Re[2]: [at-l] "The Trail Isn't Really Wilderness Anyway..."

[saunterer@jimbullard.org (saunterer@jimbullard.org)]

Well written as usual Weary.

At 03:25 PM 1/11/02 -0500, Bob Cummings wrote:
>      The following is a slightly edited version of the message I am providing
>      Maine environmental groups as I seek support for MATC's opposition 
> to the
>      wind power proposal for the Western Maine mountains. I can't comment on
>      Vermont and its governor. But:
>
>
>  I oppose the proposed Endless Energy windpower project in the western 
> mountains
>of Maine. I don't make this suggestion lightly. I believe in alternative 
>energy.
>I've written a book on the subject, designed and built two passive solar 
>houses,
>and helped convert a century-old historic town office into a modern, super
>insulated town facility.
>
>But this project is simply located in too valuable an area to meet the 
>criteria
>of the Maine law. Endless Energy proposes its 28 giant towers, topped with
>swirling blades, to be located as close as a mile to one of the most scenic
>sections of the world's most famous walking path, a path built and maintained
>mostly by volunteers and protected by Congress as the nation's first National
>Scenic Trail.
>
>This project will devastate the view that thousands of hikers sense is one of
>the wildest and most remote sections of the entire 2,160-mile Appalachian 
>trail.
>
>Yes, this is a heavily developed area by rural Maine standards, but the
>development is largely invisible to hikers using the trail. They see a tiny
>corner of the Saddleback ski area, the lights of Rangeley at night, a small
>building or two on the summit of Sugarloaf -- and what appears to most casual
>hikers as an undeveloped wilderness as far as the eye can see to the 
>north, west
>and south. I've helped maintain the Appalachian Trail for 20 years. Ten years
>ago I walked north from Springer Mountain in Georgia to Katahdin. I can attest
>that few sections rival the beauty of the Saddleback-Redington area.
>
>The Saddleback to Crocker Range is one of the longest roadless sections of the
>trail -- 32 miles between Route 4 and Route 27 -- north of the Smokies in 
>North
>Carolina and Tennessee.
>
>Replacing this sense of wildness would be 28 towers, each 12 feet in diameter
>and up to 325 feet tall, topped by 125-foot lighted, whirling blades.
>
>The project makes a mockery of the long and sometimes bitter struggle with the
>Saddleback Ski area over the location of the trail. The compromise -- paid for
>with $4 million in taxpayer dollars -- largely left the decision about future
>development on the mountain to Maine. It's hard to imagine what kind of ski
>expansion the regulatory agencies could rationally reject if they approve an
>industrial-sized power complex less than a mile away and in full view of the
>open Saddleback ridgeline and from almost every overlook along 20 miles of the
>trail.
>
>The photo simulation that Endless Energy has distributed seems to have little
>relationship to reality. By happenstance the steeple of an 1802 church is
>visible just a mile away across water, fields and woods from my living room
>window. It is a major factor in the landscape. I find it hard to believe that
>gray paint would in any significant way obscure 28 objects four or five times
>higher. From the top of my driveway I can see a lighthouse two miles down the
>river. It is the dominant feature in the land and seascape. Could 28 towers,
>each eight times taller also not dominate the view from the mountains of 
>Western
>Maine?
>
>A few years ago I saw a photo simulation of the stack proposed for the 
>addition
>to an oil generating plant. It showed an almost invisible gray streak in a 
>photo
>of Casco Bay. The reality proved quite different. I live 15 miles across Casco
>Bay from the stack. From every hillside with views of the bay that stack is a
>major part of the scene.
>
>I've visited the site of the proposed wind towers on Redington. From the
>northernmost tower site I can see with naked eyes the outlines of every 
>30-foot
>(9 meter) stunted fir on nearby Crocker Mountain. When 80 or 100 meter towers
>are viewed in the opposite direction from Crocker is it logical to claim
>"(a)dequate provision has been made for fitting the proposal harmoniously into
>the existing natural environment in order to assure there will be no undue
>adverse effect on existing uses, scenic character and natural and historic
>resources..." as the Maine statute requires. Alternative energy sources are
>important. But it is also important as we enter this new age of scarce 
>petroleum
>supplies that we do not willy, nilly destroy other things of major value 
>in the
>process of converting to a more rational energy source.
>
>We need to use judgment and caution. The logic that says any alternative 
>energy
>development needs to be endorsed, even one that would dominate the viewshed of
>the Appalachian Trail, probably would also require we look again at 
>damming the
>West Branch of the Penobscot or to petition Congress to revive Dickey 
>Lincoln on
>the wild St. John River, both wild river damming projects stopped by
>environmentalists after long and bitter battles.
>
>Like the Endless Energy's proposal for Redington, the West Branch and St. John
>projects would supply significant amounts of alternative renewable energy, and
>severely damage important other resources in the process.
>
>Weary
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>AT-L mailing list
>AT-L@mailman.backcountry.net
>http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l