Thursday’s sages fill their quills to write about an eminent ecologist, proper respect for the dead, jet-skiers off Broughty Ferry and wind power reports.
Sir, Far from being “sinister” (Robert Anderson, April 7), Eric McVicar is a highly respected ecologist concerned about all species, including humans.
His warnings in the past have been borne out. Here are just two examples.
Thirty years ago, Eric McVicar warned the government and the fishing industry not to allow trawling inshore.
They chose to ignore him. Within a decade, inshore fishing collapsed.
Ten years ago he warned about a freshwater parasite called Argulus being spread by the transfer of non-indigenous stock.
He was dismissed as a scaremonger.
Within five years, this parasite was wiping out commercial rainbow trout fisheries.
Everyone then came rushing for his advice.
His new concern is about those resisting controls on non-indigenous beavers be these American or European. Either species is equally threatening.
Mammalists are seeking exemption first from bans on the importation of non-indigenous species and secondly from statutory dam legislation intended to let salmon reach their spawning grounds.
They want to “wild” their pets, regardless of anyone else’s interest.
Martin Stansfeld.Fortesk Tower,Finavon Hill.Who monitors the jet-skiers?Sir, For some months, during my frequent visits to Broughty Ferry, I have observed in wonder the noisy, wet-suited attention seekers who congregate several times a week around the harbour.
I have no objection to people enjoying themselves but the noise and the flouting of the speed restrictions in Broughty Ferry harbour and the access channel seems to be an integral part of their fun.
The jet-skiers also seem to have no regard for the powerboat exclusion zones and are frequently seen close to the beach and certainly nowhere like the 400 metres from the high water mark that they are supposed to be.
I can read the information on the marine charts on display at the waterfront- why can’t they?
Who monitors activities on the river and what can they do to ensure that jet-skiers enjoy themselves out of earshot of the rest of us?
I would like to think that the jet-skiers could act responsibly but it appears as if they place the importance of their leisure time above that of the rest of the population.
Robert Anderson.Kirkton,Arbroath.Landscape under threatSir, Referring to the report, Analysis of UK Wind Power Generation by consultant Stuart Young and supported by the John Muir Trust, Stefan Morkis (April 7) reported Scottish Renewables as accusing the John Muir Trust of acting irresponsibly in backing this investigation into the facts.
The John Muir Trust is a wild land conservation charity. SNH statistics show that the percentage of Scotland’s natural landscape visually unaffected by built development dropped from 41% in 2002 to 28% in 2009.
This was mostly due to industrial-scale wind developments and infra-structure.
This is at the core of our job-standing up for the protection of our wild land.
Scottish Renewables also accused Stuart Young of serious discrepancies and disputed the accuracy of his data which is taken from a publicly-available National Grid website, with the data available for anyone to check.
Or, just check with the Department of Energy and Climate Change, quoted widely last week as saying that, “Ten months of 2010 saw lower wind speeds than the 10-year average. Wind farms operated at only 21.4% of their maximum potential capacity, compared with 27.4% in 2009. The decline in output was greater in Scotland than in England.”
Stuart Young’s figures were 21.14% in 2010 and 27.18% in 2009. I would say that a less than 0.3% difference is an acceptable margin of error.
Interestingly, DECC’s statistics show that, since 2000, onshore wind load factor has never exceeded 28%.
Yet the industry routinely claims an average of 30%. Certainly, someone needs to check their figures but it isn’t Stuart Young.
Scottish landscapes are being changed forever on a false promise, fuelled by untargeted subsidies.
Ask your election candidates about it and join the John Muir Trust’s campaign to protect wild land, before it is gone,
Helen McDade.Head of Policy,John Muir Trust,Station Road,Pitlochry.Cemetery used as training areaSir, Following the recent letters published in this column relating to the apparent disrespect shown to funeral corteges, I do agree with your correspondent, James Thomson, that it is very difficult to know which cars are part of the funeral cortege apart from the obvious black limousines, so there is not necessarily any lack of respect involved.
Last week, however, when we visiting a cemetery to renew the flowers at three family graves, we were somewhat surprised to find a man in T-shirt and shorts running within the cemetery, obviously training for an event as he was making use of the hilly part of the cemetery in his circuits.
While he was doing this, a young girl with him was cycling round the paths, accompanied by an unleashed dog.
While he did alter his route slightly while we were there, one has to question whether this is appropriate conduct within a cemetery. I think not.
Bob Ferguson.North Muirton,Perth.
Get involved: to have your say on these or any other topics, email your letter to letters@thecourier.co.uk or send to Letters Editor, The Courier, 80 Kingsway East, Dundee DD4 8SL.