[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Windfarm opponents fear their voice would be lost  

Opponents of a proposed wind farm near Pugwash are fearful of what could happen should the Municipality of Cumberland move forward with bylaws setting the minimum distance between turbines and homes.

The county is expected to make a decision on its proposed wind turbine bylaw at its first May session here today. It is proposing setting the distance at three times the turbine height while opponents feel the distance should be two kilometres.

Opponents fear that by passing the land-use bylaw the county will omit the public from any future discussions when it comes to locating wind farms within the county.

“Public consultation is one of the most sacred principles of democracy, particularly at the grassroots level, our municipal councils, and this is what the proposed amendment will take from every resident in the county,” Dartmouth resident and former city councillor Dennis Rodgers said in a letter to the county.

Rogers owns property in the Gulf Shore area where Atlantic Wind Power Corporation hopes to erect 20 to 27 wind turbines. It is proposing a setback of 500 metres, or half a kilometre.

Rodgers fears the county is attempting to take away the rights of the public to open and due process by amending the bylaws to circumvent the current Municipal Planning Strategy. He feels that by changing the bylaw, developers wanting to install a wind farm in the county won’t have to hold public consultations as long as the project meets the criteria set out in the bylaw.

“This would mean that the usual rights of the public for access to the process of a public hearing pertaining to wind farm development will no longer exist,” Rodgers said, adding the current staff recommendation is developer friendly and errs on the side of the developers, not on the side of residents.

By Darrell Cole
The Amherst Daily News


1 May 2007

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.