16th July 2007, 06:54 PM
I don't want to appear to rubbish the merits of their case, about which I know nothing, but this looks very much like local opponents seizing on an issue to support a campaign against the road.
Having led EIA projects and Public Consultations on controversial road schemes, I am very familiar with this phenomenon, whereby people will seize on any real or imagined environmental issue without any real interest in it just because it can be used as another stick with which to beat those proposing the road. Sometimes they do so while proposing alternatives which would have worse effects on the same environmental issue.
Sometimes the opponents have a good case, sometimes not - but unfortunately, this kind of clutching at straws just undermines their argument.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Having led EIA projects and Public Consultations on controversial road schemes, I am very familiar with this phenomenon, whereby people will seize on any real or imagined environmental issue without any real interest in it just because it can be used as another stick with which to beat those proposing the road. Sometimes they do so while proposing alternatives which would have worse effects on the same environmental issue.
Sometimes the opponents have a good case, sometimes not - but unfortunately, this kind of clutching at straws just undermines their argument.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished