Why wind turbines were brought up in your July 3 editorial relating to shellfish propagation in Popponesset is beyond me. Since you did equate the two subjects, let’s look at the hypocrisy mentioned by the private council of the 18 residents.
I fail to see how you can compare oyster cages in shallow water to seven 492-foot wind turbines in Bourne. The previous bylaw, until recently overruled at a special town meeting, required only a 502-foot setback to a property line. All the reasons quoted by Attorney Wall on why the shellfish operation should not take place in Popponesset should be the exact same argument used against the Bourne turbine proposal.
“The shellfish operation would impair his client’s property rights.” Would this not relate to turbines?
“You’re allowed to use your property free from unreasonable interference of others.” Again, would this not relate to turbines?
“This is going to be a nuisance.” Once again, would industrial wind turbines not be a nuisance?
Wall’s clients believe the grant could decrease their property values. These are all valid points in relation to the irresponsible siting of wind turbines and the impact they will have on Cape Cod and our community.
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding