Are environmental impact statements imperfect

[Michael Gochfeld]

Doug raises the question about the reliability (and or veracity) of 
consultants performing environmental impact statements (or similar 
surveys) of land slated for development. 

We are in the process of validating (or invalidating) an EIS submitted 
for a 50A (20 Ha) plot of second growth woodland.  The EIS was a 
travesty. It's not surprising that it might have overlooked a threatened 
species of Skipper (since the listing hadn't occurred yet and the 
skipper is only active for about two weeks in late summer), but they 
listed fewer than 20 trees, 20 breeding birds, no herps etc. 

It would be important, I think, if people become aware of EIS that are 
similarly flawed, to do a side by side comparison and publish it. Or 
perhaps we ought to collate these and do something big with it. 

I remember someone once saying that EIS were a deadly enemy because once 
completed they took on a life of their own and became official, 
regardless of the credentials of people who challenged them. 

Mike Gochfeld