On August 21, the Minnesota Supreme Court denied the request of the Friends of the Boundary Waters that the higher court review the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruling allowing AT&T to construct a 450-foot cell phone tower adjacent to the Fernberg Road in Ely, about two miles from the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness boundary.
The high court’s decision means a June ruling by the Minnesota Court of Appeals—which allows construction of the tower—will stand. The Friends group attempted to block the tower proposed by AT&T, saying its location atop a ridge near Ely would make it visible from 10 lakes within the protected area. The group had argued that a smaller tower without lights would provide sufficient coverage.
“The Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the Friends of the Boundary Waters case against the AT&T cell phone tower may be a sign the courts are getting tired of the frivolous lawsuits filed by these preservation groups,” said Nancy McReady, president of Conservationists with Common Sense.
“Here in the Ely area, people live year-round just about up to the Boundary Waters borders. The cell phone tower is much more to provide service for the residents of the area than it is for the visitors of the Boundary Waters,” said McReady.
Friends’ Director Paul Danicic sent out an e-mail notification stating, “The Supreme Court’s decision not to review this case is a disappointment and a loss for all of Minnesota’s protected natural resources. This tower is contrary to Minnesota’s values of environmental stewardship.
“In light of this decision, we call on AT&T to do the right thing—leave the existing 199-foot tower in place, and do not build the 450-foot tower,” wrote Danicic.
He added, “If AT&T builds its 450-foot tower—a tower that will permanently mar the wild horizons of at least 10 Boundary Waters lakes—AT&T will forever be known as having championed a new and dangerous precedent that will allow it, little by little, tower by tower, to erode the scenic resources of our beautiful state”
McReady doesn’t share those concerns. “I live on Fall Lake, a lake that has a lighted town at the west end and the Boundary Waters on the east end. It is rather naive to think by paddling into the Boundary Waters on Fall Lake, which is a motorized lake, one would have a full wilderness experience when crossing over that imaginary boundary line in the middle of the lake. One more light isn’t going to mar the wild horizons,” she said.
Leave a Reply