Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="tdmidget"] No I'm not saying that an EIS in and of it's own sake means that there is environmental effects. You have to read it , y'know. What I am saying and what is perfectly obvious is that when you make a waterway wider, deeper, obstruct it's natural flow, or place fill ,contaminated ot not, in a place where it was not before there are evironmental effects. These actions ARE evironmental effects and even if beneficial one must consider consequential and secondary effects. What could replacing rail,ballast, or ties do that isn't done already?[/quote]So you're saying there's no difference between initial augmentation and the subsequent regular maintenance of the updated channel?BTW - I'm not saying that the initial actions don't deserve environmental scrutiny in the form of an EIS, but once they are established why should an EIS still be required for subsequent maintenance?That would be like forcing the DM&E to provide the EIS for their new PRB rail line, then also requiring them to provide an EIS every time they perform maintenance.BTW2 - I'm sure there are plenty of environmentalists who, if given the chance to opine, will find plenty of environmental impact from the simple act of reballasting, et al!  Reasonableness is not in their lexicon.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag