Our statement on the proposed Gaylord solar farm

Nuance should enter decision-making; bad-faith actors should exit

Just after New Year’s Day, news broke that the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) was considering leasing 420 of 1,200 acres of a public trust parcel of land in Ostego County for a solar energy farm.

The acreage in question—a mix of harvestable forest, degraded land, and oil and gas wellheads—drew a strong response from, among others, Republican lawmakers, who called for MDNR firings and for the solar lease to be denied.

The Michigan Environmental Council—after spending time to study available documents, maps, studies and news updates—issued the following statement in response.

“The Michigan Environmental Council is concerned that the MDNR’s announcement to lease land for solar has been harnessed by bad-faith actors to start an anti-solar firestorm.

“The lease announcement is the start of a process that will include ample opportunity for the public and stakeholders to weigh in. Furthermore, the decision has been painted as black and white: the state leases all the land in question and develops solar on all of it, or it doesn’t. That is not the case. The project can be tailored and shaped by the public. They can weigh in to limit unintended consequences and to scale the design to the character of the parcel and the surrounding community.

“The Environmental Council underscores that we support leasing or selling marginal state land for solar and wind development. We do not support leasing or selling state land that is ecologically significant or significant for recreation and outdoor enjoyment. At first blush, the property in Gaylord appears to be a well-situated site for some level of solar development. Much of the land is already degraded, the habitat is fragmented by surrounding industrial and residential development, and there are oil and gas wells and transmission lines within the parcel. There is even clear-cutting already taking place on the property to harvest red pine. Anti-solar actors have expressed no concern for the trees around these deforestations; they only care now.

“However, clear cutting trees, while necessary in some instances, should be approached with caution and care. There are cases where clear cutting can be a climate and ecological benefit and where it is a climate and ecological harm. We call on the MDNR to conduct a robust climate analysis of this project and any future projects to assure the public that there will be reduced greenhouse gas pollution. We will actively engage in the project development process to ensure the best outcome for our land, water and beloved places.”