Town of Russell Cell Tower

I am a resident of Russell and disapprove of this fort the reasons outlined in the petition. This seems shortsighted and from what I gather alternative options have not been considered.

We recently purchased rural land near this proposed site. This tower will likely enhance our reception on our land but more importantly this tower will disrupt the night sky, disturb migratory pathways, and degrade the rural character of the area. I am strongly against this permit approval especially considering there are other towers that could be utilized to enhance the reception of their customers without building another tower.

We need to find a more suitable location for this tower that is less intrusive to night skies and on the landscape. We have such extensive county lands in our area. Please consider these lands in a location decision. Also, bald eagles are considered a threatened species here. They are also protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. They are a species of cultural importance to the Ojibway. Studies have shown the impact of these especially large towers on eagles because of all the wires needed to hold the tower upright. Has this impact been considered since we have a sizable bald eagle population?

We need to examine location of the cell tower more carefully, as well co-location with the existing tower in Red Cliff.

I live on Schultz Fire Lane in Town of Bayfield and I agree with all points in the petition. Additionally, I believe that income from such a tower in important to consider as a public resource and not for a private family. I would like to see us give this income to Red Cliff, as they have existing tower infrastructure and have welcomed more companies to colocate.

They should utilize the existing Towers.

I wholeheartedly oppose the location of this tower. I am a Town of Russell community member.

I am concerned about inappropriate construction for the sake of construction, without utilizing existing towers already in the area. Each new tower contributes to light pollution and increases radiation and other interference for migrating birds. The Bayfield peninsula is a safe haven and flyway for so many migratory species.

Please find another location. Thank you in advance for honoring the genuine issues raised in opposition.

I live in Bayfield and also own an orchard near the proposed tower. This must be stopped. There is no need for a 299 foot tower. A smaller tower that does not require a flashing light may be acceptable, but one that has a constantly flashing light is totally unacceptable.

This new tower is NOT NEEDED!

This tower is unnecessary and would have tremendously negative environmental, economic and social impacts on neighboring families, farms, and the larger community.

Is another tower in Turner Road area necessary. This goes against the Dark Sky directives of the Bayfield County board.

There has to be a less impactful place for this.

Bad idea all together

How does a tower of this height is even being considered to build while existing towers have space to sell?

Preserve the rich lives of our Place.

i am not in favor of this too high tower

Since this tower doesn’t comply with zoning regulations nor County night sky initiatives, I strongly urge you to not allow it to be built.

No!