Mountaineers and other outdoor groups hope Highland councillors will ignore the advice of their planning officials next week when they consider the controversial extension to an existing wind farm.
Falck Renewables Wind Limited want to add another 10 larger turbines to the 26 which currently operate as the Millennium wind farm in the hills between Glenmoriston and Glengarry to the west of the Great Glen.
The Millennium wind farm consists of 26 turbines, 16 of which are 377ft and 10 of which 410 m, both to blade tip. The proposed 10 'Millennium South' turbines would be larger at 433ft m to blade tip.
The final decision will be taken by Scottish ministers but Highland Council's Head of Planning and Building Standards, Ken McCorquodale, has advised members of the South Area planning applications committee, to "Raise No Objection". The council is an official consultee.
But Fort Augustus and Glenmoriston Community Council does object to the application not least because of the cumulative landscape impact with four wind farms consents within a radius of less than 10 miles.
Mountaineering Council for Scotland also objects because of the cumulative visual impact in an area of outstanding landscape importance. It argues the capacity of this area to absorb the environmental impact of wind farms has been exceeded.
The Scottish Rights of Way Society also has concerns over cumulative impact on recreational users of this countryside.
However the wild land charity the John Muir Trust raises different issues saying of the application "It does not on the whole significantly increase the impact of the existing structures with the exception of the new proposed access route from the south. This new route is not justifiable and could change access to the whole wind farm. "
The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) raised a similar objection. It particularly highlights the lack of justification for the proposed new 4x4 access track, which crosses peatlands.
Dave Gordon, Co-director for Landscape and Access with the Mountaineering Council of Scotland, said: "The MCofS objected to this application - the third for this wind farm - on the grounds of the cumulative impact of the density of turbines. Taken together with Beinneun wind farm and its proposed extension, this area will appear as a substantial mass of turbines particularly visible from classic mountains to the west and south.
"It is regrettable, but predictable, that Highland Council's planners would recommend no objection. This area is already an industrial site and intensifying development does less harm than a new development elsewhere. However, our worry is that we will continue to get both further development on existing sites and new sites being proposed, such as at Culachy, just across the Great Glen, where an application is imminent. Large chunks of the Highlands are losing their appeal to many mountaineers."
But Richard Dibley, Falck Renewables project manager, insisted: "This is an extension to an existing wind farm which will have very minimal visual impact. It is close to our UK operational headquarters from where we monitor all our European wind farms. The existing Millennium Wind Farm is located on a site which enjoys an extremely good wind resource and is well established and a very successful producer of electricity."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article