Subject: Re (Statham) Power lines in other states (fwd)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 183323 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info.
---559023410-851401618-928366403=:5155
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii
Content-ID:
......."Bless Carney's heart."...... See below...... Also, a couple
of guru comments.....
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)......
rbeavers@llion.org.......
.....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....
EMF-L web-site can be found at:
EMF-L archives can be found at:
..................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS..................
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 19:05:17 -0700
From: linda
To: "Roy L. Beavers"
Subject: Re: (Statham) Power lines in other states (fwd)
Thanks for your reply. Concerning our own situation here in Georgia, our
atty. and family are still waiting to hear a ruling from the Fulton County
(Atlanta is in Fulton Co.) judge as to whether or not Georgia Transmission
Corp. is truly an EMC or a private corporation and thus should not have the
power to use eminent domain. We presented our paperwork about 2 1/2 months
ago to the Fulton judge. She said she did not want to "hear" the case but
would take the paperwork and make a ruling in 15 days. We have heard
nothing. Our hope is that she truly is studying the issue since there has
been such a delay. It's hard to know but I sure don't want to rush her. She
can take years to decide as far as I am concerned.
This same corp. was planning to build a 45 mile line through SE Georgia in
the Moultrie area. It is my understanding that they had already erected
poles. Now they are cancelling that project. You can look up their website:
gatrans.com to see a copy of the letter they sent to the property owners.
Seemingly, they say some new information has come forward showing that the new
power is not needed. How I would love to know the real story. Should you
look on their website, our project is called Batesville.
[......Linda, do you recall -- did they change their minds about the time
of the publication of the NIEHS RAPID study????...... There is MUCH about
that in our archives..... If you have forgotten it -- go in there and
take a look. It might explain their "change of mind" -- particularly if
their line was transitting residential neighborhoods with children!!!....
....guru....]
I am thrilled with your latest reports on the list concerning new
"admittings" of the dangers. I share your articles with many. Bless Carney's
heart! She is passionate and please let her know that many appreciate her
tenacity.
[......I appreciate her tenacity too!!!!.....guru......]
Here's another thought for your readers. These 115 kv powerlines are
proposed to run alongside the Little River. The Little River is on the EPA
303d list which means that it is already in an endangered state and is on
active status showing the river does not meet the water quality standards for
its designated use which is in this case, fishing. By running powerlines 100
ft. from the shores, it truly will be more damaged. Do any of your
environmental list members know if there is a basis for trying to stop further
damage to a waterway that is already listed as 303d?
Oh, what an education this has been!
Linda Statham.....
Roy L. Beavers wrote:
> ......I regret that I must assure you, Linda, -- on the basis of some
> considerable professional experience -- that the issue of "ugliness" or
> "unsightliness" is an issue that the courts refuse even to consider in
> ANY of our states ... when ruling in favor of the power companies on
> behalf of eminent domain "easement rights" where power lines are
> concerned......
>
> The power companies won that battle decades ago, and the beauty of what
> was once the great American landscape is clearly the loser..... You
> cannot avoid seeing that as you enter virtually any city, town -- and,
> today, even the rural areas -- of America.... More and more, bigger
> and bigger, power lines and substations ... crowd into residential
> neighborhoods in our center cities, threaten the health of our children
> and encroach upon the once pristine vistas of rural America....
>
> It is the curse of our electrical civilization....
>
> You must raise the public health issue..... In most states, the courts
> are still open minded on that...... The public health issue is the issue
> that the power companies DO NOT want to have to deal with....
>
> Still, it would be good to hear from others who may know of cases of
> exception to the general rule I offer above.......guru.....
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 09:50:30 -0700
> From: linda
> To: "Roy L. Beavers"
> Subject: other states
>
> Hi Roy,
> I know you have folks on the list from many states. My question to them
> is:
>
> Do other states allow these unsightly, mammoth 80ft. steel/concrete towers
> to be run throughout their state to run transmission lines? Are they run
> through the midst of subdivisions in other states as they are presently
> being run in Georgia? Are they allowed to be placed through the middle
> of beautiful horse and dairy farms? Are they buried in some states? I
> am just curious as to how other areas handle this problem?
>
> Thanks,
> Linda
> linda.statham@cwixmail.com
---559023410-851401618-928366403=:5155--
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html