[ 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

White Pines hearing underway in Wellington  

Credit:  Henri Garand/ Special to The Intelligencer | Tuesday, November 3, 2015 | www.countyweeklynews.ca ~~

PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY – [If] day one is any indication, the White Pines appeal will be as contentious as Ostrander Point’s.

Even before opening statements, the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT), consisting of co-chairs Marcia Valiante and Hugh Wilkins, heard motions that may require an adjournment of the proceedings.

The tribunal is hearing appeals against wpd White Pines’ 27 industrial wind turbine project approved for Prince Edward County. WPD Canada is also appealing the elimination of two turbines from the project, based on heritage preservation.

Eric Gillespie, counsel for one of the appellants, The Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County, asked the ERT to summon two staff members of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) and to order production of all materials related to White Pines permits approved under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The request derived from similar disclosures and witnesses in the Ostrander Point appeal that have raised doubts about the integrity of the MNRF’s process for assessing risk to endangered species like the Blanding’s turtle.

Gillespie believes testimony is relevant and necessary from Joe Crowley, the MNRF’s expert on reptiles and turtles, and Kathleen Pitt, the MNRF manager who oversaw permitting for White Pines. He argued an appellant has a right to all the related documents on the basic principles of justness and fairness.

Four other lawyers challenged the motion: Sylvia Davis and Andrew Weretelnyck representing the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC), Sunny Zhai for MNRF, and Patrick Duffy for approval holder/wind developer WPD. They questioned the timing of the motion at this stage, the broad scope of the materials and the difficulty of timely production, the focus of the materials on ESA permits rather the Renewal Energy Approval (REA) under appeal and the overall need for such evidence, some of it dealing with Ostrander Point, when APPEC was calling its own expert witnesses.

Duffy went so far as to accuse Gillespie of “bad faith” in using a delaying tactic.

In rebuttal, Gillespie pointed out the ERT had been informed in September about the potential, but the need only became clear and imperative after documents were disclosed at the Ostrander appeal last week. Since much of the White Pines project adjoins Ostrander Point, he said, Blanding’s turtles would also be harmed by White Pines access roads because experts had agreed the turtles range over “the wetland complexes along the whole south shore and as far as six kilometers inland.”

Gillespie questioned how the White Pines ERT could choose not to follow the ruling of the Ostrander Point panel when the situations were so similar.

John Hirsch, the initial appellant of the White Pines REA, supported Gillespie’s motion by asking the ERT to consider why the MNRF, curiously, didn’t require an ESA permit for Blanding’s turtles which
would be harmed by the White Pines project.

The opening day concluded with the ERT panel seeking comments on the scope of a production order and the probable timelines for witness preparation. A ruling on the motions was to be given when the hearing resumed on Wednesday.

Source:  Henri Garand/ Special to The Intelligencer | Tuesday, November 3, 2015 | www.countyweeklynews.ca

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.