Nature organization fighting tree, growth felling rules on riverbanks in court

Nature organization Natuurmonumenten is fighting the Rijkswaterstaat’s felling rules for trees and shrubs in the major rivers’ floodplains in court. According to the public works department, trees and other growth in the floodplains must be cut down to protect against flooding. But according to Natuurmonuenten, these rules are far too strict and stand in the way of dynamic rivers, Trouw reports.

According to Rijkswaterstaat, trees, and shrubs cause backwater in some places along the major rivers. Bank vegetation slows down the flowing water, which can lead to the dangerous weakening of the river dykes, the public works department reasons.

But after the extreme floods in the Maas river in 2021, nature organizations in Limburg asked bureau Stroming to examine the extent to which riparian forests along the Grensmaas slowed down the water running towards the North Sea. Stroming concluded that it was not the growth but the narrow floodplains with constricted river dikes that primarily caused the accumulation of high water.

According to the nature organizations, cutting down the growth is at odds with agreed-upon nature objectives for the Grensmaas. All authorities agreed to give nature free reign along the banks of the Limburg river to encourage a dynamic river nature. The Grensmaas, about 50 kilometers of winding river from Maastricht to Maasbracht, is considered the showpiece of wild nature development along the major rivers in the Netherlands.

Rijkswaterstaat set its rules based on the vegetation layer - a legal instrument that determines down to the square meter where trees and shrubs can grow in the floodplains of major rivers, aimed to ensure a safe flow. Natuurmonumenten long accepted the forced felling but will now take the matter to court.

“We think the vegetation layer focuses too one-sidedly on high water safety. It is also too static to make dynamic river nature possible,” Rob van Schijndel of Natuurmonumenten said to Trouw. “Nature goals are secondary to Rijkswaterstaat. Rijkswaterstaat, therefore, does not take its task as a nature manager seriously.”

The case will appear in court in October, according to the newspaper.