Wind company asks landowners to ban hunting

[JBen]

Pretty much Mike, though there is truth to what they are saying. My limited understanding ( not an area I paid much attention to) is that "really", most farming these days, is large conglomerates vs smaller family farms. But also agree with you. If I or anyone here own a hundred acres of bush lot and want to log it for $. Who thinks I shouldn't be able to or would begrudge me. Or conversely if I decide to raise chickens ( something people on these forums do).......or if I decide I want to HUNT on my land, kill wildlife (some might consider that avarice) and some might resent being woken up Sunday mornings when I and my friends cut loose on a flock of Geese. Or as in Monihan. Try to ban target shooting....

so "the truth lies in the middle" and "shades of grey". However there are differences. One of which is zoning by-laws (enter the GEA). For example even though it's my land, if I want to fence my land, by-laws dictate how high fences can be. They also prevent people from erecting eyesores and more. There are other factors to. One being we don't need them. We produce so much excess power as is. We need to house people, so selling farms to get plowed under...etc etc

In the end, after slicing and dicing it. Cut to the chase and there's no one to blame but the politicians and those who despite oh so very much campaigned for this admin, and voted for them. Not just once (2011) but again in 2014.

[MikePal]

Wait till they start the east-west pipeline....right thru the backyard of people who heat their home with oil..

Now here may be a firm that might be justified in requesting a 'No Hunting' clause and a landowner might actually agree if he's responsible for the clean up.

I wonder what caliber it would take to puncture one of these at 100 yds ?

[LowbanksArcher]

Neither are most corporate decisions...it's how Capitalism works....isn't every business that uses off shore manufacturing to produce cheaper products lacking integrity and filled with greed ? Taking jobs from Canadians ?

How many things do you own that are made by what is paramount to slave labour in off shore factories ? Got an iPhone ? Let's no get all sanctimonious about integrity v Greed and then look the other way to buy a cheaper products made by cheap labour.

A farmer that if offered money to lease his land has every legal right to do so. If they have a moral compass and decide that they don't like what it will do to the landscape so be it. But to use a blanket statement like they lack integrity and are all greedy without knowing the reasons as to why they signed the contracts is wrong. Since when is making money considered greedy ?

Have you turned down a promotion or bonus because you didn't want to make more money and appear to be greedy?

Just because you don't like the sight of them while driving along the rural hwy's doesn't give you the right to condemn the landowner for having them on his property anymore that I have the right to condemn the developers for putting up skyscrapers and apartment towers on what was once farm land.

Do you like the look of the sprawling suburbs on the outskirts of the GTA ? Urban sprawl stretching as far as the eye can see on what used to be farm pasture...a blight on the horizon...Why was that allowed ?

Were the farmers that took money from the developer for the land your house is sitting on greedy ? Do you lack integrity for buying a home on land that was once scenic farmland ?

Lets' not get too sanctimonious here and decide what is a blight.

The issue of wind farms is fraught with problems that land squarely on the laps of politicians. And as was pointed out, Ontarian's have had the opportunity twice to remove them and failed. Now as taxpayers we will pay for it.

Oh man, you really are reaching here...
Well, personally, I do actually happen to be the kind of guy that will spend more to buy something locally and ethically made. Who won't buy a Juan Deere product since they moved the local plant to Mexico. Who won't even watch Global TV since they cancelled all hunting programs. Stuff like that.

"If they have a moral compass and decide that they don't like what it will do to the landscape so be it." Exactly.
Selling out to disgusting urban sprawl? Sure, same idea. (Montgomery Gentry's - Daddy Won't Sell the Farm comes to mind. Haha)
Spin and stretch this thing any way you want to continue your argument, but simply put, if you sign a gag order to hide information from your neigbours, and take their property value/children's inheritance for personal profit to further your multi million dollar operation, you're a peice of garbage.

[MikePal]

if you sign a gag order to hide information from your neigbours, and take their property value/children's inheritance for personal profit to further your multi million dollar operation, you're a peice of garbage.

really..and you accuse me of stretching it..LOL...

not my argument..just punching holes in yours

you might be interested in reading the facts about property values....but then again, not likely to change your opinion.

Darn those nasty facts

The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) commissioned this study of the effects of industrial wind turbines (IWT) on the current value of property in proximity to the turbines. Over the last few years, the subject of IWTs has been the subject of a number of reports and studies – both in Canada and worldwide. Past and current studies

undertaken by both academics as well as real estate and health professionals have focused on the potential impacts of IWTs on property value and health. Given MPAC’s
legislated mandate, this report focuses on the potential impact of IWTs on property values.

MPAC’s study concludes that 2012 Current Value Assessments (CVA) of properties located within proximity to an IWT are assessed at their current value and are equitably assessed in relation to homes at greater distances. No adjustments are required for 2012 CVAs. This finding is consistent with MPAC’s 2008 CVA report. The 2012 CVA study also found that there is no statistically significant impact on sale prices of residential properties in these market areas resulting from proximity to an IWT. The study underwent a rigorous independent third-party peer review and includes appendices describing the study parameters and documenting the analyses.

https://www.mpac.ca/sites/default/fi...ndTurbines.pdf

[JBen]

Mike, first off, you don't have to spend a lot of time researching MPAC before calling in to question their ability to assess property values and "allegiance".

file this under anecdotal, given we recently went through the insanity of moving. Not sure how familiar you are with Durham region, but for the sake of bandwidth, will assume you know it. We looked at very many properties, put offers in on four. While we ran into a number of things, that really would take too much to relate concisely. Here's two things we found.

Properties inside Whitby, Oshawa, Courtice, Bowmanville. Would sell in 1 day, always with multiple offers ranging in number from 3-5 to 20 offers. And would sell for anywhere between 20,000 over ask, and 120,000 over ask.

properties around Port Perry (rural) would sell in one day, with multiple offers. Fewer offers (3-6) and 20-80k over ask. That surprised us, thinking the further out we looked, we'd avoid the insanity. Uh uh. One place on Scugog Island we bid on, I offered 50,000 over list. We lost to someone who offered 10,000 less, but was willing to waive septic and well inspections. I wasn't. In short, everything no matter how good, or run down are selling. In a day.

we looked at 5 houses in Bethany. Where turbines are going up and where the 407 will link to 115 a little down the road. It's a prime place. All but 1 of those house sat. And sat and sat. Likely until the sellers lowered their asking price.

and we ultimately decided those turbines and who knows how many more coming. Not worth the risk. Mind you $ talks, and I will always at least look at and consider good bargains, for the right price

[werner.reiche]

Question. For those who feel that the farmer should be able to do what he wants with his land.

Should a farmer be allowed to bulldoze fence lines and timber to increase their workable acreage?

Around here, I see big farming operations buying properties, and bulldozing fence lines. Big equipment moves in, safe wildlife travel corridors turn into increased profits.

Of course he should.
There's a farmer near Limoges that in the last couple of years has clear-cut about 300 acres of soft maple bush, bulldozed it and is now growing corn.

If you want the land preserved in its current state, BUY IT and you can.

I am completely astounded by the number of posters here that don't believe in landowners rights.

[LowbanksArcher]

Mike, first off, you don't have to spend a lot of time researching MPAC before calling in to question their ability to assess property values and "allegiance".

file this under anecdotal, given we recently went through the insanity of moving. Not sure how familiar you are with Durham region, but for the sake of bandwidth, will assume you know it. We looked at very many properties, put offers in on four. While we ran into a number of things, that really would take too much to relate concisely. Here's two things we found.

Properties inside Whitby, Oshawa, Courtice, Bowmanville. Would sell in 1 day, always with multiple offers ranging in number from 3-5 to 20 offers. And would sell for anywhere between 20,000 over ask, and 120,000 over ask.

properties around Port Perry (rural) would sell in one day, with multiple offers. Fewer offers (3-6) and 20-80k over ask. That surprised us, thinking the further out we looked, we'd avoid the insanity. Uh uh. One place on Scugog Island we bid on, I offered 50,000 over list. We lost to someone who offered 10,000 less, but was willing to waive septic and well inspections. I wasn't. In short, everything no matter how good, or run down are selling. In a day.

we looked at 5 houses in Bethany. Where turbines are going up and where the 407 will link to 115 a little down the road. It's a prime place. All but 1 of those house sat. And sat and sat. Likely until the sellers lowered their asking price.

and we ultimately decided those turbines and who knows how many more coming. Not worth the risk. Mind you $ talks, and I will always at least look at and consider good bargains, for the right price

I think of it quite simply. There is unarguably a definitive percentage of potential home buyers that are opposed to purchasing a home near one. That percentage of the population alone is enough to lower property value by 'x' amount.

[LowbanksArcher]

Of course he should.
There's a farmer near Limoges that in the last couple of years has clear-cut about 300 acres of soft maple bush, bulldozed it and is now growing corn.

If you want the land preserved in its current state, BUY IT and you can.

I am completely astounded by the number of posters here that don't believe in landowners rights.

Fair enough. I disagree and think there should be an approval process involve with a local conservation authority. I suppose this opinion's greatly affected by what part of the province you're in. In the densely populated south, there's less and less timber standing every year. I don't think that's a good thing.

[MikePal]

Mike, first off, you don't have to spend a lot of time researching MPAC before calling in to question their ability to assess property values and "allegiance".

Normally, yes I would agree....but as it said for this report; " The study underwent a rigorous independent third-party peer review and includes appendices describing the study parameters and documenting the analyses."

see: https://www.mpac.ca/PropertyOwners/I...alWindTurbines

Your findings..anecdotal yes...but the same finding you see in any report ..it may take a little longer as there would be less buyers, but eventually they would sell at close to asking.

[MikePal]

Fair enough. I disagree and think there should be an approval process involve with a local conservation authority.

A lot of property for sale around here have 'use' restrictions on portions of the property applied by the Conservation Authority, but it usually involves water/swamps etc. Never heard of one with trees/brush.