Nelson Sergerie, LJI Journalist
Environnement vert plus has raised concerns about the credibility of a study conducted by Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton, which was commissioned by the Regroupement des MRC de la Gaspésie. The study claims that the caribou pilot project could result in significant job losses and an economic downturn of $23 million in Haute-Gaspésie.
Spokesperson for Environnement vert plus, Pascal Bergeron, criticized the report stating, “We find that the report is alarmist and the consequences in terms of job losses are overestimated. The report lacks credibility.”
The environmental group mentions, in particular, a title in the document which states that “Several other projects will be put at risk because of the caribou conservation measures.” Among these are, La source Isabella, the exploitation of critical minerals and Ressources Minières Pélican.
“Regarding Pélican Mineral Resources, we called the promoter and he told us that his project is not on the territory targeted by caribou protection. Of the three projects that were presented and that are at risk, none are actually at risk. For me, statements like that take away a lot of credibility from the report,” says Mr. Bergeron.
“What we feel is that a mandate was given to the firm to find all the possible holes where there could be job losses, make a big addition and produce a figure that would scare people. It succeeded in scaring people, but it has little credibility for the rest,” adds the environmentalist.
Mr. Bergeron is aware that the recreational tourism component could be impacted but blames the Quebec government for its lack of communication following the presentation of the pilot project in Sainte-Anne-des-Monts in April.
“The government did not communicate anything afterward. Benoit Charette, instead of touring Ottawa to prevent the federal government from issuing a decree on a species that he is supposed to protect, should come to Haute-Gaspésie to explain the measures that he wants to implement, to seek out the concerns of people on the ground and to adapt,” suggests Mr. Bergeron.
According to him, Ottawa considers that certain recreational tourism activities are compatible with the protection of caribou.
“Of course, we will not go ski-dooing or four-wheeling on Mount Jacques-Cartier, but for off-trail skiing, there is plenty of room. Areas that have already been devastated by the forestry industry could be used for off-trail skiing. Quebec is doing things halfway,” mentions the spokesperson.
“It would be appropriate to reduce the distribution area, but to increase protection in the immediate perimeter of the Parc de la Gaspésie. We should take the area around the park to restore the habitat rather than having 98% of the telemetric data that imply the same protection measures that do not take into account the uses of the territory,” maintains the environmentalist.
On the forestry aspect, Mr. Bergeron emphasizes that the plan to recover 5,000 hectares of forest damaged by a windfall last December is misleading.
“What science tells us is that it is not in our interest to come and disturb a habitat that has been naturally disturbed. When we read what is said about forest fires, we are going to recover the wood, we are affecting the soil, we are creating entry routes for predators… It is not a good idea. This proposal must be studied more rigorously,” believes Mr. Bergeron.
According to him, the forestry economy is undergoing complete restructuring while there is a major crisis, maintaining that some Quebec sawmills that closed for summer maintenance have not restarted their activities.
“The unions are asking for consolidation because there is too much industrial capacity for the remaining wood. Even if we don’t protect the caribou, would the Gaspésie sawmills stay open? We should stop blaming the caribou for everything and hold a (Quebec-wide) general assembly on the forest,” suggests Mr. Bergeron.
A public consultation regarding the project will conclude on October 31. Mr. Bergeron expressed uncertainty about how much weight Quebec will give to the feedback received. “We understood that there was a strong political game at the Council of Ministers that prevents the work from being done properly. What will be taken into account? The CAQ (Coalition Avenir Québec) will go where the wind blows,” illustrates Mr. Bergeron.