In the July 26 Telegram, there was a front-page article about the possibility of some more wind turbines in Washington County (“Nowhere’s special”). Nowhere’s special, eh? No, everywhere is special.

Some objections by guests, guides and camp owners to wind turbines are understandable. You can see wind turbines. They want their beloved woods and their views left unchanged. But at what real cost to them?

Pollution that is killing off fish and affecting animal and human health as well as that of the woods themselves can’t be seen like the turbines will be.

As we all know, mankind’s polluting activities around the globe affect all of us and all the places we go.

In suppling energy, turbines pollute far less than other methods of getting needed energy. Even the middle of nowhere is affected by pollution.

Less pollution everywhere is needed. Keeping on polluting as we humans have been will leave no fish. That’s something to carp about.

Warren Roos

Cape Elizabeth

What are we doing? When discussing mountaintop industrial wind, the response is typically the same. “We’ve got to do something to get off foreign oil.” You need to ask yourself these questions. When will I trade my gasoline powered auto for a hybrid?

When will I convert my home heating system from oil? What am I doing to reduce my dependence on foreign oil? What am I doing to conserve?

With less than 5 percent of the electricity consumed in Maine generated from oil, I’m not sure how destroying our mountains will benefit us.

Unless you are willing to make changes to your lifestyle, you shouldn’t expect your neighbors living in expedited wind permit areas to sacrifice their lifestyle.

To those taking a stand against mountaintop industrial wind, thank you for being a NIMBY and saying “Not In Maine’s Back Yard!”

Joan Hassam

Belgrade

Maine schools work hard at teen suicide prevention

As I read Bill Nemitz’s column in the June 26 Telegram (“Parents’ loss epitomizes the toll of mental illness”), I was saddened to read about yet another set of parents having to deal with the loss of a child to suicide.

Over the years, there have been a number of parents who have chosen to go public with the death of their son or daughter in an effort to create an awareness about the prevalence of mental illness and suicide among young people, as well as the warning signs and where to turn to for help.

I would like to assure or at least offer some comfort to these parents by making them and others aware that health education programs offered in high schools throughout the state address these very issues.

My colleague and I work closely with the Maine chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness and also implement the Maine Youth Suicide Prevention Program as part of the health curriculum we teach. Most schools throughout the state have also implemented similar programs based on the growing need for them.

In addition to educating students about mental health issues, health education programs also address a variety of other pertinent issues facing young people today including dating violence, internet safety, nutrition, sexuality, substance abuse and addiction, to name but a few.

I urge people to become familiar with the health education programs in their school districts and to continue to support them. These programs and those who teach them can provide a vital resource and have a profound impact on the overall health of our youth and their quality of life.

Jeanne Billings

Health Educator, Mt. Ararat High School

Topsham

LURC panel shouldn’t be stacked with opponents

The Maine House and Senate both recently passed bill LD 1534, which proposes a study commission to review the Land Use Regulation Commission, the group that watches over and protects the North Woods.

The study commission will be composed of 13 members from various backgrounds, all to be chosen by Gov. LePage, Senate President Kevin Raye and House Speaker Bob Nutting. Both LePage and Raye have been clearly advocating for the elimination of LURC. People who are against preserving LURC will appoint all of the members of this committee; therefore the recommendation will be to disband LURC.

It is of great importance that this study commission be a fair and balanced group of people so that an accurate review of LURC can be established. If this commission is stacked with biased members, then a fair assessment cannot be reached and LURC will have a slim chance of survival. Personally, I enjoy hiking, fishing, and camping frequently in these beautiful areas of Maine.

The North Woods is a fundamental part of my life and protecting it is very important to me.

For the North Woods and its inhabitants to receive the care they deserve, a fair study commission is needed.

Brooke Dahl

Gorham

Concealed carry permits express basic human right

Steve Meyers’ View on June 26, showing a concealed weapons permit holder looking for something to shoot, is at best disrespectful and at worst disgusting.

Obviously he has never been in a position where he needed to protect himself. Many have not, thankfully, but that right and ability are constitutionally ours. If he feels so safe he should take a walk through parts of Boston, Los Angeles, Chicago or Washington, D.C., after dark and unarmed. He would see why people want to be armed for protection.

If someone were breaking into his house, would he feel safer calling 911 than having a weapon to defend himself? After all, the police would say, we will be there at some time after you call, not when you are attacked. It may be too late then, don’t you think?

As to the comment that people who want to carry concealed shouldn’t be allowed to, people go through background checks and classes to show their proficiency with firearms before getting a permit, whereas street gangs often get “on the job” experience with junk guns that may blow up in their faces.

The liberals of this country are often quoted as saying no one needs a gun, but if they have money they have bodyguards who carry weapons to protect them. Who is the hypocrite in this scenario?

Richard A. Aspinall Sr.

Scarborough 

Barring national park study denies Mainers best data

The recent resolution put forth by the Republican Senate President Kevin Raye that would prohibit a feasibility study on a Maine North Woods National Park is a distressing symptom of failed political leadership.

The sly and deceitful strategies used to further such a vote in the Maine Senate and House reflects the old politics of the past and not of the future. I would expect most Mainers would welcome further study of such a significant and historically important issue as the future use and protection of the North Woods.

To do less is to deny all of us the right of a clear view of the best and current information available. We know that all of the existing national parks in America have annually become predictable sources of income for all of the gateway communities near them.

The fact that a Maine North Woods National Park would augur economically well for those towns that ring the North Woods is vividly written by the long history of national parks in America. The study and its results would allow for statewide discussion of the pros and cons of a Maine North Woods National Park.

That would be a good thing and the way a healthy political system should work. It should distress all Mainers that the Legislature would vote on and pass such a critical public issue without following the steps of public awareness.

The responsibility that we all have to be good caretakers of this Earth should be our ultimate inspiration to leave no measure undone to better it.

In our quest for knowledge, we should drink from the cup of enlightenment, not the cup of ignorance.

John Oser

Parsonsfield

 

Copy the Story Link