Baltic Sea National Park: "No reason to ban sailing in general!" - YACHT interview with Tobias Goldschmidt

Yacht: The topic of the Baltic Sea National Park is also the subject of very emotional debate among sailors ...

Environment Minister Tobias Goldschmidt:That is understandable at first. After all, many people in the country live from and with the Baltic Sea, and sailors love their sailing area. But I think there are also an incredible number of misunderstandings! That's why we have also published FAQs which categorise many things.

I think there are an incredible number of misunderstandings in the room!

Our readers often express the fear that the consultation process is only intended to reassure them and that the outcome is already clear. What do you say to people in response?

That is wrong. Nothing is certain, except that we want to improve the protection of the Baltic Sea, especially with regard to our protected areas. With the consultation, we decided to talk to the people first about whether we should designate the national park and, if so, how we should set it up for the benefit of people and nature. I think it's a shame that this democratic approach of early dialogue is now apparently being called into question.

• Click here for the minister's open letter

A national park law is being discussed. This would make it possible to regulate restrictions in a fairly straightforward manner by way of ordinance. Many sailors are therefore concerned that their interests will no longer be taken into account in regulations in the Baltic Sea National Park once it has been established.

Whether there will be a national park law has not yet been decided. We are in an open-ended process. If there were to be a national park, it would be done through a state law, which is right and important because it is a major project and should have a broad democratic basis. A law expresses the will of the parliament, the people's representatives. And I think that is absolutely appropriate for a project like this. Any navigation regulations would be made by the federal government at the request of the federal state, because the federal government is responsible for federal waterways under the Basic Law. But I have already made it quite clear several times that I see no reason whatsoever to restrict sailing in the Baltic Sea or even to apply to the federal government to do so. This is neither necessary in terms of nature conservation nor politically desirable.

Whether there will be a national park law has not even been decided yet!

Our readers are concerned that a similar situation could arise as in the Wadden Sea, where there has been uncertainty since the establishment of the national parks as to whether further restrictions for sailors are to be expected. There have been years of negotiations about this, including with sailors, and on the Baltic Sea coast there are now fears that a similar state of limbo could arise there, in which there is a constant tug-of-war over the question of what is still permitted and what will be banned. Can you allay these concerns?

There has been an intensive dialogue with the sailing associations on the west coast. And I have the impression that regulations have been agreed there that are very widely accepted. And then you have to say that these are very different natural areas. The ecosystems on the west coast are particularly vulnerable because they are drying out. In addition, other species are at the centre of attention. It makes a difference whether boats fall dry on sands in the Wadden Sea, where seals lie, rare birds breed and where no one else can go, or whether they are sailing on a body of water. That's why I say quite clearly that I see no reason to ban sailing in general, even in the core zone of a possible Baltic Sea national park.

This raises the question of other restrictions. Sailing from A to B is only half the fun. Of course, there is also anchoring, motoring, swimming, dinghy sailing, and if everything in the core zone remained as before, you wouldn't need it ...

This argument assumes that we are talking about this national park because sailors practise their sport there. But that is not the case. The point is that the habitats and species of the Baltic Sea are endangered because many different pressures are coming together: Disturbance of ecosystems, nutrient inputs, munitions, climate crisis. And that is why everyone must do something to better protect the Baltic Sea if we want to have a chance of turning the corner. In the consultation, we will talk to the water sports sector about what we can do to help. And it doesn't have to be bans, there are milder and more creative ways. How about agreeing to use climate-neutral fuels, for example? Or to collect plastic that is floating around somewhere. It's about creative solutions, for example moorings for seagrass meadows so that you don't have to drop an anchor there to damage them. Or avoiding the resting areas of sea ducks during sensitive periods. There are thousands of ways in which users of the Baltic Sea can do something good for it. And that is what we would like to see under the umbrella of a national park, where the focus is not on bans. A national park could become a kind of donor conference for our Baltic Sea.

I have the impression that sailors are very close to nature

Sailors see the Baltic Sea as their habitat and are concerned about its condition, but many fear that the national park will distract attention from the major problems, such as agricultural pollution ...

I also have the impression that sailors are very close to nature. And that's why it's not the case that we only hear fears, worries and anxieties from the sport of sailing, but also a lot of approval and interest. And I think that's very good. I'm pleased about that. And it is true that a national park would not solve all the problems in one fell swoop. The Baltic Sea is just one big sea. That's why everyone will have to make a contribution if we want to improve the situation, which really is extremely dramatic. And in my view, a national park could be a contribution from Schleswig-Holstein, because it would calm parts of the Baltic Sea from disturbance and give nature its space. So far, there is a lack of resting and retreat areas for many endangered species. The harbour porpoise, for example, is doing extremely badly, and hundreds of other species whose habitat is the Baltic Sea are under massive threat. Beyond this protected area, many things would become much easier, such as the acquisition of federal and European Union funding, for example for national park centres where nature can be experienced. Or the topic of environmental monitoring, the detection of changes in the Baltic Sea due to the many negative environmental influences. We know comparatively less about the Baltic Sea than we do about the Wadden Sea, for example. Research would therefore be improved. A national park would be a great tool for all of this.

In this context, people often ask why the so-called potential landscape consists exclusively of water areas ...

... this is initially just a proposal. We are also discussing in the consultation which areas could become part of a national park. However, our starting point is a marine national park. That is why we are starting from the existing marine protected areas. However, it is not quite right that no land areas are included. Where land areas are already protected or are particularly worthy of protection, they have been included in the potential landscape.

Nothing may be introduced into the core area and nothing may be removed from it. Does this also apply to inputs from agriculture?

Although a national park is an effective instrument, it is not a miracle weapon against all problems in the Baltic Sea. The regulation of agricultural inputs must be achieved through the consistent implementation of the relevant specialised laws. Fertiliser legislation is a very important part of this. This has just been tightened up. The national park would not lead to changes in this area. Agriculture has set out on its own path. With a lot of initiative, but also with regulatory law. We should recognise this and give the measures taken a chance to take effect.

A national park is not a miracle weapon against all the problems of the Baltic Sea

A completely different question: representatives of the maritime industry, i.e. shipyards, charterers and so on, have complained that they were not involved enough in the consultation process. What is your view on this?

We invited a broad range of social stakeholders to participate in the consultation process. We also took into account many expressions of interest in the workshops. When creating the invitation distribution list, we also ensured that as representative a cross-section as possible of the relevant stakeholders with a connection to the Schleswig-Holstein Baltic Sea coast had their say. We have also published the rules for who can take part in the consultation on the website.

A workshop on the regional economy will take place on 12 September. Many representatives of the maritime industry are also invited to attend. You can also find the invitation mailing list on our website.

At the kick-off event of the consultation process in Kiel, it was criticised that the findings on what the previous measures on the Schleswig-Holstein Baltic Sea coast have achieved, for example through protected areas, are not sufficiently included in the planning ...

... of course we have incorporated all the information available to us into our planning. We are also using this year to hold consultations with the many experts who live on and with the Baltic Sea. With the fishermen who go out to sea every day, or with nature conservation organisations that have been keeping an eye on the environmental status of the Baltic Sea for a long time. All of these insights will be incorporated into the process. At the same time, we are gathering further scientific information that is constantly being incorporated into the concept. But the national park itself would also give us the opportunity to find out even more about the status.

What is the timetable for the project?

The water sports workshop will take place on 11 July. And we have said that we want to finalise the consultation with stakeholders by the end of the year. Next year, we will then analyse and process all the results so that the cabinet and state government can then decide whether they want to establish a national park and if so, how. However, the open-ended nature of a process naturally also means that a decision will have to be made in due course.

I believe that sailing and nature conservation can achieve a lot together!

What do you expect from the water sports workshop?

I know that sailors are also concerned about restoring the sea to a good condition. I have also seen the many letters to the editor in YACHT, where opinions were very different. That's why I really hope that everyone is well informed about the process and the situation in the Baltic Sea. But I believe that sailing and nature conservation can achieve a lot together. And I would hope that we can talk about this Baltic Sea National Park project in such a way that it is seen as an opportunity to hand over this sea to future generations in good condition and in its full beauty.

YACHT: Thank you very much for the interview!

More about the Baltic Sea National Park:

• Baltic Sea National Park: Loud protest at the rally in Fehmarnsund
• Baltic Sea National Park: "There is no sailing ban" - exact restrictions remain unclear
• Baltic Sea National Park: Schedule for workshops - water sports event on 11 July
• Potential backdrop: The plans for a Baltic Sea National Park
• Baltic Sea National Park: How YACHT readers react to the plans