO

system
— Answer of the state gov­ern­ment to the small ques­tion no.149