While Lyme's wind law may appear "restrictive" compared to those in other nearby towns, I prefer to think it is more protective of Lyme's residents. Lyme's Planning Board chose not to simply accept, as many towns have, the wind developer's suggestions as to what a wind zoning law should be. Instead, we developed a comprehensive questionnaire, which was answered by more than 900 residents of the town.

Now that industrial wind energy is back in the news in Cherry Valley, it might be good to take a look at recent developments regarding noise from wind turbines. A "windfarm" in Cohocton began operation a couple of months ago, and now complaints are coming in from residents (including those who favored the project) that noise is penetrating their homes and disturbing sleep.

My heart aches for the citizens of Hammond, both year-round and seasonal, for they are about to lose their entire way of life and the wildlife and peace and quiet of the area. The natural beauty will be gone. Friends and neighbors will be choosing camps, and lifelong grudges will be formed. Is it worth it just to pick up a few thousand bucks? Ask the people of Lowville what it has done to families and neighbors. I say to the turbine industry, go away and leave us alone. Stop appealing to people's sense of greed no matter what the cost.

Opponents of New York Regional Interconnect's scheme to force a 400,000-volt power line through our area had to be cheered last week when a federal court essentially ruled that the issue should be decided on a state rather than a federal level. The Fourth Circuit Court in Richmond, Va., struck down rules that would have allowed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to approve the power line.

Make no mistake, Mr. Lensenhuber, we are not against wind energy that produces large amounts of electricity and does not drive nearby residents out of their homes with annoying noise and shadow flicker. We want any wind farm in Orangeville to be sited at adequate distances from residents, as the wind laws proposed by the citizens preservation groups ...The health, safety and welfare of the people of Orangeville must come before financial agendas! First do no harm!

What were the problems with Reunion Power's 24 windmills proposed for Cherry Valley's East Hill? Foremost, they presented an industrial use in a rural setting. Would a steel mill be appropriate on the rise above Route 20? Or a coal mine? Beyond that, there were concerns about noise, possible impacts on the health of people living in the vicinity, occasional transformer fires, interference with TV signals and degradation of property values.

How many people work inside an industrial wind turbine? How long do the construction jobs last post-project? This is industrialization of a vast area of land without many sustainable local jobs. Wind energy development on such a large scale will certainly seal the fate for the area. It is a life sentence which defines the land use for decades.

There are some troubling aspects regarding the proposed wind turbine project being considered for the Chipmonk area in Allegany that we think should be taken into consideration.

An anonymous writer sent letters to many citizens of Hammond in which accusations were made against Concerned Residents of Hammond. It stated that members are not true residents of Hammond, are anti-environment, are self-serving, hostile people and are making up facts. While part of me balks at responding to one who does not have the integrity to sign his own name, as a member of CROH I think clarification is important.

A renewable portfolio standard is said to be needed for creating and improving renewable energy technologies. In practice, however, it does little to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and makes energy production excessively expensive. Coal-fired power plants produce more than 83 percent of the electricity sector’s carbon dioxide emissions. But because coal is cheaper than natural gas or oil, it is the least likely to be displaced by solar or wind power. Natural gas has a relatively low carbon content. But it is likely to be the first to be displaced by renewable sources of energy because it is more expensive than coal. That means that even a renewable portfolio standard as high as 20 percent would reduce emissions by only a small fraction of what is needed to lower the risk of catastrophic climate change.

The old adage, "figures never lie, but liars figure," is a most appropriate axiom when applied to the Orangeville wind turbine survey (mailed Aug. 19, 2008). The first of five survey questions is worded to elicit a desired response from Orangeville residents. It reads; "Would you be in favor of a wind turbine energy project in the Town of Orangeville if it reduced your town property taxes for at least 20 years or more?" This conditional question is both hypothetical and directional.

In my opinion it is unreasonable and irresponsible for Supervisor Rienbeck and the zoning law review committee to recommend any less setback from all of our public roads. The notion that the users of secondary or seasonal roads warrant less protection from potential harm than those using main roads is an absurd idea. I am discouraged that this review committee is resisting virtually every effort to significantly regulate the placement of wind turbines in Cape Vincent contrary to Mr. Rienbeck's claim.

Wyoming County, once labeled one of the most beautiful counties in the U.S., has come under siege to the unscrupulous "snake oil" salesmen of the industrial wind corporations. Approximately 200 of these massive 400-feet industrial scale oil-filled wind turbines litter the landscape as if someone indiscriminately threw giant darts in a slipshod fashion irreversibly devastating green hills, forests, wildlife with a failed technology that produces less than 1 percent of the nation's electricity.

Both developers of wind farms in the town of Cape Vincent have asked for a quick conclusion to the wind law committee's work. Well, what a surprise. The developers thought that the town had been bought and paid for and now that the town fathers are giving the appearance of concern toward the citizens they serve, the developers are becoming impatient.

I hope the first order of business for the committee is to abolish the rules that prohibit public attendance or participation and free speech of committee members. I would point out that it was the public who brought these issues to the attention of the board and proved the case for changes on the merits. In large part, problems with the law stem from lack of public involvement. Though procedure was followed, the lack of public education or transparency to the greater weight given to developers' needs leaves the law fatally flawed.

Property values must ultimately be determined through professional appraisals and, if necessary, appeals. Meanwhile to confirm the obvious, ask a prospective buyer if they would still be interested in purchasing your home after learning that wind turbines will be constructed within the view shed of your property. Wyoming County landowners who are planning to "escape" the future onslaught of wind farms must be advised that the marketing of potentially encumbered property requires full disclosure ...Do not sacrifice your quality of life and that of your children as well as your most important financial investment by remaining passive and silent.

Perhaps the most insidious damage has only just begun. In this small, close-knit community, divisiveness has already taken hold. Many residents fear that their neighbors will sign leases without realizing how it may affect the rest of the township. Friends, relatives and neighbors are taking sides. Citizens are losing faith in a local governing board that seems to have taken the dive without checking the dangers first.

We, the Concerned Citizens of Allegany, are concerned our Allegany Town Planning Board will not act in the best interest of our residents. The board is in the process of reviewing an application for 32 wind turbines to be erected on 7,000 acres of land in Chipmonk (see www.everpower.com/allegany.html).

Protection of the public must be paramount. After reading the Cape Vincent engineers' recommendation of 1,200-foot setback from public roads, I was astonished to read one of the committee member's comments, "The chances are so minuscule. I don't see why putting these restrictions on these roads is reasonable." My response is: it is not a chance I want to take with my family, friends or fellow citizens. So why did they choose a 1,000-foot setback instead of 1,200 feet?