<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for South Torfrey Farm - Holiday Cottages in Cornwall</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com</link>
	<description>Self Catering Farm Stay Holidays</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:18:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by Graham Slack</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>Graham Slack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:18:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-48</guid>
		<description>Dear All

It is so sad to see such comments. There can be no question that the Country side of the British Isls has evolved over the last 1000 year or even more. This has been because of the need to use our countryside in different ways. There have always been those that do not want change for what ever reason,,sensible or not.... objection is totaly acceptable. However, what is not acceptable and proven by history is for a small minority to stop the country side evolving. (Check with King Canute is you disagree!)&#039;. If they had, we would be living in a totally disorganised world or worse.

We have to make use of our resources. and as for &#039;Dear old&#039; Allans comments about Airy fairy sustainability!!!  and getting friends to comment ,,,,SORRY friend you are way off the mark...I actualy have regular discussions with Debbie about the reality of Organic farming,,,We agree to disagree,,So we are hardly calling for this project from the same platform.

I have heard one objection based on,,&#039;Being able to see the masts from Looe. Are they superman with very sensitive eyes or what???? HAve they ever tried to look for a Yacht with a large mast out at sea? Or even spot the Eddystone light house?  Will the next objection be that when flying over Golant it will be visible. Sure, there are places you will see the trurbines, but objecting from Looe if you are looking through a telescope???

Objections need to be informed and in touch with real issues. We can quote planning practice and issues. ,,but then we need to realise that other people will be using this changing countryside well after we are dead and buried. 

To give my credentials, I used to lecture on Countryside managment Degree courses. From an academic and practical point of view this type of project will have a longterm benefit to country side management along with improved welfare of wild life. The initial thought is that it will &#039;Chase&#039; wild life away. Wrong, you need to look at the overall effect and long term. Not a short 5 yr cycle.

I think we all agree, for the sky line of the Fowey Estuary to be covered by Turbines, this would be a problem.  Two turbines set back and only visible when close to or a small area, this is not creating a presidence for development to surround the river banks.

There are certainly one or 2 reasonable arguments why not to have turbines, but bringing up &#039;Un true&#039; facts about the project or about the developer are certainly not helping that particular &#039;Anti&#039; cause.

I apologise for spelling errors,,,,,but dyslexia rolls when no spell check.

Regards to all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear All</p>
<p>It is so sad to see such comments. There can be no question that the Country side of the British Isls has evolved over the last 1000 year or even more. This has been because of the need to use our countryside in different ways. There have always been those that do not want change for what ever reason,,sensible or not&#8230;. objection is totaly acceptable. However, what is not acceptable and proven by history is for a small minority to stop the country side evolving. (Check with King Canute is you disagree!)&#8217;. If they had, we would be living in a totally disorganised world or worse.</p>
<p>We have to make use of our resources. and as for &#8216;Dear old&#8217; Allans comments about Airy fairy sustainability!!!  and getting friends to comment ,,,,SORRY friend you are way off the mark&#8230;I actualy have regular discussions with Debbie about the reality of Organic farming,,,We agree to disagree,,So we are hardly calling for this project from the same platform.</p>
<p>I have heard one objection based on,,&#8217;Being able to see the masts from Looe. Are they superman with very sensitive eyes or what???? HAve they ever tried to look for a Yacht with a large mast out at sea? Or even spot the Eddystone light house?  Will the next objection be that when flying over Golant it will be visible. Sure, there are places you will see the trurbines, but objecting from Looe if you are looking through a telescope???</p>
<p>Objections need to be informed and in touch with real issues. We can quote planning practice and issues. ,,but then we need to realise that other people will be using this changing countryside well after we are dead and buried. </p>
<p>To give my credentials, I used to lecture on Countryside managment Degree courses. From an academic and practical point of view this type of project will have a longterm benefit to country side management along with improved welfare of wild life. The initial thought is that it will &#8216;Chase&#8217; wild life away. Wrong, you need to look at the overall effect and long term. Not a short 5 yr cycle.</p>
<p>I think we all agree, for the sky line of the Fowey Estuary to be covered by Turbines, this would be a problem.  Two turbines set back and only visible when close to or a small area, this is not creating a presidence for development to surround the river banks.</p>
<p>There are certainly one or 2 reasonable arguments why not to have turbines, but bringing up &#8216;Un true&#8217; facts about the project or about the developer are certainly not helping that particular &#8216;Anti&#8217; cause.</p>
<p>I apologise for spelling errors,,,,,but dyslexia rolls when no spell check.</p>
<p>Regards to all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by South Torfrey Farm</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>South Torfrey Farm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:58:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-42</guid>
		<description>Oh dear ... it is standard to erect a post to the height of the hub.  No wool.  I have said all along that the posts will give an idea of the HUB HEIGHT. I am being as open and as honest as I can be - I will be sitting in the Reading Rooms in Golant tomorrow from 11.30am until 1pm for anyone to come along and have a chat.  I am extremely happy for anyone to come and visit the poles.  This is meant for local parishoners.  I have absolutely no problem with discussing the project.  
AND for your information, I resigned from the Parish Council, NOT thrown off, and so it would appear that you have your facts wrong.  Please check what you are saying before posting on a public site.  Alternatively, put yourself up for election as Councillor to serve your Parish as I did.  
Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh dear &#8230; it is standard to erect a post to the height of the hub.  No wool.  I have said all along that the posts will give an idea of the HUB HEIGHT. I am being as open and as honest as I can be &#8211; I will be sitting in the Reading Rooms in Golant tomorrow from 11.30am until 1pm for anyone to come along and have a chat.  I am extremely happy for anyone to come and visit the poles.  This is meant for local parishoners.  I have absolutely no problem with discussing the project.<br />
AND for your information, I resigned from the Parish Council, NOT thrown off, and so it would appear that you have your facts wrong.  Please check what you are saying before posting on a public site.  Alternatively, put yourself up for election as Councillor to serve your Parish as I did.<br />
Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by peter johnsom</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>peter johnsom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:42:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-41</guid>
		<description>Pulling the wool over our eyes ??

You state  that the height will be 21.48 metres. Why then put up 15 metre masts to show the height to all of your villagers.  Your demonstration  mast is  6.48 metres or 20 ft short,  dont take people for fools. That is pure deceit at its lowest form. But  since as locals tell me that you got thrown off the parish council a few years back for a similar planning &quot; mistake&quot; its not as if you dont have history !!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pulling the wool over our eyes ??</p>
<p>You state  that the height will be 21.48 metres. Why then put up 15 metre masts to show the height to all of your villagers.  Your demonstration  mast is  6.48 metres or 20 ft short,  dont take people for fools. That is pure deceit at its lowest form. But  since as locals tell me that you got thrown off the parish council a few years back for a similar planning &#8221; mistake&#8221; its not as if you dont have history !!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by South Torfrey Farm</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>South Torfrey Farm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 12:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-39</guid>
		<description>Dear Peter, we don&#039;t need to put forward an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), as according to the Secretary of State this &#039;Very Small&#039; development will not impact on the environment.  Details of the turbines at St Breock: Rated Power: 4.95MW; Wind Turbines: 11 x Bonus 450kW; Rotor Diameter: 36 metres; Hub Height: 35m.  Ours would be a total 21.48m, compared to those at St Breok which are 53m to the blade tips.  AND at St Breok there are 11 of them.  
I hope you&#039;ll agree that there is little comparison to be made here.
Not a &#039;cash cow&#039; as you put it.  Merely an effort to become self sufficient and reduce our dependency on carbon fuels.  The fact that our fuel is mined elsewhere to the huge detriment to other ecosystems, habitats and populations (see articles regarding tar sands) does not mean that we shouldn&#039;t take responsibility where we can.  
Regards, Debbie Andrews.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Peter, we don&#8217;t need to put forward an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), as according to the Secretary of State this &#8216;Very Small&#8217; development will not impact on the environment.  Details of the turbines at St Breock: Rated Power: 4.95MW; Wind Turbines: 11 x Bonus 450kW; Rotor Diameter: 36 metres; Hub Height: 35m.  Ours would be a total 21.48m, compared to those at St Breok which are 53m to the blade tips.  AND at St Breok there are 11 of them.<br />
I hope you&#8217;ll agree that there is little comparison to be made here.<br />
Not a &#8216;cash cow&#8217; as you put it.  Merely an effort to become self sufficient and reduce our dependency on carbon fuels.  The fact that our fuel is mined elsewhere to the huge detriment to other ecosystems, habitats and populations (see articles regarding tar sands) does not mean that we shouldn&#8217;t take responsibility where we can.<br />
Regards, Debbie Andrews.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by peter jones</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>peter jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 11:52:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-38</guid>
		<description>Yet another attemp to pull the wool over our eyes on wind turbines.. The planning applications contain many innacuracies though it is not for me to say whether thet are deliberately dishonest or not. I live neat the St Breock turbine, it is noisy and has a detrimental effect on the landscape. Why have you not put forward an environmental impact statement in support of your application? If you are so convinced that this is more than just a cash cow to your holiday business for disabled persons largely funded by the taxpayer then get the environmental assesment done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yet another attemp to pull the wool over our eyes on wind turbines.. The planning applications contain many innacuracies though it is not for me to say whether thet are deliberately dishonest or not. I live neat the St Breock turbine, it is noisy and has a detrimental effect on the landscape. Why have you not put forward an environmental impact statement in support of your application? If you are so convinced that this is more than just a cash cow to your holiday business for disabled persons largely funded by the taxpayer then get the environmental assesment done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by South Torfrey Farm</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-35</link>
		<dc:creator>South Torfrey Farm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:27:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-35</guid>
		<description>Furthermore Barry, I would appreciate it if you could refrain from calling me dishonest in a public forum with no evidence.  It is the second time this has happened within the past week - I received a verbal apology for last week&#039;s accusation that the Statement of Commununity Involvement amounted to lies.  I won&#039;t take it any further, no written apology needed.  But no more please.  Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Furthermore Barry, I would appreciate it if you could refrain from calling me dishonest in a public forum with no evidence.  It is the second time this has happened within the past week &#8211; I received a verbal apology for last week&#8217;s accusation that the Statement of Commununity Involvement amounted to lies.  I won&#8217;t take it any further, no written apology needed.  But no more please.  Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by South Torfrey Farm</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>South Torfrey Farm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:14:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-34</guid>
		<description>Hi Allan, firstly, may I point out that the comments on the County Council website have been independently posted.  I can discuss the planning application with my &#039;chums&#039;, and I may ask them to comment, but ultimately they will decide for themselves whether to support or object.  In my opinion, the views posted are valid, and form part of an important discussion leading to a decision.  It is afterall a PUBLIC consultation.  Sue Reardon and David Jenkinson have land neighbouring ours.  Jim Soufi has invited people to visit his 15m turbine at Tywardreath.  Others refer to Government policy to progress towards renewable electricy generation. Comments of support imply that any visual impact of these very-small turbines (classified as such) will be outweighed by the benefits of the energy produced.
Thank you for your concerns regarding the harmful effects of positive comments, but I shan&#039;t be losing any sleep.
Regards, Debbie Andrews</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Allan, firstly, may I point out that the comments on the County Council website have been independently posted.  I can discuss the planning application with my &#8216;chums&#8217;, and I may ask them to comment, but ultimately they will decide for themselves whether to support or object.  In my opinion, the views posted are valid, and form part of an important discussion leading to a decision.  It is afterall a PUBLIC consultation.  Sue Reardon and David Jenkinson have land neighbouring ours.  Jim Soufi has invited people to visit his 15m turbine at Tywardreath.  Others refer to Government policy to progress towards renewable electricy generation. Comments of support imply that any visual impact of these very-small turbines (classified as such) will be outweighed by the benefits of the energy produced.<br />
Thank you for your concerns regarding the harmful effects of positive comments, but I shan&#8217;t be losing any sleep.<br />
Regards, Debbie Andrews</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by South Torfrey Farm</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>South Torfrey Farm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:04:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-33</guid>
		<description>Hi Barry, I would like it made clear to me how my innocuous comments can be perceived as &#039;dishonest&#039;. I posted the comment complete with a link to the County Council&#039;s on-line register, where interested people may view the Parish Council&#039;s list of objections.  There are 6 in total.  The main Planning consideration as far as I am concerned is one of visual impact within an AONB.  Others include RSPB consultation (barn owls and Ospreys), the Statement of Community Involvement (I have spoken to Simon Funnell with regards to this), &#039;enjoyment&#039; of the Saint&#039;s Way, the possiblity of views of the turbines from the river (again, visual impact), and the concern that a host of applications will follow should we be successful.  These objections will be addressed in due course.  For the moment, may I point out that when I walk the Saint&#039;s Way from Fowey to Padstow each year on May Day, it takes me through the commercial wind farm at St Breock.  It is not deterimental to my enjoyment of the walk ... if anything it enhances it.  But &#039;enjoyment&#039; is totally subjective, isn&#039;t it?
Thanks for your comments.  Debbie</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Barry, I would like it made clear to me how my innocuous comments can be perceived as &#8216;dishonest&#8217;. I posted the comment complete with a link to the County Council&#8217;s on-line register, where interested people may view the Parish Council&#8217;s list of objections.  There are 6 in total.  The main Planning consideration as far as I am concerned is one of visual impact within an AONB.  Others include RSPB consultation (barn owls and Ospreys), the Statement of Community Involvement (I have spoken to Simon Funnell with regards to this), &#8216;enjoyment&#8217; of the Saint&#8217;s Way, the possiblity of views of the turbines from the river (again, visual impact), and the concern that a host of applications will follow should we be successful.  These objections will be addressed in due course.  For the moment, may I point out that when I walk the Saint&#8217;s Way from Fowey to Padstow each year on May Day, it takes me through the commercial wind farm at St Breock.  It is not deterimental to my enjoyment of the walk &#8230; if anything it enhances it.  But &#8216;enjoyment&#8217; is totally subjective, isn&#8217;t it?<br />
Thanks for your comments.  Debbie</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by Barry Campbell-Taylor</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Campbell-Taylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:56:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-32</guid>
		<description>Dear Debbie.
The above statement is downright dishonest. The Council will be opposing your application for lots of reasons, visual impact is only one of many.  It&#039;s quite legitamate for you to canvas support from your customers but at least lell them the truth.
Barry C-T</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Debbie.<br />
The above statement is downright dishonest. The Council will be opposing your application for lots of reasons, visual impact is only one of many.  It&#8217;s quite legitamate for you to canvas support from your customers but at least lell them the truth.<br />
Barry C-T</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Wind Turbines by Allan Driscoll</title>
		<link>http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/2012/01/wind-turbines-cornwall/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator>Allan Driscoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:10:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.southtorfreyfarm.com/?p=1859#comment-31</guid>
		<description>Debbie.
It&#039;s no good just getting all your followers to put in letters of support for you turbines. It&#039;s quality not quantity that counts with planning comment letters! All the ones posted so far are absolutely usless to your cause; they actualy have to give sound reasons, not just airy fairy stuff about sustainability , and what nice organic chaps you are etc. They have to look at the planning policy for the area and make a sensible and well argued case for permission BASED ON THE EXISTING PLANNING POLICY! In fact, what is being put up at the moment will do more harm than good - it just gives the impression that you have organised a one sided petition from your chums</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Debbie.<br />
It&#8217;s no good just getting all your followers to put in letters of support for you turbines. It&#8217;s quality not quantity that counts with planning comment letters! All the ones posted so far are absolutely usless to your cause; they actualy have to give sound reasons, not just airy fairy stuff about sustainability , and what nice organic chaps you are etc. They have to look at the planning policy for the area and make a sensible and well argued case for permission BASED ON THE EXISTING PLANNING POLICY! In fact, what is being put up at the moment will do more harm than good &#8211; it just gives the impression that you have organised a one sided petition from your chums</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

