Foundational concern

For the (very) few of you who read this from time to time, this post is more for me - so I apologize if I don't make an effort to be especially clear.

I've been in school for a long time. That, by itself, is not frustrating. I've accepted that this "road" takes times. I'm convinced it is was the only road for me and I'm committed to it. However, I'm stuck up against a frustrating wall of statistics that's halting progress on all of the many projects I need to finish before graduating or publishing or feeling successful in any way.
What's more frustrating, is that most people ignore this problem and I could be much, much further "ahead" if I, too, was willing to ignore it. The bottom line,however, is that the way we found landowners to participate in our survey is biased toward owners with larger properties and we must correct for this bias as part of any analysis. The nagging and discouraging fact that won't allow me to ignore this is that it is not a small bias. And it impacts almost everything. Size matters, ha.
There is a silver lining in this. No one doing forest landowner research has bothered to pay attention to this before. Everyone doing forest landowner research uses USFS data and results - which are similarly biased. Showing this and the affect on results will be huge. And that's what will keep me going.
But the survey went out 2 and a half YEARS ago. Fuck. And I can't even run basic statistics on the data...how many landowners own for timber? What percentage have harvested? How many post their land? All of this is wrapped up in acreage and currently, "unwrappable."
I look like I'm not making any progress. Fact is, I'm unwilling to build analysis, conclusions, nor papers on a knowingly unstable foundation. And I'm making a lot of progress toward defining and correcting for this foundational problem.
As I work on characterizing this problem and work through paths to address it, I'm realizing there are some types of analysis I can do in the meantime (show the relationship between acreage and other variables, look at our visit data and line up potential analysis - some may be doable now).

I'm frustrated with this basic problem. I'm unwilling to move forward on a crumbling foundation. I'm tired of looking like a slouch, though. I hope it was clear to my committee, during my comps, that I am thinking about these issues, I am thinking about how to analyze this quantitative data, I do have new ideas about landowners and their approach to ownership and management of their forests. But in good conscience, I can't move these ideas forward until I know my analysis will be correct. Beyond the fact that the results would be wrong, it's dishonest, unprofessional, and paying it attention will change the way PFL research is done.