For Immediate Release 



May 29, 2015

On May 28, 2015, the Court of Appeal for Ontario denied leave to appeal to the Drennans, Dixons, Ryans, and the Kroeplins, in respect of their Charter Challenge to the current legislation for the approval of wind turbine projects.

These farm families had been seeking the opportunity to argue that the Environmental Protection Act provisions approving renewable energy projects exposes them to a reasonable prospect of serious harm to their health and therefore does not comply with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Health Canada Study Summary Results released on November 6, 2014, showed an association between wind turbine noise and annoyance, and an association between wind turbine noise annoyance and sleep disturbances, migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, and measured blood pressure and hair cortisol.

Shawn Drennan commented on the Court of Appeal’s decision: “We are disappointed with the Court’s decision not to hear our case. No one has been able to tell us that the turbines are safe.  We are being told that we have to wait to be harmed before we can do anything to stop them. The Court has given us two choices: leave the land my family has farmed for three generations, or be a guinea pig for the government and the wind companies.”

Lawyer for the farm families, Julian N. Falconer commented: “This decision will leave people like my clients, who face massive wind development projects across this Province, in an impossible position. The Health Canada Study has already shown an association between the turbines and serious health effects. My clients and other families in rural Ontario will now have to suffer these adverse health effects before they can seek any relief from our court system. It won’t surprise anyone that my clients are frustrated with a process that seems to be stacked against them.”

While this decision may restrict these farm families from pursuing Charter remedies for these harms, they are committed to exploring the other legal options available to them and to holding both the government and the wind turbine companies accountable for the failure to protect their health.

Concerned citizen groups throughout the Province remain committed to seeking justice for those in rural communities affected by industrial wind projects.

For further information, please contact Odi Dashsambuu of Falconers LLP at

416-964-0495, extension 248

Suncor Energy recently filed a court application to quash Plympton-Wyoming’s legislation

PLYMPTON-WYOMING – A legal challenge from Suncor Energy has prompted town council to back away from a noise bylaw the municipality enacted last year to limit local wind farm development.

Construction of Suncor and NextEra's 46-turbine Cedar Point wind energy project is underway in Lambton County. A crew works on a turbine foundation next to Hillsboro Road in Plympton-Wyoming on Thursday May 28, 2015 near Sarnia, Ont. (Paul Morden/Sarnia Observer/Postmedia Network)
Construction of Suncor and NextEra’s 46-turbine Cedar Point wind energy project is underway in Lambton County. A crew works on a turbine foundation next to Hillsboro Road in Plympton-Wyoming on Thursday May 28, 2015 near Sarnia, Ont. (Paul Morden/Sarnia Observer/Postmedia Network)

Suncor, a developer behind the 46-turbine Cedar Point wind project under construction in Lambton Shores, Plympton-Wyoming and Warwick Township, recently filed a court application to quash Plympton-Wyoming’s bylaw, said town clerk Brianna Coughlin.

The municipal legislation sought, among other things, to limit wind turbine-produced noise lower than 20 hertz — infrasound: the normal limit of human hearing. Wind turbine opponents argue exposure can negatively impact people’s health.

Complying with the bylaw would have made it impossible to operate the 100-MW wind farm, expected to be operational by late 2015, Suncor spokesperson Jason Vaillant said Thursday.

“We are committed to complying with and operating within the limits that are set out for us by the province,” he said, noting noise limits for wind farms are provincial territory. “And we felt that the municipality just didn’t have jurisdiction on this particular matter.”

Based on legal advice that the town’s bylaw would likely not survive a court challenge, council decided Wednesday to repeal it, Coughlin said.

Suncor, Vaillant said, is pleased with the decision and will withdraw its legal challenge.

“Certainly the relationship with the community is important to us,” he said. “We know that this project will be part of the community for 20 years or more, so we want to ensure that we develop and operate the project in a way that addresses the needs and concerns of Plympton-Wyoming.”

read more: By Tyler Kula, Sarnia Observer Thursday, May 28, 2015

Port Ryerse beautiful vista threaten by Turbine Invasion

Schedule for Port Ryerse ERT Irvin v. Ontario, 14-064:


unnamed (1)Location:  Norfolk County Council Chambers   in Simcoe at 50 Colborne St. South, Simcoe. (Talbot St. entrance near Town Centre mall parking lot)


Wednesday June 3, 2015:


unnamed (2)10 am  – Opening Statements

11 am – 12:30 pm   Site Visit

12:30 – 1:30 pm   Lunch

1:30 pm on Appellant’s 2 witnesses:  Ms. Walters and Ms. Andrews and the Presenter Grant Church


Monday June 8, 2015:

unnamed (3)10 am – 11 am    Adam Rosso

11:15 am – 1: 15 pm   Dr. Mundt


2:15 pm  – 4:15 pm

Dr. Baines




The Tribunal  is poised for another resident stand-off  in the ongoing opposition to wind development. The Port Ryerse wind project (Boralex) appeal hearing  is set to start on Wednesday June 3, 2014.

unnamed  This is the wind power plant that will invade the known nesting Barn Owls that have created major delays while the MNFR figures out how they can yes to creating another exemption for a rare species.   The hearing has split the health and environmental portions.   The health appeal is proceeding and the residents have sent some photos and the following message  which makes for very sobering contemplation.


Port Ryerse, on the shores of Lake Erie Ontario:


“Save these photos…. it may not look like this soon.”

Photography courtesy of:  Earl Hartlen Photography www.earlhartlen.com

Resident suggestion for the Site Visit scheduled for June 3, 2015 1130 am:

“I sent in my recommendations for a site visit to start at the pier in Port Dover for all to look at the cliff towards Port Ryerse. I would also suggest that they go to the Port Ryerse pier and look toward Port Dover to see the ugly wind turbines. On a clear day you can count 36 of them miles away. The view of Port Dover can be seen in Turkey Point also 25 miles from Port Dover carried over the inner bay towards Long point. Here are more scenes of our serene beauty from Earl Hartlen, a local photographer.”    

Where were YOU? MPP Tim Hudak asks Minister of Natural Resources

Where were YOU? MPP Tim Hudak asks Minister of Natural Resources

Yesterday, MPP Tim Hudak rose to ask a question about the Blandings turtle, which is an officially endangered species in Ontario, and whose habitat is now threatened by the approved Niagara Region wind power project.

Here is the record of the exchange:

Mr. Tim Hudak: My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. Minister, Blanding’s turtle is a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. Where it exists in Ontario, it lives in shallow waterways and wetlands, including the Niagara peninsula. They are uniquely vulnerable to extinction because it takes 20 years before females start to reproduce.

The Ontario courts made the decision recently that set a precedent: When choosing between industrial wind turbines and a threatened species, Blanding’s turtle, they sided with the turtle, tossing out a wind farm application. It was the right decision. It was the right thing to do.

My question simply is, if it’s right in Prince Edward county, shouldn’t we protect the Blanding’s turtle environment everywhere in the province of Ontario?

Interjections. Continue reading Where were YOU? MPP Tim Hudak asks Minister of Natural Resources

commentary on the ERT Decision related to the Mothers Against Wind Turbines.

Commentary ERT Case No. 14-096 Decision: Mothers Against Wind Turbines

By Carmen Krogh, BScPharm May 25, 2015

To Whom It May Concern Re: ERT Case No. 14-096 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF an appeal by Mothers Against Wind Turbines Inc and Renewable Energy Approval No. 4353- 9HMP2R issued by the Director, Ministry of the Environment, on November 6, 2014 to Niagara Region Wind Corporation.

This Commentary is public and may be shared. I declare no potential conflicts of interest and have received no financial support with respect to the research and authorship of this Commentary.

read entire commentary here: Commentary_Ontario ERT Appeal Mothers Against Wind Turbines Inc May 25 2015 FINAL

Acoustical Society of America Conference 2015, Waubra Foundation Presentation & Notes

The Foundation’s CEO, Sarah Laurie, Bachelor Medicine, Bachelor Surgery (Flinders University) was invited by the President of the ASA, and the Director of Acoustics Standards Dr Paul Schomer to make a presentation at the Acoustical Society of America Conference held at Pittsburgh, USA on 21 May, 2015, and to attend a special meeting to discuss research directions and priorities.

The Acoustical Society of America (ASA) is the largest acoustic society in the world, with a broad range of views readily available at major biannual conferences, with one of the most respected scientific journals in the world. The acoustic aspects of industrial wind turbine impacts on humans, and indeed options for mitigation of that noise, are major journal and conference discussion topics.

Unfortunately the CEO was unable to attend in person, however fortunately Professor Robert McMurtry, from Canada, made the presentation on her behalf.

The following Briefing Notes were prepared as Comments for Discussion, in advance of the conference, to be used as discussion points in determining the priority directions for further wind turbine noise and health research at the special research meeting convened after the conference session on Wind Turbine Noise. They have been made publicly available at the request of health, research, and acoustic colleagues working in this area.

21st May, 2015

re priority directions for wind turbine noise and health research 

The following comments would have been made in person had I been able to attend this meeting in Pittsburgh. I would be delighted to discuss them further with interested parties, and hope they are useful.

follow to read more: Waubra Foundation, 2015

PDF – Pittsburgh-Powerpoint-FINAL-with-references Pittsburgh-Powerpoint-FINAL-with-references

How the Blanding’s turtle took on wind turbines in Prince Edward County

A wind turbine project near Ostrander Point was brought into question by some local turtles.

CaptureIn the summer of 2013, Jim Coyle wrote about how the tiny Blanding’s turtle managed to thwart the development of nine massive wind-turbine generators in Prince Edward County, much to the joy of local residents and nature activists.

It was a very human story, full of human characters, human politics, an human point-of-view.

The following is a recap of that story but from a very different, hyperlocal perspective.

How a wind turbine project near Ostrander Point was brought into question by some local turtles.

The Star.com, Jim Coyle News, Published on Fri May 22 2015

Henry Co. residents fed up with wind turbine noise contact Call 11 for Action

CaptureHENRY COUNTY, OH (Toledo News Now) –Imagine being awakened in the middle of the night by a wind turbine. It was happening for years to several residents of Ridgeville Township near Archbold until they got fed up and turned to Call 11 for Action for help.

“Sometimes it’s really shrill and loud, other times it just hums,” said Joni Decator, who lives on County Road U. “But when it’s shrieking, you can’t even hear to talk to someone on the patio.”

Decator says she can hear the noise from inside her home, too, even with the doors closed and the air conditioner from PortableACNerd.com running.

“In the spring, we don’t open our windows at night because we can hear it,” said neighbor Mandy Walker. “It’ll wake you up. It’s loud enough to wake you up at like 3 in the morning when it starts in.”

Walker and her family have a clear view of the turbine from the house they moved into nine years ago. They say the problem started in the summer of 2012 and prohibits them from even spending time outside at their pool.

read more and watch news report: Posted: May 21, 2015

Risks to Children

Open Submission: Risk of Harm to Children and Industrial Wind Turbines

Health and Social-economic Impacts in Canada
Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise and Health Study
Health Impacts and Exposure to Wind Turbine Noise:
Research Design and Noise Exposure Assessment
Submitted by Carmen Krogh, BScPharm
December 27, 2012

Issued Decision – Case No. 14-096 Mothers Against Wind Turbines Inc. v. Ontario (Environment and Climate Change)

The appeal decision has been released in the case against the Niagara Regional Wind Corporation.  Mothers Against Wind Turbines Inc. and its supporters are reviewing the document and will be releasing a statement in due course.  

Mothers Against Wind Turbines Inc.

ERT14096d1 (2)