Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

Opinions of participants
[…] we will never be able to replace the balance, beauty, value, human richness
and majestic aspect of a site such as ours. Such a landscape is unique in the
world. It has slowly become part of our culture, through the subtle and mysterious
bond that exists between a land and its inhabitants. In this landscape we can read
our history, we recognize our place in the world, and we are building together a
future that is open to all of us.
(Mr. Pierre Morency, DM434, p. 2)
Many participants 1 were of the opinion that the project would have devastating
consequences on the area’s landscape and heritage aspects. Project components which
were deemed to impair the landscape included the storage tanks, the metallic jetty jutting
out into the river, the lining with stones of part of the riverbank and the LNG tanker traffic
(Ms. Mireille Castelli, DM626, p. 3; Association pour la protection de l’environnement
de Lévis, DM459, p. 28; North American Tourism Research Institute Inc., DM297, p. 4
and 5).
Specifically, the feared impacts on the landscape and heritage value were deemed to
have an impact on tourism. Some participants 2 underscored the fact that the region is
renowned among travellers and that the project would harm its tourism appeal. The river
corridor where the project would be built is considered to be the maritime entrance to the
region, and many feared 3 that the presence of the LNG terminal would lessen the appeal
for cruise travel companies and boaters. One participant believed that the project “goes
against the trend to restore the beauty and health of rivers, and of the itineraries taken
by excursions and tourist cruises” (Ms. Andrée Roberge, DM366, p. 1).
Some had doubts about the effectiveness of the visual impact mitigation measures
proposed by the proponent (Ms. Madeleine P. Couture, DM111, p. 2; Conseil des
monuments et sites du Québec, DM394, p. 13). In this respect, the Conseil régional
de l’environnement de la Capitale-Nationale and Stratégies Saint-Laurent
underscored the importance of implementing all the required measures to integrate
the project into the landscape in the most harmonious way possible (DM74, p. 12;
DM557, p. 10).
Some participants noted many gaps in the impact study’s approach regarding
landscape and heritage value aspects (Conseil des monuments et sites du Québec,
1. Mr. Guy Martel, DM405, p. 3; Ms. Marie Dubé and others, DM399, p. 2; Mr. Rosaire St-Pierre, DM412, p. 5;
Mr. Marcel Junius, DM633, p. 1 and 2; Ms. Jeanne-D’Arc Dubé-Lavoie, DM373, p. 2; Ms. Marielle and Mr. Serge
Gagnon, DM587.
2. Mr. Jacques Jobin, DM18, p. 7; Conseil central de Québec–Chaudière-Appalaches, DM120, p. 6; Ms. Andrée
Labrecque, DM583, p. 2; Conseil régional de l’environnement Chaudière-Appalaches, DM591, p. 5; Mr. Denis
Guay, DM614.
3. Conseil des monuments et sites du Québec, DM394, p. 11; Ms. Louise Latulippe, DM196, p. 6; Ms. Pierrette
Bélanger, DM302, p. 45; Mr. Patrick Plante, DM382, p. 35; Stratégies Saint-Laurent, DM557, p. 9 and 10;
Ms. Louise Maranda, DM596, p. 18.
34 Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure