THE decision of the West Devon planning committee to reject the planning application for a wind farm at Den Brook, North Tawton is shameful. Every day the headlines spell out the clear message that climate change caused by our use of fossil fuels is leading to massive changes to the biosphere which threaten the very existence of our species: ?WHO - human-induced climate change already causes 150,000 deaths a year?; ?Greenland ice swells ocean rise?; ?Climate change far greater threat than international terrorism says UK Government?s chief scientific adviser? - to quote a few. Ostrich-like, with their heads well and truly buried in the sand, the committee decided that the ?visual impact? of the wind turbines is of greater importance than the fight against climate disaster. Have they any idea what landscape our grandchildren will inherit when climate change ravages our West Devon countryside and ecosystems world wide later this century? Fortunately, not everyone is so short-sighted. Three cheers for Sweden which has made a commitment to wean itself off oil completely within 15 years - without building a new generation of nuclear power stations. Closer to home, more environmentally aware councils have made tackling climate change a top priority. For example, Woking has adopted a comprehensive climate change strategy covering power, heat and transport for local authority, home and business users with demanding targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2050. Many other councils are doing likewise. The question the people of West Devon have to ask is ? is our council the most environmentally unfriendly in the country? Martin Quinn West Devon Green Party 61 Old Exeter Road Tavistock I WAS perversely pleased to read the letters (February 9) of Messrs Moore and Bibey from opposite poles of the wind farm debate. At least my committee has collectively managed to offend both extremes, so we probably got the decision right. For those not near the extremes, it is worth explaining that we do not do emotion, we do development control; it is different. West Devon is not a NIMBY authority: our policy is to support renewable energy schemes, provided that they do not do significant harm to other aspects of our environment. We do not pick the sites, because that is a job for landowners and developers; we evaluate applications against our policies. There may well be other reasons why the Dartmoor National Park Authority, which is a planning authority in its own right, might refuse a wind farm application on open moorland, but scale would struggle to be a defensible one in such a massive landscape. Moreover, there are few protests against the 640-ft open-lattice mast atop North Hessary Tor, compared with which the lazy elegance of a modern windmill, waving its gentle welcome to visitors seems positively graceful, in my view. Personally, I am sad that we have had to refuse yet another wind farm application, partly because I am beginning to doubt whether there exists a suitable place for one in West Devon, given the relatively small scale of most of our landscape outside the Park. But I am in no doubt that we made a proper decision, soundly based on our adopted planning policies. That was our job and it is greatly to the credit of our officers and councillors that we did so without emotional irrelevance. And finally . . . there are two kinds of politicians: those who play a straight bat and accept the consequences; and those who contrive to spin webs of deceit and silence to conceal their intentions and obfuscate their views. I know what I want to be remembered for. Roger W Mathew Chairman West Devon planning and licensing committee