Mr. Iler,

I don't think you have made it clear to the readers that the argument you are making that ignores "Transport Canada classifications" is only your legal opinion. If you had such a strong case on this issue I think it would have been pursued many years ago.

The reality is that a judge would have little choice but to respect the TC classifications as they are the authorities on aviation classification in Canada. Additionally, back when the Tri-Partite agreement was created, it was structured to indicate STOL aircraft as they were probably the only aircraft considered safe for operation at the Island. Speaking of "intentions", the agreement doesn't restrict an aircraft the size of the Dash 8-400 because of it's weight or size so if the "intention" was to ONLY allow aircraft the size of the Dash 8-100, then they should have specified a size limitation - this was not done.
I'd like to remind Mr. Iler that it is 2010 and the Agreement governing the airport is almost 30 years old and doesn't take into account advances made in the capabilities of aircraft. As the Dash 8-400 has proven - despite it's increase in length, weight, range and capacity (and reduction in pollution and noise), it is more than capable of safely operating at the Island airport.
The Tri-Partite agreement needs to be updated to reflect this reality as compared to the early 80's, very few STOL aircraft are used commercially worldwide in a "Porter Airlines" type of role.

Furthermore, as Mr. Lipton brought up, the TC definition of STOL includes "An aircraft that, at some weight within its approved operating weight, is capable of operating from a STOL runway." In my opinion, this definition leaves the door open to aircraft that are not STOL by definition, yet operate in a STOL environment with STOL characteristics.
40 thousand flights of the Dash 8-400 would serve as proof that this aircraft can safely operate from a STOL runway.

As a final question, WHY is Mr. Iler demanding that we keep living in 1983 and only allow older, louder and more polluting aircraft to operate at the Island? Realistically, if there is NO CURRENT PLAN to close the airport (at least until the agreement finishes in 2033), shouldn't the focus be on reducing noise and pollution as much as possible?

Take Care!
Joe