[ exact phrase in "" • ~10 sec • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]

LOCATION/TYPE

News Home
Archive
RSS

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Wind farm sounds alarm for conservation charity  

Credit:  David Ross, Highland Correspondent, The Herald, www.heraldscotland.com 17 February 2012 ~~

It is a part of Scotland famous for its rugged wild land and mountains, attracting thousands of tourists to its natural beauty.

But now plans for a wind farm in Sutherland have left conservationists worried about the impact the 410ft- high turbines will have on the area which is home to Quinag, Ben Mor Coigach and Suilven.

German company WKN Windkraft Nord AG wants to install 22 turbines on the shore of Loch Shin, near Glencassley Hydro Power station, north-west of the village of Lairg. It says the Sallachy site will pump £6 million into the local economy over the 25-year lifespan of the wind farm.

However, the John Muir Trust charity is objecting to the plan because the site has been identified by Scottish Natural Heritage as one of the country’s main areas of wild land.

The trust believes the turbines will be visible from up to 10% of the Assynt and Coigach National Scenic Area further west, including from Conival and Ben More Assynt, the two Munros in the area.

John Muir Trust chairman John Hutchison said: “This is a worrying proposal. Assynt and Coigach is an area of great beauty and spectacular natural landscape that includes the summits of Quinag, Ben Mor Coigach and Suilven.

“Folk are becoming very concerned about the effect of this type of development on our wild landscape, the unique Scotland that visitors come to see. We can’t afford to lose high-quality areas of wild land such as this, particularly when there are impacts on an established National Scenic Area.”

He said that for some time the trust has been concerned that as less sensitive land is used up, Scotland’s wildest land will come under increased threat.

“The Sallachy proposal is a step closer to this happening,” he said.

Steven Turnbull, policy officer for the trust, added: “The developer in this case has recognised the wildness of the site but has significantly undervalued this quality. If Sallachy is approved it would set an unwelcome precedent for future developments. It would make it even more difficult in the future to challenge wind farms that impact on National Scenic Areas, the highest accolade for Scotland’s natural landscapes.”

The German firm said it recognised that the key concerns raised by people attending an exhibition it had hosted had largely been the landscape and visual impact of the proposed development, as well as the potential effect on tourism in the area.

Its environmental statement says: “The layout design of the turbines was explored through understanding the visibility from key viewpoints.

“This involved lowering the height of the proposed turbines, removing some turbines all together, and relocating others so that the overall visual impacts are reduced.”

A WKN spokesman said they had held discussions with the Lairg, Creich and Ardgay and district community councils regarding benefits to the area. It was now in discussion with the Scottish Communities Foundation about administering a community fund, should the project go ahead.

“We have drawn up proposals but the minimum would be about £230,000 a year, index-linked for the 25 years of operation planned,” said the spokesman.

A little over a year ago surveys had been sent to more than 2000 households within 20 miles of the site and 453 responses were received. Among the findings 220 (49%) respondents said they believed the proposed site was a good location, 25% were unsure and 25% were opposed.

Source:  David Ross, Highland Correspondent, The Herald, www.heraldscotland.com 17 February 2012

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate

Share:


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.
Share

Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter