Low-level flying review a PR exercise - Penashue

Page 3

Innu Nation president Peter Penashue said he is disappointed the mandate of an environmental review of low-level flying in Labrador and Quebec did not include halting the program altogether.

He said the consultant concerned himself only with finding alternative ways to keep the military program active rather than finding evidence for having the practice stopped.

Penashue said this is the second environmental review of its kind in the past eight years. The first was disregarded for having too many deficiencies in the statement.

This latest review, released to the public April 21, suggested two alternatives for lessening the impact on the inhabitants over which the military low-level training flights take place. Neither alternatives is acceptable to the Innu, said Penashue.

Alternative one is to maintain the size of the training areas of 100,000 sq. km. and reduce the established avoidance program. The avoidance program restricts pilots from flying at low-levels over any known occupied hunting or fishing camps or wildlife species sensitive to disturbance.

The review suggests the avoidance restrictions are too extensive and may hurt Canada's chance in renewing air force training contracts with the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands. Contracts come up for renewal in 1996 and could be increased to include Italy and Belgium, said Penashue.

The renewed contracts could see low-level training flights double in number, said Penashue. This would mean 15,000 low-level flights undertaken within a nine-month period.

The second option offered by the review is an increased training area of 130,000 sq. km. of which no more than 100,000 sq. km. would be used at any one time. This would allow maintenance of the current avoidance program and shifts training permanently away from land favored by the George River caribou herd and from Harp Lake areas.

Penashue said option two would expand low-level flying into Innu hunting territory in Quebec.

The review concludes that noise has the most impact on the inhabitants in the training area. Other effects, such as jet exhaust, possible forest fires and contaminants from accidents have only negligible to moderate impact.

It said the jet noise in the training area can startle people and wildlife, but does not seem to have a significant effect on moose, large carnivores, fur-bearing animals or waterfowl.

The Innu leader said the environmental review is just a public relations scheme and that no real studies have been conducted on the animals that live in the area.

There have been caribou, partridge and other wildlife die from no apparent cause and migration paths have changed, but no studies have been done to find out if low-level flying is a direct cause of the changes.

The report concedes: "There is very little information available on the effects of aircraft noise on many wildlife species....." A proposed effects monitoring program will be conducted over the life of the renewed training program, reads the report.

The public has 90 days to review and comment on the Department of National Defence's environmental impact statement. The panel reviewing military activities in Labrador and Quebec will then make its determination of the documentation is sufficient and could proceed to public hearing by September. The government is expected to determine a course of action with respect to the project some time in 1995.