.
—Calvin Luther Martin, PhD

On September 15, 2004, I fell down the rabbit hole into the make-believe world of “wind energy.”  Nine years ago the wind turbine hucksters arrived in Franklin County, NY, oiling their way from townhall to townhall, farmhouse to farmhouse, selling the (palpably absurd) idea of  “clean, green, renewable” wind energy.  (Just another snake-oil, yet spectacularly lucrative.)

For nine years, I’ve been witness to a colossal corporate scam that flourishes despite all the contrary evidence of physics, clinical medicine, economics, environmentalism—and common sense.  Nine years wracking my brain for ways to vanquish it.

We tried publishing Nina’s book, “Wind Turbine Syndrome:  A Report on a Natural Experiment,” thinking (not unreasonably) that 300 pages of clinical and scientific evidence would shut it down.  We were naive.  Zealots driven by dollar bills and the magical thinking of “clean energy” countered with a tsunami of junk science in various junk formats—and, horrifically, it worked.  (Never underestimate the ingenuity of corrupt fools, especially the ones with PhD’s.)

I debated the merits of suing wind companies.  Nope, that was a non-starter.  I pondered the likelihood of convincing local governments to reject these useless grotesqueries marching across the landscape.  This had mixed results.

Finally, despite knowing better, I confess I hoped federal governments—browbeaten by the Corporate Green lobby—would get a grip, do the arithmetic, and pull the plug on the massive subsidies.

Meanwhile, the heart-wrenching stories of Wind Turbine Syndrome multiplied.  This website is loaded with them.  From virtually every continent and both hemispheres.  The stories are a carbon copy of one another; the script is identical for all of them.  I keep posting them, though I’m not convinced it does much good:  How many hundreds of identical stories does it require to stop this nightmare?  The answer is becoming increasingly obvious:  “Mr. Martin, the number of WTS casualties is irrelevant.”

Then—a breakthrough.  A lawsuit.  In Ontario, Canada.  Triggered by this woman.

Her name is Esther Wrightman.  (Remember the name.  It’s going down in Canadian history under the heading, “Heroes.”)  Esther is to wind energy what Rosa Parks was to the American Civil Rights movement.  (Rosa had the common sense and courage to refuse to give up her seat on the bus to a white guy.  Rosa understood truth and integrity and fairness—and the American Constitution.)

I’ll go a step further.  Esther is to wind energy what Dr. Martin Luther King was to the Civil Rights movement.  King became a leader when there was a huge injustice crying out for a leader.  He was jailed and reviled for non-violent disobedience.  In his now famous letter from the Birmingham jail, King outlined his agenda:

The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. . . . Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. . . . It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. . . .My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking.  But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth.

Notice the line:  “It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored!”  Enter Esther Wrightman.  A mom.  A wife who runs the family (plant) nursery.

Esther’s not a lawyer, not a physician, not a PhD.  Her credentials are more “grounded” than this.  Esther’s someone who can distinguish a purple martin from a swift or a bobolink.  (See if a wind company CEO can do the same!)  She can also tell a bog orchid from a begonia.  With her naturalist’s eye, she’s especially adept at distinguishing corporate fraud, harm, and bullshit from garden-variety common sense and truth.

Esther the gardener has decided it’s time to “weed out” NextEra from rural Ontario.  Paraphrasing Martin Luther King, above, Ms. Wrightman has resolved to so dramatize the issue of wind energy “terrorism” that it can no longer be ignored.

“NextEra,” she has publicly and loudly declared, is misnamed.  “More truthfully, it is Next Terror!”  Brilliant!  Succinct.  Snappy.  And true.

For this, ham-handed NextEra sued her.  (Click here for the entire suit.)

Remember the biblical David and Goliath?  Bellowing Goliath, reincarnated as a 500′-tall giant industrial wind turbine, has swung round and fixed its bewildered gaze on the mere wisp of a girl standing before it—all 5′, 100 pounds of her.

Perhaps “Joan of Arc” would be a more apt name than “David.”

In her formal reply to NextEra’s legal bullshit, Esther filed the following “intent to defend” with the Ontario Superior Court.  (Click here for the entire document).

Through it’s own means, [NextEra] discredited its own business in the ways and means it dealt with the public, and earned the name “NextError” and “NexTerror” through these actions.  These include . . . [whereupon follows a long list of evidence].

Whoa!  This is unprecedented!  Improbable as all hell!  And—brilliant.

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe Esther Wrightman has shown us the way forward.  The moment of truth:  Publicly accuse the wind developers of being terrorists and bullies and liars, and invite them to sue you.  Then, make them defend their lies, terrorism, and bullying in court and—best of all—before the media who will stampede you for a juicy story.  (Yeah, it helps if you’re a 5′ tall, 100 lb. young mom with zero financial assets.)

.
Don’t use a lawyer.  Keep it cheap.  Let Goliath hire the blue-stocking Toronto law firm with its $500/hour “fee” meter running.  (Of course, Goliath writes it all off as a tax credit.)

Go for the jugular:  Ask the court for subpoena powers—to get Goliath’s records.  Go after emails and other correspondence.  Find the government/industry corruption, the sleaze, the broken laws.

Call expert witnesses, including Dr. Pierpont, Dr. Laurie, Dr. Salt, Dr. Hanning, Dr. Nissenbaum, Dr. Swinbanks.  And noise engineers:  Rick James, Rob Rand, and their counterparts in Australia and the UK and Canada.  And professional property assessors, like Mike McCann (Chicago).  And wildlife biologists, like Jim Wiegand.  I can say with confidence that Dr. Pierpont, at least, would waive her (normally large) “expert witness” fee and testify pro bono.  (Her fee is large because of the hundreds of hours required to prepare her testimony.  In this instance, she will do it—free.)

In sum:  Get sued!  Keep it cheap, keep it true, keep it honest.  And hammer the sons of bitches in court.  Most of all, create a media spectacle—at the wind company’s expense.

And if the court decides against you—you still win the moral argument, and you win zillions of onlookers who are drawn to the huge spotlight you are shining on these terrorists.  And when you’re hauled off to prison for a (brief) period of time, because you can’t pay the fine—you win even bigger!  Dr. King, Nelson Mandela, Henry David Thoreau—all did jail time to drive home the justice of their cause.  (Get used to the idea of wearing an orange jumpsuit for a week or two. Bring along some good books.  I recommend Thoreau’s classic essay,  “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience.”)

Editor’s note:  When I was an academic, one of my specialties was “Disease in History.”  I taught this course at a worldclass university, where I was a tenured professor.  In addition, for several years I had a courtesy appointment at the Institute of the History of Medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

All by way of background to this:   Dr. Sarah Laurie will one day have a postage stamp bearing her image.  Yes, in Australia.  Dr. Laurie will one day be featured in textbooks.  Dr. Laurie will have at least one book written about her—at least one of them, a scholarly book.  Dr. Laurie will be likely the subject of a Hollywood movie, like Erin Brockovich.  Dr. Laurie will be routinely taught in courses on the History of Medicine at medical schools.

The people persecuting Dr. Laurie are cowards and contemptible.  A year or so ago I contacted one of them and referred to his “fabulous imbecilities” regarding Wind Turbine Syndrome—and, frankly, most everything else I saw on his pretentious academic resumé.  To pronounce this man an academic buffoon would be generous.  That he’s taken seriously in Australia is nothing short of appalling.  (I predict this man will, as well, turn up in textbooks—whenever the history of The Big Wind-Energy Folly is written.  History will not be kind to him.)

But I digress.  The European Platform against Windfarms and North American Platform against Windpower have issued a joint declaration of support for Dr. Laurie.  We, at Wind Turbine Syndrome.com, are honored to join the signatories to this ringing endorsement.

.
Click here to read more.

Memorandum to the Massachusetts Dept. of Environmental Protection

.
—Michael Fairneny (5/10/13)

This note is in regards to my wife’s hearing loss, the Hoosac Wind Project, and the current compliance testing done by Iberdrola.

My wife, Jo Ann, has been to an ear specialist on three different occasions within the past few months.  (She has never had ear problems!).  Her hearing has definitely been affected and deteriorating since her initial visit.

The debilitation happened so dramatically that the doctor had her have an MRI of her ears and head. The test evidently showed nothing significant, but the ringing/buzzing in her ears still persists each and every day we are home. This has caused her many sleepless nights and continues to wake her up.

She says she doesn’t look forward to coming home, being at home, gardening in our yard (which is her passion), and has been looking for an opportunity to work, live, and get away from our “dream home” of 29 years. When she is away at work or leaves for awhile, the symptoms dissipate and eventually go away, but I (we) are afraid the hearing loss could become permanent.

I find this situation very distressing and I ask you what solution would you suggest?

I am also having some sleep disturbance and headaches when I am home (not from her), and even if I wasn’t having symptoms, what choice do I have? We are now seriously considering Plan B.  Unfortunately, we don’t know what that is.

I am now 60 years old with 4 grandchildren who all love it up here.  What has been allowed to happen here is devastating to me and my family.

I still have a very hard time trying to see though and evaluate the true benefits of what seems to be very questionable science and obscure guidelines, without any proper governmental/state standards for siting/setbacks as well as noise pollution (audible and inaudible sound) to protect us. Aren’t we, the residents (citizens), part of the environment? Don’t we deserve to be protected, as well as the birds, the bats, and the earth?

Just because we have chosen to live in a sparsely populated, rural area and there are only a few dozen of us (that have not taken the money offered by Iberdrola’s so-called Good Neighbor agreement, but what I call a gag agreement), does that mean our health and well-being can be cast aside? That the agencies set up to protect us don’t even have in place adequate standards/protocol to evaluate the technology that has been jammed down our throats:  Why?

I’ll tell you why!  Money!  Big money!  This is not fair.  This is not right to have our “pursuit of happiness” thrown out the window.  If we can’t feel safe in our own home, then how can we be happy?  Isn’t this our right?

How can it be acceptable that (1) the only sound test done is paid for by the developer, (2) the acoustic firm is chosen by the developer, (3) monitoring sites are selected by developer, (4) positioning/placement of monitoring devices is chosen by developer, (5) stablished DEP procedures (however inadequate) are totally disregarded by developer, (6) interpretation of data is done by the developer?

I am asking for proper testing.  This means current standards are to be followed (i.e., attended monitoring, proper intervals, duration and times of testing, assurance of maximum output and speed of turbines, etc).  Also essential is that the new, current knowledge for infrasound and low frequency noise be included.

I am no sound expert, nevertheless I am very much aware of my own headaches and symptoms as well as what my wife of well over 30 years has been experiencing day after day.

We want an explanation and relief!  We want our peaceful world back!

Please help!

—Alan Farago, Vinalhaven, Maine (4/10/13)

My family and I are victims of wind turbine noise. With neighbors on our small Maine island, we have spent three years litigating the State of Maine on wind turbine noise regulations and enforcement, and lack thereof.

My friend, Art Lindgren, trudged through the Maine woods near our homes in fall, winter and spring; taking noise measurements in all kinds of weather, to prove the failure of state regulation and enforcement. This battle has taken a toll on our health, our peace and quiet, and finances.

There are additional penalties incurred by citizens with no ulterior motive except protecting their peace and quiet, their health and property values. Our group of neighbors on Vinalhaven is suffering like many communities the United States where wind turbine farms have been permitted too close to homes.

The Lindgrens have made efforts to engage their Maine US Senator Susan Collins, asking that Senator Collins support a Congressional hearing on impacts to people from wind turbine noise. Their letters are attached (click here).

We all have stories to tell, and it is important for Congress to hear your stories now.

Please support our effort for a Congressional hearing on the impacts of wind turbine noise.

Please write a letter now, to Senator Collins and to your own elected Congressional representatives. (And if you do, please copy me at alanfarago@mac.com.)

Click anywhere, above, to read the entire journal and accompanying Wind Turbine Syndrome report.

Editor’s note:  Before reading the article, below, watch this video.  (With thanks to Tim & Ella.)

.
“Obama administration gives wind farms a pass on eagle deaths, prosecutes oil companies”

—FoxNews.com (5/14/13).  Read this companion article.

CONVERSE COUNTY, Wyo. – The Obama administration has never fined or prosecuted a wind farm for killing eagles and other protected bird species, shielding the industry from liability and helping keep the scope of the deaths secret, an Associated Press investigation has found.

More than 573,000 birds are killed by the country’s wind farms each year, including 83,000 hunting birds such as hawks, falcons and eagles, according to an estimate published in March in the peer-reviewed Wildlife Society Bulletin.

Each death is federal crime, a charge that the Obama administration has used to prosecute oil companies when birds drown in their waste pits, and power companies when birds are electrocuted by their power lines. No wind energy company has been prosecuted, even those that repeatedly flout the law.

Wind power, a pollution-free energy intended to ease global warming, is a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s energy plan. His administration has championed a $1 billion-a-year tax break to the industry that has nearly doubled the amount of wind power in his first term.

The large death toll at wind farms shows how the renewable energy rush comes with its own environmental consequences, trade-offs the Obama administration is willing to make in the name of cleaner energy.

“It is the rationale that we have to get off of carbon, we have to get off of fossil fuels, that allows them to justify this,” said Tom Dougherty, a long-time environmentalist who worked for nearly 20 years for the National Wildlife Federation in the West, until his retirement in 2008. “But at what cost? In this case, the cost is too high.”

Documents and emails obtained by The Associated Press offer glimpses of the problem: 14 deaths at seven facilities in California, five each in New Mexico and Oregon, one in Washington state and another in Nevada, where an eagle was found with a hole in its neck, exposing the bone.

One of the deadliest places in the country for golden eagles is Wyoming, where federal officials said wind farms had killed more than four dozen golden eagles since 2009, predominantly in the southeastern part of the state. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose the figures. Getting precise figures is impossible because many companies aren’t required to disclose how many birds they kill. And when they do, experts say, the data can be unreliable.

When companies voluntarily report deaths, the Obama administration in many cases refuses to make the information public, saying it belongs to the energy companies or that revealing it would expose trade secrets or implicate ongoing enforcement investigations.

Nearly all the birds being killed are protected under federal environmental laws, which prosecutors have used to generate tens of millions of dollars in fines and settlements from businesses, including oil and gas companies, over the past five years.

“What it boils down to is this: If you electrocute an eagle, that is bad, but if you chop it to pieces, that is OK,” said Tim Eicher, a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service enforcement agent based in Cody, Wyo.

The Fish and Wildlife Service says it is investigating 18 bird-death cases involving wind-power facilities and seven have been referred to the Justice Department. A spokesman for the Justice Department declined to discuss the status of those cases.

In its defense, the wind-energy industry points out that more eagles are killed each year by cars, electrocutions and poisoning than by turbines. Dan Ashe, the Fish and Wildlife Service’s director, said in an interview Monday with the AP said that his agency always has made clear to wind companies that if they kill birds they would still be liable.

“We are not allowing them to do it. They do it,” he said of the bird deaths. “And we will successfully prosecute wind companies if they are in significant noncompliance.”

But by not enforcing the law so far, the administration provides little incentive for companies to build wind farms where there are fewer birds. And while companies already operating turbines are supposed to do all they can to avoid killing birds, in reality there’s little they can do once the windmills are spinning.

Wind farms are clusters of turbines as tall as 30-story buildings, with spinning rotors the size of jetliners.

Flying eagles behave like drivers texting on their cell phones — they don’t look up. As they scan for food, they don’t notice the industrial turbine blades until it’s too late.

Former Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, in an interview with the AP before his departure, denied any preferential treatment for wind. Interior Department officials said that criminal prosecution, regardless of the industry, is always a “last resort.”

“There’s still additional work to be done with eagles and other avian species, but we are working on it very hard,” Salazar said. “We will get to the right balance.”

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has proposed a rule that would give wind-energy companies potentially decades of shelter from prosecution for killing eagles. The regulation is currently under review at the White House.

The proposal, made at the urging of the wind-energy industry, would allow companies to apply for 30-year permits to kill a set number of bald or golden eagles. Previously, companies were only eligible for five-year permits.

“It’s basically guaranteeing a black box for 30 years, and they’re saying `trust us for oversight’. This is not the path forward,” said Katie Umekubo, a renewable energy attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, who argued in private meetings with the industry and government leaders that the 30-year permit needed an in-depth environmental review.

But the eagle rule is not the first time the administration has made concessions for the wind-energy industry.

Last year, over objections from some of its own wildlife investigators and biologists, the Interior Department updated its guidelines and provided more cover for wind companies that violate the law.

Under both the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the death of a single bird without a permit is illegal.

But under the Obama administration’s new guidelines, wind-energy companies don’t face additional scrutiny until they have a “significant adverse impact” on wildlife or habitat.

That rare exception for one industry substantially weakened the government’s ability to enforce the law and ignited controversy inside the Interior Department.

“U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service does not do this for the electric utility industry or other industries,” Kevin Kritz, a government wildlife biologist in the Rocky Mountain region wrote in internal agency comments in September 2011. “Other industries will want to be judged on a similar standard.”

The Obama administration, however, repeatedly overruled its own experts. In the end, the wind-energy industry, which was part of the committee that drafted and edited the guidelines, got almost everything it wanted.

“Clearly, there was a bias to wind energy in their favor because they are a renewable source of energy, and justifiably so,” said Rob Manes, who runs the Kansas office for The Nature Conservancy and who served on the committee. “We need renewable energy in this country.”

Click here for transcript of doctor’s testimony.

Editor’s note:  Horses, as well as humans, suffer from being in close proximity to wind turbines, strongly suggests a study performed last year at the School of Veterinary Medicine, Technical University, Lisbon, Portugal.  The study was written up as a Master’s thesis, titled “Acquired flexural deformity of the distal interphalangic joint in foals.”

On this stud farm, the owner has been breeding normal and physically sound horses since 2000. There were no changes in diet, exercise or any other significant alteration in management. Until in 2008, wind turbines were installed adjacent to the property and grazing paddocks.
  Since this date, a good number of foals and yearlings have developed deformities.

The subjects of the study were:
  11 Lusitano horses. Age between 0 and 48 months old.
  6 males and 5 females
.  9 were born at the stud farm, 2 were acquired from a different breeder.

The M.A. thesis was presaged in a conference paper by Professor Mariana Alves-Pereira et al. several years ago, and summarized as follows.

In 2007, at the 2nd International Conference on Wind Turbine (WT) Noise, held in Lyon, France, low frequency noise (<500 Hz, LFN)-induced pathology, consistent with vibroacoustic disease (VAD), was shown to be emerging in the R. Family, exposed to residential LFN generated by 4 WT installed in close proximity (300-700 m) to their home. Herein, a follow-up is provided.

The wife and 2 children no longer reside within that home. Mr. R., however, must remain to care for the thoroughbred Lusitanian horses and bulls that he trains and breeds for bullfights.

In addition to the continued deterioration of Mr. R’s health and well-being, his financial situation is aggravated by the condition now appearing in his horses during the first year of life. Between 2000 and 2006, 13 healthy thoroughbred Lusitanian horses were born and raised on Mr. R’s property. All horses (N=4) born or raised after 2007 developed asymmetric flexural limb deformities. WT began operations in November 2006. No other changes (constructions, industries, etc) were introduced into the area during this time.

Tissue analyses of the defected tendons were performed and revealed the classical features of LFN-induced biological responses: thickening of blood vessel walls due to proliferation of collagen in the absence of an inflammatory process.

In a personal communication, Alves-Pereira underscores, “The observation in these horses of abnormal growth of collagen in the absence of an inflammatory process is in conformity with the same observations found in low frequency noise (LFN)-exposed rats, and in vibroacoustic disease patients who are employed in LFN-rich environments.”

The following text is taken from here, with appreciation.

~~~~~~~~~~

Abstract:

Since 2008, a high prevalence of front limb acquired flexural deformities was observed in a Lusitano stud farm. This work aims to evaluate this problem by reporting the results from tissue alterations in the affected animals as well as environmental conditions and management changes, which could have led to this observation. A total of eleven affected animals were studied. In these, a complete physical and orthopaedic examination were performed specifically the determination of the angle between the dorsal hoof wall and the floor. Radiographic examination, CT imaging, determination of the thickness of the cortical bone of the third metacarpian and histopathology of some tissues collected in biopsy and necropsy were done in a subset of affected foals.

All the animals had been supplemented with balanced commercial diet for equine. To investigate a possible genetic cause, two foals from distinct bloodlines were brought to the stud. These also developed the deformities after 6 months. Two of the affected foals were placed in a
pasture away from the initial one and two others were admitted at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine of Lisbon. In those animals, except for one that had to be euthanized for humane reasons, an improvement was observed on their condition, with partial recovery of the deformity.
Histopathology was performed from (i) the tendon obtained by surgical desmotomy in one foal, (ii) tendon biopsies were performed in three foals and (iii) from the tissue of one foal during necropsy. Histologically the most significant alterations were the dissociation of myofibrils of the smooth muscle. This was predominantly seen in the small intestine but also in the walls of small capillary vessels, including those of the tendon vasculature. The flexural deformities have a complex and multifactorial etiopathogeny. They occur due to uncoupling of the longitudinal development of the bone and its adjacent soft tissues, but also from shortening of the tendon-muscle unit in response to pain.
In the case series presented here, there was no obvious cause for the development of this problem, therefore we hypothesised that unusual environmental conditions might have played an important role in the development of this condition, especially those introduced in recent years.

~~~~~~~~~

The following is the summary of a case study of a group of Lusitano horses that have been monitoried over 4 years which were the subject of a masters thesis at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Technical University, Lisbon, completed in 2012.

The study was performed by Teresa Margarida Pereira Costa e Curto,  ADVISOR: Dr. Maria da Conceição da Cunha and Vasconcelos Peleteiro CO-ADVISOR: Dr. Maria Luisa Jorge Mendes.

The study reports the findings from a stud where 11 foals developed flexural deformities of the front limbs, after they were born. (Acquired flexural deformity of the distal interphalangeal joint.)

The above image shows the same foal at 3 and 6 months of age

A foal was bought from another breeder to exclude a possible genetic link to this problem. He came to the farm at 15 days old and like the others, developed a flexural deformity.

Radiological examination of front limbs

The following tests were used for the study:  
• Anamnesis
• Clinical examination
• Goniometry
• Ultrasound and x-ray
• Measurement of cortical bone
• CT
• Desmotomy of the check ligament
• Histopathology
• Sound measurements
• Measurements of ground vibration

Proximity of horses to wind turbines

Aerial view of farm proximity to wind turbines

Measurements of ground vibration were made at different distances from the wind turbines, with the same equipment that is used to detect seismic vibrations (earthquakes). The results of these measurements, showed ground vibration at different frequencies.
Research has shown that vibration effects bone metabolism.

The above research project was based solely on this case study. Therefore, further research is necessary in order to validate these preliminary findings and hypothesis. Regarding the sound that the wind turbines produce, measurements were taken and studies have demonstrated some cellular damage is caused by low frequency noise.

The full thesis can be downloaded here in Portuguese.

Editor’s note:  The following note was written by Michelle Levine, an environmentalist who helped lead a campaign in Israel to defeat wind turbines.  Michelle wrote her note to Esther Wrightman who, like Michelle, is a young woman of courage and formidable will.  Evidently the battle in Israel is not definitively over; nonetheless it’s encouraging to see that the courts have upheld the principle that wind turbines slaughter birds.  I am unaware of any other court in the world which has such common sense.  Bravo to the Israelis!

—Michelle Levine

Esther, you are fighting a righteous battle, but my prayer for you is that you should be joined by legions, and that some of them will take a different tack—by helping you fight in the courts, by raising public awareness, as Nina clearly has done.

I believe it is usually the combined efforts of many that help bring a win—and with you as their leader, your legions would be tenacious indeed.

My colleagues have successfully fought off wind farms in Israel, but we had a lot more organizational support, from the nationwide environmental movement—the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel (SPNI). SPNI attorneys took the Israel Electric Corporation (IEC) to court, and though it took a judge to issue the ruling, the IEC also understands SPNI’s position of massive nationwide public support.

Interestingly, the campaign in Israel has been and continues to be about the threat turbines pose to decimating species of migrating birds, rather than focusing on public health. Wind farms continue to be proposed, however, so it is an ongoing battle.

I will pass on word about your struggle, so that this obviously critical issue be considered as well.

B’hatslacha—to your victory!