I am my own Neighbor

I'm not that familiar with SE Ellis Co. 2cents. I wouldn't care if they put one right behind my house in town if they pay me enough. Say two lots I own at 8 to 10 K per would be pretty nice extra cash.

No, I said they will not breed around tall structures.

Justoo wrote:

No, I said they will not breed around tall structures.

Maybe they're shy and know naturalists have a habit of sitting on high places to try to watch them breed.

ok, is a house too tall to breed by?

hell I won't breed around a tall structure either

Also, how will displacement not demise of prarie chickens breedeing grounds effect the ecosystem?

Can I hunt them?

As for grassland, wouldnt the only place the grass not grow is at the base of the tower? Or is grass scared to breed near tall structures too?

Justoo wrote:

Denying people their rights is bad.

yes , it is bad when you deny someone the right to earn a living from their land in a rural area

All about Benjamins, and who receives them.

my2cents wrote:

Why is the greed of a few more important than the rights of others?

but wasn't it someones greed that opened the land west of Hays to housing in the first place?
where was the outcry about the greed then?

Blackie Kuhn wrote:

hell I won't breed around a tall structure either

If she were cute enough, I'd breed by the front doors of the Sears Tower.

NIMBY!

I got the answer to this. Make the turbine blades like the old days windmills here and have old crafter women paint them to look like sunflowers. The rich women would think they were cute and want one, and the prairie chickens would just see giant sunflowers and hump like bunnies.

What about the flicker?

Ratzilla wrote:

I got the answer to this. Make the turbine blades like the old days windmills here and have old crafter women paint them to look like sunflowers. The rich women would think they were cute and want one, and the prairie chickens would just see giant sunflowers and hump like bunnies.

that's pure genius......... why didn't I think of that?

Shhhh. I had em about sold nitro. The way women go for crafts they'd have had them in all their yards for a week before they even noticed that. And when they think there's cool craft stuff to buy it always outweighs practicality, comfort, and good taste. The Prairie chickens? I doubt they understand flicker effect.

Free shippig today!!!

LukeTHr wrote:

Justoo wrote:

Denying people their rights is bad.

yes , it is bad when you deny someone the right to earn a living from their land in a rural area

No one is denying them the right to earn a living.
I am not allowed to rob banks.

Not only are we not denying them a right to make a living, It could be said they are making a fine living without the added income. I suspect Harold Krause will not go broke anytime soon.
Out of 2,512 farmers in Ellis County during the years of 1995-2006 Harold Krause collected more government subsidies than any other farmer in the county. Denying the industrial wind operation on agricultural land will not bankrupt him.

Does the government subsidize your business?

Noboby is wanting to deny these people the right to make a profit BUT not at the expense of others. The easment signers can have 100 turbines each for all I care but do not force them onto others.

my2cents wrote:

Noboby is wanting to deny these people the right to make a profit BUT not at the expense of others.

Not to toss a fly in the ointment, but isn't that standard protocol? Do we not subsidize a lot of corporations and their projects who are making large profits and have moved their production outside of the United States? Look at the oil industry. Did they not just ask a month ago for incentives? After making record profits in the last quarter? There are so many things that we subsidize and many we have no clue about that it's not even funny.

Justoo wrote:

Do they just unbolt that and let it fall? What about the 100-150 gallons of oil in the nacelle?

Wow, do you just set around thinking up every worse-case scenario that you can? Seriously, you need to work for the Homeland Security or something.

I guess they could dump it on the lease roads like they do now instead of using crude..........

As far as the government protecting us from corporations...the only thing I see here is them protecting us a from a renewable energy source while at the same time, they're climbing in bed with others to ram down out throats coal fired power plants...to produce energy for other states.

Justoo wrote:

Not only are we not denying them a right to make a living, It could be said they are making a fine living without the added income. I suspect Harold Krause will not go broke anytime soon.
Out of 2,512 farmers in Ellis County during the years of 1995-2006 Harold Krause collected more government subsidies than any other farmer in the county. Denying the industrial wind operation on agricultural land will not bankrupt him.

Does the government subsidize your business?

This is why I think sour grapes has alot to do with things. I'm no fan of subsidies at all, but if he gets the most it might just indicate he knows how to get deals a little faster than his neighbors who got left out. The old "He beat us to the deal and screwed us out of our share again" story.

Ratzilla wrote:

Justoo wrote:

Not only are we not denying them a right to make a living, It could be said they are making a fine living without the added income. I suspect Harold Krause will not go broke anytime soon.
Out of 2,512 farmers in Ellis County during the years of 1995-2006 Harold Krause collected more government subsidies than any other farmer in the county. Denying the industrial wind operation on agricultural land will not bankrupt him.

Does the government subsidize your business?

This is why I think sour grapes has alot to do with things. I'm no fan of subsidies at all, but if he gets the most it might just indicate he knows how to get deals a little faster than his neighbors who got left out. The old "He beat us to the deal and screwed us out of our share again" story.

The way I understand it his nephew, Dana (wife Jo, ex-zoning board member) and several other members of his family, got this going secretively about 3.5 years ago, very hush, hush. I guess you have to have it in your blood to screw people over to get what you want. Let's not forget about Lance Russell, Dororthy Bemis, Taylor Bemis, Esther Kraus... gee, I hope I didn't forget anyone in the ring leaders family.

LukeTHr wrote:

Justoo wrote:

Denying people their rights is bad.

yes , it is bad when you deny someone the right to earn a living from their land in a rural area

Just pointing out that not allowing turbines on his land does not infringe on his right, nor on his ability, to earn a living on his land.

my2cents wrote:

The way I understand it his nephew, Dana (wife Jo, ex-zoning board member) and several other members of his family, got this going secretively about 3.5 years ago, very hush, hush. I guess you have to have it in your blood to screw people over to get what you want. Let's not forget about Lance Russell, Dororthy Bemis, Taylor Bemis, Esther Kraus... gee, I hope I didn't forget anyone in the ring leaders family.

There's three ways to get money. Be born to it, get very lucky, or learn the tricks of business and not be afraid to use them. Sorry, but that's life and why reasonably honest guys like myself will usually get hosed.

There is a fourth way: Work an HONEST days wage.

my2cents wrote:

There is a fourth way: Work an HONEST days wage.

No, that only gets you peanuts. Even an honest businessman has to occasionally take the advantage when he can if he expects to advance very far, because if he doesn't his co-workers will and they'll leave him at the bottom.

my2cents wrote:

There is a fourth way: Work an HONEST days wage.

so you are saying that the landowners to the west of Hays wanting to lease their ground to Iberdola are dishonest?

Just pointing out there are other ways to make a living. You can read into that whatever you want.

It's funny how people think, yet avoid the issue.

my2cents wrote:

Just pointing out there are other ways to make a living. You can read into that whatever you want.

When I said there were three ways to make money, I meant make MONEY. I work hard making an honest "living" but around here that doesn't amount to much money. Todays world is highly competitive so if you want the big bucks, you just damn near have to push someone out of the way.

my2cents wrote:

Just pointing out there are other ways to make a living. You can read into that whatever you want.

So if you were offered to make $$, that would also help the environment, you would turn it down? Do you recycle? If so, why?

The new proposal, lowers the number of turbines, doubles the distances from homes, paves Golf Course Road, and guarantees cleanup.

What do you wan't hays known for, advocates of clean energy, or a hub for Walmart?

I choose the previous.

I think 2000 feet from homes, guaranteed disposal, and less turbines is a nice offer, not to mention paving Golf Course. If there's no attempt to accept this offer or at least compromise it will prove sour grapes is the real issue.

Yes, I know there were questionable tactics maybe at play, but I'd like to see a solid effort at some kind of compromise besides just saying put them in someone elses county.

So you are stating that Iberdrola approached them and asked them if they wanted to help the environment? I believe they approached Iberdrola because they heard of the subsidies that were out there to be profited from. If their only intent was helping the environment they would not be opposed for the project to be moved somewhere where it would not be protested.

No, I do not recycle. They town that I live in is unincorporated, we burn our trash.

Ratzilla wrote:

I think 2000 feet from homes, guaranteed disposal, and less turbines is a nice offer, not to mention paving Golf Course. If there's no attempt to accept this offer or at least compromise it will prove sour grapes is the real issue.

Yes, I know there were questionable tactics maybe at play, but I'd like to see a solid effort at some kind of compromise besides just saying put them in someone elses county.

I believe you think 2000 feet from homes is a decent amount of distance. I also believe that unless it is YOUR HOME that is 2000 feet from these things you have really no idea how you would feel. As the old saying goes: Walk a mile in my shoes, then we will talk.

Why is anything less than honest acceptable in today's society. I believe that is how society got to be in the despairing place it is today.

my2cents wrote:

So you are stating that Iberdrola approached them and asked them if they wanted to help the environment? I believe they approached Iberdrola because they heard of the subsidies that were out there to be profited from. If their only intent was helping the environment they would not be opposed for the project to be moved somewhere where it would not be protested.

No, I do not recycle. They town that I live in is unincorporated, we burn our trash.

Does it really matter who made the first contact to initiate talks? I really don't think it does. Whether it was Iberdola or the landowner is irrelevant. Two groups that have a mutual interest in setting up a business deal is not against the law.

Sorry to hear that you still burn your trash. Aren't there any private trash collection services that could haul it? That would be a better option than burning it.

my2cents wrote:

I believe you think 2000 feet from homes is a decent amount of distance. I also believe that unless it is YOUR HOME that is 2000 feet from these things you have really no idea how you would feel. As the old saying goes: Walk a mile in my shoes, then we will talk.

Golly gee, I know it'd be really really high. Like maybe even as high as my house. Maybe even way up in the sky like that giant guy in my story book.

So now you accuse me of being too stupid to know what a 400 foot windmill is.

my2cents wrote:

Why is anything less than honest acceptable in today's society. I believe that is how society got to be in the despairing place it is today.

Never said it was good to play under the table, but I also don't think it's quite right to tell a neighbor they can't do something just because the view will offend you. They're windmills, not giant nude photos of Hillary. They could have just as easily snuck in a deal for a feed lot a full mile from the homes and then they might not see anything, but it'd smell as bad as Hays in the summer.

And speaking of trash burning. Did you make sure nobody within smell range of the smoke objected, or do you just do it because you can? I'd rather see a windmill than smell burning garbage.

Ratzilla wrote:

I think 2000 feet from homes, guaranteed disposal, and less turbines is a nice offer, not to mention paving Golf Course. If there's no attempt to accept this offer or at least compromise it will prove sour grapes is the real issue.

Yes, I know there were questionable tactics maybe at play, but I'd like to see a solid effort at some kind of compromise besides just saying put them in someone elses county.

They did not offer 2000' They offered the same 1000' they have always offered.
They did not offer a surety bond for disposal. Only their word. There is nothing there to legally hold them to their word.
The only real change in the newest proposal is that they have disallowed the right to protest the location.


What compromise?

Ratzilla wrote:

my2cents wrote:

I believe you think 2000 feet from homes is a decent amount of distance. I also believe that unless it is YOUR HOME that is 2000 feet from these things you have really no idea how you would feel. As the old saying goes: Walk a mile in my shoes, then we will talk.

Golly gee, I know it'd be really really high. Like maybe even as high as my house. Maybe even way up in the sky like that giant guy in my story book.

So now you accuse me of being too stupid to know what a 400 foot windmill is.

WOW! I really don't know how to respond to that one, except the only really really high that you could be talking about is you. I never said you didn't know how high 400' is. What I said was that unless it is YOUR house that is 2000 ' from these things there really is no way of knowing how you would feel.

Ratzilla wrote:

And speaking of trash burning. Did you make sure nobody within smell range of the smoke objected, or do you just do it because you can? I'd rather see a windmill than smell burning garbage.

I am following the rules and regulations of my township. We ALL burn our trash, therefore, nobody is there to protest.

Hey Justoo, what ever happened to 'masking' people's names. seems a bit hypocritical, don' you think?

It is publicly available information. No slander, libel, or rude comments. Just facts that are in open records.

my2cents wrote:

Just pointing out there are other ways to make a living. You can read into that whatever you want.

So essentially what you're saying is that a minority can and will, dictate how an individual will make a living with their land.

JustAnotherTourist wrote:

So essentially what you're saying is that a minority can and will, dictate how an individual will make a living with their land.

The way county zoning is written, 20% of the neighbors is enough to derail a project. In this case more than double that percentage objected.

If you don't like the rules as written, ask your zone board to change the rules. They can do that.

JustAnotherTourist wrote:

my2cents wrote:

Just pointing out there are other ways to make a living. You can read into that whatever you want.

So essentially what you're saying is that a minority can and will, dictate how an individual will make a living with their land.

Thats how our country works nowdays, minority rules.......... I think if a county wide vote were to be held on the matter, you would see windmills going up to the southwest of Hays

my2cents wrote:

I am following the rules and regulations of my township. We ALL burn our trash, therefore, nobody is there to protest.

Maybe it's time to update the township rules and stop burning trash. Your trash burning adds to the global pollution issues.

Well, I would suppose if you wanted to supply the truck to haul the trash and a worker, not to mention gas to get to the nearest town that would take our trash, by all means, have at it. Our little town, as I said, is unincorporated. We don't have the monies available to do what you are suggesting.

I bet if you would contact one of the local trash haulers, they would work up a price for you to haul off your garbage. It doesn't have to be paid for by a city governement, it is paid for by the users themselves.