Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Impacts on the natural environment
Along the proposed pipeline route, 103 of the 116 species observed in June 2005 are
breeding birds. On the other hand, no nesting location for precarious-status species
has been recorded in the proposed pipeline right-of-way. The proponent’s inventories
have nevertheless confirmed that the northern goshawk – a priority species
designated as such because it is located at the top of the food web 1 – would breed in
the right-of-way. The proponent has planned to validate the use of the nesting location
and, if needs be, to resort to appropriate mitigation measures.
According to the proponent, the main impacts of the terminal construction work and
pipeline operation would be the loss and fragmentation of potential habitats. The
proponent believes that 546 breeding couples would be affected by the deforestation
work in the terminal area. In the case of the pipeline, deforestation would take place
on a 23-m long strip corresponding to the right-of-way width.
Scheduled deforestation work could also cause habitat losses for migratory birds. In
order to mitigate the anticipated impacts, various measures have been suggested by
the proponent. For instance, these would include conducting deforestation, inasmuch
as possible between September 1 st and April 1 st , i.e. outside of the nesting period, this
condition being subject to a waiver should the work time frame require it (PR3.3.1,
p. 6.59; PR3.4.1, p. 7.62; PR5.1, p. 2.35). As for the pipeline, the proponent would
conduct the deforestation outside the bird nesting periods (PR5.1, p. 2.40).
The federal Migratory Birds Regulations (C.R.C., c. 1035) prohibits “disturb[ing],
destroy[ing] or tak[ing] a nest, nest shelter […] or an egg of a migratory bird […]
except under authority of a permit therefore”. Environment Canada 2 deems that the
‘‘most efficient measure to comply with this regulation would be to avoid migratory bird
nesting periods during the deforestation work’’. In fact, the proponent has invoked this
measure several times, in particular to mitigate the effects on small mammals and
herpetofauna (PR3.4.1, p. 7.51 and 7.65).
♦ Recommendation 28 — The Panel recommends that Environment Canada and the
ministère des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune ensure the effectiveness of the
mitigation measures suggested by the proponent with regard to avian fauna.
Protected plant species
With the exception of aquatic species, protection measures set out in Canada’s
Endangered Species Act apply only to floristic species on federal lands, on a national
1. [On-line (April 3 rd , 2007): www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/publications/eval/mig/index_e.cfm].
2. [On-line (March 9, 2007): www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents_staticpost/ceaaref_3971/R-0119.pdf].
Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure 217