In the editorial of April 26 titled "It's time to reap Vermont wind," it was apparent that the opposing views needed to be told. Wind power is a viable source of renewable energy in a productive location with reliable and sufficient wind. The editorial referred to a study that if we were ever to provide sufficient wind energy in Vermont it would take the placement of 250 huge wind turbines on the spine of the Green Mountains. What a horrible thought for tourists, hikers, hunters and most residents.

This letter concerns specifically the Georgia Mountain Community Wind Project. For many years several state agencies and boards have spent time and money to protect our heritage, natural beauty and most importantly our environment. In the past decade we have gone from banning billboards, requiring special landscape designs to protect the aesthetics of a community to decorating our mountain ridges with lighted 400-foot wind turbines. The laws recently passed in Montpelier by some uninformed politicians are responsible. Voters need to take more of an interest in candidates' views on major issues.

If the truth be known, the Georgia Mountain Community Wind Project is a project of up to five massive wind turbines being erected on the top of Georgia Mountain with limited and unreliable wind speed. These will dramatically affect the lives of the families in close proximity to the site and everyone who appreciates our beauty. Environmental concerns include animal and plant life, noise, water supplies, blasting and erosion while constructing towers and building a road to the site. The true facts about the landscape changes and serious health and environmental concerns should be shouted from the mountaintops.

The following question comes to mind as I watched the beautiful sunrise recently: Why isn't as much time and effort spent educating and encouraging people to conserve rather than defacing our landscape? The property owners near the site are affected emotionally and financially.

Wind turbines should not be portrayed as the most reliable, cleanest and cheapest source of energy. The changes to our scenic landscape will not be minimal. Why do we have to watch the value of our property decrease and our beautiful ridgeline be destroyed? A few business people with a profit motive should not rush through an approval process that sacrifices the natural beauty of Vermont for decades or forever.

We have elected people at the state and local level who should be listening to both sides of the issue. They should decide what is most practical and what is both financially and environmentally feasible. There are currently hydroelectric plants, if updated and used at their full capacity, that could supply clean and reliable energy. Our picturesque Georgia Mountain could remain for everyone to enjoy.

Long-term benefits like preserving the character of Vermont and energy conservation are more important than short-term solutions that create more problems than they solve.