Last spring, Kaja Kallas' (Reform) first government opted to settle a lengthy dispute between the environmental protection and heritage protection fields in Estonia. In permitting a derogation from protection in the Natura network, the government accepted that salmonids' environment in the Jägala River may continue to be ruined, as the preservation of the century-old Linnamäe Dam and hydroelectric plant are more important.

Nonetheless, the government was also aware that Natura derogations may only be granted if the damages caused as a result are compensated. Then-minister of the environment Erki Savisaar (Center) had read the Environmental Board's analysis as well.

"Complete relief isn't possible to provide," Savisaar noted. "This has been analyzed, and this was shown by the Natura assessment as well. It will be possible to compensate in part." He noted that protected areas should be expanded along the Pirita River, Vasalemma River as well as Purtse River, adding that the last of these should first be thoroughly cleaned as well.

The government ultimately agreed to grant the necessary authorization to dam the river, leaving the technical side up to the Environmental Board to organize.

Four legal disputes and a letter from Brussels

Nonetheless, the Environmental Board has yet to issue a water permit. This isn't yet perceptible in the landscape itself, as the agency once again extended the existing permit — this time through the end of next year. Environmental Board Deputy Director Erik Kosenkranius acknowledged that there are currently four legal disputes involving the dam underway in various tiers and between various parties.

Among the disputes are those over the extension of the current water permit as well as over the Estonian government's 2022 decision, objections to the conservation management plan calling for the improvement of salmonids' quality of life, as well as objections to the order issued by the minister of culture which placed the reservoir under protection together with the hydroelectric plant. Parties to these disputes include both the owner of the power plant as well as fish conservationists.

Nonetheless, the Environmental Board has yet to issue a water permit. This isn't yet perceptible in the landscape itself, as the agency once again extended the existing permit — this time through the end of next year. Environmental Board Deputy Director Erik Kosenkranius acknowledged that there are currently four legal disputes involving the dam underway in various tiers and between various parties.

Among the disputes are those over the extension of the current water permit as well as over the Estonian government's 2022 decision, objections to the conservation management plan calling for the improvement of salmonids' quality of life, as well as objections to the order issued by the minister of culture which placed the reservoir under protection together with the hydroelectric plant. Parties to these disputes include both the owner of the power plant as well as fish conservationists.

"And with all of this, so as not to rush senselessly anywhere, we're going to wait for legal clarity — and it's based on this, actually, that we've extended the authorization of the existing permit," Kosenkranius explained. "We're not doing anything more with this right now. Let's see what the courts say."

The commotion surrounding the Linnamäe Dam has caught the attention of Brussels as well. This April, Estonia received a letter from the European Commission's Directorate-General (DG) of the Environment reminding it that were it not for this dam, salmonid populations could be more than 10,000 fish bigger each year.

Vivian Loonela, head of the European Commission Representation in Estonia, recalled that upon joining the EU, Estonia itself recommended the Jägala River be added to the Natura list of protected areas.

"The Commission's position is that if we have agreed that a given area is under protection and if there are protected species present there, then they need protection," Loonela stressed. "And how this is ensured is what is [currently] under debate."

Commission relying on Estonian board

The European Commission drew attention to the same issue of which the Estonian government was aware a year ago already. "Why does the government consider it possible to compensate damages to protected habitats and species in the area despite the fact that according to the [Environmental Board's] assessment, full compensation isn't possible?" the Commission asked.

As it was Estonia's Ministry of Culture that requested the Natura derogation, they are now the ones that have to reach a deal with the Commission. Reesi Sild, an adviser at the ministry's Cultural Heritage Department, acknowledged that when it comes to environmental matters, they nonetheless seek help from the Environmental Board.

The Environmental Board in turn, however, is largely standing by what it said a year ago. Kosenkranius noted that the necessary compensation package can't be precipitated unless the dried up rapids of the Narva River, located along Estonia's eastern border are refilled with water; this is the only other river with sufficient space for enough salmonids to spawn. This move, however, would require an agreement as well as cooperation with the Russian Federation.

"Considering the current geopolitical situation, this is a very challenging component," he acknowledged. "We're of course still looking at these measures, but if this Narva River solution isn't implemented, then all of those other things involved [alone] are not enough."

Ministry: Dam is older than Natura area

The Ministry of Culture nonetheless didn't hesitate to respond to the Commission. First, the ministry informed the Commission that the preliminary Natura assessment drawn up by Estonia's Environmental Board was a working version, the cited reasons in which are not binding for the government. Second, the ministry noted in its reply that the Jägala River was first dammed up 100 years ago already, while the area was only declared a Natura area once Estonia joined the EU, i.e. in 2004.

"Our position is that we should take the moment the Natura area was established as the starting point," Sild explained. "And at that point in time, Linnamäe Dam was already functioning there."

In its subsequent response, the European Commission held that the Estonian government's interpretation is not correct. As this dispute is over the issuing of a new water permit, the state cannot proceed based on what has previously been built in the river in question. On the contrary; the Commission finds that Estonia should take action to restore the previously damaged natural environment.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!