NRDC Can't Have It Both Ways

The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a New York City-based advocacy organization, has emerged as the primary opponent of the relocation of the Panama City airport.

They went to court in New York City to get an administrative review of the FAA’s Record of Decision to relocate our airport – and they have threatened to challenge the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit when it is issued. The USACE permit is the final permit needed before construction can begin.

On the one hand, the NRDC says that our new airport is a boondoggle, that there’s no demand for it and it’s not needed. Then they turn around and say that if the airport is relocated, it will trigger massive development in the Panhandle. But they can’t have it both ways.

If there’s no demand (they’ve called it an “airport to nowhere”), then how will it trigger massive development? And if there is all this pent up development waiting to happen if the airport relocates, then how can they say there’s no demand?

The NRDC is advancing a fundamentally flawed, illogical argument.

Further, they have painted a picture of the new airport site as this pristine wilderness, these wetlands and environmental jewels that will be destroyed. But it’s not true.

Audubon of Florida has said:

"The site of the relocation, in spite of claims by some environmental groups, is a former industrial pine forest. While there are former wetlands on the site, they were mostly heavily ditched and drained decades ago to allow for pulp wood production for a local paper mill."

In a March 5, 2006 editorial, the News Herald said the NRDC was “thuggish, too often with too little regard for the truth,” and added “much of what they say should be taken with grains of salt.”

Now, if you really want to understand what the NRDC is all about, read this article written by the progressive San Francisco Weekly about one of the NRDC’s campaigns. It’s an eye-opening look into NRDC tactics.