In adding to the sentiments expressed by the letter writer of "Negatives of wind turbines ignored" (Eagle 12/7) there seems to be a willingness by The Eagle, when it's convenient, to forgive development that destroys all that makes the Berkshires beautiful and livable.
A case in point is the disgraceful clearcut of 120 acres of forestland in order to expand Pittsfield Municipal Airport. From the beginning, The Eagle was "all in" for this project once characterizing it as "Job One" for the city.
Let's be clear. This is enhanced transportation infrastructure, paid for by the 99 percent for the 1 percent who fly private and corporate aircraft. Safety was never the entire issue. I believe economic development, or an illusory hope for it, was the main issue. And The Eagle spent lots of space in their "all in" articles touting that aspect. Certain high level people in the Pittsfield establishment pushed the notion that if the airport was expanded the skies would turn black with private and corporate aircraft bearing high-priced CEOs ready to bring economic salvation to a troubled and struggling city. This is not likely to happen until the crime rate is vastly reduced and the arterial and residential streets that are in deplorable condition are put back in a state of good repair. And those are Jobs 1 and 1a.
The Eagle, as late as last week, in an article by Dick Lindsay in the context of South Mountain Road, was still pinning the blame for the clearcut on the Federal Aviation Administration. They made us do it. How convenient! Here's the important question. If Pittsfield had failed to gain the necessary funding, therefore leaving the airport in its original footprint, was the FAA still requiring a clearcut? I suspect not but I could be wrong. I challenge The Eagle or any other interested party to present documentation.