Report - Agence canadienne d'évaluation environnementale

The recreational uses of the area
Opinions of participants
Some participants feared that current fluvial boating uses for this area (small vessel
boating, yachting, fishing and kayaking) would be restricted by the project
(Ms. Thérèse Carrier and Mr. Claude Labrecque, DM40, p. 3; Ms. Chantal Lacasse,
DM163, p. 3; Ms. Louise Grenier, DM615, p. 1). This situation would result in a loss of
enjoyment in this site. For one participant, “the area between the Hydro-Québec
towers and the Pointe De La Martinière is really an ideal spot for activities, for small
vessels, kayaks and family canoeing, as there is much less current along the bank”
(Ms. Isabelle Carrier, DT17, p. 82). For the sea kayak club Le Squall de Lévis:
It is crucial to ensure fluvial user security […] we want the proponent to act like a
good responsible citizen, and that he maintain good neighbourly relations and a
harmonious cohabitation with kayakers and other boaters, in order to comply with
elementary nautical security standards, and ensure the security of the portuary
facilities.
(DM1, p. 1)
Stratégies Saint-Laurent wanted to “make sure that small pleasure craft such as sea
kayaks will be able to skirt the coast, and therefore cross the terminal’s integration
area safely” (DM557, p. 9). In this respect, the sea kayak club Le Squall considered
that “it is essential for the jetty to be piled, so that kayaks and other small vessels can
sail close to the shore and pass under the jetty at all times” (DM1, p. 1).
Some participants wanted to retain access to the St. Lawrence River’s bank where
certain recreational activities take place in the area, such as swimming and walking.
Some believed that the project will be harmful for swimmers: “swimming is allowed in
these areas. No one swims close to a port where these kinds of ships berth”
(Ms. Louise Latulippe, DM196, p. 5). One participant protested: “they are damaging
our river, while the City of Québec spends millions to allow its citizens to swim, relax
and exercise once again” (Ms. Aurélie Tanguay, DM25, p. 1). Démocratie Lévis asked
if building an LNG terminal is the best way to use the St. Lawrence River’s banks in
that area (DM371, p. 5). The Comité ZIP de Québec et Chaudière-Appalaches
denounced the privatization of the river’s banks, and wanted instead to foster access
to them (DM636, p. 9). Moreover, Accès Saint-Laurent–Beauport believed that it was
crucial to “declare the overall coastal corridor as a public area which is sustainable
touristically” in order to protect and consolidate efforts made in this respect and to
preserve the river banks for future generations” (DM457, p. 4).
Some hoped that a major regional park would be created at the De La Martinière and
were worried about the project’s impacts on its developmental potential. In the opinion
of the Société de développement économique de Lévis, “the Pointe De La Martinière
would be the only site where the Rabaska facilities would be visible from the fluvial
Rabaska Project – Implementation of an LNG Terminal and Related Infrastructure 37