| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Councillors reject ‘astonishing’ bid to impose two-year ban on path users at Caithness wind farm site
Credit: By Alan Hendry | John O'Gorat Journal & Caithness Courier | 05 November 2020 | www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
A bid to ban walkers from using a footpath for two years during the construction of a Caithness wind farm has been rejected after one councillor called it an “astonishing” request.
Councillor Nicola Sinclair argued that allowing the company behind Limekiln wind farm to close off access to the 7.8km core path would set a dangerous precedent as it would mean the developer riding roughshod over public opinion and access rights.
Another councillor claimed that the attempt to exclude people from the land was reminiscent of the Highland Clearances.
The path is within within Limekiln Forest, south of Reay, where energy firm Infinergy has consent for 21 turbines and has applied for an extension of five more.
The application for an order to exempt access rights during the construction of the wind farm was made to Highland Council under Section 11 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003. Objections were lodged by Caithness West Community Council, the Ramblers Association and ScotWays, the Scottish Rights of Way and Access Society.
The issue came before an online meeting of the council’s economy and infrastructure committee on Wednesday and was turned down unanimously.
Councillor Sinclair (Wick and East Caithness), a member of the committee, said afterwards: “The request from the developer to close off a core path for two years to allow construction of the wind farm was the first of its kind in Scotland.
“Any closure beyond six days has to go out for public views, so two years is an extraordinary length of time to remove public access to a local forest.
“The access management plan and the Scottish Government guidance made it abundantly clear that access needed to be maintained, and it’s astonishing that the developer sought to get around this without coming up with a single alternative proposal.
“Caithness members discussed the Section 11 request in detail at a recent ward business meeting and we stand united with the local community in their objections to the application.
“I was pleased to have the opportunity to make the case at the economy and infrastructure committee and heartened that members unanimously rejected the Section 11 request.
“It would have set a dangerous precedent to allow developers to ride roughshod over public opinion and rights of access, and a clear message has now been sent.”
This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.
| Wind Watch relies entirely on User Funding |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=98532 ]
| Tag: Complaints |
