Denmark’s Musik i Lejet festival could harm local wildlife and flora, warns Nature Conservation Association

The upcoming Musik i Lejet festival, set to welcome around 10,000 guests next week in the Tisvilde region of North Zealand, could have a detrimental impact on the local flora and fauna, according to Denmark’s Nature Conservation Association in Gribskov. The region, protected under the EU’s Natura 2000 law, is home to vegetation that grows on sandy soil, making it particularly vulnerable to large crowds. The Association has criticized Gribskov Municipality for approving a new local plan that allows for the festival to take place.

Birgith Sloth, a board member of the Nature Conservation Association in Gribskov and a biologist specializing in nature protection, emphasized the need to thoroughly investigate the potential impacts of activities in a protected area like Tisvilde Hegn. She also expressed concerns that the large influx of festival attendees could disturb local wildlife, including bats, porpoises, and seals in the sea, all of which breed at this time.

In accordance with EU regulations, a habitat impact assessment must be conducted, which the municipality has not done, according to Sloth. This criticism is supported by Peter Pagh, a law professor specializing in nature protection and EU legislation at the University of Copenhagen, and consulting firms WSP and Niras. They have suggested that it cannot be ruled out that the Musik i Lejet festival could harm the vulnerable nature in the area.

However, Bent Hansen, the mayor of Gribskov Municipality, is not concerned. He argued that the festival has been held for many years at its current size without any noticeable harm to nature and reminded that the festival takes place on a human-made asphalt parking lot. He also mentioned that the Nature Agency granted the festival a dispensation last year.

The final adoption of the local plan was delegated to the municipality’s administration. Søren Korsholm, head of the Center for Urban Development and Culture, stated that they concluded there was no significant risk to the area’s nature and therefore, no need for a habitat impact assessment. He emphasized that the decision was based on all the information available in the case and that it is the municipality’s duty to make the final conclusion.