Association continues to fight for wilderness in the national park

The chair­man of the board of the Asso­ci­a­tion of Friends of the Ger­­man-Pol­ish Euro­pean Nation­al Park Unteres Oder­tal e. V., Thomas Berg:

“The alle­ga­tions and accu­sa­tions of Mr. Tre­ichel are not cor­rect. The asso­ci­a­tion nat­u­ral­ly sup­ports the zon­ing con­cept pre­scribed by the state and fights for at least 50% of the nation­al park area to become wilder­ness. He has by no means said good­bye to the nation­al park con­cept. That is a mali­cious assumption!

How­ev­er, he is of the opin­ion that the asso­ci­a­tion and state areas must be assigned to the nation­al park with­in the frame­work of the land con­sol­i­da­tion in accor­dance with the law. Deci­sive for this is undis­put­ed­ly the order res­o­lu­tion of the Min­istry for Rur­al Devel­op­ment, Envi­ron­ment and Con­sumer Pro­tec­tion (MLUV) from the year 2000. In this, the Agri­cul­ture Min­is­ter him­self clear­ly stip­u­lates that the state of Bran­den­burg, as the com­pa­ny respon­si­ble for the com­pa­ny, must assign itself to the total reserves (Zone I) with the land that the state received free of charge from the BVVG for this pur­pose alone. Laws and statutes must also apply to agri­cul­ture min­is­ters in Brandenburg!

Inci­den­tal­ly, the club already owns over 40% of all Zone I areas and the club is of course ready to keep this. How­ev­er, the state of Bran­den­burg should now also feel respon­si­ble for its only nation­al park and, fol­low­ing the exam­ple of the asso­ci­a­tion, should also take over its own areas in the wilder­ness zones.

The first step towards actu­al­ly improved nature con­ser­va­tion in the Fid­di­chow­er Pold­er (10) would be to final­ly give up the cost­ly and ener­­gy-inten­­sive pump­ing out of Germany’s only allu­vial reserve. On the instruc­tions of Tre­ichel and con­trary to the express promis­es of State Sec­re­tary Schulze (MLUV), as much water has not been pumped out of the nation­al park this year, to the detri­ment of nature. That makes a flood­plain nation­al park a fraud­u­lent label.

The asso­ci­a­tion nego­ti­at­ed with the MLUV and the nation­al park admin­is­tra­tion for a long time with great will­ing­ness to com­pro­mise. The nego­ti­a­tions were bro­ken off by the min­istry and by no means by the asso­ci­a­tion, which is still ready to negotiate.

In doing so, the MLUV has repeat­ed­ly added new demands that should ulti­mate­ly lead to the coör­di­na­tion of the asso­ci­a­tion and would have only made it an appendage of the Bran­den­burg Min­istry of Agri­cul­ture. The Zone II areas (with a few excep­tions) should already be from 15.06. of each year and not, as has been prac­ticed by the asso­ci­a­tion so far, from June 30th. may be used. The asso­ci­a­tion should be forced to agree on all future leas­es with the MLUV. That would be the end of nature con­ser­va­tion in the Low­er Oder Valley.

The claim that the asso­ci­a­tion wants to oper­ate on a large scale as a farm is also untrue. The asso­ci­a­tion cur­rent­ly only uses 0.05% of the nation­al park area (5.29 ha) in this form.

The asso­ci­a­tion is still very inter­est­ed in a sen­si­ble nego­ti­at­ed solu­tion, but sees no last­ing dam­age if the com­pe­tent courts first explain the cur­rent legal sit­u­a­tion in Bran­den­burg to the MLUV. ”