Lack of information on health could be the way out of wind leases: Gillespie

no to wind leasesSarnia Lambton Independent
An environmental lawyer says there is hope for landowners who want out of wind turbine leases. Eric Gillespie, who currently is working for Plympton Wyoming in its court battle with Suncor Energy over wind turbine bylaws, gets “dozens” of calls from landowners who signed leases long before anyone realized the potential problems associated with the industrial turbines. Gillespie, who was slated to speak at a meeting organized by Conservation Of Rural Enniskillen Saturday, says some of those landowners are successfully getting out of what many people had believed are ironclad leases.

“We’re aware of at least three situations where it appears we have been successful,” says Gillespie. “One of the elements that factually they all have in common is the apparent lack of information provided by the wind company at the time the agreement was signed,” he says. “Quite consistently there appears to be a lack of disclosure around potential health issues.

“Experts around the world have been saying for many years that industrial wind turbines cause certain effects on certain people; that is part of the reason why there is a mandatory setback in just about every country that has a high or a significant number of wind turbines. If you could place people safely in very close proximity, there would be no need for a setback. The problem is that while governments around the world acknowledge the health risks, participants, people who signed up in Ontario, don’t get any setback protection,” says Gillespie. Read article

26 thoughts on “Lack of information on health could be the way out of wind leases: Gillespie

  1. What is worse still….is the innocent children of these host farmers, who have been put at risk through no fault of their own. They are innocent victims of their parents greed and/or ignorance.

  2. I stupidly bought land with a lease already on it years ago. I thought I was being smart
    In taking it to our small town lawyer.

    Turns out he gave advice through really no
    Fault of his own, what turned out to be bad advice for us. You see he told us that seeing
    As we had lots of sensative spots there would be no worries that the company would come to put a turbine on it.

    But not all laywers are ” windwise” and neither were we in the least! We all had no idea that our own province had erased all protections that are stringent to us locals, but NOT to the oversea companies.

    Do u think we ever heard of trans lines, access roads?? It doesnt have to be a turbine on
    Your land, theres just as much other filth that
    Comes as well.

    Bad idea to buy it, bad idea to think a small town lawyer had the answers, lack of knowledge all around.

    And lots of people are in the same boat getting the same advice from other family long time lawyers that simply dont have the experiance to spot this sham.

    I guess thats why this has hit the fan so quickly… we were all preyed on by big wind. We didnt even know we were on the menu!

  3. Did they get out of the option or an actual lease? Were the turbines already installed when they got out of the lease?

  4. And we live in a world where government agencies are willing to investigate/ban/restrict any activity or food which might have injured somebody, somewhere, or has a minor link to a tummy upset in rats. McGuinty silenced everybody for his crime against rural Ontario.

  5. Shellie,
    CAS needs to be notified and the children removed from the harmful environments. We need names and addresses of these victims and this needs to be reported. If you do not feel comfortable doing this, please provide the necessary information so we may get these kids out of harms way. It is my responsibility to report this. The law states this.
    Will make arrangements as to where this information can be reported.
    One of the main reasons I did not rent my house out that it is surrounded by industrial wind turbines is because I was afraid that children would be moved in and exposed to low frequencies. People are brainwashed and ignorant to the truth.

    • Do people know how difficult it is to remove children from their homes? The proof standards are very high as they should be. The courts view the situation as children in undesirable surroundings are often better off than in foster homes. Courts don’t view breaking up families as such a good thing to do.

      • Actually if one believes Ezra Levant and Charles Adler at Sun News — in many cases it only takes an accusation against the parents.

        Here’s one:
        http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/straighttalk/archives/2013/04/20130403-070832.html

        In this case it would be an accusation against the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Energy — so I can’t see that it would be viewed as credible.

        If you frame it any other way then it makes the parents responsible for allowing the wind turbines to be built. The logical inconsistencies of that particular approach would guarantee a failure in any court based on logic.

      • A child may be removed from a home based on accusations but a court still has to decide what is in the best interest for the child.
        Very often more damage can be done to a child by removing the child from its home than leaving the child there.
        If you apply this logic to this situation then children living in non-IWT homes can also be removed because they live too close to IWTs
        This is a UN recommendation which can’t be applied in practice as the courts will have the final say.
        It is unwise to scare adutls and children caught up in this situation by suggesting that families can and will be broken up due to the presence of IWTs.

      • CAS can be notified but the court would most likely act on the recommendations of attending physicians as these are health issues.

  6. Contact anyone you know hosting a turbine….this works….enlighten your old friend neighbour,help them out as a friend….send them this article…..shut them down one at a time….

    • Getting out of options and leases may not be difficult but once the iWTs are installed the only way out is to sell out to the developer. What landowner has the money to fight this through the courts? it would be cheaper to just abandon the homes and live elsewhere while retaining the land ownership.

  7. The OFA – a huge lobby group – representing farmers
    has a nice cooling effect on the body.

    The fish are jump’n – summertime!

    • Depending on the OFA to do anything in this situation is a waste of time. The OFA backed the passage of the Green Energy Act to begin with.

  8. There’s another possible angle on this.
    In the early days, the landowners may reasonably not have known they were putting themselves AND THEIR NEIGHBOURS at risk.
    But today, with all that’s now known, there’s no possible excuse for the landowner to be unaware that the health and well being of neighbours could be affected.
    So landowners today should be put on notice that if a project (planned or already approved) proceeds to construction and operation, they may themselves, as a participating party, be subject to legal action for knowingly putting their neighbours in harm’s way.

  9. In the just concluded OP ERT only health studies/issues involving adults was introduced? is this correct? If so, this represents only one part of the population. No studies have been done on children?
    Sooner or later health issues caused by IWTs will show up in the school systems and will have to be dealt with by school staffs.
    If children’s ability to perform well in school becomes impaired for any reason then this causes serious problems for school systems.

  10. I guess there really isn’t much hope for the children living in toxic environments exposed to low frequencies from industrial wind turbines. According to UN recommendations, less damage is done if you do not remove a child from their home. Each case must be thoroughly investigated: if a child is being sexually molested by a parent or a sibling, the best decision in this case is to remove the child. On the other hand, to place a child in a foster home where conditions are not favorable for the child may also be a bad decision made. In saying this, it is important for CAS workers to: 1) be educated, 2) do their job-be accountable, 3) investigate and screen both parents and foster parents.
    As a professional, by law, it is my duty to report a child I suspect may be a victim of abuse. Yet in doing this, so often kids slip throught the cracks because of poor decisions made by parents or CAS people.
    “It is unwise to scare adults and children caught up in this situation.” Parents need to smarten up…..Raising kids is the most important responsibility they have in life. They should be the number one provider and care giver for their children.It is even more unwise, and dangerous to leave a child in this environment.

  11. If students’ ability to work optimally is compromised, poor grades will affect their competitiveness for post-secondary educational placements as well. So are we systematically disadvantaging our rural kids? Creating an urban elite (hard to believe, eh?)

    • If a child is absent too much, comes to school sleepy repeatedly or shows signs of long term illness this is a signal to staff that something is wrong and this will be investigated.
      Parents are contacted first and if the situation dosen’t imporove then an investgation begins.
      So if people who host IWTs and expect to send thier children to school who exhibit “symptoms” that affect their school work and nothing will be said are misinformed.
      Schools also want to know if a child is under medical care so that their needs can be met.

  12. Pingback: Recent Energy And Environmental News – July 15, 2013 | PA Pundits - International

Leave a Reply to Rural101 Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *