Development of IJmeer and Markermeer André van den Berg senior policy maker nature and legislation

k

Designated under Birds and Habitats Directives –Art 4.1 BD; Spoonbill, Smew, Little gull, Common tern, Black tern, Barnacle goose –Art 4.2 BD ; Crested grebe,Cormorant, Greylag goose, Wigeon, Gadwall, Northern Shoveler, Red-crested pochard, Common pochard, Tufted duck, Common goldeneye, Goosander, Coot, Greater Scaup –Art 4.4 HD ; Annex I Habitat 3140 Annex II Species; Bullhead and Pond bat.

HMWB; –Chemical quality, macrofauna and macroalgae are ‘good’ –Measures for fish and plants Irreversible changes and public interests –Dikes, dams, sluices, polders –Navigation, sandmining, fisheries, drinking water, swimming waters –Mitigating measures : disproportional costs 100’s Mln and technical limitations Water Framework Directive

Ecology of the system Zebra mussel Aquatic plants Smelt

Weaknesses in the current ecological system = system pre 1992 but: Silt is dominant factor (physico-chemical poor) –Limited algal bloom –Limited development mussels –Limited development aquatic plants Smelt doing poorly 1981 Gem. 81 ml 1993 Gem. 70 ml 2000 Gem. 29 ml 2006 Gem. 22 ml

Weaknesses in the current ecological system Decrease of Smelt (Osmerus eperlanus) Climatic effects? ANT- studies

Conservation status of several species is poor Therefore, for future projects significant negative impacts cannot be excluded [HD 6.3 & 6.4] and were denied

Conflicts WFD and BHD? –Chemical requirements might limit food production for diving ducks (benthos) –Fish criteria WFD would require less intense commercial fisheries, but than populations of birds that eat small fish will decline Solution; formulate appropriate conservation objectives for Natura 2000 –For species lowered objectives that correspond to sustainable GEP criteria –Some objectives are conditional (ANT-studies)

WFD and BHD measures worked out in integrated management plan; Why Project DMIJ? New perspective needed by government Current ecological quality negative trend Ambitions for recreational developments Ambitions for urban developments Long term flood protection Preservation and enhancement of spatial quality

Measures from the development perspective Clear zones near western coast A gradient in silk in the centre Land-water zones: 10% of surface Strenghten ecological relationships; connectivity

DMIJ creates a Future proof ecological system What –Resilient ecological system (retains natural functions after economical projects and climate changes) How –Improvement and addition of (sub)systems = HD 6.1! Result –Lager numbers of N2000 species –Additional habitats –Increase biodiversity –Legal space for other functions (positive outcome HD6.3) –Robust answer to climate changes

Theory of surplus approach Natura 2000 and additional benefits for biodiversity DMIJ, HD 6.1 and WFD full GEP Projects with impact Natura2000 and WFD measures ANT Time Natural dynamics Conservation status and resilience 1990/2004

What could theoretically oppose this win – win? Restoration  new elevated conservation objectives in future Restoration (HD 6.1) is compensation for future projects, thus AIC criteria (HD 6.4) must be applied These legal uncertainties halts investments (more guidance)

General message Try to find economic and social motives to combine, enhance and accelerate efforts to reach favorable conservation status and good ecological potentials (wider scope HD 2.3?). Especially suited for densely populated protected areas with multiple use (water bodies)?