Landowners within the Biogradska Gora National Park (NP), gathered in the informal association “Right to Ancestry and Private Property”, have been protesting for weeks, blocking the highway from Kolašin to Mojkovac for an hour once a week. Their demands relate to, as they explained, “the right to dispose of their property”.
There was no precise explanation as to whether their dissatisfaction was caused by the yet-to-be-adopted Protection Study for that NP, which did not change the outer boundaries of the protected area, but did change the boundaries of the protection zones. The owners of the property have repeatedly requested that all private property be within the III protection zone, as they explained, so that everyone would have “equal legal status and would not be discriminated against”.
The NP Protection Service has recorded 15 cases of illegal construction within the protected area over the past two and a half years. As "Vijesti" was told by the Public Company for National Parks of Montenegro (JPNPCG), six cases of illegal construction were recorded and reported in 2023, four last year, and five cases of illegal construction by July 9 this year. Almost 80 percent (4.720 hectares) of the NP area is state-owned. Three protection zones have been defined within the protected area. The first zone provides for strict protection, where construction of facilities is not allowed. In the second zone, human activities are limited and traditional agriculture, livestock breeding, beekeeping with seasonal facilities are planned. The third zone supports sustainable and rural tourism with the application of all environmental standards.
The JPNPCG explains that "in the previous period, at the request of the then Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism, the Environmental Protection Agency, as the competent authority, prepared a draft Study on the revision of the status, category and protection regime of the Biogradska gora National Park."
"With this document, the area along the Biogradsko Lake itself is defined as the II protection zone, that is, the protection regime has been changed from the third to the second protection zone. Regarding the proposal to classify the katuns in the III protection zone, the JPNPCG as the manager has no authority, these are the competences of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Development of the North," the state-owned company said.
They state that the main changes, compared to before, are the introduction of clear protection zones and three regimes with clearly defined activities that can be carried out in them.
"The document states that the preservation of natural resources will also contribute to the economic development of the local community, through the improvement of rural tourism, traditional agriculture, beekeeping and livestock farming, maintenance of pastures through grazing, use of medicinal and honey-bearing plants, promotion of domestic products - activities that are compatible with the protection regime," the Public Enterprise NPCG told "Vijesti".
They remind that, according to Article 56 of the Nature Protection Act, the manager is obliged to mark the boundaries of a protected area. However, the boundaries of the Biogradska gora National Park have not yet been physically marked. The working body for marking the outer boundaries of this protected area was formed at the beginning of this year, and as they say from the JPNPCG, "there was no intention at the meetings to change the boundaries of the NP, but to make minor corrections in the sense that the boundary does not intersect the plots, but rather follows the boundaries of the plots, and not to the detriment of private plots."
JPNPCG also reminds that the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Urbanism and State Property has developed the Program of Temporary Facilities for the period 2025-2029, in accordance with the received requests, protection regimes defined by the Special Purpose Spatial Plan (SPSP) for the Biogradsko Lake National Park and in accordance with the Law on Nature Protection. JP NPCG, based on this program, issues urban and technical conditions for temporary facilities.
"Given that a large number of complaints from locals relate to the impossibility of building within the park's boundaries, we emphasize that the JPNPCG is not competent to issue construction permits for permanent structures, nor to decide on changes to the protection regime... Adaptation, reconstruction and revitalization of existing structures is possible by complying with regulations on protection zones and obtaining the necessary approvals from competent institutions," the state-owned company concludes.
There is still no document that refers to strategic development, or sustainable development and tourism within protected areas, while simultaneously protecting nature and preserving the rights of local communities. The JPNPCG says that such a strategy would "define and provide clear guidelines for the development of a specific type of tourism that suits managers - that is sustainable tourism, nature-based tourism."
"Regarding the local community, as managers of national park areas, we want and are working to improve local economies that are based on traditional production and sustainable development. What we recognize as a conflict when it comes to nature protection and preserving the rights of local communities is the lack of understanding by local communities of the legal procedures that we, as managers of protected areas, must implement," said the JPNPCG.
The Environmental Protection Agency says that the requests of local residents, who are property owners within the NP, are resolved in compliance with applicable laws and professional rules. They explain that the boundaries and protection zones are determined based on the distribution of habitats and species that are important for protection. First of all, these are legally protected species (Decision on placing certain plant and animal species under protection), as well as species according to the IUCN categories of threat, then Natura 2000 habitats and species protected under the European Union Habitats Directive, the Bern Convention and CITES.
They also recall that Article 9 of the Constitution of Montenegro establishes that "ratified and published international treaties and generally accepted rules of international law constitute an integral part of the internal legal order and have primacy over domestic legislation, and are directly applicable when they regulate relations differently from domestic legislation."
“Biogradska gora National Park was established and proclaimed in 1952. In the new Revision Study, protection zone II remained where it was. The legal act defined and proclaimed protection zone II for the aforementioned area.
In March 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency completed and submitted the Biogradska Gora NP Review Study to the relevant Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Northern Development. The entire procedure has been completed, from public forums to responses to received comments, which were further submitted to the Ministry of Ecology," the Agency told Vijesti.
They remind that the review of protected areas is initiated based on Article 35 of the Law on Nature Protection. This law stipulates that, “if it is determined based on scientific knowledge that there has been a change in certain types of protected areas, the review procedure shall be initiated”. The procedure is initiated based on the request of the Ministry, local government body or manager, and should contain the reasons for initiating the procedure. The request shall also be accompanied by the results of the research and other information relevant to initiating the review procedure.
"If it is determined that there is no data on the boundaries, target habitats and species for a protected area that is entered in the register of protected areas, the administrative authority is obliged to inform the authority competent for adopting the act of proclamation of the need to initiate a review procedure for that protected area. The review of a protected area is initiated by preparing a Review Study," the Agency explains.
It's not true that we ignore the locals, we had meetings
Although the property owners at the protest point out that "the state does not hear them, so they plan to address the EU representatives in Montenegro", the Ministry of Ecology claims that after the protest organized by the association "Right to Ancestry and Private Property", together with the JPNPCG and the Agency, they said that they remain open to dialogue with the local population. At the initiative of the Minister of Ecology Damjan Ćulafić, the ministry told "Vijesti" that a meeting has already been held with representatives of the locals, where it was agreed to hold a wider meeting in the coming period, with the presence of all relevant institutions, to consider citizens' demands.
The Ministry reminds that during the public discussion on the Audit Study, which lasted 55 days, the local population had the opportunity to present comments and suggestions. Two public forums were also held in Kolašin and one round table. The Agency professionally considered all the comments received.
They also say that private property is dominant in Zone III. The department headed by Ćulafić says that "there is no room for selective action or illegal construction, and that the goal is balanced preservation of natural values and development of the local community through a legal and inclusive approach."
Bonus video:
