Will Lessons be Learned about National Parks and Wind Turbines? OP-ED SaveOurSeaShore
March 31, 2010
Dear Mr. Price, and Members of the CCNS Advisory Commission,
Although there were many reasons to believe that the Wellfleet Wind Turbine Project was a terribly ill-conceived idea, it is gratifying to know that, at the end of the day, the Town of Wellfleet – the developer of the project – just couldn’t bring itself to sacrifice the incomparable natural beauty of the landscape or the pristine upland pine woods in the heart of the National Seashore. The voters of Wellfleet, and the Board of Selectmen by unanimous vote, ultimately rejected a project from which they stood to profit in order “to preserve the character of the Seashore.” We applaud their decision.
We hope that the management of the National Seashore will take heart from Wellfleet’s example and reassess the paramount importance of its primary mission – to preserve the park in its natural, unimpaired condition for all future generations – relative to the other competing interests to which Superintendent Price has repeatedly and steadfastly insisted that it must be “sensitive,” including the interests of the abutting towns and the perceived interests of other organs of the federal government.
All national parks have a very clear mandate from Congress that intentionally includes categorical prohibitions against any encroachment on their core conservation mission: “no commercial or industrial use is permitted within the park.” This mandate is fortified by hundreds of pages of detailed Director’s Orders and almost one hundred years of tradition.
In addition, with respect to land based industrial wind turbines, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, responding to an Order from the Secretary of the Interior and in cooperation with a Federal Advisory Committee specially appointed for that purpose, has spent over two years developing detailed policy prescriptions for “responsible development” of land-based industrial wind energy resources. I think that you will agree, when you read these Guidelines, that the fundamental concept underlying the final recommendations of the Federal Advisory Committee is the urgency of avoiding inappropriate sites for wind energy development – such as fragile habitats, conservation areas and, by extension, national parks.
It is our hope that the Superintendent will appreciate that he now has the full backing of Congress; the Department of the Interior; the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; the Federal Advisory Committee – whose members are drawn from the ranks of both prominent wind energy developers as well as every leading conservation group in the country; the Board of Selectmen and the voters of Wellfleet; and, doubtless, the majority of both the local residents and the citizens of the United States; to safeguard the integrity of the National Seashore and to reject any form of intrusion which compromises the core conservation mission of the park.
In other words, the only sense of “balance” that must be applied to the consideration of any projects – including wind turbines -- which are incompatible with the fulfillment of the park’s mission, and which threaten the fundamental integrity of the park, is to reject them out of hand. You have Congress, the law, one hundred years of tradition, the entire apparatus of the Department of the Interior and popular sentiment on your side. What authority do you lack?
We urge the Superintendent and the Advisory Commission to use these tools, without apology, for the benefit and preservation of the National Seashore and on behalf of all of the park users who place their faith in you, and who rely upon you to do your duty.
Sincerely,
Eric Bibler
President
Save Our Seashore
WE STOPPED THE WIND TURBINES IN WELLFLEET, MA
WE STOPPED THE WIND TURBINE!!!! March 30, 2010
The Wellfleet Board of Selectmen wisely voted 5-0 to spend no more money to develop a wind farm.
Thanks to everyone that helped out!
Once you take the time to understand the issues, no other honest judgement could be made!
RECORD ACTIVITY FOR SAVEOURSEASHORE.ORG
Yesterday March 22, 2010 broke the record for the most active day for our website SAVEOURSEASHORE.ORG We recorded 192 hits which considering the modest Wellfleet population, IS HUGE! The previous most active day was set five months ago just after our startup. I want to thank the many people getting involved in saving Cape Cod National Seashore. Let's keep getting the word out to protect our National Parks.
If the town is successful in developing this commercial industrial wind farm in our National Park; will the National Park Service see this as a opportunity to develop all the NATIONAL PARKS? No one debates whether this land is in the park boundaries. There is no doubt this is industrial equipment and the commercial purpose is to make money. Once Pandora's box is open then will any park be protected? Mr Price the CCNS Superintendent currently believes this is part of a National mission. Let's not give them that green light!
Tension still churns over proposed Wellfleet wind turbine
By Marilyn Miller Provincetown Banner Posted Mar 04, 2010 @ 12:17 PM
Voters won’t be asked to approve the proposed 400-foot wind turbine at the upcoming Annual Town Meeting. But the turbine issue is far from dead.
That was evident Tuesday when more than 125 people filled the senior center, many forced to stand along the walls as four speakers talked about the proposed Wellfleet turbine, in particular, and the turbines operated by the towns of Brewster, Harwich and Falmouth.
Geof Karlson, chair of the Wellfleet Energy Committee, tried to touch on a number of concerns, including financial and regulatory issues, and the potential of sound and the blades’ shadow flicker to affect people living near the turbine. He also touched on the objections of some to siting an industrial turbine on town-owned land within the Cape Cod National Seashore.
Town counsel Betsy Lane, he reported, opined that a turbine on town-owned land within the Seashore is an allowed municipal use.
“If the Seashore superintendent chose to challenge the issuance of a permit, such a challenge would be subject to dismissal by the court for lack of standing,” Karlson quoted from Lane’s opinion.
The Seashore itself, Karlson said, is considering putting up a turbine on its land in Truro.
Seashore Supt. George Price attended the meeting, held by the Wellfleet Community Forum, but did not speak.
Dennis O’Connell, an opponent of the turbine, said he and Jim Rogers, another critic of the project, visited the turbines at Vinalhaven, Maine, and Newburyport. “What I saw furthered my resolve that there are going to be negative impacts from this project,” O’Connell said. He challenged the selectmen to visit Vinalhaven “and then go to your proposed site in the heart of the Cape Cod National Seashore and see if that is what you want to do to this property.”
He spoke with people in Vinalhaven and Newburyport, he said. “Many were very supportive of the project when it was proposed, but now they are against it. These people have suffered,” he said. “They’ve seen a decline in the quality of life and they’ve been marginalized.”
Sound and flicker were issues with the turbines in both towns, he said.
Wellfleet is talking about a turbine that is 400 feet tall, he said, noting that is 3.2 times the size of the town’s water tower. “To me the water tower is benign, it doesn’t move, it doesn’t catch the eye,” he said. It casts a shadow a little bit, but it doesn’t do anything like a wind turbine does. It does not rip apart an unfragmented area.”
One of his major issues with the turbine, O’Connell said, is that it is a “heavily subsidized” industry. “When you start playing around with Mother Nature and Father Economics, then you are creating things that just don’t make sense. You are going to end up in trouble,” he said. “The subsidies involved in this project are huge. … This synthetic pricing has a habit of going away when people realize what is going on. You can see this as subsidies are disappearing in Hawaii, in Europe and California. And as all these are drying up, they are being left and they are a blight on the countryside.”
WOMR Outer Cape Debate Wind Turbine in Cape Cod National Seashore
This is the audio from the Outer Cape Debate on WOMR on Feb 17, 2010 by Ira Wood between Geof Karlson and are own Save Our Seashore Jim Roger
http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/womr/local-womr-885821.mp3
That tone is the democratic process
Geof Karlson's Jan. 20 My View ("Ugly tone besets Wellfleet project) appears to conflate criticism of the Wellfleet Energy Commision, of which he is the new chairman, with an attack on the will of Wellfleet voters and the democratic process.
In a more libelous version of his op-ed that appeared in The Provincetown Banner and The Cape Codder, Mr. Karlson "beseeched the leadership of SOS to direct their sympathizers to refrain from lawlessness," a reference to the recent unfortunate survey stake pulling at the proposed wind turbine site.
Members of Save our Seashore, among other concerned individuals, have raised many valid questions about the proposed wind turbine in Wellfleet. No commission or board in Wellfleet, or any town, is beyond public scrutiny, even if that public consists partly of nonresident taxpayers. Approximately 60 percent of the taxpayers in Wellfleet are nonresidents, who by definition do not vote in that town. Are the legitimate concerns of abutters to the proposed installation, resident and nonresident taxpayers alike, to be dismissed with accusations of maligning the will of the town and the democratic process?
Among Save our Seashore's concerns are: radical change to the landscape; financial viability of the project; noise; safety; the effect on property values for nearby residents; adverse impacts on wildlife and unfragmented habitat; and implications for all users of the National Seashore. The Wellfleet Energy Commission, Wellfleet Board of Selectmen and other town officials must more fully investigate these concerns with the understanding that the town of Wellfleet has a responsibility to all the aforementioned constituencies. The questions of Save our Seashore and others warrant detailed answers before Wellfleet proceeds with this project and spends any taxpayer (resident and nonresident) money on permitting and other related expenses.
Mass Audubon recently abandoned its plan to install a 200-foot wind turbine at the Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary (the same town!) — half the size of the wind turbine proposed by Wellfleet — because of grave concerns about noise (for neighbors, employees and members), risks to resident wildlife and migratory birds, and potential disruption to valuable habitat. Does Mass Audubon's extensive review and decision to reject a project half the size of the town's reflect the machinations of an irresponsible minority, or a principled decision based upon a thorough and unbiased review?
Mr. Karlson correctly applauds the citizenry of Wellfleet for their profound concern for the environment and, in particular, for maintaining the beauty of their town. Residents and nonresidents of Wellfleet, as thoughtful and caring citizens, are committed to contributing in helpful ways to solutions to the complex problems of global warming and energy independence.
One might argue, however, (as do members of Save our Seashore) over the appropriateness of siting a 400-foot industrial wind turbine on town land within the Seashore. What's the upside? Wellfleet gets a symbol of the new, green economy and a break on its utility bills, an expense the electric company will pass on to other towns. And the downside? One of the most beautiful panoramas in the Cape Cod National Seashore is gone forever and one of the three largest Capewide unfragmented forests with attendant wildlife is severely disturbed.
As Wellfleet voters become better informed on the positive and negative ramifications of the turbine project, resident and nonresident members of Save our Seashore are hopeful that resident voters will defeat the proposed turbine project at a future town meeting.
The democratic process at so many levels is a messy and difficult one. Feelings are bruised on both sides when the hard work of a committee is held up to scrutiny and criticized and, on the other side, when something very beautiful that has been in the hearts of people for so long is threatened. Geof Karlson seems to feel that hard-hitting criticism of the Wellfleet Energy Commission equals disloyalty to the town of Wellfleet and the democratic process. I would suggest that dissent and criticism is, in large measure, the democratic process.
James F. Rogers of Save our Seashore lives in Sandwich and is also a nonresident Wellfleet taxpayer.
http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100209/OPINION/2090338/-1/NEWSMAP
Letter Concerning Wellfleet building a Wind Turbine in a National Park
To Whom it May Concern:Please forward to Wellfleet BOS, Energy Committee and Planning
I am writing about Wellfleet's plan to build a 400 foot wind turbine
On-Shore in Cape Cod National Seashore, one of only 10 National Seashores in
the country. I was reviewing various wind turbine siting guidelines.
Wyoming's seem so sensible and you would guess Massachusetts would have a
similar one. I am forwarding you a link to Wyoming's. Their slogan "Doing it
Smart from the Start". That is so important to avoid a BIG backlash against
Wind Power . That backlash for me has already begun; in that I was
ambivalent to wind power and thought National Parks were safe from Wind
Turbine. How wrong I was and how blind people in the pursuit money can be!Here is a challenge to the people allowing this wind turbine in a National
Park Is Wyoming a more informed and caring State than Massachusetts? You
would think that MTC the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative with their
$250,000,000 budget and a state with it's a renowned progressive liberal
very "green" establishment, would put a bunch of cowboys in a conservative
state such as Wyoming to shame. But alas Massachusetts, the Town of
Wellfleet and CCNS "show me the money guide to Wind Turbines Siting" and a
complete disregard for a NATIONAL PARK is SHAMEFUL!Please read the State of Wyoming Wind Turbine Guidelines. A beautiful
example of owning up to responsibilities of conservation! What exactly would
the town of Wellfleet, CCNS and state protect?http://www.voiceforthewild.org/WindPowerReport.pdf
The Superintendent of Cape Cod National Seashore says it is town land and he
is fine with a big industrial wind turbine. Again we have to look at a
responsible group in Wyoming who clearly state:Exclude from wind power siting consideration: National Parks, Monuments,
and Wildlife Refuges; USFS Roadless..and even "citizens proposed wilderness"Or
National Parks and Monuments
Units of the National Park system (including National Parks and National
Monuments) are managed under a strong legal mandate which
directs the federal government to "protect and preserve" these
lands and their natural resources "for the use and enjoyment of
the public." National Park units are precluded from industrial
development (although commercial development for tourism is
permitted. Wind energy development would not be allowed by
law in these units regardless of their wind energy potential, and
key viewsheds visible from park overlooks should be protected
from visible wind energy development as well.
Even the town of Wellfleet's own Audubon Society claims no position on the
turbine, no matter what birds fly or live where the turbine will be built.
Ideology over conservation is not a position of pride. Shame on
them...Wyoming's guide states:Many types of wildlife are expected to be sensitive to wind power
development. The propensity for wind turbines to kill birds (particularly
raptors) and bats through collisions with spinning blades is well known, and
thus turbines sited in areas where bird and bat activity is not concentrated
are preferable.Obviously Wyoming has lots more land, though a lot is federal and national
park and Massachusetts has lots more money. Responsibility is not relative!
Anyone who proposes or accepts a commercial industrial wind turbine in a
NATIONAL PARK is at fault EVERY STEP OF THE WAY! I am not waiting till the
studies roll in! A National Park is ZERO Tolerance for Industrial Wind
Turbines and I call on everyone involved to stop the Wellfleet Wind Turbine
in Cape Cod National Seashore TODAY!Shame on all involved!SincerelyBarry Doyle
barry@saveourshore.org
Letter in Response to Geof Karlson Recent Viewpoint
Geof Karlson's recent Viewpoint (1/14/10) appears to conflate criticism of the Wellfleet Energy Commision, of which he is the new chairman, with an attack on the will of Wellfleet voters and the democratic process. Mr. Karlson with slanderous innuendo "beseeches the leadership of SOS to direct their sympathizers to refrain from lawlessness", a refernce to the recent unfortunate survey stake pulling at the proposed windturbine site.
Members of Save our Seashore, among other concerned individuals, have raised many valid questions about the proposed wind turbine in Wellfleet. No commission or board in Wellfleet, or any town, is beyond public scrutiny, even if that public consists partly of non-resident taxpayers. Approximately sixty percent of the taxpayers in Wellfleet are non-residents, who by definition do not vote in that town. Are the legitimate concerns of abutters to the proposed installation, resident and non-resident tax payers alike, to be dismissed with accusations of maligning the will of the town and the democratic process?
Among SaveourSeashore's concerns are: radical change to the landscape, financial viability of the project, noise, safety, the effect on property values for nearby residents, adverse impacts on wildlife and unfragmented habitat, and implications for all users of the National Park. The WEC, Wellfleet Board of Selectmen and other town officials must more fully investigate these concerns with the understanding that the Town of Wellfleet has a responsibility to ALL of the aforementioned constituencies. The questions of SaveourSeashore and others warrant detailed answers before the Town of Wellfleet proceeds with this project and spends any taxpayer (resident and non-resident) money on permitting and other related expenses.
Mass Audubon recently abandoned their plan to install a 200 foot wind turbine at the Wellfleet Bay Wildlife Sanctuary (the same town!) - half the size of the wind turbine proposed by Wellfleet -- due to grave concerns about noise (for neighbors, employees and members), risks to resident wildlife and migratory birds, and potential disruption to valuable habitat. Does Mass Audubon's extensive review and decision to reject a project half the size of the Town of Wellfleet's, reflect the machinations of an irressposible minority or a principled decision based upon a thorough and unbiased review?
Mr. Karlson correctly applauds the citizenry of Wellfleet for their profound concern for the environment and in particular for maintaining the beauty of their town. Residents and non-residents of Wellfleet, as thoughtful and caring citizens, are committed to contributing in helpful ways to solutions to the complex problems of global warming and energy independence. One might argue, however, (as do members of SaveourSeashore) over the appropriateness of siting a four hundred foot industrial wind turbine on town land within the Seashore. What's the upside? Wellfleet gets a symbol of the new, green economy and a break on its' utility bills, an expense to the electric company which they will pass on to other towns. And the downside? One of the most beautiful panoramas in the Cape Cod National Seashore is gone forever and one of the three largest Cape wide unfragmented forests with attendant wild life is severely disturbed. As Wellfleet voters become better informed on the positive and negative ramifications of the turbine project, resident and non-resident members of SaveourSeashore are hopeful that resident voters will defeat the proposed turbine project at a future town meeting.
The democratic process at so many levels is a messy and difficult one. Feelings are bruised on both sides, when the hard work of a committee is held up to scrutiny and criticized; and on the other side, when something very beautiful that has been in the hearts of people for so long is threatened. Geof Karlson seems to feel that hard hitting criticism of the Wellfleet Energy Commission equals disloyalty to the town of Wellfleet and the democratic process. I would suggest that dissent and criticism IS, in large measure, the democratic process.
Jim Rogers
New Forum Option
We have added a Forum area for anyone who wants to talk about the issues surrounding turbines in National Parks and their impact!http://saveourseashore.org/?page_id=611
One Thousand Hits
We have passed one thousand views! Admittedly we are small, but we are getting close to 100 views a day and no they don't count me. People are finding the facts!
We also have a Twitter that will draw people in. There are many vacationers and residents who have yet to learn that their favorite place is in risk of a BIG change.
Lobby your campaigning US Senator in MA
Now is the time to get politicans to say the right things. Sen. Scott Brown and Martha Coakley will go head-to-head in the Jan. 19 election for US Senate. It would be perfect if they debated the industrialization of our US Parks with large wind turbines. If anyone has a way to get this question to them, please do it! I will try to contact them, but I encourage everyone to get them talking about how to save the Cape Cod National Seashore in Wellfleet, MA!
SaveOurSeaShore is Tweeting on Twitter
SaveOurSeaShore is now twittering. We are just out of the egg so don't expect hundreds of tweets, but we will keep getting the word out!