Tribunal rules in favour of Dufferin Wind

ERTShelburne Free Press
The Environmental Review Tribunal has upheld ministerial approvals of the 100-MW Dufferin Wind Power (DWP) wind farm in Melancthon. The approvals include not only the turbines but also the 230 kv transmission line along the rail corridor. DWP also has Ontario Energy Board “leave to construct” the power line but lacks agreement with Dufferin County and other property owners for necessary easements, and is seeking permission to expropriate.

In upholding environmental approvals, the tribunal essentially rejected claims of adverse effects on human and animal health and of irreparable damage to the environment. “The Tribunal finds that the Appellants have not established that engaging in the Project as approved will cause serious and irreversible harm to plant life, animal life or the natural environment.

“The Tribunal finds that the Appellants have not established that engaging in the Project as approved will cause serious harm to human health.

“The Tribunal finds that the Appellants have not established, on the facts of this case, that the renewable energy approval process violated the Appellants’ right to security of the person under section 7 of the Charter,” reads the decision. Read article

8 thoughts on “Tribunal rules in favour of Dufferin Wind

  1. Do the folks there know about Ben Lansink and how to deal with expropriations – how to make expropriation REALLY REALLY EXPENSIVE!
    With luck, so expensive that it isn’t worth doing

  2. The environmental review tribunal is nothing more than a kangaroo court set up by the province. The purpose of this bureaucratic scam is to cost opponents time and money to try to take monetary resources before any court action. Justice is suppose to be blind, but these tribunals are deaf and dumb too.

  3. To begin with the ERTs were set up so that only two issues could be brought before these tribunals. So the government cut the people off so they could not win.
    The government knew that health and environmental issues would be hard to prove 100%.
    Then they appointed environmental lawyers to run them. Being an environmental lawyer does not mean these people have any scientific training in medicine or environmental issues.
    Now there has been established in these ERTs a systematic removal of unwanted testimony/witnesses that would result in outcomes/results the government dosen’t want.
    So this is a set up from begining to end. And this is why they don’t want the public to have access to the transcripts.

  4. Quote: “Province virtually ignored the 2,874 comments from the public opposing the turbines.”

    Ontario has an Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR). You have the right to comment but THEY do NOT have the duty to give your comments due consideration.

    While the threshold at the ERTs is “serious harm” …which the fascist state interprets to mean “direct” effects only, the regulations apply a higher standard for assessing and mitigating impacts of developments. E.g., the regulations require developers to identify all “adverse effects”, direct and indirect and mitigation measures in the supporting assessments. Instead hired gun consultants just address “serious harm” in the project documents.

    The federal assessment agency (CEAA) publicly posts all public comments, as it should be in any public consultation process. But not in Ontario. Here in fascist Orwellian Ontarioooooooooo, under environmental commissar Miller’s EBR, environmental assessments amounts to keeping the citizens in the dark and feeding them crap. And the commissar gives moral cover in his latest report to the miscreants at the MOE. People who complained about Harper gutting federal environmental assessments are totally fooled by the smoke and mirrors of the EBR.

  5. Sierra Legal Defence Fund, News Release, Feb.4,2002
    Environment Canada through the Canadian wildlife Service is mandated to enforce the Canadian Migratory Bird Convention/MBCA.
    MCBA is based on the treaty between Canada and the U.S.
    Regulations under the Canadian Migratory Bird Convention Act (MBCA) prohibit the destruction of migratory birds nests.
    Jerry DeMarco, Acting Executive Director.
    DeMarco now serves on the ERT.

    Are the MOE & MNR ruling on bird issues that are not under their jurisdiction?
    Has anyone looked into these federal issues?

    • It seems – all the right people – are in all the right places.
      ‘[excerpt] Jerry DeMarco, Acting Executive Director.
      DeMarco now serves on the ERT.’

      Mmmm…….those Liberals think of everything!

    • This cabal was attacking the Conservatives @ the time.
      Apparently, they are quite happy with the Liberal government.
      Not a peep!

      ‘[excerpt] TORONTO: The Canadian government is failing to enforce its own legislation protecting migratory birds, according to a complaint launched today by a group of environmental organizations from Canada and the United States. The groups today formally requested an investigation under Article 14 of NAFTA’s environmental agreement.

      Sierra Legal Defence Fund, representing Canadian Nature Federation, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Earthroots, Federation of Ontario Naturalists, Great Lakes United, Sierra Club of Canada, Sierra Club (U.S.), and Wildlands League, is asking NAFTA’s Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) to investigate the Canadian government’s failure to enforce its own environmental legislation resulting in the widespread destruction of migratory bird nests from logging operations. The group estimates that up to 85,000 bird nests are being destroyed by logging operations on an annual basis in Ontario.

      “Canada’s failure to protect migratory birds at their nesting sites is an international embarrassment. We are hopeful that a full investigation under NAFTA will encourage the federal government to finally comply with the Migratory Birds Treaty,” says Sierra Legal Defence Fund’s Acting Executive Director, Jerry DeMarco.’

  6. This could be an important document because an eagle’s nest was destroyed without a federal permit? People asked at the time why the feds were not involved but thre was nothing in writing that the people had to know there should have been federal involvement.

Leave a Reply

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