[at-l] MATC and Windmills

[ellen at clinic.net (Bob C.)]

Sloetoe:

I think the wisest of us share your belief that we need alternatives to fossil
fuels. The debate really is about how much we are willing to give up in return
for continuing our energy wasteful ways.

 I don't believe it is necessary to damage all the special wild places and
natural areas in our quest for alternative energy, just as we don't need to dam
the last of the earth's wild rivers.

There are seven or eight windpower developments, including some within sight of
the AT, in New England. ATC is opposing only this one.

  I think it significant that the MATC vote was unanimous. These are the guys
  who created the trail in Maine and keep it among the best maintained sections.
  MATC directors span the political spectrum. Most donate at least 100 hours a
  year to the trail -- some twice that.

    More than alternative energy sources are at stake. The regulatory agency
    that makes the decision is the planning board, zoning board and building
    inspector for the 50 percent of Maine without municipal governments. In an
    effort to keep this forested region wild, the law says new developments must
    "fit harmoniously into the existing natural environment."

    If approval is given for 29 450-foot high towers, spanning two mountain
    ranges, and connected with roads and power lines, in one of Maine's most
    scenic areas, a precedent will have been established. It's hard to imagine
    what couldn't be approved, given such a precedent.

    Until a decade ago, this wouldn't have been such a severe threat. Then the
    lands were almost all owned by companies whose business was growing trees
    for timber and fiber production. But that era has ended. Now the ownership
    is shifting to speculators and investors who see development and profits,
    not the growing of trees, as their primary goal.

    Weary