Watching politics is akin to watching sausage-making — i.e., not for the squeamish or weak kneed. Opponents of industrial wind development on Vermont’s ridgelines are hoping the view from high atop Lowell Mountain will have a similar effect on anyone who is still undecided on this contentious issue.
For sure, that’s been the effect on Steve Wright. The former Vermont Fish and Wildlife commissioner under Gov. Madeleine Kunin has become a vocal opponent of Green Mountain Power’s Kingdom Community Wind Project, a 21-turbine industrial wind farm now under construction not far from his Albany, Vt., home.
“I’ve seen enough pictures of the site to make me nauseated,” says Wright, 69, who can no longer make the strenuous hike up Lowell Mountain due to chronic back problems. “Frankly, I can’t even look at the pictures anymore.”
But this weekend, the “Lowell Mountain Occupiers,” a group that includes anti-industrial-wind protesters encamped near GMP’s construction site as well as other grassroots opponents, are inviting others to make the 45-minute climb and then decide for themselves. On Sunday, December 4, the group is holding its second “Mountaintop Open House” adjacent to GMP’s construction zone. The first open house, held November 13, attracted more than 90 people. According to organizers of that event, a show of hands from the group indicated that they unanimously supported holding a second open house.
Although this weekend’s event is being billed as a “nonjudgmental, nonconfrontational” event — no civil disobedience or overt anti-wind advocacy is scheduled — no one really expects GMP president and CEO Mary Powell to greet hikers at the top with muffins and Gatorade, then plead her case for the benefits of industrial wind.
Nevertheless, open-house organizer Anne Morse says the event is intended for individuals with a wide range of interests and questions: those who support wind power generally but are conflicted about ridgeline development; folks who are concerned about the loss of wildlife habitat, water-quality issues and/or the aesthetics of large-scale wind; those in favor of wind development who wonder why people oppose it; and anyone simply curious about what the project looks like up close.
“Projects like the one on the Lowell Mountains have been proposed for over 200 miles of Vermont’s ridgeline, so it’s very important that the residents of the state have a chance to see what the changes to the ridge look like, and to gather information from sources besides the developers,” Morse writes in a press statement. “These projects affect everyone.”
Don and Shirley Nelson, the Lowell landowners who have been engaged in a very public legal battle with GMP about the Lowell project, are in no way involved in the open house, except that their property is unposted, which by Vermont law allows visitors to be there without fear of trespass. No blasting is scheduled for this weekend, so organizers insist there’s no danger that visitors will violate the temporary restraining order imposed on the Nelsons and visitors to their land. As Wright puts it, “We’re not interested in challenging anything but realities.”
Anyone interested in attending should meet in the parking lot of the Albany Community School (on Route 14, north of the Albany village center) at 11:30 a.m. and carpool to the base of the mountains. Following a short informational overview of the project, groups will hike (at their own pace) to the top.
At the camp, ther group will hold a brief orientation of the site and make time for questions and answers, warming by the campfire. The hike up the mountain takes 30 minutes to an hour. Organizers urge interested attendees to bring a daypack with water and lunch or snacks, and dress for the weather by wearing several layers and a warm hat, as well as hiking shoes or rubber boots, as the trail is muddy and steep. If there’s snow, gaiters or appropriate boots are recommended. Attendees may also want to bring a walking stick or snowshoe poles. The event will take place rain or shine.
Does Wright expect people to see the environmental impact firsthand and become as “nauseated” as he is?
“Well, that would be an accomplishment,” he says with a laugh. “But it’s broader than that. Many people are unfamiliar with the level of [destruction]. So, our purpose is to show people that effect, and let them make up their own minds.”
For more information, contact Anne Morse at amorse@sterlingcollege.edu or 281-4432.
File photo: Ken Picard
This article appears in Nov 30 – Dec 6, 2011.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Oh, I see, but that accusation by Smith that all three members of the PSB simply shirked their legal duties and their professional and ethical obligations and “ignored public input” is a perfectly okay thing to say?Get a grip.Shame on these disgraceful accusations by the losers in this process.
Hey Caleb, you need a fact checker angry guy “That’s an outright lie, and it’s based on the fact that you didn’t get your way.” How would you know the facts of someone’s personal opinion?The three member board is made up of at least one appointee who was originally appointed by Gov Dean, not Douglas. He was re-appointed by Douglas. And the point is not that they don’t work hard or work in Vermont. Anyone can comment? That is an over simplification, I know from direct experience, that simply is not true. You need a smaller brush to paint with Caleb. There is some middle grounds here. Sure, there are extremists on both sides (like yourself), but there are many who have yet to make up there mind, but are deeply discouraged by a process that doesn’t pass the smell test.
“The PSB has ignored their input.”That’s an outright lie, and it’s based on the fact that you didn’t get your way. Shame on you for this sucrrilous accusation.Shall we ask the three PSB members if they believe that they “ignored the public input”?
The public, including towns, have spent more than $1 million now participating in the PSB process on 5 wind projects. The PSB has ignored their input. There is nothing responsive to the public about the PSB where wind development is concerned. When asked, they tell people that “our hands are tied”, your beef is with the legislature who set policies that mean we have no choice but to approve them. Three people are deciding the future of our state based on input from developers who will make more than 10% in profits. These projects are extraordinarily profitable for the corporations, at the expense of our communities. Do you really support that kind of energy paradigm?
It’s not like the PSB is some remote, unresponsive, faceless, unhuman bureaucracy in Washington, DC. It is 3 Vermont people trying to do their best. They are based just down the street in Montpelier. Anyone who wants can submit their comments to the PSB. The PSB members are our friends and neighbors.And, by the way: all three of the current members were appointed by the notoriously anti-wind Governor Douglas. I support the decision to put energy-siting decisions in the hands of the PSB, and not in local zoning boards, etc., where every yahoo with a backyard gets to veto these decisions based on pure NIMBYism. Energy plants are not the same as housing developments. We cannot function as a society if every single citizen is suddenly an “energy expert” and gets to veto a project ecause he or she lives down the street. Democracy doesn’t mean that Joe Sixpack can kill a needed energy facility because he wants it “somewhere else.” EVERYBODY wants it somewhere else, and somewhere else ultimately equals NOWHERE.
Caleb, I agree with a few of your points i.e. trade-offs, solar panel toxins etc. Clearly we are making massive trade-offs every day via all of our consumption. And yes, in some way society is making a balancing decision. However, one of the benefits to creating our own power in our own backyard, is the ability to do it our way, as in the VT way. The wind lobby aka D. Blittersdorf and co has quietly created a system through the legislature to give all of the “power” to the PSB when making these decisions, with very little to no binding input from Vermonter’s. IMO, this is not the VT way. This is the GW Bush way. aka make critical decisions about the future of our state with as little input as possible, taking advantage of the topic and fear of the day, just like in the immediate post 9/11 days, you we’re “un-american” if you we’re against the “Patriot act” or invading Iraq. Today it’s, “how can you possibly be against “renewables” you must be anti-environment, clueless, a whiner etc…”. The reality is, the vast majority of citizens who say they are all for renewables, are really for the idea of renewables, not the reality of them. This Lowell project is experimental at best. If we are going to experiment, which i think we should, let’s do it where at least partial infrastructure already exists and where there is a viable wind resource. Lowell and Sheffield are not those places.