A lot of you obviously interested in alternative energy. Wind rubines are an important addition to our energy generation and I’ve no problem with them – in appropriate places. Problem with the proposal for Wigtown Bay is that it is almost on-shore and, if the proposal goes ahead, no environmental assessment will be required, which I think is wrong. Tourism, leisure our local fishermen are really important to the economy of the Machars and all would be affected by this proposal. I have already made my views known when the Area Committee met to formulate a response to Marine Scotland and I have heard nothing since to change my mind. I also think there are other forms of wave and water generation that should be explored and developed.
I haven’t studied it in detail as Wigtown isn’t in my constituency. In principal I’m in favour of off shore wind but it has to be in the right place and not obstruct other uses of the sea or shore. On a map the location looks rather close to the shore and could be rather intrusive. The council will have to consider the views of local residents when it considers its response to the application
As an aside, I am irritated by the consultation paper in which Ministers actively invite the reader to suggest that the proposed windfarms for the NW of Scotland should not be included. Why not? We depend in just the same manner upon the region’s natural assets.
I’m against it. In general, I’m not against wind farms, but this one in propsed for Wigtown Bay is wrong for two main reasons: (1) because it’s too close to the shore and (2) it’s going to stop sailors and fishermen going about their business.
A lot of you obviously interested in alternative energy. Wind rubines are an important addition to our energy generation and I’ve no problem with them – in appropriate places. Problem with the proposal for Wigtown Bay is that it is almost on-shore and, if the proposal goes ahead, no environmental assessment will be required, which I think is wrong. Tourism, leisure our local fishermen are really important to the economy of the Machars and all would be affected by this proposal. I have already made my views known when the Area Committee met to formulate a response to Marine Scotland and I have heard nothing since to change my mind. I also think there are other forms of wave and water generation that should be explored and developed.
0
I haven’t studied it in detail as Wigtown isn’t in my constituency. In principal I’m in favour of off shore wind but it has to be in the right place and not obstruct other uses of the sea or shore. On a map the location looks rather close to the shore and could be rather intrusive. The council will have to consider the views of local residents when it considers its response to the application
0
I do not support it.
As an aside, I am irritated by the consultation paper in which Ministers actively invite the reader to suggest that the proposed windfarms for the NW of Scotland should not be included. Why not? We depend in just the same manner upon the region’s natural assets.
0
I’m against it. In general, I’m not against wind farms, but this one in propsed for Wigtown Bay is wrong for two main reasons: (1) because it’s too close to the shore and (2) it’s going to stop sailors and fishermen going about their business.
0