Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan: Sailors in the sights of politicians

As part of the discussions on the Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan (APO), recreational boating has now also become the focus of political attention. The wastewater produced on board water sports enthusiasts is a burden on the water, as it is often not discharged on land but at sea, and this is not permitted, according to State Secretary Julia Carstens from the Schleswig-Holstein Ministry of Economic Affairs at information events on the APO.

Older boats, Carstens is quoted by the Kieler Nachrichten as saying, usually do not have faecal tanks that allow disposal on land, which leads to impairment of the water quality and even damage to the ecosystem through "bacteria and other pollutants".

Carstens' colleague, ministry spokesman Harald Haase, described the alleged behaviour of recreational shipping in even more pithy terms. It was illegal - discharging black water into the Baltic Sea is generally prohibited.

Anyone who considers the relationship between pleasure craft and military and commercial shipping on the Baltic Sea, and cruise ships in particular, quickly realises that a problem is being constructed here that distracts from the real issue.

The tragic thing is that there is an obvious lack of clarity in the debate on the subject of black water on pleasure craft and the rules to be observed when disposing of it in the Baltic Sea region. We have dared to take a look at the existing regulations.

International agreement on waste disposal

As early as 1973, the seafaring nations that are members of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) agreed on a globally applicable environmental treaty in the form of the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships (MARPOL).

The text of this convention regulates the framework conditions, while several annexes deal with the individual areas of regulation. The relevant one for wastewater disposal is Annex IV.

Accordingly, the discharge of black water within the 3 nautical mile zone is generally prohibited. Mechanically treated and disinfected wastewater may be discharged from the boundary of the 3 nautical mile zone to the beginning of the 12 nautical mile zone.

The disposal of real black water, as faeces are called in the language of the regulation, is then generally permitted seawards of the 12 nautical mile zone. In the Baltic Sea, which is a "special area for the discharge of sewage from ships" according to Annex IV of the MARPOL Convention, an important exception to this principle has applied since June 2021, although it only affects passenger ships. They must comply with limit values for disposal.

It is not necessary to carry out a numerical survey to realise that the disposal of faeces by passenger ships on the Baltic Sea is so immensely greater than that of pleasure craft, despite these limits, that the discussion about the black water of pleasure craft smacks of symbolic politics.

MARPOL IV does not apply to recreational craft

In addition, MARPOL IV only applies to ships with a gross tonnage (GT) of 400 or more, or those carrying more than 15 people, i.e. crew and passengers combined. Recreational craft are therefore also excluded from this agreement, but they are subject to the regulations of the countries concerned when it comes to toilet wastewater in the Baltic Sea, which are very different.

Different national regulations for recreational craft

In Germany, there is a federal regulation for recreational craft only with regard to the Baltic Sea, namely in the Ordinance on Environmentally Sound Behaviour in Maritime Navigation, known as the See-Umweltverhaltensordnung (SeeUmwVerhV). Section 9 of this ordinance prohibits in paragraph 1 no. 2 a) and b) the emptying of faecal tanks of pleasure craft on sea waterways and pleasure craft flying the German flag seawards of the limits of sea waterways.

The scope of the regulation then ends at the outer limit of the 12 nautical mile zone. Recreational craft without holding tanks are not mentioned in the regulation.

In Sweden, on the other hand, there is a general ban on discharging untreated faeces, regardless of whether it is pumped from a tank or directly from the bowl and where. The direct route from the polluter into the watercourse and the diversions via the Pütz are exempt.

The regulations, which vary from country to country, either follow this Swedish model and prohibit or restrict the discharge of black water on pleasure craft, or they require a tank to be installed for this purpose, on the assumption that it will be emptied at appropriate stations in the harbour.

Holding tank: compulsory or optional?

While it is considered harmless to a certain extent to add fresh faeces to a body of water when bathing or using the pump toilet, as they are biodegradable, emptying tanks in which black water has often been stored for days poses a very real bacterial risk to people in the immediate vicinity.

There is no need to go into detail about how unsightly it is to pollute the coastal waters where people swim with untreated toilet waste. And in the narrow bays of the Baltic Sea, the algae in summer are an impressive example of how over-fertilisation, albeit from the land side, literally leads to blooms.

Black water collected on board should therefore of course be disposed of ashore. This also makes sense because it can be treated there.

Ship Safety Ordinance

After MARPOL led to the Helsinki Convention (Helcom) on enhanced protection of the Baltic Sea, a mandatory faecal refuelling requirement for pleasure craft was introduced in Germany by ordinance.

Section 6b of the Ship Safety Ordinance stipulates that black water tanks are mandatory on recreational craft built in 2003 or later. If the boat was built before 1980, this obligation does not apply. For pleasure craft built between 1980 and 2003, the tank must be retrofitted if the boat is larger than 11.5 metres (length) and 3.8 metres (width). Exceptions are possible if it can be demonstrated to the competent authority (BSH) that installation is technically impossible or economically disproportionate.

Baltic Sea protection or distraction from the problem?

In fact, sensible regulations are already in place and the environmental impact of recreational craft on the Baltic Sea is negligible compared to that of cruise ships and ferries.

The demand for stricter bans on recreational boating is a distraction from this problem - and others. The Baltic Sea would be better served if politicians were instead in favour of expanding onshore disposal facilities. In addition, a reduction in fertiliser discharges from agriculture and a complete ban on discharges from passenger ships, together with consistent prosecution of violations.

It is possible that the Baltic Sea suffers much more from this distraction than we sailors do.

More about the Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan

• Statement by Hafen Orth GmbH on the APO (June 2025)
• Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan: Participation procedure opened (June 2025)
• Interview with Schleswig-Holstein's Environment Minister Tobias Goldschmidt (May 2025)
• Start of the information events (April 2025)
• State government informs about the Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan (March 2025)
• Report on the Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan (October 2024)