I am writing in support of Jill Buchanan’s column “Trying to muscle big solar into Shutesbury forestland,” [Recorder, June 12]. She wrote about the lawsuit filed against her town by the large multi-international solar company AMP Energy and WD Cowls, a Shutesbury landowner. The lawsuit claims that the bylaws, passed almost unanimously by town residents, unreasonably restrict their ability to develop industrial solar in Shutesbury. This frightening lawsuit affects all those in western Massachusetts who see better ways to combat climate change. Solar panels should be on roofs, in backyards, on the many flat roofs of buildings like super markets, in parking lots, and on abandoned landfills. They do not belong in meadows, on farmland and in forests. AMP Energy and WD Cowls’ solar project would destroy hundreds of acres of trees whose undoubted benefit for the climate is well known.

On April 14, 2023, an essay by Roger Worthingham entitled “I pledged $1 million to plant new trees. My money could have been better spent,” was published in The New York Times. (I urge people to look up this excellent article.) Among the many things Mr. Worthingham says is that saving existing trees is crucial. We all know that new trees will help in the future but larger trees will help us now.

If AMP Energy and WD Cowls win their lawsuit, then those of us who oppose the rapid spread of huge solar installations have much to fear. Please urge your legislators to support and vote for bills H.3230 and S.2164 which will preserve the rights of municipalities to regulate solar installations. I strongly urge people to contribute to Smart Solar Shutesbury to help the people of Shutesbury fight this disgraceful lawsuit.

Kathryn Sternstein

Hawley

]]>