Overfishing, warming and far too many pollutants in the water: the Baltic Sea is in a miserable state. Before Christmas, Schleswig-Holstein’s Ministry of Agriculture and several local Baltic Sea advisory councils presented measures to reduce the amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus. The problem: all measures are voluntary. That is not enough, fears the Friends of the Earth Germany (BUND). Currently Schleswig-Holstein does not even meet the EU Water Framework Directive limits.
“We are all very motivated; the will is there in agriculture,” said Heinrich Mougin. The farmer with a farm in Grömitz and a board member of the Schleswig-Holstein Farmers’ Association led one of five Baltic Sea advisory councils nationwide. They had been agreed at the end of 2024 as one item in a target agreement between the state government and the agricultural associations.
In addition to the Farmers’ Association, the Association of Family-Owned Farms, Forestry in Schleswig-Holstein, the State Association of Organic Farming Schleswig-Holstein and Hamburg, and the association “Land schafft Verbindung” are involved.
The advisory councils were to develop ideas for their region to reduce pollutant inputs and thereby do something to save the Baltic Sea. “We said no to a Baltic Sea National Park, but for all of us the Baltic Sea is a defining element of our homeland,” Mougin said. “We accept the challenge to protect it.” A Baltic Sea National Park modeled on the Wattenmeer National Park had been the wish of the Environment Minister Tobias Goldschmidt. The project failed due to resistance from the agricultural and tourism associations, and even the CDU could not warm to the idea.
Cornelia Schmachtenberg (CDU), since November 2025 Minister of Agriculture in Schleswig-Holstein, praised the work of the advisory councils: It was right to hand responsibility to “the experts on site.” No one had tried to delay decisions; everyone had committed to the common goal.
Specifically, the plan is to reduce nitrogen inputs by around 470 tons and phosphorus by 16 tons of phosphorus annually by the year 2035. That is ten percent less than the values in the average of the past years.
Specifically, the plan aims to reduce nitrogen inputs by around 470 tons and phosphorus by 16 tons per year by 2035. That is ten percent less than the values averaged over the past years. By 2045, pollutant inputs from fertilizer and pesticides should drop by a further ten percentage points.
Possible measures include wider shore strips where pollutants can seep in, filtration systems, less fertilizer, a different crop rotation, or the rewetting of moors. Among all measures, the Baltic Sea advisory councils will select those that they deem feasible in their respective region. Taken together, they would even exceed the target of the 2024 agreement. “The agriculture sector has taken on a large upfront burden,” praised Minister Schmachtenberg. Praise for the results of the five regional advisory councils also comes from the Friends of the Earth Germany in Schleswig-Holstein: “The plans appear very well grounded,” says BUND spokesperson Sina Clorius to . “They are a good start and we are glad that the agriculture minister remains engaged in implementing the Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan.”
Plans Are Not Binding
However, there is a major flaw: the ideas of the Baltic Sea advisory councils are not binding for farmers. While the possible measures are to be announced in the coming months, consultations with individual farms and information days will take place. But if the ideas are not adopted, there is no power to enforce them.
In fact, the state is under pressure too. For years, Schleswig-Holstein has violated the EU requirements of the Water Framework Directive. “Currently, the target and guidance values for nitrogen and phosphorus at several Baltic Sea inflows in Schleswig-Holstein are not yet reached,” the ministry said in response to a request. However, this also affects other states. Compliance with the target values is a nationwide task. The target agreement with agriculture is a building block to gradually further reduce agricultural nutrient inputs.
Sina Clorius finds this insufficient given the current state of the Baltic Sea, but also groundwater: “Nitrate nitrogen is an existential problem for all of us. Several drinking-water wells have had to be closed because the water was contaminated. Nitrate threatens our health and biodiversity.”
The BUND reminds of the state’s “Baltic Sea Protection Action Plan.” It calls for a reduction in annual nitrogen inputs of around 2,000 tons. The amount of phosphorus would need to be cut by about 65 tons per year to meet the Water Framework Directive.
“Plans are good, but for the Baltic Sea the outcome matters,” says Clorius. “There must not be so much nitrogen and phosphorus entering the water anymore, or else we will not see a blue sea but algae soup!”
