[ 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

Judge reaffirms restraining order in Lowell Mountain case  

Credit:  John Dillon, VPR News, www.vpr.net 21 October 2011 ~~

(Host) Protesters challenging construction of a wind project in the Northeast Kingdom town of Lowell must stay 1,000 feet away from a blasting zone or risk being found in contempt of court.

That’s according to a restraining order that was re-affirmed yesterday by Orleans Superior Court Judge Martin Maley.

Maley told Green Mountain Power that it can contact sheriffs if it needs to have his order enforced and the protesters removed.

(Maley) “They’re clearly doing that in contravention of the order. And whether or not there has to be the sheriff sent out there to have them physically removed while this order is still in place, that’s what is going to have to be done.”

(Host) Maley’s order is aimed at the dozen or so people who are occupying private property near where GMP is using explosives to remove rock and ledge for a road along the ridgeline.

The judge says the people have to move away from the blasting zone one hour before and one hour after blasting is to occur.

(Maley) “It is indeed a court order and it sounds to the court that it’s being violated. I’m not saying the defendant’s violating it. But these third parties are there and are making a mockery, making a mockery of the order. And the court’s not going to stand for that, at least not while the matter is pending.”

(Host) The judge made his decision at the end of a three-hour hearing in Newport.

GMP sued retired farmers Don and Shirley Nelson, whose land adjoins the site of the wind project. The Nelsons’ land has been used for demonstrations against the project.

Lawyers for the two sides argued over a disputed property line and who was responsible for the project slipping behind schedule.

The judge continued the hearing, but he said his order will remain in effect for 10 days.

Source:  John Dillon, VPR News, www.vpr.net 21 October 2011

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.