Background Nitrogen mood
Utrecht's radical shrinkage plan draws full houses
While little is happening nationally in terms of agricultural policy, in the province of Utrecht the UPLG (Utrecht Rural Area Programme) is drawing packed houses with concerned farmers. Provincial Executive Member Mirjam Sterk (CDA) aims to use this program to bind agricultural businesses in almost the entire province to extremely strict emission standards – much stricter than those required nationally – for nitrogen and ammonia, as well as crop protection products.
She's doing this under the banner of further sustainability, target-oriented management, and a new perspective for the remaining farmers. The problem, however, is that while the restrictive emission standards are very precise, the clarity in the standards that should provide this perspective is completely lacking. Concerned farmers in the province are taking action en masse, fearing the end of their businesses.
Impact of ÖBAG companies
As a long-serving politician, Sterk cleverly avoids detailed questions on this point, as was evident in Lexmond, but it's clear that her plan still lacks a socio-economic impact analysis. Sterk is likely aware of this, but delaying such an analysis beyond the point of no return It can also be a strategy. A clever politician knows her tricks.
The fact is that both the more outspoken farmers' organizations (Agractie, NMV, NFO) and the generally more compliant LTO (Dutch Farmers' Federation) are very uneasy about Sterk's plan. Farmers in Utrecht are losing their old certainties and will be left to rely on a provincial plan, incorporated into a provincial environmental ordinance, that lacks legal force.
Perspective or empty hands?
It has no basis in national or European standards and therefore seems easily challenged. "Therefore, there's a very high risk that we'll end up empty-handed if the province goes ahead with this," observes Utrecht LTO chairman Jeroen van Wijk. For example, he believes the 40-kilo ammonia emission standard for 2035 is both unattainable and poorly secured. After all, who's to say that the effectively unattainable 40 kilos will eventually become a hard certainty? He also believes the UPLG system doesn't help achieve targets. "Every hectare of nature that's added makes it difficult for farmers to meet the set targets on their own land."
LTO Nederland still believes in target-based management, unlike other farmers' organizations, but the way it's being handled in Utrecht doesn't match Van Wijk's belief. He believes target-based management must be both feasible and legally sound, not treated as a vague umbrella term.
Peekaboo with water data
At the launch of the UPLG, water quality was also used as an additional argument to give the plan urgency. At an evening meeting organized by Agractie, NMV, and NFO in Vianen, it was discussed that the province was basing its decision on outdated data. Officials in attendance promised the province would look into it. This topic came up again at an LTO evening in Lexmond a few days later. At that time, the officials (accompanied by Sterk) said they were unaware of any newer data. This was a case of bureaucratic peek-a-boo, as the Amstel, Gooi, and Vecht water board had already admitted to journalist Geesje Rotgers that it had newer and more favorable data for the area in question.
'Essential' must-haves
Politics is often simply about exerting pressure. The province of Utrecht also wants to expropriate a series of agricultural plots and therefore calls them "essential plots." In the current events of the past few weeks, it sounds a bit Trumpian. The most powerful American citizen uses precisely these kinds of terms when referring to Greenland. It's also considered an "essential area" by the US. Perhaps it's just fashionable international bureaucratic jargon. But you just have to deal with it as an ordinary citizen.
Utrecht not bee-proof
Incidentally, the supposed quality of nature is still being used to claim more agricultural land in the Netherlands. Striking in this regard is the fact that the number of hectares of nature in Utrecht, or the amount of pesticides used, for example, doesn't reflect how bees experience that nature, as crop advisor Jan Peeters pointed out Monday evening in Vianen. Utrecht, as a province, has the lowest pesticide use, but the highest bee mortality, a perfect mirror image of Flevoland, he said. Could Utrecht be pushing the wrong buttons?
Nature falls, but it does well
Even what nature authorities say about nature should regularly be taken with a grain of salt. Take the Ecological Authority, the plaything of former nitrogen minister Van der Wal. Under the last Rutte cabinet, it approved a whole series of nature target analyses. These almost all had the same message: nature is in a bad way and is on the verge of collapse, but their scientific basis was weak. Even the crown jewel, the Veluwe, was said to be seriously threatened. Retired naturalist Henri Prins argued for this. the official EU Natura 2000 monitoring protocol in to assess the state of nature and reached very different conclusions. Whether it concerns honey buzzards, the spotted woodpecker, or the wryneck, the number of breeding pairs of all the species monitored exceeds expectations, contrary to the forecasts of the Ecological Authority and the reports commissioned by the provinces.
View from outside
Oh, and who's thinking: Well, a retired researcher. How would they look at this abroad, by the way? Then the following. Just this week, something came from the US. the Environmental Performance Index 2025 out, with the Netherlands not in the lead, but certainly not at the back in 13th place either.
Cheaper fertilizer, but no Renure
Finally, there was some additional bitter news from Brussels for the livestock sector. It is known that Minister Wiersma was unable to gain any traction with European Commissioner Roswall for a new derogation. This is partly due to the minister's much-delayed efforts (while the country report for the Netherlands had already been available for six months, she only began to engage more seriously in political consultations after the summer) and lack of transparency in water quality reporting. It is significant that Ireland, which has higher surface water pollution, did receive a derogation.
On the other hand, it also plays a role that apparently no one in Brussels is actively and creatively considering how best to serve their own agricultural sector. To further compensate European agriculture for the consequences of the Mercosur agreement, Trade Commissioner Šefčovič, Agriculture Commissioner Hansen, and Environment Commissioner Roswall decided to temporarily significantly reduce import tariffs on fertilizers. Because fertilizer is now 60% more expensive for European farmers than it was in 2020, and that is unsustainable. according to Šefčovič. Quite nice in itself, but apparently no one was thinking about Renure anymore, or was that currently taboo in Brussels?
Klaas van der Horst
© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.
