“Following a press release last week it seems that several of the leading industrial companies in Israel are going to enter the wind business. These are deeply connected to leading politicians. Our ministry of environment is quite hopeless. The future seems bleak.”

From Gibraltar, from Sicily, from the US, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, and now from Israel, day by day more bad news comes in from the main bird migration flyways of the world. For windfarm developers think nothing of erecting their wind turbines in migration bottlenecks. Wind speed and maximisation of profit is their main concern.

Birds are killed by the large blades, whose tips revolve at speeds exceeding 100 mph while deceiving the victims by an appearance of slowness. In Sweden, one wind turbine is reported to have killed 895 birds in one year [ref: California Energy Commission, A Roadmap for PIER Research on Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines in California, Dec. 2002, quoting Benner et al. (1993)].

They also get killed by the powerlines, which are built next to each windfarm to carry puny amounts of this very expensive, intermittent electricity to the grid. According to the report “Protecting Birds from Powerlines”, high tension lines may kill over 500 birds per km per year in migration zones [ref: Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats -- Birdlife International (2003)]. Smaller windfarms may not require high-tension lines, but overhead cables are still needed to connect to the distribution network, and they, too, maim and kill birds that collide in the fog, or at night, or while fleeing some danger.

In short: if someone wanted to set about exterminating the world’s migrating birds, placing windfarms in migration hotspots would be looked upon as best practice.
We are not doing any better in the UK. For instance, the “Bird Sensitivity Map to Provide Locational Guidance for Onshore Wind Farms in Scotland” designates practically the whole of the Western Isles as highly sensitive — except for two areas, one of them being the site where a windfarm project is seeking approval (Pairc).

Yet the Pairc environmental statement predicts the possible death of 66-165 golden eagles as a result of collisions with the giant blades. No other project in Scotland declares that it may kill so many eagles; and the subject of migrating birds is poorly addressed. The applicant for the Pairc windfarm is Scottish & Southern Energy.

The same map marks the whole of the Shetlands as highly sensitive, except for a few tiny yellow spots — presumably where Scottish & Southern Energy plans to erect more wind turbines. How on earth will migrating birds be able to avoid the giant rotors when adverse winds push them towards one of these “yellow spots”? or when they fly or make landfall at night? Yet a bird society is actually supporting a large windfarm project on Shetland. Don’t they know the island is a crucially important staging post for migrating birds?

Until these and many other pertinent questions are answered by the ornithological fraternity, we ask that all those who cherish Britain’s heritage of migratory and other birds ask their favourite bird society why windfarms are allowed in migration corridors, e.g., in the Hebrides or in the Shetlands. Also ask your electricity suppliers how much of the electricity supplied to your homes comes from wind. Details from BWEA’s web site indicate that windfarms supply only 1.5% of Britain’s electricity. Then ask yourselves if the slaughter of our birds is really necessary, and join the thousands who are already campaigning against the erection of these wind monsters across Britain.

March 26th 2008

Professor David Bellamy
Mark Duchamp

Alex.Salmond.msp@scottish.parliament.uk

cc: snp.hq@snp.org, FirstMinister@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

Office of the First Minister
St. Andrew’s House
Regent Road
Edinburgh
EH1 3DG

Dear First Minister

A National Conversation has been set up by your party to engage the views of the people of Scotland on Independence and the future of our country.

Why is there no National Conversation on wind farms?

Areas of high scenic value in Scotland are under attack by wind developers!

Prior to your election you told the people of Scotland that you would listen to their views.

More than 5,000 people objected to the Barvas Windfarm in Lewis. Will you listen to them or ignore them?

Will SNP be known as the party that helps a rich ‘few’ make vast sums of money through wind farm subsidies, whilst the poor, the vulnerable, the sick and the elderly are expected to suffer increasing fuel poverty?

If consumers of electricity are expected to pay subsidies for wind farms, shouldn’t the people of Scotland have the right to a National Conversation about wind farms?

Golden eagles bring in huge amounts of cash that benefit the ‘many’, not the ‘few’.

Scotland does not need its own Altamont Pass, environmental law suits or massive EU fines.

The purpose of this development: to make money. If breaking EU law results in EU fines, that negates the whole purpose.

Will the people of Scotland perceive “minded to refuse” as being a wishy washy response by a party that wants to lead an Independent Scotland?

Please offer confidence with a decisive, resounding, ‘NO’ to this wind farm development.

I look forward to hearing that this development will not proceed.

Yours sincerely
~~~
Sylvia Wallace

Dear Mr Salmond

Over the past few days it has been reported that you are ‘Minded to Refuse Permission for the Lewis Wind Power development’

I applaud this stance and encourage you to stick to your intention.

Far from being the green solution that it has been claimed as, this development would be very damaging to the environment. Not just the damage to the landscape but the amount of carbon released from disturbing the peat bog would in fact negate any possible benefit gained from the ‘green’ energy.

The promise of jobs for the locals is just smoke and mirrors. I live in Mid Wales and at Cefn Croes the same promises were made — jobs for local people and economic benefits for the local community. None of this is true. There have been no jobs created locally at all. The contractors came in, tore up the landscape, poured masses of concrete into a primary water source, scattered the disturbed peat over the concrete bases in the name of conserving the environment and left. So far the local community are still waiting to see the benefits.

I urge you to refuse permission for this development and to mount a thorough review of your government’s policy on wind energy. An intermittent source of power can never provide the ‘base load’ energy that is required for a civilised society and will only every be a symbolic gesture of ‘greenness’

My husband and I are both artists and for many years we regarded Scotland as our second home, enjoying the unspoilt beauty of her wild places. The prospect of the industrialisation of the most inspirational views in the British Isles fills us with utter despair and we could not bring ourselves to visit Scotland again if it becomes the industrial wasteland that your government is proposing.

Please remember why tourists come to Scotland — for the scenery — don’t destroy it. Please.

With heartfelt feeling.

Yours sincerely
~~~
Jenny Keal

Dear First Minister,

I subscribe to the terms of Mrs Keal´s letter and invite you to ponder the enormity of the loss a windfarm on Lewis would represent. Tourism, wildlife, biodiversity, ruined quality of life for the inhabitants, who massively rejected the project in various polls …

The developer may present a revised plan with fewer turbines. But Lewis must be saved in its entirety. A stain on a beautiful painting is not acceptable, no matter its size. Likewise, placing giant de-facto bird traps within a bird reserve is an act of poaching, no matter their number.

The European Commission has been informed of this threat to the Lewis Peatlands Special Protection Area, and they may bring the matter to the European Court of Justice, who in turn may impose heavy fines that would burden Scottish taxpayers.

It would be regrettable if the Scottish National Party would tarnish its good name with the destruction of Scotland´s wildlife, of its landscape, and of its main renewable resource: tourism.

Yours, faithfully
~~~
Mark Duchamp

Located in one of the Scotlands most productive Golden Eagle breading areas, Stacain would kill one of these magnificent birds each year Argyll and Butes planners are recommending the application is refused and Scottish Natural heritage (The Scottish Governments natural heritage advisers) have lodged a very strong objection. There is local opposition, but the area is sparsely populated and to date the local group have managed 100 objections. They face a decision on the 20th of November by the Oban area councilors, who have in the past gone against planners advice. AWF have put a website together for this small community and we would ask you to please object if you possibly can.

Please take one minute to object at www.stopstacain.com. Potentially one Golden Eagle saved for each 3 seconds of your time.

Thank you for helping the people, landscape and birds of North Argyll.

Alan Stobie

On Behalf of AWF’s Directors

9th October 2007