Redington Wind Farm Could End Up in Court

The 19 January 2007 John Richardson article in MaineToday.com (the web site of the Portland Press Herald and the Maine Sunday Telegram newspapers) says that several environmental "groups said the recommendation of the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission staff dismissed or ignored evidence presented by opponents. They also said the recommendation violates standards for development in the land use plan for Maine's unorganized territories. The state agency's director called those criticisms nonsense."

Is it prejudicial that the agency's director is using words like "nonsense" before the agency's vote on their staff's report?

While environmental groups have been divided about this particular wind farm, "Maine Audubon, the Appalachian Mountain Club, the Appalachian Trail Club and the Appalachian Trail Conservancy repeated their opposition to the plan on Thursday at a news conference at the Gilsland Farm Audubon Center, saying the risks to the sensitive sub-alpine ecosystem and valuable recreation area outweigh the benefits. They also hinted strongly that approval by the commission could lead to a court appeal based on what the critics called legal flaws in the staff review."

It isn't about wind farming in general, but about this particularly bad location for one. (But, then, any wind farm along migratory bird flight paths is a bad idea in itself.)