Guides say Bowers Mountain wind project would disrupt wildlife, harm business

By Nick Sambides Jr., BDN Staff

Posted July 06, 2011, at 1:29 p.m.
Last modified July 07, 2011, at 11:47 a.m.

Poll Question

Kate Collins | BDN

James Palmer, Ph.D., of Scenic Quality Consultants of Burlington, Vermont, listens to the line of questioning presented by attorney Juliet T. Browne, who is representing Champlain Wind LLC, during the Bowers Wind Power Project Hearing on Wednesday, July 6, 2011, at the Spectacular Event Center in Bangor. The hearing is part of a series of public forums held by Maine's Land Use Regulation Commission to allow both the public and the applicant opportunities to present testimony for and against the wind power development.

View Bowers Mountain in a larger map

BANGOR, Maine — With his long beard and hair and brown flannel shirt, David Corrigan looks much more like the professional guide he is than a member of the bar, but the 33-year-old Concord Township man had a few F. Lee Bailey-ish moments on Wednesday.

Speaking during a Land Use Regulation Commission hearing at the Spectacular Event Center, Corrigan sharply questioned a scenic consultant and state wildlife officials about the impact of Champlain Wind’s proposed $136 million industrial wind site on 700 acres of eastern Maine’s Bowers Mountain.

Under Corrigan’s brisk cross-examination, Mark A. Caron, a regional biologist for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, said that state surveys of migration patterns of the Canada lynx, which federal officials list as a threatened species, were somewhat lacking in the project’s proposed area.

But it was a cross-examination by attorney Juliet T. Browne, who represents Champlain, a subsidiary of Massachusetts-based First Wind, that might have helped Corrigan’s case against the project when her questions led to an admission from scenic consultant James Palmer that wildlife guides might lose customers if the project goes forward.

The guides, which could number as many as 50, might depend on customers for whom windmills pose more of a disruption to pristine woodlands than they do for most people, Palmer said.

“In that respect, I have to agree with Mr. Corrigan that they have more experience with their customers than I do,” said Palmer, who was hired to advise LURC on the project’s impact on the mountain area. “I don’t have any real knowledge of that particular gentleman user and whether he is shrinking rapidly [in numbers due to the presence of turbines] or static or whatever.”

“That would be information that would be nice to have, but we don’t,” Palmer added.

The 27-turbine project, on top of the 1,127-foot Bowers Mountain, would cover 700 acres and have a maximum energy output of 57 megawatts. The proposed project is about 10 miles east of Lee in Carroll Plantation in Penobscot County and Kossuth Township in Washington County and is within the area designated by Maine for expedited permitting.

The wind project is the latest of several operating, under construction or proposed in Maine. An industry group, Wind Power for Maine, says 195 turbines have been constructed or are under contract in Maine.

Groups opposed to large-scale wind projects argue that the projects disrupt wildlife and have adverse effects upon residents and the natural settings in which they are built. They typically generate too small a fraction of their capacity and require too much federal and state funding to be worth building, the critics contend.

Proponents argue that wind projects are ecofriendly producers of pollution-free electricity that aid their local economies with the electricity and jobs they generate while helping in a small way to offset the national dependence upon foreign oil.

Wednesday’s hearing provided grist for both positions. Corrigan noted that he and dozens of other professional guides told LURC at a public hearing in Lincoln on June 27 that they would lose a substantial portion of their business if the project is approved.

Browne drew out of Palmer survey information which showed that people who use the lakes in the mountain area felt the project would have a negligible impact on them. Studies on other wind turbine areas showed no indication of the collapse of recreational use within them — that the visibility of turbines was irrelevant to the areas’ use, Palmer said.

Caron conceded to Corrigan that DIF&W had concentrated its surveys of Canada lynx activity well north of the proposed site and on the possibility that lynx are crossing through the area to get to lands south. Caron found little relevance in that, however.

“I don’t see where this project would be a barrier to the movements of a terrestrial animal that is capable of movements of hundreds of miles,” Caron said.

After the hearing, he said that his agency has limited resources and concentrates its surveys in areas where Canada lynx are more numerous and scientists are more likely to learn from them.

LURC’s review of the project continues.

Similar articles:

Anonymous

I am willing to bet the guide pictured here knows where all the best pot grows too.
Anonymous

I am willing to bet the guide pictured here knows where all the best pot grows too.
Anonymous

stereotype much?
http://twitter.com/fakelepage Fake Paul LePage

You people just don’t get it. It doesn’t matter anymore what industry does to the environment. Maine needs jobs and if we have to burn every forest and level every mountain to get it we will. Every tree standing is standing in the way of progress. Every road yet to be built is going to lead to strip malls full of jobs.
Anonymous

Real Paul LePage has spoken out against wind power and the impact on the environment and quality of life, yet fake paul lepage parodies the opposite. Brilliant.
Anonymous

Flannel in July is quite the fashion statement!
Anonymous

I do believe that wind power in it’s self is a waste of money.The ROI on the turbines seem to be bad.The only good part of them are they kept the construction industry in maine working.
Anonymous

I do believe that wind power in it’s self is a waste of money.The ROI on the turbines seem to be bad.The only good part of them are they kept the construction industry in maine working.
Anonymous

I do believe that wind power in it’s self is a waste of money.The ROI on the turbines seem to be bad.The only good part of them are they kept the construction industry in maine working.
Anonymous

I do believe that wind power in it’s self is a waste of money.The ROI on the turbines seem to be bad.The only good part of them are they kept the construction industry in maine working.
Anonymous

The LURC gang should be disbanded. They should have to state where the power from Rollins, Stetson and now Bowers Mt projects is going. The grid is at capacity. This whole fiasco is illegal and people should go to jail.

And First Wind should answer the question already asked of them by a MPBN reporter, “How much money have you given to LURC?”

Over a million given to LURC from Plum Creek developers. Some countries would call this bribery and prosecute. Not the US free trade policy , business as usual, pay to play, how much justice can you afford? …it is all the same thing.
Anonymous

Very similar to our president. Talk from both sides of the mouth syndrome.
Anonymous

First Wind donated 5,000 dollars to the Mars Hill fire dept. in case there was a fire in one of the turbines. They have, of course a fire dept.

First Wind donated nothing to the volunteer fire dept covering the Stetson Mt forests surrounding the wind farm. I live near Stetson MT, watched a 100 year farm house burn to the ground . Took over an hour. The volunteer fire dept. pulled up just as the house finished burning. All the forests and homes are at risk now around Stetson Mt. Although the First Wind rep. in correspondence with Marcia Famous of LURC called our homes “camps”, we do live here year round.

I wonder who negotiated the 5,000 donation as a part of the Mars Hill wind farm contract?…. Selectmen looking after the best interests of Mars Hill?

Who negotiated the contract where Stetson Mt wind farm could be built with no fire equipment capable of putting out a forest fires? LURC? The “fees” for doing the paper work for permitting probably cover the costs?
Anonymous

Maximum energy output of 57 megawatts. Now a question that should be asked is how much energy would realistically be generated at that site, cause I can tell you right now that they are always toting the maximum numbers, but I have yet to see a wind site with turbines spinning enough to get maximum output. What is a real travesty is that the wind companies are only trying to set up these sites so they can get paid by the taxpayers. I recommend this site for some extra reading for anyone whose interested http://www.aweo.org/ Keep in mind that you should also do a little digging on your own.
Anonymous

By the time First Wind and it subsidiaries get finished, Washington County will be windmill county. And, the only reason this is in a expedited area is because LURC caved and rezoned the area. This was a mistake on LURC’s part, however, it was during the Baldacci Wind power era and they just went along with it.
PaulNotBunyan

I get it just fine. Get them dang trees and critters out of the way so we can build the road to prosperity. That 57 megawatts will power a lot of tanning salons in the new strip malls. Anyway, I’m still waiting for new manufacturing jobs spurred by the availability of this “cheap” wind power. Maybe GM or Toyota will build a new plant in the area. It’s so exciting!
Anonymous

Shows FPL doesn’t have a clue to what he’s talking about!
Anonymous

While I am not in agreement on these large scale developments on our mountains, “real” Paul LePage does not oppose them because of his environmental ethic, it is because of the cost of the electricity from wind generated sources. If wind power generate electricity at a rate that comparable to others, he would, in all likelihood, back these developments. He has show repeatedly that he is not concerned about conservation and environmental issues.
Anonymous

While I am not in agreement on these large scale developments on our mountains, “real” Paul LePage does not oppose them because of his environmental ethic, it is because of the cost of the electricity from wind generated sources. If wind power generate electricity at a rate that comparable to others, he would, in all likelihood, back these developments. He has show repeatedly that he is not concerned about conservation and environmental issues.
Anonymous

I have a feeling that when the Govt subsidies for these windmills dry up. Companies like First wind will also dry up. The people of Maine will be stuck with these eye sores till the Chinese come and knock them over for the scrap metal
clamcove

The turbines don’t belong here, LURC, keep them out of eastern Maine. If required, why not put them first on the source, like Bunker Hill, Charlestown and Munjoy Hill. If that doesn’t do it, come back for some more suggestions like the islands in the harbor in Boston. Why spoil our place when they are the ones needing more electrictity. We already export more than 50% of what is generated here.
clamcove

The turbines don’t belong here, LURC, keep them out of eastern Maine. If required, why not put them first on the source, like Bunker Hill, Charlestown and Munjoy Hill. If that doesn’t do it, come back for some more suggestions like the islands in the harbor in Boston. Why spoil our place when they are the ones needing more electrictity. We already export more than 50% of what is generated here.
clamcove

The turbines don’t belong here, LURC, keep them out of eastern Maine. If required, why not put them first on the source, like Bunker Hill, Charlestown and Munjoy Hill. If that doesn’t do it, come back for some more suggestions like the islands in the harbor in Boston. Why spoil our place when they are the ones needing more electrictity. We already export more than 50% of what is generated here.
clamcove

The turbines don’t belong here, LURC, keep them out of eastern Maine. If required, why not put them first on the source, like Bunker Hill, Charlestown and Munjoy Hill. If that doesn’t do it, come back for some more suggestions like the islands in the harbor in Boston. Why spoil our place when they are the ones needing more electrictity. We already export more than 50% of what is generated here.
clamcove

The turbines don’t belong here, LURC, keep them out of eastern Maine. If required, why not put them first on the source, like Bunker Hill, Charlestown and Munjoy Hill. If that doesn’t do it, come back for some more suggestions like the islands in the harbor in Boston. Why spoil our place when they are the ones needing more electrictity. We already export more than 50% of what is generated here.
Anonymous

FW is already on the verge of being owned by Emera, Bangor Hydro’s parent company, with Emera owning 49% of the stock, as reported a few weeks ago in the BDN. FW won’t “dry up” they will simply be bought outright by Emera and then all of their debts will be rolled into your electric bill over the course of the next few decades. The Chinese will be knocking over their own turbines, as well as entire ghost cities they have built, as they are playing the same central banking games the U.S. is playing……mal-investment on steroids!
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OG5DCCA3PZE2WW44EPSHMGZOJI Leola

A tidbit of information for ya… Look up open space tax law on maine.gov 4 pages that describe how towns will adopt an open space policy for nature conservancy, not knowing that harvested wood lots, limited use conservancy land and wind turbine land can register and could qualify for 20% to 95% tax reduction on land taxes. Wouldn’t it be great if we could qualify for that on our 3/4 lot we call home?
Anonymous

Juliet Browne and First Wind are trying to convince the LURC Commissioners that the highly-rated scenic lakes near the proposed project are not important enough to protect. Hey, people of Maine, wake up, they’ll be doing this in your area next. We need to band together and stop the projects all over the state. As one guy in Lincoln said last week to the Lincoln News after seeing the turbines outside his camp, ‘It’s like the movie, War of the Worlds, and the tripods have landed.” This wind law is destroying the very thing that makes Maine unique: its scenic beauty.
Anonymous

Juliet Browne and First Wind are trying to convince the LURC Commissioners that the highly-rated scenic lakes near the proposed project are not important enough to protect. Hey, people of Maine, wake up, they’ll be doing this in your area next. We need to band together and stop the projects all over the state. As one guy in Lincoln said last week to the Lincoln News after seeing the turbines outside his camp, ‘It’s like the movie, War of the Worlds, and the tripods have landed.” This wind law is destroying the very thing that makes Maine unique: its scenic beauty.
Anonymous

Juliet Browne and First Wind are trying to convince the LURC Commissioners that the highly-rated scenic lakes near the proposed project are not important enough to protect. Hey, people of Maine, wake up, they’ll be doing this in your area next. We need to band together and stop the projects all over the state. As one guy in Lincoln said last week to the Lincoln News after seeing the turbines outside his camp, ‘It’s like the movie, War of the Worlds, and the tripods have landed.” This wind law is destroying the very thing that makes Maine unique: its scenic beauty.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OG5DCCA3PZE2WW44EPSHMGZOJI Leola

Wind power is a definite leech to the federal deficeit.
Anonymous

Succinctly put. I would click 5 “likes” if I could! There are huge negatives to wind, yet we relentlessly continue to have one of the most corrupt statutes ever—the heinous Expedited Wind Permitting law—dictate that wind turbines rule over all other values we place on our natural resources. LURC needs to stand up and say the LURC mission in its enabling legislation says NO! to industrial wind sites destroying Maine’s special places.
Anonymous

Succinctly put. I would click 5 “likes” if I could! There are huge negatives to wind, yet we relentlessly continue to have one of the most corrupt statutes ever—the heinous Expedited Wind Permitting law—dictate that wind turbines rule over all other values we place on our natural resources. LURC needs to stand up and say the LURC mission in its enabling legislation says NO! to industrial wind sites destroying Maine’s special places.
Anonymous

Succinctly put. I would click 5 “likes” if I could! There are huge negatives to wind, yet we relentlessly continue to have one of the most corrupt statutes ever—the heinous Expedited Wind Permitting law—dictate that wind turbines rule over all other values we place on our natural resources. LURC needs to stand up and say the LURC mission in its enabling legislation says NO! to industrial wind sites destroying Maine’s special places.
Anonymous

85% are against First Wind at 10:00 PM is telling. Maine gets it. If it’s First Wind speaking, it’s too good to be true.

Here in Mass, First Wind CEO and President is an Appointed Advisor writing wind energy policy to direct wind energy development in the state in which First Wind does business.

Consistent with complaints, cause for arrests, asset seizures and prosecutions, wind projects associated with UPC First Wind—Kahuku as example, fail to produce energy, yet developers still collect public subsidies.
More on First Wind….the truth is outing!
Check out “Wind Farm Doing Nothing!” on Fix Oahu Now! Panos Prevedouros for Mayor of Honolulu

To view this video, visit:http://www.fixoahunow.com/video/video/show?id=2206164%3AVideo%3A8443

http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/main/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/ArticleType/ArticleView/ArticleID/4239/Default.aspx

Changing laws and creating laws to benefit one industry by that industry is bad for the environment and its inhabitants.

Don’t let these flatlanders destroy your environment while claiming to save it. This is all about a shift of power and wealth from us to multinationals. They’ll gladly have us pay to destroy our environment.
Anonymous

It’s time we put a stop to this destruction of Maine’s precious natural resources and special places by industrial wind developers. This is an industrial park, with twenty seven 438 foot tall machines, perched on a prominent ridgeline above an incredible undeveloped watershed. The ridges will be blasted and hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of the mountain will be leveled to put it in. This does not belong here, or anywhere else in our beautiful state. Maine already does more than its fair share of renewable electricity production. First Wind, Angus King, TransCanada, Patriot Renewables and all other wind developers, leave rural Maine the beautiful place it is and go perpetrate your taxpayer subsidy-sucking scam elsewhere.
Anonymous

It’s time we put a stop to this destruction of Maine’s precious natural resources and special places by industrial wind developers. This is an industrial park, with twenty seven 438 foot tall machines, perched on a prominent ridgeline above an incredible undeveloped watershed. The ridges will be blasted and hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of the mountain will be leveled to put it in. This does not belong here, or anywhere else in our beautiful state. Maine already does more than its fair share of renewable electricity production. First Wind, Angus King, TransCanada, Patriot Renewables and all other wind developers, leave rural Maine the beautiful place it is and go perpetrate your taxpayer subsidy-sucking scam elsewhere.
Anonymous

An extensive research project in New York showed that when you average out the actual pproduction from every wind turbine project in that state, the actual production averaged 22%. There is also evidence based on FERC reporting that Kibby Mt. in Western Maine is only producing 22% of it rated capacity. Then when you look at the turbine at UMPI which over a two full year period has averaged less that 12% of it rated capacity. So take whatever production numbers that the developer is touting and 22% of that is realistic. There is certainly new technology being utilized in the construction of these wind tubines but so far no one has been able to figure out how to defeat the laws of physics. Wind power is unreliable, sporadic, inefficient, and a huge waste of taxpayer dollars.

Say “NO” to Bowers! Don’t let this out of state band of snake oil salesmen ruin the scenic character of 10 lakes that are rated as being of “signifcant or oustanding for their scenic resources. This project needs a “deny” vote. Please write LURC c/0 Fred.Todd@Maine.gov wiht your comments about DP 4889 Bowers Mt. project. Save these irreplaceable chain of lakes.
Anonymous

We have renewable options, but Industrial wind is far too destructive and variable to be a good option for places like Maine.   Wind developers don’t care about Maine or creating the answer to global warming. They care about making money building big projects. That’s why once the project is built they often sell it off. This isn’t about making electricity. This is about making money. How do they do that if they don’t make power?

Well.. they do make power….in short USELESS bursts. The owner of the project sells any and all of the output in advance. Can the power be used? …or depended on?   NOPE.   But that doesn’t matter because the legislature has put in place requirements for “renewable” energy. And by golly…this is renewable energy. Unfortunately this power always ends up being the extra that nobody dares to depend on.   That being the case…..and it is!….there is no reason for regular people to support it. (Of course the industry supports it loudly.) And at one time, I did too.

The more I learn though…the more I like Biomass (which will put Mainers to work!), landfill gas, cowpower, hydro..big and small and solar.    All of which are BASELOAD generators..with the exception of solar that is. (Baseload is a power source that can be depended on…one that will allow you to shut down a coal fired plant somewhere….why? Because you know it will be there when you need it to be.) Solar? Well…lets just say that it is a fact that solar is more forcastable and less variable than wind and can be put on rooftops right where it’s needed. Not on some pristine mountaintop 100 miles away.

David Corrigan has a book out.   Also, go check out the website he manages.   This man is well studied, experienced and very sharp.    http://www.realwindinfoforme.com/
Anonymous

Juliet Browne claims a survey for users in the DLW which is contrary to a survey of the Donnel Pond Bull Hill area. They claimed visual impact would have a serious effect on their usage and they would likely not return. I suspect Mz. Browne is fudging her facts or simply surveying ATVers who do not boat or fish or snowsledders who are eating free weenies bought by FirstWind. I wonder what other areas Juliet found which compared to the DLW, to compare usage? Juliet ‘s credibility is shrinking rapidly, faster than support for wind turbines whose sole purpose is to sell RECs to …drum roll please….KEEP COAL BURNING POWER PLANTS RUNNING!!! Now you know!!! PS We camped on Scraggly Lake 3 years ago and saw a mountain lion. Lynx are not the only kitties in the area. Save the Downeast Lakes from the corporate terrorists.
Patten_Pete

Maine Guide Draws First Blood in Battle with First Wind.
The ragtag Oakland Raiders weren’t even supposed to be in uniform and they won the Super Bowl. My money’s on David Corrigan, standing up for Maine.
Anonymous

Whatever the reason that Gov. LePage opposes wind farms, I appreciate his stance. He is not bowing down to the corporations and political pressure. Wind farms are a democratic party baby. Only the republicans are standing up against them in Congress. Mark some points up for republicans on this one.
Anonymous

leave rural Maine the beautiful place it is and go perpetrate your taxpayer subsidy-sucking scam elsewhere.
An audit is being done on Obama’s stimulus bill which benefited renewable energy/ wind farms. i.e. the grant which built Stetson II is illegal. The money was supposed to go to wind farms which were up and running. Stetson I is not online. There was a lawsuit , US govt. vs. FERC prior to the constuction, it stated that the transmission lines were at capacity. Bottleneck in Orrington. No power goes any further south. Where are the new 1.4 billion dollar transmission lines supposed to be going? Starting at Orrington. The cost will be paid by rate payers.
Anonymous

1barbaradurkin has a lot of information on the way that the founder of UPC, First Wind’s parent company was associated with the mafia in Italy.He was prosecuted for building wind farm’s which did not produce energy and starting wind farms without finishing them…sending money to the US. Very similar to the way First Wind operates here in Maine.

The wind farms in Italy were used as a reference as to how great the company was during the permitting of our Mars Hill wind farm. Small world.
Anonymous

Fascists. The people get nothing, except the bill.

The Expedited Wind Permitting Law passed under baldaci states that towns in rural , poor areas have no say in whether they even have a wind farm.

Fascism should be called corporatism because it is the merger of govt. and corporations.

Benito Mussolini
Anonymous

There is no place in the eastern United States that compares to the Downeast Grand Lakes. It deserves National Park status, it is such an incredible natural resource. Indeed, in the last decade, immense effort has gone into conserving more than 350,000 acres of forest land surrounding these glacial-carved lakes, striking a delicate balance between maintaining the forestry resource and at the same time protecting miles of shoreline from development. We will throw this all away by LURC approving the sprawling industrial site proposed by First Wind on the heights of Bowers Mt.

This travesty follows on the heels of the ruination of the ridges above the nearby Lincoln Lakes and is just part of a grand scheme and scam by First Wind to blast away and level every possible ridge from the Penobscot River to the Canadian border, from the ridges above the magnificent Downeast Grand Lakes to the very doorstep of Baxter State Park. Put in as many turbines as possible, not for producing more than a fickle trickle of electricity (because the wind resource is “poor”, NREL) but to reap taxpayer subsidies and sell REC’s, a carbon tax that is passed on to consumers.

Alas, unless LURC and DEP stop this insane proliferation of wind-sprawl, future hikers on Mt. Katahdin will look out over a forest of ugly, useless forty story wind turbines as far as the eye can see. Percival Baxter will roll over in his grave. May Pamola wreak havoc on First Wind!
Anonymous

The more I learn though…the more I like Biomass (which WILL put Mainers to work!)
My neighbor has hauled pulpwood for biomass. He says that you have to be really careful…can’t have a styrafoam cup in with the wood. These are the people who care about the environment and give jobs. Our gov. is on the right side with this one. …to oppose wind farms.

After Stetson Mt wind farm was built, two power plants were scheduled to be shut down. One was bio mass, the other was hydro. Both alternatives that work and are not destructive to the environment. Funny thing, hydro is not considered an alternative in ME, but it is in NH.

Politics..disgusting.
Anonymous

What happened in Lincoln Lakes is terrible. Arrive in downtown, look through the attractive gazebo, up across Mattanawcook Lake and there are turbines all over the ridges of Rocky Dundee. Click here for photos of First Wind’s “Rollins Project” and keep in mind Bowers Mt is higher, is above a far more significant natural resource, and the turbines will be 50 feet taller than the ones used in Lincoln Lakes! https://picasaweb.google.com/Blueyes1119/RollinsWindProjectMay12011# https://picasaweb.google.com/Blueyes1119/RollinsWindProjectFromTheAirMay12011# https://picasaweb.google.com/Blueyes1119/RollinsWindProjectRockyDundeeUpperPond#
Anonymous

Wind projects are Not ecofriendly. This is because they rely on Permanent magnets that require rare earth metals, and mining the metals is highly toxic. The blades can not be recycled according to sources from Denmark and are either in land fills or burned eventually. They are ineffective electric generators and require fossil fuel backup. Wind and foreign oil is often used as an incorrect reason to be for them, but we don’t make electricity from oil. They get the highest subsidies per kilowatt hour produced of any form of electric generation. It is truly the special interest group of the left. The politicians from the left don’t want you to know you will see the highest electric bills of your life but thats the truth.
Anonymous

Wind projects are Not ecofriendly. This is because they rely on Permanent magnets that require rare earth metals, and mining the metals is highly toxic. The blades can not be recycled according to sources from Denmark and are either in land fills or burned eventually. They are ineffective electric generators and require fossil fuel backup. Wind and foreign oil is often used as an incorrect reason to be for them, but we don’t make electricity from oil. They get the highest subsidies per kilowatt hour produced of any form of electric generation. It is truly the special interest group of the left. The politicians from the left don’t want you to know you will see the highest electric bills of your life but thats the truth.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Brad-Blake/1071730803 Brad Blake

I grew up in this area. I know the now-destroyed by First Wind Lincoln Lakes and the threatened Downeast Grand Lakes so well that I can just close my eyes from 200 miles away and be there in my mind. And hear the loons calling. David Corrigan and the constant stream of people who testified last Monday and Tuesday at LURC’s hearing in Lincoln know what scenic beauty and wondrous natural resources abound in the Downeast Grand Lakes. So do I.

Apparantly, Mr. Palmer doesn’t. As a taxpayer, I urge Gov. LePage to put a stop on payment to this guy. And why are we paying someone out of Burlington VT come here to tell us what is or is not scenic? We have more knowledge and wisdom about the Downeast Grand Lakes than outsiders like Palmer and First Wind! We live this special place! We love this treasure! LURC should listen to the citizens who took the time away from jobs, family, and other interests to tell LURC to do their job and protect Maine’s natural resources and say NO! to these destructive, sprawling industrial wind sites. Forty story or taller machines don’t belong on top of Maine’s ridges to support the wind power farce.
Anonymous

Wind projects are Not ecofriendly. This is because they rely on Permanent magnets that require rare earth metals, and mining the metals is highly toxic. The blades can not be recycled according to sources from Denmark and are either in land fills or burned eventually. They are ineffective electric generators and require fossil fuel backup. Wind and foreign oil is often used as an incorrect reason to be for them, but we don’t make electricity from oil. They get the highest subsidies per kilowatt hour produced of any form of electric generation. It is truly the special interest group of the left. The politicians from the left don’t want you to know you will see the highest electric bills of your life but thats the truth.
Anonymous

In deregulated electricity markets, limits on transmission lines make prices fluctuate wildly. Utilities try their best to limit price disparities by asking strategically located power plants to turn themselves on and off throughout the day.
The resulting patchwork is like a “whack-a-mole” game in which prices for electricity quickly soar and collapse. Prices can change within minutes by a factor of 300 without warning.

This link shows how a large scale solar facility in Arizona works during a typical day. (Wind is also quite irregular as I can attest being a former wind power consultant).

http://bravenewclimate.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/apt_pv_fluctuations1.jpg

This would result in enormous price disparities on any given day. Also plants like this get full nameplate rating for the purposes of renewable credits trading (RGGI) even though they do NOT produce it. Traditional plants need to be operating continuously (spinning reserve) to deal with the peaks and lulls of renewables.

This fiasco needs to be shut down. It is Enron all over again, run by former enron employees using numerous shell/shelf corporations.
Anonymous

David Corrigan, the Maine guide with common sense and clad in his trademark plaid took on the impeccably dressed slick “Ice Queen” lawyer from Portland and went toe to toe! David, you are one of my heroes! I think the Gov. should appoint you Commissioner of IFW so you can straighten out those guys and make them do their job of advocating for fish and wildlife and not for 40 story wind turbines fragmenting wildlife habitat and scars on our ridges sending silt into our fisheries. Lastly, invite Mr. Palmer to cross the Kennebec with you so you can personally introduce him to the wilds of Maine and just maybe a tippy canoe in the swift current might pitch him overboard for a very personal and up close encounter with the fishes.

Thank you, editors, for including the map of the area and it isn’t even the entire Downeast Grand Lakes watershed. Just look at the map and marvel over what a gift the glaciers gave to Maine. It is ringed with forested ridges. LURC, please do not allow First Wind or any other developers to encircle this magnificent treasure with industrial wind turbines. LURC, do not allow the dark skies to be sullied by blinking aviation lights. LURC, do not replace the stillness that is punctuated by the call of the loons or the hoots of owls with the constant roar of spinning turbine blades. LURC, do your job and protect the natural resources of the Downeast Grand Lakes and deny First Wind’s Bowers Mt. project.
Anonymous

Truth-is not showing the true views from the lakes. Your doctored photos are done will zoomed lenses. On a hazy not cloudy day when you look out across Mattanawcook Lake you can hardly see the turbines. Your photos that you show them, make them look like they are on top of the lakes. You are useing eveidence like Casie Anthony’s defense team-smoke screnes. They are at least 7 miles form the lake. Come to Lincoln and look through your eyes, not the eyes of a zoomed in camera. This is why some people do not believe the ideas of you people that are against FW. You don’t show the truth in the Lincoln area.
Anonymous

“Zooming in” is now equivalent with “doctoring” ???
That’s an incredible statement.

The pictures are not particularly zoomed in at all, anyway.
Yes, they’re taken near the turbines, looking toward the lakes. Does that make them “doctored”? No, of course not.
Look at #27 and tell me how that is doctored to make the house look so small next to the turbines.

They may be 6-7 miles from Mattanawcook, but they’re right on Caribou and Long Pond.
And how is this “doctoring” making the turbines appear as tall as the mountains themselves?

I’m there every summer weekend, that’s how they really look.

This is why some people do not believe the ideas of you people that are pro-windrape. You make up charges that you can’t support.
Anonymous

“Zooming in” is now equivalent with “doctoring” ???
That’s an incredible statement.

The pictures are not particularly zoomed in at all, anyway.
Yes, they’re taken near the turbines, looking toward the lakes. Does that make them “doctored”? No, of course not.
Look at #27 and tell me how that is doctored to make the house look so small next to the turbines.

They may be 6-7 miles from Mattanawcook, but they’re right on Caribou and Long Pond.
And how is this “doctoring” making the turbines appear as tall as the mountains themselves?

I’m there every summer weekend, that’s how they really look.

This is why some people do not believe the ideas of you people that are pro-windrape. You make up charges that you can’t support.
Anonymous

“Zooming in” is now equivalent with “doctoring” ???
That’s an incredible statement.

The pictures are not particularly zoomed in at all, anyway.
Yes, they’re taken near the turbines, looking toward the lakes. Does that make them “doctored”? No, of course not.
Look at #27 and tell me how that is doctored to make the house look so small next to the turbines.

They may be 6-7 miles from Mattanawcook, but they’re right on Caribou and Long Pond.
And how is this “doctoring” making the turbines appear as tall as the mountains themselves?

I’m there every summer weekend, that’s how they really look.

This is why some people do not believe the ideas of you people that are pro-windrape. You make up charges that you can’t support.
Anonymous

“Zooming in” is now equivalent with “doctoring” ???
That’s an incredible statement.

The pictures are not particularly zoomed in at all, anyway.
Yes, they’re taken near the turbines, looking toward the lakes. Does that make them “doctored”? No, of course not.
Look at #27 and tell me how that is doctored to make the house look so small next to the turbines.

They may be 6-7 miles from Mattanawcook, but they’re right on Caribou and Long Pond.
And how is this “doctoring” making the turbines appear as tall as the mountains themselves?

I’m there every summer weekend, that’s how they really look.

This is why some people do not believe the ideas of you people that are pro-windrape. You make up charges that you can’t support.
Anonymous

Time to add the voice of a tourist. Juliet Brown, you are so wrong! We’ve been coming to Maine for many years from overseas. We chose to come here because of its vast wilderness, its unspoiled nature, the silence, the night sky. We don’t need to come all the way to the Northwoods to look at ugly, huge industrial constructions, destroyed landscapes and red blinking strobe-lights. Tourist can choose where they want to go and spend their money. Since the environment we were looking for has been destroyed by projects like Rollins and Bowers-Mountain and more to come, Maine won’t get our dollars anymore.
Anonymous

Come to Lincoln and look across the lake and see how big they look. I am saying what you see in the pictures are not what you see with the naked eye. The other day when channel 5 was taping the meeting at the gazebo, they had to zoom in to show the turbines. This made them stand out. When they were talking to the people, you could hardly see the turbines. You anti wind people show your pictures that benefit you. Look at a natural picture without your zoom lens, and you will not put it on the web. I’m not anti or pro wind, but show me the true pictures, so I can make up my mind. I don’t need to look through your eyes or pictures. I see the view across Mattanawcook Lake 3 or 4 times a day, and quess what Bird, it is not what your pictures show. If the turbines look this close to the lake in Lincoln to you, then you need your eyes checked.
Anonymous

The whole thrust behind renewable energy, of which wind is one source, is to reduce the sort of pollution generated by non-renewable sources such as coal-fired generating plants. The wind energy industry say they do that but there is not one scientific study showing that that’s true and until such a study is completed this whole industry is being politically driven rather than scientifically driven. Somehow The Great State of Maine seems to be particularly susceptible to the politics driving this industry. Think about this: The wind is not reliable but coal fired plants are. Therefore, when the wind is blowing and the turbines are generating electricity the coal fired plant electricity might not be entirely needed but it cannot be shut down. That is because that in order for the coal-fired plant to start back up the coal must be ignited to heat the water to produce the steam to run the turbines. That process takes about a day, which means it must be kept running when the wind is blowing unless you want blackouts. So the coal-fired plants keep burning the coal and just vent the steam. Where is the reduction in air pollution?
Anonymous

Do politicians have massive personal investment in wind? Why are they so blind to all
its imperfections? Greed not green is the answer. Do we have to destroy our environment and
wildlife before all these greedy idiots wake up? How do they sleep at night? They just don’t
care about what matters.
Penny Gray

Mr. Corrigan’s shirt looks like a Filson to me, all wool and a yard wide, as my father would have said. And I would have to say that Mr. Corrigan is all wool and a yard wide. Thank you for speaking up for Maine’s environment, wildlife, and guides, Mr. Corrigan. Industrial subdivisions have no place in Maine’s mountains.
Penny Gray

This statement and information below was from a IF&W report in 1999.
(Have they forgotten the importance of their own study?)
Economic Impact of Sport Fishing in St. Croix

Sport fish guiding and sporting camps on the United States side
of the St. Croix Watershed furnish employment for at least 142 people,
including at least 64 fishing guides and an additional 78 employees working
at 19 different sporting camps. The St. Croix region probably represents the
highest density of employment in the sporting camp and guiding business
found in Maine.

MDIFW has documented more than 61,000 angler-days and estimates
a total of more than 75,000 angler-days of use annually on waters in the St.
Croix Watershed. The total estimated economic output is estimated at more
than $5.45 million annually (1999 dollar values). Sport fishing is highly
important to the depressed economy of Maine’s Washington County and also
generates valuable federal and state tax revenue from the sale of fishing
tackle, fuel, food, and lodging.LURC,please protect Bowers Mountain from industrial wind! Just say no.
Anonymous

Unfortunately, LURC was not given any say whatsoever when, in favor of wind, the Legislature overrode the zones that LURC had previously established – and also forced LURC to ignore their ordinary standards and rules about industrial and residential development. It happened under the Baldacci administration with D’s in majority in both House and Senate, and it is being kept in place under the LePage administration with R’s in the majority. LURC is under attack when it is the Legislature that is responsible. Don’t blame LURC.
   We wish profoundly that the ordinary good LURC standards that take all people, properties and communities into account would be applied throughout UT for wind development in place of these standards of the Legislature that restrict consideration to places of “state and national significance” like a few special lakes, the Appalachian Trail and places on the National Historic Register and ignore the people and places of Maine.
   LURC will be damned if they do and damned if they don’t when they make the final decision. Don’t blame them for doing a very difficult job in public service – at absolutely no compensation for all their time and their thoughtfulness.
   Vote to support candidates next year who pledge to change the wind statute and give planning and zoning back to LURC with its 40-year record of success in the Maine North Woods.
Anonymous

I honestly don’t remember the Legislature overriding the LURC zones with regard to wind power so if you could direct me to the legislative action that did this, I would very much appreciate it. As for the compensation of the Commissioners, they do receive legislative pay ($100 per day for each meeting, etc.) plus reimbursement of expenses. This is not a great deal of money, however, they are compensated. The LURC staff receives good salaries for their work.
Anonymous

I stand corrected on LURC Commissioner’s compensation: they receive $55 per diem for meetings, lunch and mileage when they meet, no compensation for time reading and digesting the volumes and volumes of testimony and information in preparation. Minimum wage?

Here’s the statutory citation for the legislative override of the LURC standards to be found in Chapter 10 of the rules and standards ta would ordinarily apply.
Anonymous

I stand corrected on LURC Commissioner’s compensation: they receive $55 per diem for meetings, lunch and mileage when they meet, no compensation for time reading and digesting the volumes and volumes of testimony and information in preparation. Minimum wage?

Here’s the statutory citation for the legislative override of the LURC standards to be found in Chapter 10 of the rules and standards that would ordinarily apply:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/35-A/title35-Asec3452.html
G. Alan Woods

You’re so right: Maine gets it.

As I talk to people in Lincoln most reluctantly admit they were conned by First Wind. The photosimulations First Wind provided understated the visual impact. Many of the people who attended the hearings held for the Bowers project were folks from Lincolnand they were there to testify against Bowers. Speaking up on the Bowers project is all they can do now. Too late for Lincoln. The public testimony at the Bowers hearings ran 20 For and 58 Against. That’s 3 to 1 against! And yet even in the Bowers hearings, under oath, First Wind’s Neil Kiely continues to state that 80% of Mainers support wind.

Remember: wind developers (and their lawyers) are not penalized for lying!
G. Alan Woods

You’re so right: Maine gets it.

As I talk to people in Lincoln most reluctantly admit they were conned by First Wind. The photosimulations First Wind provided understated the visual impact. Many of the people who attended the hearings held for the Bowers project were folks from Lincolnand they were there to testify against Bowers. Speaking up on the Bowers project is all they can do now. Too late for Lincoln. The public testimony at the Bowers hearings ran 20 For and 58 Against. That’s 3 to 1 against! And yet even in the Bowers hearings, under oath, First Wind’s Neil Kiely continues to state that 80% of Mainers support wind.

Remember: wind developers (and their lawyers) are not penalized for lying!
G. Alan Woods

You’re so right: Maine gets it.

As I talk to people in Lincoln most reluctantly admit they were conned by First Wind. The photosimulations First Wind provided understated the visual impact. Many of the people who attended the hearings held for the Bowers project were folks from Lincolnand they were there to testify against Bowers. Speaking up on the Bowers project is all they can do now. Too late for Lincoln. The public testimony at the Bowers hearings ran 20 For and 58 Against. That’s 3 to 1 against! And yet even in the Bowers hearings, under oath, First Wind’s Neil Kiely continues to state that 80% of Mainers support wind.

Remember: wind developers (and their lawyers) are not penalized for lying!
Patten_Pete

First of all, the view of the turbines from the gazebo in Lincoln is shocking and out of place, with the scene repeated everywhere you go in the Lincoln Lakes region. Forty 389 foot tall machines dominate the blasted and scarred ridges above the lakes. The photographer makes note in captions that in some instances a zoom lens was used. In reality, if you go to homes and summer camps and other places closer than the photographer could get, the images are the reality. These are also the images that boaters and fishermen get from out on the lakes closer to the ridges. The word around Lincoln is that the turbines are bigger and more intrusive than expected and worse than what First Wind had presented in their computer simulated photos. You just don’t want to admit that First Wind, with the complicity of the DEP and the four towns, has ruined the scenic beauty and natural resources of the Lincoln Lakes.

An excerpt from written LURC testimony of a seasonal home owner: “Speaking as a landowner in Lincoln, I feel that the Rollins wind power project has come with high costs to me personally with few benefits that I can see. I used to have an exceedingly beautiful view from the dock located in front of my cabin. Indeed, the Town of Lincoln website still uses a pre-2011 photo taken from my property to illustrate why people should come to enjoy our (formerly) magnificent 13 lakes and to spend their tourist dollars. When I arrived at my camp in June I was shocked and dismayed to discover that eleven giant, unsightly wind turbines erected on a nearby ridge had completely spoiled the view from my dock. This major degradation of the natural environment has greatly reduced the feeling of contentment and well being that I have always felt in the Maine woods.”
G. Alan Woods

I wonder where Juliet Browne, Neil Kiely, Geoff West, Matt Kearns, Kurt Adams, Paul Gaynor and all the other First Wind people go to vacation.

Do you suppose they go to a place that’s peppered with wind turbines?

Or some place without?

Food for thought.
Anonymous

There was a posting problem. Third try:

I stand corrected on LURC Commissioner’s compensation: they receive $55 per diem for meetings, lunch and mileage when they meet, no compensation for time reading and digesting the volumes and volumes of testimony and information in preparation. Minimum wage? Want the job?

Here’s the statutory citation for the legislative override of the LURC standards to be found in Chapter 10 of the rules and standards that would ordinarily apply:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/35-A/title35-Asec3452.html
Anonymous

There was a posting problem. Third try:

I stand corrected on LURC Commissioner’s compensation: they receive $55 per diem for meetings, lunch and mileage when they meet, no compensation for time reading and digesting the volumes and volumes of testimony and information in preparation. Minimum wage? Want the job?

Here’s the statutory citation for the legislative override of the LURC standards to be found in Chapter 10 of the rules and standards that would ordinarily apply:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/35-A/title35-Asec3452.html
Anonymous

There was a posting problem. Third try:

I stand corrected on LURC Commissioner’s compensation: they receive $55 per diem for meetings, lunch and mileage when they meet, no compensation for time reading and digesting the volumes and volumes of testimony and information in preparation. Minimum wage? Want the job?

Here’s the statutory citation for the legislative override of the LURC standards to be found in Chapter 10 of the rules and standards that would ordinarily apply:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/35-A/title35-Asec3452.html
Anonymous

There was a posting problem. Third try:

I stand corrected on LURC Commissioner’s compensation: they receive $55 per diem for meetings, lunch and mileage when they meet, no compensation for time reading and digesting the volumes and volumes of testimony and information in preparation. Minimum wage? Want the job?

Here’s the statutory citation for the legislative override of the LURC standards to be found in Chapter 10 of the rules and standards that would ordinarily apply:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/35-A/title35-Asec3452.html
Anonymous

There was a posting problem. Third try:

I stand corrected on LURC Commissioner’s compensation: they receive $55 per diem for meetings, lunch and mileage when they meet, no compensation for time reading and digesting the volumes and volumes of testimony and information in preparation. Minimum wage? Want the job?

Here’s the statutory citation for the legislative override of the LURC standards to be found in Chapter 10 of the rules and standards that would ordinarily apply:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/35-A/title35-Asec3452.html
http://www.facebook.com/WiegandsWindow Jim Wiegand

It is time
for everyone to take a closer look at the true character of the wind industry.
For over 25 years there has been bird mortality/wind turbine cover-up. As it
now stands at wind farms across the world, thousands of protected bird species
are killed daily. I have been told by good sources the industry has been hiding
the bodies of rare and endangered species for decades. Today body disposal is
all a part of a days work at a wind farm. This tragic cover-up will continue
until it is made a felony to conceal fatalities at wind farms. Not until enough
people stand up against this industry can they be forced to implement new
turbine designs into their wind farms. Until then the profiteers will lie,
pacify the public with bogus studies, claim they are working on the problem,
and continue to make their fortunes from these killers.

Today the
California Condor habitat in the mountainous region of Tehachapi and Tejon
ranch has been destroyed for the condors. This is due to the thousands of
lethal wind turbines constructed in their natural habitat. The wind industry
has made a complete mockery of the condor recovery. Despite the success of
condor breeding programs there are few if any free flying condors and it will
stay that way as long as there are propeller style turbines.

Today the
only way to keep the condors from flying off into the turbines is by the
permanent feeding stations that have been set up for them. Without the feeding
stations the condors would be hopping on the same wind currents used to spin
the turbines searching the countryside looking for a meal. Their clumsy slow flights
that would normally cover hundreds of square miles a day make them an easy
target for the spinning wind turbine blades. Now the condors primarily just
wander from perches close to the stations where the carcasses are dumped. If
condors start to wander, they are trapped so they will not perish.

The new
propeller style wind turbines reach 400- 500 ft into the sky and have a kill
zone 30-45 times the area of the famous eagle killing turbines built at Altamont Pass. Now a wind farm of just 50
turbines is equivalent to 1500-2250 of theses early turbines. The blade tips on
the new models with 12 ton blades, rip through the air at over 220-240 mph when
spinning at 20 just rotations per minute. This is twice as fast as the old
turbines and over three times the speed of a major league baseball bat swing.
The industry does not like to talk about these facts but this is the truth.

Despite
industry propaganda, cats, windows, cars etc. kill almost no rare and
endangered species such as Condors, Whooping Cranes, Red Kites, Tasmanian Wedge
Tailed Eagles, and Egyptian Vultures. I could go on and on with this industry
death list. The fact is, once these turbines are put into their foraging and
nesting habitats they become the primary killers of these species. The reality
is that no bird or bat is safe from these turbines. The public rarely hears
about it because of bogus studies, wind farm security and carefully written
contracts with gag orders. Think about it. Why would an honest industry ever
need gag orders? Why would they rig Environmental Impact Documents? Why hide
bodies?

Recent
studies from Altamont Pass would have us believing that the new larger wind
turbines are much safer than the early turbines used at Altamont
pass. Much has been written about the benefits of repowering Altamont Pass
with the new safer turbines. After reading the June 6 Wind Energy story
published in the LA Times I began looking into the research behind the
statement made by Dr. Shawn Smallwood ………”The neighboring Buena
Vista Wind Energy Project recently replaced 179 aging wind turbines with 38
newer and more powerful 1-megawatt turbines. That repowering effort has reduced
fatality rates by 79% for all raptor species and 50% for golden eagles,
according to a study by Shawn Smallwood, an expert on raptor ecology in wind
farms”.

I found a
major flaw in the research and everyone I have shown this to agrees with me
about this. The reason the studies are flawed is that all the search areas
looking for blade strike victims are statistically inconsistent with the
turbine sizes. I will illustrate the most extreme example of this
inconsistency. The old 40KW turbines at Altamont
have a stated historical search areas of a 50 meter radius yet the new and much
larger 1 Mw turbines have a search area radius of only 75 meters. The
comparison between these turbines reveals that the new 1 MW turbines have a
20.65 times greater rotor sweep(Kill Zone), yet their search areas were only
increased by 2.2 times. By my calculations the search areas should have been
many times larger. There is good reason bird mortality went down per KW of
power production in these studies, the search areas are proportionally much
smaller.

Being a
Wildlife biologist with decades of observations, I know as well as anyone the
integrity of the wind industry. I have read their rigged Environmental Impact
Reports and I have yet to see an honest one. In my opinion there should many
going to jail for this ongoing fraud. If corporations would lie about the
impacts to Condors, Whopping Cranes and Eagles, they would lie about anything,
including energy projections. As it now stands with wind energy, the taxpayers
and wildlife are the big losers.

I will
finish by saying that in order to keep all this in proper perspective one must
keep in mind that state and federal renewable energy mandates that were written
into law were created by this industry. The laws that absolve this industry
from killing endangered

species
were also created by them. These deliberate actions created a demand for their
products and enabled the industry to circumvent Federal Wildlife Laws. It is
time to rethink what has taken place and acknowledge the terrible impact this
industry will have on the world. New non-lethal turbine designs have to be put
into production. If not, then there will be the inevitable extinction of
several bird species in the near future
http://www.facebook.com/WiegandsWindow Jim Wiegand

It is time
for everyone to take a closer look at the true character of the wind industry.
For over 25 years there has been bird mortality/wind turbine cover-up. As it
now stands at wind farms across the world, thousands of protected bird species
are killed daily. I have been told by good sources the industry has been hiding
the bodies of rare and endangered species for decades. Today body disposal is
all a part of a days work at a wind farm. This tragic cover-up will continue
until it is made a felony to conceal fatalities at wind farms. Not until enough
people stand up against this industry can they be forced to implement new
turbine designs into their wind farms. Until then the profiteers will lie,
pacify the public with bogus studies, claim they are working on the problem,
and continue to make their fortunes from these killers.

Today the
California Condor habitat in the mountainous region of Tehachapi and Tejon
ranch has been destroyed for the condors. This is due to the thousands of
lethal wind turbines constructed in their natural habitat. The wind industry
has made a complete mockery of the condor recovery. Despite the success of
condor breeding programs there are few if any free flying condors and it will
stay that way as long as there are propeller style turbines.

Today the
only way to keep the condors from flying off into the turbines is by the
permanent feeding stations that have been set up for them. Without the feeding
stations the condors would be hopping on the same wind currents used to spin
the turbines searching the countryside looking for a meal. Their clumsy slow flights
that would normally cover hundreds of square miles a day make them an easy
target for the spinning wind turbine blades. Now the condors primarily just
wander from perches close to the stations where the carcasses are dumped. If
condors start to wander, they are trapped so they will not perish.

The new
propeller style wind turbines reach 400- 500 ft into the sky and have a kill
zone 30-45 times the area of the famous eagle killing turbines built at Altamont Pass. Now a wind farm of just 50
turbines is equivalent to 1500-2250 of theses early turbines. The blade tips on
the new models with 12 ton blades, rip through the air at over 220-240 mph when
spinning at 20 just rotations per minute. This is twice as fast as the old
turbines and over three times the speed of a major league baseball bat swing.
The industry does not like to talk about these facts but this is the truth.

Despite
industry propaganda, cats, windows, cars etc. kill almost no rare and
endangered species such as Condors, Whooping Cranes, Red Kites, Tasmanian Wedge
Tailed Eagles, and Egyptian Vultures. I could go on and on with this industry
death list. The fact is, once these turbines are put into their foraging and
nesting habitats they become the primary killers of these species. The reality
is that no bird or bat is safe from these turbines. The public rarely hears
about it because of bogus studies, wind farm security and carefully written
contracts with gag orders. Think about it. Why would an honest industry ever
need gag orders? Why would they rig Environmental Impact Documents? Why hide
bodies?

Recent
studies from Altamont Pass would have us believing that the new larger wind
turbines are much safer than the early turbines used at Altamont
pass. Much has been written about the benefits of repowering Altamont Pass
with the new safer turbines. After reading the June 6 Wind Energy story
published in the LA Times I began looking into the research behind the
statement made by Dr. Shawn Smallwood ………”The neighboring Buena
Vista Wind Energy Project recently replaced 179 aging wind turbines with 38
newer and more powerful 1-megawatt turbines. That repowering effort has reduced
fatality rates by 79% for all raptor species and 50% for golden eagles,
according to a study by Shawn Smallwood, an expert on raptor ecology in wind
farms”.

I found a
major flaw in the research and everyone I have shown this to agrees with me
about this. The reason the studies are flawed is that all the search areas
looking for blade strike victims are statistically inconsistent with the
turbine sizes. I will illustrate the most extreme example of this
inconsistency. The old 40KW turbines at Altamont
have a stated historical search areas of a 50 meter radius yet the new and much
larger 1 Mw turbines have a search area radius of only 75 meters. The
comparison between these turbines reveals that the new 1 MW turbines have a
20.65 times greater rotor sweep(Kill Zone), yet their search areas were only
increased by 2.2 times. By my calculations the search areas should have been
many times larger. There is good reason bird mortality went down per KW of
power production in these studies, the search areas are proportionally much
smaller.

Being a
Wildlife biologist with decades of observations, I know as well as anyone the
integrity of the wind industry. I have read their rigged Environmental Impact
Reports and I have yet to see an honest one. In my opinion there should many
going to jail for this ongoing fraud. If corporations would lie about the
impacts to Condors, Whopping Cranes and Eagles, they would lie about anything,
including energy projections. As it now stands with wind energy, the taxpayers
and wildlife are the big losers.

I will
finish by saying that in order to keep all this in proper perspective one must
keep in mind that state and federal renewable energy mandates that were written
into law were created by this industry. The laws that absolve this industry
from killing endangered

species
were also created by them. These deliberate actions created a demand for their
products and enabled the industry to circumvent Federal Wildlife Laws. It is
time to rethink what has taken place and acknowledge the terrible impact this
industry will have on the world. New non-lethal turbine designs have to be put
into production. If not, then there will be the inevitable extinction of
several bird species in the near future
http://www.facebook.com/WiegandsWindow Jim Wiegand

It is time
for everyone to take a closer look at the true character of the wind industry.
For over 25 years there has been bird mortality/wind turbine cover-up. As it
now stands at wind farms across the world, thousands of protected bird species
are killed daily. I have been told by good sources the industry has been hiding
the bodies of rare and endangered species for decades. Today body disposal is
all a part of a days work at a wind farm. This tragic cover-up will continue
until it is made a felony to conceal fatalities at wind farms. Not until enough
people stand up against this industry can they be forced to implement new
turbine designs into their wind farms. Until then the profiteers will lie,
pacify the public with bogus studies, claim they are working on the problem,
and continue to make their fortunes from these killers.

Today the
California Condor habitat in the mountainous region of Tehachapi and Tejon
ranch has been destroyed for the condors. This is due to the thousands of
lethal wind turbines constructed in their natural habitat. The wind industry
has made a complete mockery of the condor recovery. Despite the success of
condor breeding programs there are few if any free flying condors and it will
stay that way as long as there are propeller style turbines.

Today the
only way to keep the condors from flying off into the turbines is by the
permanent feeding stations that have been set up for them. Without the feeding
stations the condors would be hopping on the same wind currents used to spin
the turbines searching the countryside looking for a meal. Their clumsy slow flights
that would normally cover hundreds of square miles a day make them an easy
target for the spinning wind turbine blades. Now the condors primarily just
wander from perches close to the stations where the carcasses are dumped. If
condors start to wander, they are trapped so they will not perish.

The new
propeller style wind turbines reach 400- 500 ft into the sky and have a kill
zone 30-45 times the area of the famous eagle killing turbines built at Altamont Pass. Now a wind farm of just 50
turbines is equivalent to 1500-2250 of theses early turbines. The blade tips on
the new models with 12 ton blades, rip through the air at over 220-240 mph when
spinning at 20 just rotations per minute. This is twice as fast as the old
turbines and over three times the speed of a major league baseball bat swing.
The industry does not like to talk about these facts but this is the truth.

Despite
industry propaganda, cats, windows, cars etc. kill almost no rare and
endangered species such as Condors, Whooping Cranes, Red Kites, Tasmanian Wedge
Tailed Eagles, and Egyptian Vultures. I could go on and on with this industry
death list. The fact is, once these turbines are put into their foraging and
nesting habitats they become the primary killers of these species. The reality
is that no bird or bat is safe from these turbines. The public rarely hears
about it because of bogus studies, wind farm security and carefully written
contracts with gag orders. Think about it. Why would an honest industry ever
need gag orders? Why would they rig Environmental Impact Documents? Why hide
bodies?

Recent
studies from Altamont Pass would have us believing that the new larger wind
turbines are much safer than the early turbines used at Altamont
pass. Much has been written about the benefits of repowering Altamont Pass
with the new safer turbines. After reading the June 6 Wind Energy story
published in the LA Times I began looking into the research behind the
statement made by Dr. Shawn Smallwood ………”The neighboring Buena
Vista Wind Energy Project recently replaced 179 aging wind turbines with 38
newer and more powerful 1-megawatt turbines. That repowering effort has reduced
fatality rates by 79% for all raptor species and 50% for golden eagles,
according to a study by Shawn Smallwood, an expert on raptor ecology in wind
farms”.

I found a
major flaw in the research and everyone I have shown this to agrees with me
about this. The reason the studies are flawed is that all the search areas
looking for blade strike victims are statistically inconsistent with the
turbine sizes. I will illustrate the most extreme example of this
inconsistency. The old 40KW turbines at Altamont
have a stated historical search areas of a 50 meter radius yet the new and much
larger 1 Mw turbines have a search area radius of only 75 meters. The
comparison between these turbines reveals that the new 1 MW turbines have a
20.65 times greater rotor sweep(Kill Zone), yet their search areas were only
increased by 2.2 times. By my calculations the search areas should have been
many times larger. There is good reason bird mortality went down per KW of
power production in these studies, the search areas are proportionally much
smaller.

Being a
Wildlife biologist with decades of observations, I know as well as anyone the
integrity of the wind industry. I have read their rigged Environmental Impact
Reports and I have yet to see an honest one. In my opinion there should many
going to jail for this ongoing fraud. If corporations would lie about the
impacts to Condors, Whopping Cranes and Eagles, they would lie about anything,
including energy projections. As it now stands with wind energy, the taxpayers
and wildlife are the big losers.

I will
finish by saying that in order to keep all this in proper perspective one must
keep in mind that state and federal renewable energy mandates that were written
into law were created by this industry. The laws that absolve this industry
from killing endangered

species
were also created by them. These deliberate actions created a demand for their
products and enabled the industry to circumvent Federal Wildlife Laws. It is
time to rethink what has taken place and acknowledge the terrible impact this
industry will have on the world. New non-lethal turbine designs have to be put
into production. If not, then there will be the inevitable extinction of
several bird species in the near future
http://www.facebook.com/WiegandsWindow Jim Wiegand

It is time
for everyone to take a closer look at the true character of the wind industry.
For over 25 years there has been bird mortality/wind turbine cover-up. As it
now stands at wind farms across the world, thousands of protected bird species
are killed daily. I have been told by good sources the industry has been hiding
the bodies of rare and endangered species for decades. Today body disposal is
all a part of a days work at a wind farm. This tragic cover-up will continue
until it is made a felony to conceal fatalities at wind farms. Not until enough
people stand up against this industry can they be forced to implement new
turbine designs into their wind farms. Until then the profiteers will lie,
pacify the public with bogus studies, claim they are working on the problem,
and continue to make their fortunes from these killers.

Today the
California Condor habitat in the mountainous region of Tehachapi and Tejon
ranch has been destroyed for the condors. This is due to the thousands of
lethal wind turbines constructed in their natural habitat. The wind industry
has made a complete mockery of the condor recovery. Despite the success of
condor breeding programs there are few if any free flying condors and it will
stay that way as long as there are propeller style turbines.

Today the
only way to keep the condors from flying off into the turbines is by the
permanent feeding stations that have been set up for them. Without the feeding
stations the condors would be hopping on the same wind currents used to spin
the turbines searching the countryside looking for a meal. Their clumsy slow flights
that would normally cover hundreds of square miles a day make them an easy
target for the spinning wind turbine blades. Now the condors primarily just
wander from perches close to the stations where the carcasses are dumped. If
condors start to wander, they are trapped so they will not perish.

The new
propeller style wind turbines reach 400- 500 ft into the sky and have a kill
zone 30-45 times the area of the famous eagle killing turbines built at Altamont Pass. Now a wind farm of just 50
turbines is equivalent to 1500-2250 of theses early turbines. The blade tips on
the new models with 12 ton blades, rip through the air at over 220-240 mph when
spinning at 20 just rotations per minute. This is twice as fast as the old
turbines and over three times the speed of a major league baseball bat swing.
The industry does not like to talk about these facts but this is the truth.

Despite
industry propaganda, cats, windows, cars etc. kill almost no rare and
endangered species such as Condors, Whooping Cranes, Red Kites, Tasmanian Wedge
Tailed Eagles, and Egyptian Vultures. I could go on and on with this industry
death list. The fact is, once these turbines are put into their foraging and
nesting habitats they become the primary killers of these species. The reality
is that no bird or bat is safe from these turbines. The public rarely hears
about it because of bogus studies, wind farm security and carefully written
contracts with gag orders. Think about it. Why would an honest industry ever
need gag orders? Why would they rig Environmental Impact Documents? Why hide
bodies?

Recent
studies from Altamont Pass would have us believing that the new larger wind
turbines are much safer than the early turbines used at Altamont
pass. Much has been written about the benefits of repowering Altamont Pass
with the new safer turbines. After reading the June 6 Wind Energy story
published in the LA Times I began looking into the research behind the
statement made by Dr. Shawn Smallwood ………”The neighboring Buena
Vista Wind Energy Project recently replaced 179 aging wind turbines with 38
newer and more powerful 1-megawatt turbines. That repowering effort has reduced
fatality rates by 79% for all raptor species and 50% for golden eagles,
according to a study by Shawn Smallwood, an expert on raptor ecology in wind
farms”.

I found a
major flaw in the research and everyone I have shown this to agrees with me
about this. The reason the studies are flawed is that all the search areas
looking for blade strike victims are statistically inconsistent with the
turbine sizes. I will illustrate the most extreme example of this
inconsistency. The old 40KW turbines at Altamont
have a stated historical search areas of a 50 meter radius yet the new and much
larger 1 Mw turbines have a search area radius of only 75 meters. The
comparison between these turbines reveals that the new 1 MW turbines have a
20.65 times greater rotor sweep(Kill Zone), yet their search areas were only
increased by 2.2 times. By my calculations the search areas should have been
many times larger. There is good reason bird mortality went down per KW of
power production in these studies, the search areas are proportionally much
smaller.

Being a
Wildlife biologist with decades of observations, I know as well as anyone the
integrity of the wind industry. I have read their rigged Environmental Impact
Reports and I have yet to see an honest one. In my opinion there should many
going to jail for this ongoing fraud. If corporations would lie about the
impacts to Condors, Whopping Cranes and Eagles, they would lie about anything,
including energy projections. As it now stands with wind energy, the taxpayers
and wildlife are the big losers.

I will
finish by saying that in order to keep all this in proper perspective one must
keep in mind that state and federal renewable energy mandates that were written
into law were created by this industry. The laws that absolve this industry
from killing endangered

species
were also created by them. These deliberate actions created a demand for their
products and enabled the industry to circumvent Federal Wildlife Laws. It is
time to rethink what has taken place and acknowledge the terrible impact this
industry will have on the world. New non-lethal turbine designs have to be put
into production. If not, then there will be the inevitable extinction of
several bird species in the near future
Patten_Pete

Maine Guides know how to guide, not just someone through the woods or down a river, but on overall issues impacting Maine’s environment as can be seen with Mr. Corrigan.

Who will LURC listen to, a Guide or a corporate money sucking attorney?
Anonymous

Sorry, but the per diem used to be $55, however several years ago, it was increased to $100. Thanks for the link. I haven’t read it yet, but I certainly will.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-McKay/100000584413853 Dan McKay

How can anyone who has spent any time in Maine conjure up an idea of transforming the top of the state’s mountains into a place for giant industrial generators ?. This is embarrassing to us who have worked diligently to clean up our environment for the past 40 years. From this resolve, We have come to see our state for it’s beauty , shining forth through the lakes, streams, shorelines and, yes, our mountains too.Is this the right course for Maine ? Do wind machines really fit here ? We have recovered our rivers from industrial and municipal pollution . We have cleaned our soil of hazardous chemicals. Our environmental conscious is alert now , thanks to these great accomplishments. Never did we expect to see the day our mountains would be forsaken for others to gain an advantage needlessly deserved.Please take the time to think about where we are as a state, our visions as we move forward, our goals which sets us apart from other states and our people who radiate with pride knowing our pristine scenery is the envy of many not so lucky to be here.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-McKay/100000584413853 Dan McKay

How can anyone who has spent any time in Maine conjure up an idea of transforming the top of the state’s mountains into a place for giant industrial generators ?. This is embarrassing to us who have worked diligently to clean up our environment for the past 40 years. From this resolve, We have come to see our state for it’s beauty , shining forth through the lakes, streams, shorelines and, yes, our mountains too.Is this the right course for Maine ? Do wind machines really fit here ? We have recovered our rivers from industrial and municipal pollution . We have cleaned our soil of hazardous chemicals. Our environmental conscious is alert now , thanks to these great accomplishments. Never did we expect to see the day our mountains would be forsaken for others to gain an advantage needlessly deserved.Please take the time to think about where we are as a state, our visions as we move forward, our goals which sets us apart from other states and our people who radiate with pride knowing our pristine scenery is the envy of many not so lucky to be here.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-McKay/100000584413853 Dan McKay

How can anyone who has spent any time in Maine conjure up an idea of transforming the top of the state’s mountains into a place for giant industrial generators ?. This is embarrassing to us who have worked diligently to clean up our environment for the past 40 years. From this resolve, We have come to see our state for it’s beauty , shining forth through the lakes, streams, shorelines and, yes, our mountains too.Is this the right course for Maine ? Do wind machines really fit here ? We have recovered our rivers from industrial and municipal pollution . We have cleaned our soil of hazardous chemicals. Our environmental conscious is alert now , thanks to these great accomplishments. Never did we expect to see the day our mountains would be forsaken for others to gain an advantage needlessly deserved.Please take the time to think about where we are as a state, our visions as we move forward, our goals which sets us apart from other states and our people who radiate with pride knowing our pristine scenery is the envy of many not so lucky to be here.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-McKay/100000584413853 Dan McKay

How can anyone who has spent any time in Maine conjure up an idea of transforming the top of the state’s mountains into a place for giant industrial generators ?. This is embarrassing to us who have worked diligently to clean up our environment for the past 40 years. From this resolve, We have come to see our state for it’s beauty , shining forth through the lakes, streams, shorelines and, yes, our mountains too.Is this the right course for Maine ? Do wind machines really fit here ? We have recovered our rivers from industrial and municipal pollution . We have cleaned our soil of hazardous chemicals. Our environmental conscious is alert now , thanks to these great accomplishments. Never did we expect to see the day our mountains would be forsaken for others to gain an advantage needlessly deserved.Please take the time to think about where we are as a state, our visions as we move forward, our goals which sets us apart from other states and our people who radiate with pride knowing our pristine scenery is the envy of many not so lucky to be here.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-McKay/100000584413853 Dan McKay

How can anyone who has spent any time in Maine conjure up an idea of transforming the top of the state’s mountains into a place for giant industrial generators ?. This is embarrassing to us who have worked diligently to clean up our environment for the past 40 years. From this resolve, We have come to see our state for it’s beauty , shining forth through the lakes, streams, shorelines and, yes, our mountains too.Is this the right course for Maine ? Do wind machines really fit here ? We have recovered our rivers from industrial and municipal pollution . We have cleaned our soil of hazardous chemicals. Our environmental conscious is alert now , thanks to these great accomplishments. Never did we expect to see the day our mountains would be forsaken for others to gain an advantage needlessly deserved.Please take the time to think about where we are as a state, our visions as we move forward, our goals which sets us apart from other states and our people who radiate with pride knowing our pristine scenery is the envy of many not so lucky to be here.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-McKay/100000584413853 Dan McKay

“All Americans are involved in making energy policy. When individual choices are made with a maximum of personal understanding and a minimum of government restraints, the result is the most appropriate energy policy.”- Reagan Administration Energy Plan (1981)
http://www.facebook.com/people/Dan-McKay/100000584413853 Dan McKay

“All Americans are involved in making energy policy. When individual choices are made with a maximum of personal understanding and a minimum of government restraints, the result is the most appropriate energy policy.”- Reagan Administration Energy Plan (1981)
Anonymous

Hmm. $55 per diem is what LURC office in Augusta believes the Commission is paid. They said it has not changed for 20 years or more. Try 287-2631.
Anonymous

Hmm. $55 per diem is what LURC office in Augusta believes the Commission is paid. They said it has not changed for 20 years or more. Try 287-2631.
Anonymous

Hmm. $55 per diem is what LURC office in Augusta believes the Commission is paid. They said it has not changed for 20 years or more. Try 287-2631.
Anonymous

Hmm. $55 per diem is what LURC office in Augusta believes the Commission is paid. They said it has not changed for 20 years or more. Try 287-2631.
Anonymous

Thank you for credible and informed data. I wish more biologists would come on board before the wind scam goes any further.
Anonymous

Thank you for credible and informed data. I wish more biologists would come on board before the wind scam goes any further.
Anonymous

That does not surprise me at all — the LURC staff doesn’t tend to pay attention to legislation that is not specific to LURC and dealt with in the Agriculture Committee. They really need to better acquaint themselves with the legislative process. Anyhow, the statute for the LURC commissioners is http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/5/title5sec12004-D.html

The language for the per diem is:
In addition to the salary paid for the first and 2nd regular sessions of the Legislature, when a special session is called, the members of the Senate and House of Representatives must each be compensated $100 for every day’s attendance, expenses and mileage pursuant to this section; except that if a special session is called during the time period specified in this section for a first regular session or 2nd regular session, the special session per diem does not apply. [2003, c. 691, §1 (AMD); 2003, c. 691, §2 (AFF).]
It appears that it was changed and enacted in 2004. If you were correctly informed that LURC has been paying their Commissioners $55 instead of $100 per meeting, LURC owes the commissioners a lot of money (especially considering the number of meetings on the Plum Creek issue). I am not going to contact LURC to inform them of these facts because I dealt with them enough when I worked for the unorganized territory taxpayers. Hopefully, whoever you spoke to was misinformed and LURC has been paying its commissioners the correct per diem.
Anonymous

That does not surprise me at all — the LURC staff doesn’t tend to pay attention to legislation that is not specific to LURC and dealt with in the Agriculture Committee. They really need to better acquaint themselves with the legislative process. Anyhow, the statute for the LURC commissioners is http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/5/title5sec12004-D.html

The language for the per diem is:
In addition to the salary paid for the first and 2nd regular sessions of the Legislature, when a special session is called, the members of the Senate and House of Representatives must each be compensated $100 for every day’s attendance, expenses and mileage pursuant to this section; except that if a special session is called during the time period specified in this section for a first regular session or 2nd regular session, the special session per diem does not apply. [2003, c. 691, §1 (AMD); 2003, c. 691, §2 (AFF).]
It appears that it was changed and enacted in 2004. If you were correctly informed that LURC has been paying their Commissioners $55 instead of $100 per meeting, LURC owes the commissioners a lot of money (especially considering the number of meetings on the Plum Creek issue). I am not going to contact LURC to inform them of these facts because I dealt with them enough when I worked for the unorganized territory taxpayers. Hopefully, whoever you spoke to was misinformed and LURC has been paying its commissioners the correct per diem.
Anonymous

When we look at the real issues of energy use here in Maine and other places, the reality is that we need to absorb the impacts and not expect other people in other nations to accept al the brunt of our use. If you turn on your lights you create an impact.

Maine has good wind resources, we can use those resources in a responsinble way and set aside other areas of Maine. And through wind we can turn on the lights while have far less environmental impacts verses other energy forms while keepig dollars here at home.

The continued attempt to prevent any and all wind development that is benefitting our environment and economy is based on the prospective that our lives should never change and we should never be responsible for the energy we use. It is time to adopt the advancement of technology and allow the process to move forward for the benefit of our full society.
Anonymous

Mr. Williamson once again fails to identify himself as a paid shill for the wind power industry. He is Director of the Maine Wind Industry Intitative, a group that’s spearheading the wind power sprawl that will destroy rural Maine. There is no place in Maine these guys won’t target. He continues to spin the misinformation like Maine has good wind resources (downgraded from excellent, Paul?) in spite of NREL data stating otherwise and the miserable performance of existing wind turbines. How can you push something that is totally unpredictable, unreliable, and has less than 30% output?

I contend that blasting away and leveling millions of cubic yards of mountains to clear hundreds of miles of scenic ridgelines to erect machines that are more than twice the height of the tallest building in Portland is not ” far less environmental impacts” nor is it ” benefitting our environment and economy”. Ruining our rural quality of place, damaging the multi-billion dollar tourism business for the most costly, most heavily subsidized, and least efficient form of electricity development to send a fickle trickle of power to southern New England is not good for Maine.
Anonymous

It would appear the LURC office is properly informed and the Commissioners are properly paid at $55 per day.
You cite the per diem that applies during special sessions. It would
appear you overlooked the specific provision that “Legislative per diem”
is defined to be $55 per day.
http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/5/title5sec12002.html

“3. Legislative per diem.
“Legislative per diem” means the per diem authorized by Title 3,
section 2, that is paid to Legislators for every day’s
attendance at meetings held when the Legislature is not
in daily session. ”

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/3/title3sec2.html

“For the purpose of this subsection,The President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, the floor leaders and their assistants and members
of a committee, with the approval of the President of the
Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives as to members
of a committee, may also meet on days when the
Legislature is not in daily session at any convenient location within
the State.
Each member of the Senate and House of Representatives
shall receive $55 for every day’s attendance when meetings or daily
sessions are held, a meal allowance in the amount of $32
and a housing allowance whereby actual lodging expenses will be
reimbursed
at the single-room rate, provided that a receipt is
submitted to the Executive Director of the Legislative Council for each
day in attendance at such meetings or daily sessions and
for each day that member occupies overnight accommodations away from
home either immediately preceding or immediately
following attendance at daily sessions of the Legislature and actual
daily
mileage allowances which shall be paid at the same rate
paid to state employees. In lieu of the meal and housing allowance,
each member shall be entitled to a daily meal allowance
in the amount of $32 and actual daily mileage allowances.”

Now then to the principal point: did the legislature overrule the LURC development standards when it comes to wind?
Anonymous

Sorry for the delay in responding to the standards question. I couldn’t remember the exact timeline so I had to do further research. You are correct that LURC had to do this because of the Baldacci legislative maneuver. I thank you for informing me of this fact.
However, you are still incorrect about the per diem. The law, not so clearly, states that the Commission members will receive that per diem amount that legislators receive when the Legislature is NOT in session (which is $100). This is the law in the legislature’s section of law:
In addition to the salary paid for the first and 2nd regular
sessions of the Legislature, when a special session is called, the members of
the Senate and House of Representatives must each be compensated $100 for every
day’s attendance, expenses and mileage pursuant to this section; except that if
a special session is called during the time period specified in this section for
a first regular session or 2nd regular session, the special session per diem
does not apply. [2003, c. 691, §1 (AMD); 2003, c. 691, §2 (AFF).]
If you still don’t agree, I don’t know what to tell you unless you want to do further research and call the Secretary of State’s office and talk to their boards and commissions person. I served on a board for quite some time, and it was always our understanding that “legislative per diem” was $100 per meeting in the last few years.

Penobscot

Previous story:

Next story:

VIDEO

Guides say Bowers Mountain wind project would disrupt wildlife, harm business

Poll Question

Similar articles:

Marketplace News

Marketplace

Marketplace Coupons

BDN Blogs

Man About Town

6:30 and a Glass of Wine

Bangor Daily News

About Us

Subscribe

Advertising

On Facebook

On Twitter