This is in response to Vera Trafton’s letter Jan. 21, which was in response to my letter of Jan. 10 about whether Endless Energy’s wind project should go forward.

If you believe protecting the view for an hour’s hike is more important than reducing our dependence on oil, then you should oppose this project.

If you believe protecting the view is more important than reducing pollution that kills man, plant and animal, you should oppose this project.

If you believe industrialization is putting up 30 nonpolluting windmills, you should oppose this project.

If you believe what amounts to logging roads are “big roads,” you should oppose this project.

If you believe making windmills taller so the blades spin slower so that birds like the Brecknell thrush aren’t killed and wildlife isn’t disturb by noise from faster spinning blades isn’t answering the concerns of environmentalists, then you should oppose this project.

If you believe that burying power transmission lines in a valley out of sight and allowing the regrowth of two-thirds of the cut area of a project to mitigate the impact on the views isn’t addressing the concerns of view environmentalists, then you should oppose this project.

If you believe that more people won’t hike out to see big machines at work, then you should oppose this project.

If you wonder why America only gets 3 percent of its energy from alternative sources, you should stop wondering and just look at the history of this project.

David Hughes, Lewiston