Argyll's online broadsheet.

What you say is true. RSPB qualifies that …

Comment posted Major environmental groups seriously compromised by wind developers’ cash by Hamish Beaton.

What you say is true. RSPB qualifies that statement “We are involved in scrutinising hundreds of wind farm applications every year to determine their likely wildlife impacts, and we ultimately object to about 6% of those we engage with, because they threaten bird populations. Where developers are willing to adapt plans to reduce impacts to acceptable levels we withdraw our objections, in other cases we robustly oppose them.
However, there are gaps in knowledge and understanding of the impacts of wind energy, so the environmental impact of operational wind farms needs to be monitored – and policies and practices need to be adaptable, as we learn more about the impacts of wind farms on birds.
A strategic approach
We are calling for a more strategic and long-term planning approach to wind development than is currently being taken. With the right strategy and planning safeguards, and with co-operation between developers and conservationists, renewable targets can be achieved without significant detrimental effects on birds of conservation concern or their habitats.
Wind power has a significant role to play in the UK’s fight against climate change and we will work with Government and developers to ensure this outcome. But a closer examination of the effects of interactions among wind farms and between wind farms and other forms of development is still necessary”.
What I said was: “It is disquieting to find them taking funds from the very organisations that they criticize and object to the sighting of their sites.”

Hamish Beaton also commented

  • ForArgyll’s style is more along the lines of Mrs Merton’s tv programme -“lets all have a heated debate”. I’m utterly confused by their editorial policy – the one that is on a pull down menu at the top of the site needs a bit of plain English applied – how they apply and adhere to it beats me. It will be interesting to see if Jamie McIntyre gets a response from the site’s owners and managers – it’s certainly the oddest “news” site I read and comment on. The good news is that the other commentators are invariably really worth reading – all good stuff
  • I have problems reconciling big “charities” strategic objectives. Make no mistake, these charitable organisations are big businesses, up there with some of the world’s best and most profitable organisation – ramshackled two bit organisations they are not- some like RSPB and its Scottish ilk are big land owners too, wielding massive funds as the Officers and Board think fit. It is disquieting to find them taking funds from the very organisations that they criticize. I would no more expect Sea Sheppard to be funded by the whaling industry – if you get my drift.
    From the Power industry’s point of view this is excellent news. Corporate communication is enhanced by telling your audience that you have direct communication with and actively support RSPB – Scotland. Strange bed-fellows indeed. There’s the rub – does once cancel one’s RSPB subscription or work as a Member to change this policy? I’m open to suggestions.
    I’m a long term critic of ForArgyll’s editorial policy. I for one think it’s not even written in Plain English. I have difficulty sorting editorial comment from fact. yet again, we have it’s editorial team in one breath decrying wind turbines while actively supporting community involvement in schemes up in Glendaruel. A simple statement is needed at times to make clear that the editorial team and or site owners have a vested interest in such schemes. But then if the big charities can’t get their act right, should we expect Forargyll to be any different?

Recent comments by Hamish Beaton

  • Community raffle concerns over councillor’s reporting of Tarbert raffle to police
    Netiquette on the internet is as important as anywhere else, including work. Allowing the standards of politeness to slip simply because the medium used emboldens people who would usually not be so forthright in a face-to-face context is not acceptable.
    The language used is clearly abusive and/or derogatory. (A posting filled with foul language, or a suggestion as such, this is likely to be a breach of workplace policy, and it’s highly unprofessional. It can also be the cause for legal action depending on what is said, especially if it threatens, harasses, or slurs.)
    I am not against robust comment – and will “fight my corner” -but frankly if this “mail” was sent to me by post or at my place of work, I would have no other recourse than copy it to Security for their consideration. The fact that it has appeared at all suggests that ForArgyll perhaps condones or is prepared to accept abuse which would be totally out of place at home or in the work place – goodbye
  • Community raffle concerns over councillor’s reporting of Tarbert raffle to police
    ““Where do community events – and we’re talking little weekly get togethers here, not just annual galas, go from here with their raffles?”
    Continue as they have done for years!”
    Yes, the Law makes provision for the above. The daft thing is that a lottery licence for a public Charity Raffle for selling to the general public is free to anyone that applies. The conditions of granting a Charity Raffle licence, are to makes sure that everything is “above board” and not a scam. According to the Scottish Sun, the person selling the unlicensed lottery at the Co-op knew what they were about and allegedly chose not to seek a licence. That’s OK for that person but it creates all sort of legal problems for the shop who are now complicit in breaking the law and for the receiving charity, who, unwittingly in receipt of moneys are in breach too and maybe liable to investigation by the Charity Commission. Far from me to suggest that this person was doing anything deceitful, but their alleged disregard for the law has brought heartache, tears and opened Pandora’s box, all for the want of 10 minutes simple paperwork, which would have legitimised and enhanced their work.
  • Community raffle concerns over councillor’s reporting of Tarbert raffle to police
    Yo no responden normalmente a las agresiones abusivas. Pero, ¿sería usted terminar más si me escribió en su blog acerca de caca de perro en español?
  • Community raffle concerns over councillor’s reporting of Tarbert raffle to police
    suggest you buy a shovel and bucket from next door to the Co-Op
  • Community raffle concerns over councillor’s reporting of Tarbert raffle to police

powered by SEO Super Comments