Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan: Corridors on Fehmarn, but not in Hohwacht - Interview with Environment Minister Tobias Goldschmidt
Manuel Vogel
· 17.05.2025
From the 10th floor of the tower block in Kiel's Mercatorstraße, you have a good view of what the whole thing is all about: the Baltic Sea. As blue and pristine as it looks on the day of our interview at the beginning of May, experts take a gloomy view of its actual condition: over-fertilisation, contaminated sites and dwindling fish and bird populations are just some of the problems that the Baltic Sea is struggling with. Plans to improve its condition were already addressed in the coalition agreement negotiated in 2022, but the originally envisaged Baltic Sea National Park failed due to widespread opposition, not least from the water sports community. Instead, the decision was made to Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan 2030a package of measures that also affects the water sports community. Tobias Goldschmidt, Minister of the Environment, explains how in this surf interview.
Mr Goldschmidt, the surfing community is considered to be close to nature and many water sports enthusiasts would probably answer "yes" to the question of whether the Baltic Sea should be better protected. Nevertheless, there was massive opposition when you presented the plans for the Baltic Sea National Park. Did that come as a surprise to you?
The establishment of national parks is always a major undertaking, and it is normal for there to be resistance. Sometimes these can be overcome, as with the Wadden Sea National Park on the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein. And sometimes the resistance was so great that politicians did not get round to it - as was recently the case with the Baltic Sea National Park. I was therefore not surprised by the loud criticism. What I was surprised about, however, was that things were claimed that we - the Prime Minister and I - had actually made clear early on that they would not happen.
What exactly are you alluding to?
We had always emphasised that it would also be possible to do water sports in protected areas such as a national park. To this day, there is still talk that this is exactly what we wanted to prevent. But that was never the case.
Surfers usually only need small corridors, but it is crucial that these are set up in the right places. The plans for the national park were still completely vague in this respect, but by definition included zero-use zones, which were perceived as a threat. Could you have spared yourself a lot of headwind here if you had taken a more differentiated approach from the outset and clearly communicated proposals for protection zones and corridors for water sports enthusiasts?
Yes, I quickly went public with the consultation process at the time. The reason was that we wanted to be very open about the plans and involve the individual interest groups as early as possible. We wanted to know which areas were considered particularly worthy of protection and, conversely, which zones were particularly relevant for utilisation, for example for fishing, tourism and water sports enthusiasts. In retrospect, the early timing and our openness no longer allowed for a constructive debate, but rather opened the door to fears and concerns. I have to admit that self-critically. However, it is also true that I received a lot of support for the national park plans from within the water sports community during this sometimes very emotional debate. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that the overwhelming majority of water sports enthusiasts rejected the national park plans.
However, there was and is a broad consensus that the Baltic Sea should be better protected. That is why we have worked with the Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan 2030 We launched an alternative in which we set out very specifically what we want to do. That has changed the debate. And the tone has changed significantly at the information events that we organised as a state government at several locations along the Baltic coast at the beginning of May. Everyone now knows where they stand. It is clear which restrictions are coming and which are not. We are looking ahead together.
The fact that the plans for the Baltic Sea National Park were communicated so early has fuelled fears rather than promoting constructive dialogue. I am quite self-critical in that respect
What specific measures are envisaged in the action plan and how will they be prioritised for implementation?
It involves 16 specific measures that are intended to solve the various problems in the Baltic Sea. The relevant ministries are responsible for implementing the measures. Some points are already well advanced: To combat the harmful nutrient inputs into the Baltic Sea, the Ministry of Agriculture has developed an ambitious target agreement with the agricultural associations to reduce the loads of nitrogen and phosphorus by ten per cent by 2030 and then again by 2035. The Ministry of the Environment has recruited staff for a marine conservation centre that will look after the protected areas, to name just a few points. We now have a plan and we are implementing it as quickly as possible. It is, after all, a Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan 2030.
Who checks whether the measures taken are actually bearing fruit?
There is a scientific advisory board chaired by the Prime Minister - this also shows the importance we attach to the issue of monitoring. This advisory board is concerned with how the existing monitoring systems can be further developed so that we can also track the impact of the protective measures and see whether the action plan is making the necessary progress.
Part of the action plan is also that 12.5 per cent of Schleswig-Holstein's Baltic Sea will be more strictly protected. Can you briefly describe how this is differentiated and what it means for water sports enthusiasts?
In the Natura 2000-The protected status of the Geltinger Bucht, Stoller Grund and Sagasbank areas, which make up 4.5 per cent of Schleswig-Holstein's marine area, will be strengthened. However, this will not affect water sports, which will remain permitted here all year round. We are applying for a navigation regulation for eight per cent of Schleswig-Holstein's Baltic Sea, which will be designated as a nature reserve. In concrete terms, this means that there will be a year-round speed limit for boats, but water sports will remain possible. Only from November to the end of March will there be a ban on water sports, because this is where resting birds are concentrated and need to be better protected. This affects three areas - parts of Hohwachter Bucht, the area west of Fehmarn and the area from Gelting to the mouth of the Schleimündung.
The action plan mentions corridors that should also allow use by water sports enthusiasts during the winter months. Where exactly will these corridors be located and according to what standards will they be organised?
There will be one such zone in the Schlei nature reserve as far as Gelting, and two such zones in the area west of Fehmarn. This means that surfing will be possible all year round without restrictions. We will work out the exact definition of the zones, i.e. where they will be located and how large they will be, during the summer of 2025. To this end, we will enter into dialogue with the water sports community and see how we can achieve a compromise between the protection of resting birds and water sports. I am sure that this can be achieved successfully.
What is the situation in the Hohwachter Bucht conservation area? Are corridors also planned here?
The Hohwachter Bucht nature reserve is comparatively small and no corridors are planned for use in winter.
Can water sports enthusiasts be sure that the navigation regulations will be limited to the nature conservation areas described in the Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan? Or to put it another way: can you guarantee that the regulations will not be tightened further in the future?
As the current state government, we are very clear on this and will apply for and implement exactly what is in the action plan. No more and no less.
