Managing human interventions in nature and landscape

Rules of intervention under nature conservation law

Every mining activity is associated with interventions in nature and landscape and can result in serious environmental impacts. Compensatory actions, such as compensatory or substitution measures according to the Federal Nature Conservation Act (BNatSchG), are intended to offset interventions in nature and landscape and to restore or replace their impaired functions. Only if real compensation is not possible, compensatory payments are to be made, provided that the nature conservation interests are of secondary importance. The compensatory payment shall be earmarked for nature conservation and landscape conservation measures, preferably in the affected natural area.

Overall, it is estimated that just over 1% of Germany’s entire area will be necessary to ensure the country’s natural resources in the medium and long term. On the last key date of 31 December 2023, according to the Federal Office of Statistics, approx. 1285 km², i.e. approx. 0.36% of the area of Germany is used as mining land.¹ In the last 31 years or so, the amount of land required for quarrying in Germany has therefore decreased by over 32% (593 km²). The equivalent in area for the volume of natural resources used in 2023 was just over 26.5 km². In relation to the total area of Germany (357,582 km²), this results in a temporary land requirement of approx. 0.007% of the country’s area for 2023.² The areas used for the extraction of natural resources are concentrated in different regions, which means that there are significant differences in how strong the different regions are affected by the impacts on nature and landscape.

Legal framework

The Federal Mining Act (BbergG) requires the mining operator to take the necessary precautions to reclaim the surface to the extent required by the circumstances (Section 55 (1)(7) BBergG). The term “reclaiming” means proper shaping of the surface used by the mining operation, considering the public interest (Section 4 (4) BBergG). This term covers all activities required for recultivation, without the status quo ante having to be achieved. Within the scope of the obligation under mining law to rehabilitate the area, the obligation that simultaneously exists under nature conservation law to compensate for interventions in nature (Section 13 BNatSchG) may have already been met in the individual case – depending on type and scope of the measures taken for this purpose.³

The Federal Nature Conservation Act (BNatSchG) establishes the general principle that major interventions in nature and landscape are to be primarily avoided and minimised by the polluter (avoidance obligation). Unavoidable interventions are to be compensated by means of compensatory or substitution measures (hereinafter “compensatory measures”) or, if this is not possible, by a compensatory payment in money (Section 13 BNatSchG). It is not possible to deviate from this general principle and the ensuing legal consequences (first the avoidance, then compensatory measures and, as a last resort, a compensatory payment). In the case of mining measures, the avoidance rule primarily targets a variant that is as environmentally friendly as possible. Unavoidable interventions in nature and landscape must therefore be offset or mitigated, particularly through the promotion of natural succession, renaturation, near-natural design, rehabilitation, or recultivation (Section 1(5) p. 4 BNatSchG). Interventions are avoidable if there are reasonable alternatives to achieving the purpose of the intervention in the same place, without or with less impairment of nature and landscape (Section 15 BNatSchG).

Compensatory measures must be maintained and legally secured during the required period. The period of maintenance is determined by the approval authority in the certificate of approval. The perpetrator of the intervention (the polluter) or its legal successor is responsible for the execution, maintenance and safeguarding of the compensatory measures.

In accordance with German federal and European regulations, the possible effects of a project on particularly protected species of animals and plants (special species protection legislation) and on the European protected area network NATURA 2000 is one of the aspects that must be examined in the approval procedures for nature conservation law interventions.

The BNatSchG contains a full regulation, viz. that the laws and norms of the Federal States on the instrumental design of the intervention regulation may not contradict it. To make the regulation more applicable, some Federal States have made supplementary regulations, whereby the practice differs from Federal State to Federal State. For example, the concrete assessment of the amount and the use of compensatory payments differ from Federal State to Federal State. As different biotope type lists are used at Federal State level, the Federal Government produces conversion keys that allow the respective biotope types to be counted.⁴

The Federal Compensation Ordinance (BKompV) provides specific details of the rules of intervention intended under nature conservation law for projects in the area for which the Federal Administration is responsible. It covers public infrastructure projects (e. g. power lines and pipelines, offshore wind farms, waterway projects and usually also Federal autobahns). The objective of BKompV is to standardise the rules of intervention under nature conservation law across all Federal States and make them both more transparent and more effective. Different regulations continue to apply in some countries.⁵

Approval practices in the extraction of natural resources under nature conservation law

If a company plans to intervene in nature and landscape by extracting natural resources, the rules of intervention under nature conservation law are examined at the level of the responsible approval authority. Different laws may apply depending on the natural resource extracted. This depends on which authorities are responsible in a Federal State. A nature conservation authority may be responsible for the extraction of mineral resources that are not subject to mining law or water law (The nature conservation legislation of many Federal States includes specific procedures for extraction e.g. in Saxony-Anhalt⁶). In addition, the mining authorities of the Federal States (in the case of free-to-mine and privately-owned mineral resources or underground extraction) or the Federal State authorities responsible for enforcing the state excavation laws, the building and water management laws or the Federal Immission Control Act (in the case of so-called landowners’ natural resources) may also be involved.⁷ This procedure corresponds to the “piggyback procedure”: The rules of intervention are always examined within the framework of the notification and approval procedure under the specific legislation, without separate administration proceedings. The nature conservation authorities must be involved, and they will give their opinion as nature conservation experts. The responsible approval authority then grants the authorisation taking account of the opinion in “consultation” with the responsible nature conservation authorities (Section 17(1) BNatSchG).⁸ The responsible approval authority, which makes the decision on the legal consequences of the intervention, is not bound by the opinion of the nature conservation authorities that go beyond the legal requirements of the nature conservation laws and the recognised professional standards in nature and species conservation.

It is allowed to differ from these on objective grounds. It is compulsory to comply with the provisions of the specific species protection independently of the rules of intervention. Statutory biotope protection, national and European area protection, like special species protection, are nature conservation concerns that are independent of the intervention regulation and must be dealt with separately.

In the approval procedure, the entrepreneur shall provide a nature conservation expert opinion to the competent authority, in which the contents are processed.⁹ A Landscape Management Plan (LBP) for example provides information on the location, nature, extent, and timing of the intervention, as well as the intended avoidance and compensatory measures and, where required, the amount of the compensatory payment. In this case, a major part of the necessary compensation is to be regularly provided for renaturation or recultivation (see target definition in Section 1(5) sentence 4 BNatSchG).

Compensatory measures on external areas are necessary, for example, if certain landscape or biotope structures at the place of intervention cannot be restored in the same way, if the time that has elapsed between the damage and renaturation is too long or if specific measures are necessary for reasons of biotope protection, protection area or species protection.¹⁰

In the case of the extraction of the so-called “free-to-mine” (e. g. coal, salts, oil, and natural gas) and privately-owned natural resources (e.g. certain industrial minerals) governed by the German Federal Mining Act (BBergG), the intervention regulation is processed as per the BNatSchG in accordance with the operating plan procedure under mining law, whereby the obligations as per the BNatSchG apply in full (see Authorisation of mining projects). Compensation for interventions can in general already take place within the scope of the obligation under mining law to rehabilitate the area (Section 55(1) no. 7 BBergG, Section 1(5) sentence 4 BNatSchG). If this is not possible, compensatory and/or substitution measures or subordinated compensatory payments pursuant to BNatSchG are necessary (see North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) example below). In the case of procedures which are subject to the Federal Mining Act (BBergG), the legal instruments of the Federal Mining Act are applied, such as (and in particular) regular monitoring based on the main operating plans, which must be submitted and re-approved every two years.

Documentation of compensatory measures for interventions in nature and landscape

Since the amendment of the BNatschG in 2010, German Federal States are obliged to create compensation directories for all interventions in nature. However, these take various forms and are not publicly available in all Federal States.

Example of the transparency of compensation directories in Baden-Wuerttemberg¹¹

The basis for the compensation directory in Baden-Wuerttemberg is formed by Section 17(6) of the BNatSchG and Section 18 of NatSchG BW, the compensation directory regulation (KompVzVO) and the eco-account regulation (ÖKVO) of the State, which provide for the obligation to make documentation available for the public. The latter two regulations can be downloaded from the website of the Baden-Wuerttemberg State Law:

• Compensation Directory Regulation (KompVzVO)
  https://www.landesrecht-bw.de/bsbw/document/jlr-KompVerzVBWrahmen

• Eco-Account Regulation (ÖKVO)
  https://www.landesrecht-bw.de/bsbw/document/jlr-%C3%96koKVBWrahmen

On 1 January 2026, the new KompVzVO enters into force, which in addition to the previous departments “Eco-account” and “Compensation for intervention” stipulates six other departments, including for compensatory measures under planning law (the scope of the collection is regulated by Paragraph 18(2) NatSchG BW) and for Natura 2000-related and species protection-related measures. It is intended that this will provide greater transparency and make it easier to verify these measures.

Besides, impairments of Natura 2000 sites below the significance threshold should also be recorded to better determine possible summation effects (as documented in the so-called summation register), cf. Section 18(3) NatSchG BW.

An eco-account is an instrument for the perpetrators of interventions (polluters). It enables them to decouple compensatory measures temporally and spatially from the extraction site, making the measures more flexible to manage. Compensatory measures can be stockpiled via so-called “eco-points”, which are accumulated by means of the targeted enhancement of external areas through nature conservation. The corresponding eco-points can be allocated for later interventions to compensate for the interventions either in whole or in part.¹² Polluters such as natural resource companies and local authorities are involved here as bodies of measures, consumers, and traders of eco-points.

A central overview of the total number of all interventions in Baden-Wuerttemberg, including their compensatory measures which have been authorised since April 2011, the legal environmental protection eco-account measures and the compensatory measures already assigned to an intervention under nature conservation law can be accessed centrally via the data and map service of the Baden-Württemberg Regional Office for the Environment (Landesanstalt für Umwelt Baden-Württemberg) since autumn 2024.

There, you can view the following information on the nature conservation compensatory measures:

• description of the approval authority and the compensatory measure (brief description),
• file number and date of the approval certificate,
• type of project causing the intervention,
• project developer,
• location of the compensation area,
• measures for the timely implementation of the compensatory measure and the fixed period of maintenance,
• state of the implementation.

The following information on eco-account measures can also be accessed:

• complex of measures
• status,
• natural area,
• location of the measure,
• eco-points.

Compensatory measures on intervention areas and substitute areas are documented in the compensation directory of the Federal State of Baden-Wuerttemberg.

Cooperation between stakeholders

Since each extraction of natural resources can represent a significant intervention in nature and landscape, an environmentally friendly extraction development and technology approach must be standard for companies in this sector. Timely renaturation and recultivation can contribute to the promotion of biological diversity; but operating extraction sites may also sometimes be habitats for rare animals and plants. Cooperation between the extractive companies, the employees there and nature conservationists who are familiar with the area has proven to be useful. This means that operational management can be adapted to local and specific biodiversity requirements. This usually succeeds if the company management and employees are continually involved in dialogue with specialist nature conservation institutions and persons. In the case of expansions or new extraction projects, an early dialogue between the stakeholders can also avoid conflicts before they arise. Information and training materials on the subject help to broaden the impact of initiatives like this, which are supported by strong memberships in the environmental and nature conservation associations, the industrial trade union for the construction, agriculture and environment sectors, and economic associations at Federal Government and Federal State levels.

{acf_content_section_2}

{acf_quellenangaben}