Opportunity in Bay County's West Bay Sector

The relocation of the Panama City - Bay County International Airport (PFN) has created tremendous opportunity for all of Northwest Florida, including the potential for better air service, more competitive air fares, economic development and the permanent protection of tens of thousands of acres surrounding West Bay. This blog is dedicated to providing accurate, up-to-date information about airport relocation and progress being made in the West Bay Sector.

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Expert Witness?

Tonight, the NRDC, Florida Clean Water Network, and Friends of PFN are holding an "anti-airport" rally. The featured speaker is a Professor Davis from Texas, who has already filed a affidavit on behalf of the NRDC in its challenge to the FAA's Record of Decision to relocate the airport.

Based on his affidavit, it appears he spent no more than a couple of days here in Bay County - and he says he flew over the proposed airport site in a plane, but did not physically walk the property.

From this, he is now an expert on the issues we have been dealing with for the past 12 years.

I'd like to make a couple of observations about this "expert witness," Professor Davis.

(1) Professor Davis was retained by the NRDC to be an expert witness, in part, because of the point of view he brings. The NRDC would not employ Professor Davis or ask him to file an affidavit unless his conclusions supported their point of view. Davis' knowledge of the property and the situation here is limited.

(2) There are very accomplished expert witnesses right here in Bay County who have made it their life's work to protect West Bay. I am referring to people like Dr. Ed Keppner who with his wife have spent their professional lives studying the ecology and biology of West Bay. They live here, they've been involved in the West Bay Sector Planning process for many years - and they know more about the lands in question that Professor Davis ever will.

The NRDC did not ask Dr. Keppner to be an expert witness did they? I wonder why.

(3) Everyone seems to have forgotten that the EIS process included a rigorous scientific analysis involving legions of experts in agencies who's whole purpose is the protection of the environment from every aspect (ecology, wildlife, etc.).

How can it (the EIS) be so wrong that it is invalidated by the professional opinion of one "expert witness?'' I think if a thoughtful person spends the necessary time with the Final EIS and Record of Decision documents they would come to the conclusion that the EIS is right and its conclusions can't be reversed on the weight of one expert witness' opinion.

The political forum tonight is political theater, which should never be confused with reality.