Logo Stop Europa Valley

Fact-check

Promises vs. Reality

Europa Vallée's promoters put forward attractive arguments. We examined them one by one, with sources. Here is what they say — and what we know.

0
Job figures announced
for Europa Vallée
€0
Investment amount
never disclosed for the project
€260k
Public money spent
on a study kept secret
0
Business group support
no CCI, MEDEF, or UIMM backing
1. €156 million in economic benef… 2. Thousands of jobs for the regi… 3. A 'green and quiet' project, i… 4. A 100% private investment, no … 5. A symbol of Franco-German frie… 6. Support from the President of … 7. A demonstrated local presence 8. The region lacks hotels 9. A long-term family vision, not… 10. A cross-border connection as a…
1 Strong argument

« €156 million in economic benefits for Alsace »

Claimed by: Europa-Park / University of St. Gallen study (April 2025)

What they say

« Europa-Park Resort is not only a leisure destination but also a leading economic player. »

— Roland Mack

Source

What we know

These €156M relate to the existing park in Rust (Germany), not Europa Vallée. No investment figure, revenue or economic benefit has ever been disclosed for the Alsatian project itself. Moreover, the study was commissioned and funded by Europa-Park — it is not independent.

France Bleu — €156M in benefits Rue89 — Europa Vallée report

Verdict: Real figure but irrelevant: it concerns Rust, not Europa Vallée

2 Weak argument

« Thousands of jobs for the region »

Claimed by: Supportive elected officials, ADIRA

What they say

« An extraordinary opportunity for the territory. 100% support. »

— Jean-Marc Willer, president CC Ried de Marckolsheim

Source

What we know

No job figure has ever been announced for Europa Vallée. Experience at Europa-Park in Rust shows a high proportion of seasonal and low-paid jobs. The EY/Arcadis/Ceresco study (€260,000 of public money) concludes that the territory is 'suited to other projects than Europa Vallée'.

Rue89 — Europa Vallée report Le Chaudron — ADIRA study

Verdict: No specific figure. The €260k public study concludes against the project

3 Weak argument

« A 'green and quiet' project, integrated into nature »

Claimed by: Michael Mack

What they say

« A green, beautiful, quiet space, with perhaps outdoor sports, family attractions, integrated into nature. »

— Michael Mack

Source

What we know

The project would seal 60 to 250 hectares of agricultural and natural land directly adjoining Natura 2000, Ramsar and ZNIEFF zones. The Eurasian Curlew — on the brink of extinction in Alsace (4 pairs in 2024) — is documented as a determinant species in the ZNIEFF adjacent to Diebolsheim. No hotel resort of this scale can be described as 'integrated into nature'.

Rue89 — 150 hectares targeted INPN — Natura 2000 zone FR4201797 INPN — ZNIEFF Ried de Trulygraben (Eurasian Curlew) Ramsar factsheet no. 1810

Verdict: Incompatible with 60–250 ha of land sealing in a protected zone

4 Medium argument

« A 100% private investment, no subsidies »

Claimed by: Mack family

What they say

« We have invested over 900 million euros without any public or private subsidy. »

— Michael Mack

Source

What we know

The feasibility study (€260,000) was entirely funded by public money. The necessary transport infrastructure (Rhine bridge or tunnel) would cost hundreds of millions in public investment. The project is already expensive for taxpayers before it even exists.

Le Chaudron — Study funding France Bleu — Rhine crossing

Verdict: €260k of public money already spent. Transport infrastructure unfunded

5 Weak argument

« A symbol of Franco-German friendship »

Claimed by: Michael Mack, Emmanuel Macron, Frédéric Bierry

What they say

« We don't just share the Rhine, but also a wonderful friendship. »

— Michael Mack

Source

What we know

Franco-German friendship does not need 60 hectares of concrete in a protected wetland. On the German side, the citizens' group Jetzt Langt's also opposes the project. Cross-border cooperation already exists — the Interreg programme Rhinaissance 2.0 is investing in the renaturalization of this very area.

France Bleu — Jetzt Langt's Rhinaissance 2.0 — Interreg

Verdict: Symbolic argument. German citizens also oppose it

6 Medium argument

« Support from the President of the Republic »

Claimed by: Emmanuel Macron

What they say

« Excellent idea. »

— Emmanuel Macron (Nov. 2018, in Strasbourg)

Source

What we know

Presidential support and the Légion d'honneur (January 2025) show connections at the highest level of government, but do not override the law. In Roybon, the project was backed by the prefect, the department and the region — it was still abandoned after 13 years of legal battle.

France 3 — Mack Légion d'honneur

Verdict: Does not override the law

7 Medium argument

« A demonstrated local presence »

Claimed by: Mack family

What they say

« We always keep the Europa Vallée concept in Alsace as a fascinating project. »

— Roland Mack

Source

What we know

Investments in Alsace (Plobsheim, Ollwiller, Amitié restaurant) also serve to build a local influence network. The creation of a property company (SCI) in Diebolsheim (July 2024) — one month after announcing the project was 'on hold' — suggests land acquisition is underway on the very project site, contradicting the official narrative.

SCI Maison Jean de Beaumont — Pappers JDS — Ollwiller and Amitié restaurant

Verdict: SCI created in Diebolsheim 1 month after announcing project was 'on hold'

8 Weak argument

« The region lacks hotels »

Claimed by: Local elected officials (diffuse argument)

What they say

Source

What we know

This argument is not supported by any public study. On the contrary, the EY/Arcadis/Ceresco report (2023) — which ADIRA refuses to release — concludes that the territory is 'suited to other projects'. If hotel capacity were needed, proportionate solutions (town-centre hotels, guest houses, agritourism) would be possible without sealing 60 hectares of protected land.

Rue89 — EY/Arcadis/Ceresco report

Verdict: Undocumented. The public study concludes the opposite

9 Weak argument

« A long-term family vision, not a speculative investor »

Claimed by: Michael Mack

What they say

« We think in generations, not in quarters. »

— Michael Mack

Source

What we know

A long-term family vision does not change the project's environmental impact. Destroyed wetlands do not regenerate, regardless of the investor's philosophy. The Eurasian Curlew — whose last nesting sites are in the Ried, next to the project zone — cannot afford to wait: 4 pairs in 2024, likely zero in 2025 according to LPO Alsace.

JNE — Eurasian Curlew on the brink INPN — ZNIEFF Ried de Trulygraben

Verdict: Does not change the destruction of an irreplaceable ecosystem

10 Weak argument

« A cross-border connection as a European project »

Claimed by: Mack family, elected officials

What they say

Source

What we know

The cable car was abandoned (it would overfly the Taubergiessen nature reserve). The bridge and tunnel exist only as ideas — no study, no funding, no timeline. No road bridge exists over 50 km between Strasbourg and Marckolsheim. And the Interreg programme Rhinaissance 2.0 is investing in the renaturalization of this very area (1,650 ha), making any heavy infrastructure contradictory with European commitments.

France Bleu — Rhine crossing Rhinaissance 2.0 — Interreg

Verdict: No concrete solution. Cable car abandoned, bridge and tunnel non-existent

The Major Weakness

No concrete figures for Europa Vallée

?
Investment amount
Never disclosed
?
Number of jobs
Never disclosed
?
Final area
Between 60 and 250 ha depending on sources

Despite Michael Mack's claim that the project is "nearly ready", no precise figure has ever been made public: not the investment amount, not the number of jobs, not the final area, not the timeline. All figures brandished by supporters (€156M, 2,100 jobs, 550 SMEs) relate to the existing park in Rust — not Europa Vallée.

Furthermore, no business organization (CCI, MEDEF, UIMM) has publicly come out in favour of the project. Support is exclusively political.

Summary

Promise Strength Verdict
€156 million in economic benefits for Alsace Strong argument Real figure but irrelevant: it concerns Rust, not Europa Vallée
Thousands of jobs for the region Weak argument No specific figure. The €260k public study concludes against the project
A 'green and quiet' project, integrated into nature Weak argument Incompatible with 60–250 ha of land sealing in a protected zone
A 100% private investment, no subsidies Medium argument €260k of public money already spent. Transport infrastructure unfunded
A symbol of Franco-German friendship Weak argument Symbolic argument. German citizens also oppose it
Support from the President of the Republic Medium argument Does not override the law
A demonstrated local presence Medium argument SCI created in Diebolsheim 1 month after announcing project was 'on hold'
The region lacks hotels Weak argument Undocumented. The public study concludes the opposite
A long-term family vision, not a speculative investor Weak argument Does not change the destruction of an irreplaceable ecosystem
A cross-border connection as a European project Weak argument No concrete solution. Cable car abandoned, bridge and tunnel non-existent

Stakeholders & Conflicts of Interest

Who is pushing the project?

The Roybon Precedent

Same fight, same outcome?

The Alsatian Ried

A threatened ecosystem

Our Method

Each argument is presented with its original source and confronted with documented facts. We quote the promoters' exact words. Any person quoted may exercise their right of reply.

View all sources · Legal notice

Partager :

Stay informed

Get updates on the Europa Valley case. No spam — only important news.

Double opt-in — you will receive a confirmation email. Unsubscribe anytime.