The June 26 BDN OpEd, “The freedom to use our land for wind turbines,” begs a few comments.
First, no one would deny the use of one’s property for an activity that would not impinge on the rights, values or uses of their neighbor’s property. However, wind developments always infringe on others’ property rights because of the size of the turbines (can be seen for miles), the creation of ultra-low and low-frequency noise that affects both humans and wildlife, and the loss of value of surrounding properties. The proposed Pisgah Mountain wind development in Clifton will be no different.
So, in effect, a wind development takes rights away from property owners by making their property unenjoyable or unusable for many purposes – sort of like the concept of eminent domain, except there is no just compensation for the affected landowners.
Even George W. Bush disagreed with the concept of eminent domain when his attorney general wrote an executive order on Sept. 16, 2008, ( Executive Order 13406) that the federal government must limit its taking of private property for the “purpose of benefiting the general public” and that eminent domain may not be used to “advance the interests” of private parties.
Fuller’s comment, “we as a society have to make decisions for the good of the ‘whole’ that sometimes inconveniences the ‘few’ probably would not have been made if Fuller were one of the “few.”
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding