In October last year, a Norwegian court ruled that the implementation of wind turbines in Storheia and Roan, areas of Fosen, Trøndelag, violated the rights of indigenous Sami people.

As EnergyWatch has previously described, a dialog between reindeer owners, the authorities and developers on how to solve the conflict has now been initiated, and several proposals were made in September.

Hilde Marie Gaebpie Gabrielsen is unhappy that the government does not seem to be considering removing the turbines, despite the fact that ”turbine demolition” is mentioned in the proposals.

”The government has initiated new investigations into the impact of wind turbines on reindeer herding in Fosen, despite the fact that this has already been comprehensively investigated in court cases over the past 15 years. The demolition of the turbines and re-establishing nature in the area is not a theme of the investigation, even though it would put a stop to the infringement of the Sami people’s rights, and is the preferred course of action among reindeer herders,” she wrote in a statement, before asking the Minister for Petroleum and Energy Terje Aaslund:

”Why won’t the government investigate demolition, restoration and revegetation?”

Turbines must continue operating

In his response, Aaslund writes that the ministry has initiated ”a process to ensure that the state’s commitment to the Sami people as indigenous people is maintained in Fosen.”

However, he says that the government’s position has not changed.

”The aim of the process is that turbine operation can continue at the same time as the reindeer trade is protected. Based on dialog with reindeer herders, permit holders and a thorough reading of case documents, the ministry has proposed an investigation plan, and the proposal has been sent to the reindeer owners.”

He adds that the proposal includes the statement that the investigation should include potential ”changes to operations, design or number of turbines, and the related facilities, including an investigation of roads, speed limits and turbine transport.”

”The specific contents of the investigation program have not yet been decided, but the aim of the consultation is to reach an agreement on what needs to be investigated to approve new rules for the future.”

Description was ”procedural error”

A similar description to keep the turbines is found in the proposed investigation plans. Here, it is stated that different ”appeasing initiatives” must be ”identified and assessed” in order to ensure that the wind farms don’t violate Sami ”right to cultural practice.”

These descriptions have already met heavy opposition during the hearing round, both from the Sami people themselves and from the Sametinget, a publicly elected body that secures the political representation of the Norwegian Samis.

”This attitude toward the case does not invite trust. Instead, it gives the impression that the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy has already made up its mind. The turbines will remain standing, while adequately appeasing initiatives are found, and that the entire process is only purposed with doing that. That is in direct conflict with what the Supreme Court has concluded: that no appeasing initiatives exist. In itself, this makes for an erroneous case processing where the very assumption behind the assessment is wrong,” write the Sami people from northern Fosen.

The Sametinget also isn’t impressed by the ministry’s approach:

”The Ministry of Petroleum and Energy’s approach to implementing the concession determinations is to: ’ensure operation of the wind farms so they don’t breach the Sami people’s right to cultural practice.’ The Ministry is here starting from a false premise with the wrong basis,” the Sametinget writes

Representatives from Fosen Vind and Roan Vind have previously told EnergyWatch that they plan to continue operating the wind farms.

(This article was provided by our Norwegian sister media, EnergyWatch.no)

Siemens Gamesa wants wind farms exclusively for electrolysis

Sweden: ”Grievous sabotage” caused Nord Stream 1 & 2 ruptures

How COP27 ended with success on climate justice and failure on emissions