Interesting document. Thanks for posting that.

For those who don't speak Dutch: what it basically comes down to is that the appeals are still pending, and the responsible cabinet ministers are waiting for the results of this appeal. But preliminary talks have taken place between the GA sector (represented, amongst others, by AOPA) and the branches of government that are responsible for these nature reserves and aviation.

The goal of these talks is to get a clear situation for pilots, and three situations have been identified:
1. Where the nature reserve is robust and disturbance is very unlikely, or unlikely to have a serious effect, normal aviation laws will apply. (500 feet rule and all that).
2. Where the nature reserve is slightly more vulnerable, a code of conduct will be agreed upon between the GA sector and the authorities. Probably just like it exists right now, where sensitive areas are marked on the chart and you plan to overfly these as high as possible, minimum 1500'.
3. Where the nature reserve is especially vulnerable, clear minimum heights will be identified and this will be put into legislation. Maybe in the same way the wetlands area Waddenzee is currently treated.

(Disclaimer: this is a rather loose and short translation of a much larger document with some of my own interpretations and examples thrown in. If anyone cares, feel free to put up a more formal translation.)

Backpacker; what you summarise here seems to be exactly the situation we already have; what is actually changed there to ensure that this bizarre situation doesn't happen again?

I want to fly to Ameland to tomorrow; should I cover up my registration just in case the nature loonies are out? :p

It's not exactly what we have now. What I think the article is hinting to is that each of the 162 Natura-2000 areas will be assessed for the impact that aviation might have on these areas. Very sensitive areas will get a Prohibited area (or SRZ, or something to that effect) around them, like the Waddenzee. Less sensitive areas will be marked as a nature reserve with a suggested minimum overfly height, and robust areas will not be marked on the aeronautical maps at all.

Right now virtually none of the 162 areas get any mention on the aeronautical maps or in the AIP.

Nevertheless, nothing (except preliminary discussion) will happen until the appeals process is over.

Thanks for the clarification; so it will be an addition of many new areas on the chart, rather than a major re-classification of existing ones.

It has taken a very long time but the two pilots who where prosecuted in 2009 for disturbing widlife have been cleared of charges. The Dutch appeal court has ruled that flying over the Natura 2000 aera of the Oostvaarders plassen does not constitute a disturbance of wildlife.

Some more info here (Dutch only):

Proefproces Oostvaardersplassen gewonnen | AOPA

Thanks for the update. Was only thinking about this one recently.

Glad to see that common sense has prevailed...even if it did take three years!

Actually the findings of the court were slightly different.

The courts interpretation of the Flora- and Fauna law is that it's aimed at long-lasting protection of wildlife areas. To be prosecuted under the law requires a long lasting or serious disturbance of the wildlife sanctuary, where the ecosystem may suffer long-term effects.

The most important sentence is probably this:

("Sporadic disturbance without any probable negative influences will not be considered a disturbance under the Flora- and Fauna law.")

So the court did acknowledge the rangers finding that the pilots actually caused a disturbance (birds taking flight), but didn't find the disturbance severe enough to cause long-lasting effect to the ecosystem. And thus finds the disturbance not punishable under the Flora- and Fauna law.

In the long run, the court has now placed a significant limit on the application of the Flora- and Faunalaw. Whereas previously any disturbance was cause for prosecution, the prosecutor now has to prove a long-lasting effect on the ecosystem.

All in all a very happy ending. Both for the pilots involved (a conviction, even without punishment, would give them a criminal record) and for aviation in general.

Fortunately it's still possible to fly from Texel to Scandinavia without crossing any of these areas, although it does involve remaining some way out to sea from the coast in places. Better to risk human life than disturb the wildlife, obviously. This is not the first prosecution that's been reported either.

Beware that Skydemon does not show these areas, although I understand that the SD team are looking at the possibility of adding them.

Humans are a significantly less endangered species than a great many wild ones.

I am completely shocked.

If a bird takes to flight because a plane passes overhead, the pilot should be fined €1000, for the first offence.

But seriously, these prosecutions are totally outrageous. It's a proof that there are people in positions of influence who are idiots.

Is that €1000 per bird? :sad:

No; birds in Holland can be found for far less than that :E

€10 base price?