Since its introduction into Danish planning in 1989, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been widely discussed. At the centre of the debate has been the question of whether EIA actually offered anything new and there has been a great deal of scepticism about the efficacy of the instrument, especially when it comes to livestock projects. In an evaluation of the Danish EIA experience, we have looked more closely at how the EIA instruments function regarding livestock projects. This article addresses both the EIA process as well as the EIA screening. It is demonstrated that the EIA screening in its own right is a kind of regulatory instrument. Examining the assessments made during screening more closely, we conclude that there is still some way to go in order to make the assessment broader and more holistic in accordance with the ambitions set out in the EIA directive to contribute to a more sustainable development. Although the provisions laid down are the same the praxis related to the field has developed at a considerable speed. In order to understand this development we have closely examined how the decisions made by the Nature Protection Board of Appeal (NPBA) have been changed and conclude that these changes definitely address some of the shortcomings found in the evaluation.