Zagreb protest targets Sisak chicken megafarm plan

The news in Croatian

1. prosvjedovati
   javno izražavati nezadovoljstvo ili neslaganje s nekom odlukom ili stanjem, najčešće na ulici ili trgu ↩︎
2. klaonica  (f.)
   mjesto ili zgrada u kojoj se životinje ubijaju i obrađuju za meso ↩︎
3. okoliš  (m.)
   priroda i prostor oko nas, uključujući zrak, vodu, tlo, biljke i životinje ↩︎
4. investitor  (m.)
   osoba ili tvrtka koja ulaže novac u neki projekt kako bi kasnije zaradila ↩︎
5. projekt  (m.)
   plan ili posao koji treba napraviti, često veći i važniji, s određenim ciljem ↩︎
6. odluka  (f.)
   ono što netko službeno ili čvrsto odluči učiniti nakon razmišljanja ↩︎

Translation

Text comprehension

Question 1: Why are many people in Zagreb protesting against the chicken farms and slaughterhouse near Sisak?

Question 2: What do the investor and some politicians think is good about the project?

Vocabulary

Croatian	English
prosvjedovati	to protest
klaonica  (f.)	slaughterhouse
okoliš  (m.)	environment
investitor  (m.)	investor
projekt  (m.)	project
odluka  (f.)	decision

Read the full story

Tens of thousands of people gathered in central Zagreb to protest against a planned network of large chicken farms and a slaughterhouse near the town of Sisak in central Croatia. The project, promoted by the company Premium Chicken Company, owned by Croatian firm Renaissance Capital d.o.o. with a Ukrainian investor, is worth around 600 million euros.

The planned investment includes around 20 industrial complexes for raising and slaughtering poultry in Sisak-Moslavina County, a region badly affected by war in the 1990s and more recent earthquakes. The key facility would be a slaughterhouse in Sisak with an annual capacity of about 84 million chickens.

Demonstrators, many carrying banners and flags, first assembled at King Tomislav Square (Trg kralja Tomislava) and then marched to Zrinjevac park in the city centre. The rally was organised by environmental group Zelena akcija (Green Action), animal‑rights organisation Prijatelji životinja (Animal Friends) and local initiatives including “Siščani ne žele biti Smetlišćani” (roughly, “Sisak residents don’t want to be treated like rubbish”) and “Sunjani ne žele biti smuljani” (“Sunja residents don’t want to be tricked”).

According to the organisers, more than 150 civil society organisations from across Croatia, as well as several international groups, supported the protest. Many participants came from Sisak-Moslavina County itself. Some residents said they live just a few hundred metres from the planned sites and fear major changes to their daily lives.

Opponents of the project argue that the megaplant would seriously damage the environment, public health and animal welfare. Activists warn about potential air pollution, odour, water contamination and so‑called “hyper‑nitrification” of soil and groundwater from huge amounts of animal waste. They also say that such intensive industrial farming could destroy local forests and wildlife habitats and make the area unattractive for people to live in.

For many demonstrators, the project is seen as a symbol of a wider choice facing Croatia: whether to encourage large, highly intensive agricultural investments or to prioritise smaller‑scale, environmentally friendlier development. Protesters repeatedly referred to the megafarm system as a “mega zlo” – “mega evil”, claiming that it could “destroy an entire county” and turn a picturesque region into what some called a “horror area without normal living conditions”.

The main organisers read out six formal demands addressed to the Croatian government and Prime Minister Andrej Plenković. They are calling for a complete halt to all ongoing environmental impact assessments related to these poultry projects, a review of all previously issued positive decisions, and a strategic, cumulative study of the impact of all 20 planned sites on nature, the ecological network, human health and the local economy.

In addition, they want the state and local authorities to withdraw all forms of support for the megafarm system and to adopt a national decision declaring such large‑scale poultry complexes unacceptable in Croatia. Activists argue that public consultations so far have mostly been a matter of “formality”, with few detailed responses to citizens’ questions.

On the other side, the investor and some politicians stress the expected economic benefits. Company representatives have said at public meetings that the 608‑million‑euro investment would bring economic growth and new jobs to an underdeveloped area, helping to “revitalise” rural communities that have suffered from depopulation and a lack of industry.

Supporters of the plan describe Sisak-Moslavina County as a neglected, war‑damaged region that, in their view, needs major investment. At a recent parliamentary round table on the environmental and social consequences of the megafarms, HDZ (Croatian Democratic Union) MP and HVIDRA veterans’ association president Josip Đakić defended the project. He argued that some counties would be “happy” to receive such offers and said that these areas deserve construction, reconstruction and progress, not abandonment “just because of clean nature and clean air”.

Đakić also presented the project as a way for Croatia to become an exporter of poultry. He pointed out that the country currently imports significant quantities of chicken meat and claimed that modern regulations and inspection services should guarantee environmental and health protection if the project goes ahead. His remarks, especially the comparison between economic development and “just” preserving clean air, provoked strong criticism from opponents on social media.

The Croatian Minister of Agriculture, David Vlajčić, has tried to adopt a more balanced public position. At a recent debate in Sisak that brought together activists and the investor, he stated that Croatia is not self‑sufficient in poultry production and therefore “cannot simply reject” all agricultural investments. At the same time, he insisted that the ministry “will not turn its back on citizens” and that their concerns must be properly considered.

Just before the Zagreb protest, Vlajčić received representatives of Zelena akcija and Prijatelji životinja at the ministry. According to the groups, the minister promised to pass their written demands directly to Prime Minister Plenković. Activists say the final decision now lies with the central government, which must weigh economic interests, energy and food security, environmental protection and local opposition.

Local politics around Sisak are also divided. The current mayor of Sisak, Domagoj Orlić from the HDZ, has publicly stated that the project does not have the support of the city authorities. He argues that the planned complexes are not in line with the existing spatial plans and says the city will not change its planning documents to accommodate them. Orlić has blamed the previous city administration for selling municipal land that allowed the investor to enter the area.

Members of the former city leadership and opposition politicians respond that the HDZ now controls power at the city, county and national levels and therefore has, in their words, “all the levers” needed to stop the project if it wishes. They accuse government politicians of sending mixed messages – expressing support for local residents in public while, according to critics, official documents still largely favour the investment.

The controversy has moved beyond local borders and is now debated in the Croatian Parliament (Sabor). The plan has also been criticised by the Diocese of Sisak, which rarely intervenes so directly in economic projects. Various opposition figures describe the megafarms as a potential “precedent” that could encourage similar large‑scale industrial plants in other parts of Croatia.

For language learners and readers unfamiliar with Croatia, this debate illustrates broader national tensions between economic development, environmental protection, animal welfare and local participation in decision‑making. On one side stand investors and some officials who see an opportunity to strengthen domestic food production and bring jobs to a struggling region. On the other side are residents, activists and several local and church authorities who fear long‑term damage to land, water, air quality and quality of life.

For now, the megafarm and slaughterhouse remain at the stage of permits, environmental assessments and political discussion. After the large protest in Zagreb and continuing pressure from both supporters and opponents, the Croatian government will be under close observation at home and abroad as it decides how – or whether – this controversial poultry project should proceed.

Info: ‘Croatian Learner News’ is a service from ‘Let’s Learn Croatian’, a language school for Croatian that offers various types of online courses and an in-person summer school in Croatia.