SEKI FEIS out
Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:02 pm
SEKI has made available The Final Environmental Impact Statemen for Restoration of Aquatic Habitat (i.e. mylf protection and restoration) http://parkplanning.nps.gov/aquatics
It has selected the most aggressive alternative. In reviewing their response to comments to the Draft I found the most arrogant unhelpful responses that I have ever reviewed. Some comments were totally ignored and others addressed or shined on without careful analysis. I was particularly peeved by the selective choice of the pieces of the Organic Act and other legislation in justifying the purpose and need-- a perfect case of cherry picking to meet their desires. There are conflicts in the legislation they cite but the NPS chose to ignore them rather than addressing them and explaining why one aspect outweighs the other.
They also chose to totally ignore my request to clearly define the historic habitat of the frog. It seems they either don't know or for some reason they don't want us to know.
There were a couple other places where they addressed comments without actually addressing the question or statement. Kind of like what happens in a presidential debate. Reminded me of Ted Cruz saying before answering a question saying, "before I answer that I want to say this ... " and his time was up before he answered the question. You know the routine.
The point of an FEIS is to consider all relevant information and guidance and lay it out so the public can understand and the decision maker can make a fully informed decision in a transparent manner. While I am in favor of the principle of habitat restoration I think the full disclosure necessary for an EIS is lacking. If I had the resources I would challenge the FEIS and the all but accomplished Record of Decision.
It has selected the most aggressive alternative. In reviewing their response to comments to the Draft I found the most arrogant unhelpful responses that I have ever reviewed. Some comments were totally ignored and others addressed or shined on without careful analysis. I was particularly peeved by the selective choice of the pieces of the Organic Act and other legislation in justifying the purpose and need-- a perfect case of cherry picking to meet their desires. There are conflicts in the legislation they cite but the NPS chose to ignore them rather than addressing them and explaining why one aspect outweighs the other.
They also chose to totally ignore my request to clearly define the historic habitat of the frog. It seems they either don't know or for some reason they don't want us to know.
There were a couple other places where they addressed comments without actually addressing the question or statement. Kind of like what happens in a presidential debate. Reminded me of Ted Cruz saying before answering a question saying, "before I answer that I want to say this ... " and his time was up before he answered the question. You know the routine.
The point of an FEIS is to consider all relevant information and guidance and lay it out so the public can understand and the decision maker can make a fully informed decision in a transparent manner. While I am in favor of the principle of habitat restoration I think the full disclosure necessary for an EIS is lacking. If I had the resources I would challenge the FEIS and the all but accomplished Record of Decision.