The focus of this paper is the Berger report that was released in May 1977. The information relates to the Northern Frontier, the region of Mackenzie, and highlights why and how the valley could be the biggest project of its kind. The resultant gas pipeline was eventually to result in an oil pipeline in the area. This project was supposed to require immense infrastructural support. The report presented by Thomas Berger was against the construction of the oil pipeline project. He blatantly stated that the construction of such a project in the area would result in oppression for the native people in the area and would subject the animals to be endangered in their own habitat.
The approach taken in this paper for commenting and critically stating Berger’s report has been the feminist approach which is the general approach of analyzing and presenting text without siding with any argument that might be taking place. In terms of this paper, the comments are objective and not subject to the bias of any kind.
According to Berger’s report, he was granted the flexibility to go about gathering support and material for his cause. As a result, he was able to come up with sufficient evidence to take the project to court. He even managed to hold a hearing throughout Canada and receive the support of the Commission Council, which comprised experts in the field. Berger’s established commissions also held about 35 meetings throughout the Mackenzie River Valley, and the paper has been based on the findings of this report.
The salient features of Berger’s report of 1977 state that he requested the government that no pipeline should be built in the region of Yukon for at least ten years. The reasons stated were environmental, economic, and of social nature.
The Methodology
Berger has used component and factor-based methodology to compile and present his report. The initial part of the report introduces the reader to the geographic location of the Yukon region and tells about the characteristics and history of the region. Further on, the report is divided into three main factors the environmental factor, the economic factor, and the social factors which are affecting the pipeline project.
Environmental Reasons
The environmental reasons for opposing the Pipeline project were because of the fact that the Yukon region was very sensitive to environmental changes and, as a result, could be harmed easily. The establishment of a pipeline in this area would affect the people residing in the region as well as the animals that would be forced to relocate and would eventually die or be devastated due to their move from their habitats. IN the report, Berger also stated the southern region of the Mackenzie valley was not as sensitive and susceptible to environmental harm; however, this did not mean that such a mass level project could be constructed here without causing harm to the environment. Aside from this, he also suggested that the government should invest in creating facilities and sanctuaries in the whole Yukon and Northwest region so as to safeguard flora and fauna as well as the creatures residing in these areas. He specifically mentioned that “Porcupine Caribou should be protected in the northern Yukon, white whales within the Mackenzie Bay, several bird species throughout the Mackenzie Valley, and Berger suggested a large reserve contiguous with Alaska’s National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR).” (‘The Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Commission Report,’ 1977).
Economic Factors
The economic factor that was highlighted in Berger’s report was that the economic benefit which was due to arise as a result of the construction of the pipeline was actually much less than what was being stated by the concerned parties. The promoters apparently had been falsely highlighting minute benefits to make the issue of the pipeline sell to the general public. According to Berger’s Report, the large-scale projects of this nature that were based on the transportation, extraction, and usage of nonrenewable energy sources were actually very expensive and costly. These projects also did not provide a long-term increase in employment in the region as once the source starts depleting, the employment level starts decreasing in the region. Aside from this, the temporary employment that would be offered due to the construction of the pipeline project would pertain to low-level and unskilled jobs, which would not contribute towards increasing the standards of living for the people in the region in the long term. The fact which requires notice is that specialized and skilled workers were going to be transferred and temporarily allotted accommodation in the areas to fill the skilled labor jobs, and those require substantial specialization and expertise.
It was also discovered that the construction of the pipeline would also affect the local economy of the region, which was based on hunting game and fishing. “I discovered that people in the theNorthh have strong feelings about the pipeline and large-scale frontier development. I listened to a brief by northern businessmen in Yellowknife who favors a pipeline through the theNorthh. Later, in a native village far away, I heard virtually the whole community express vehement opposition to such a pipeline. Both were talking about the same pipeline; both were talking about the same region – but for one group, it is a frontier, for the other a homeland.” (‘The Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Commission Report,’ 1977).
Ontological Arguments
The ontological argument put forward in the report is in the economics sections where Berger has stated that the building of the pipeline would require a massive pre-project just to prepare the land for such a development. The forests and their inhabitants would have to be cleared, and the land leveled enough to provide stability for the pipelines. Furthermore, the building and maintenance of the pipelines produce more tremendous expenses. Any value that is calculated keeping such facts in mind greatly exceeds the value presented by the contributing companies. Furthermore, the technology present at the time made this task all the more daunting, uneconomical, inefficient, and expensive, completely opposite to the argument the companies have presented. Furthermore, the employment of the pipeline construction, operation, and harvest of the oil and gas are very limited to the inexperienced natives. As seen in many previous similar projects, this sort of employment is not only hazardous and low salaried, but also very temporary. In this case, the natives will be left with little a few years of painstaking comfort until the wells run dry, and then they will be abandoned and unable to even resume their former lifestyle. Berger, therefore, supports his claims by proving the above-stated facts which would downplay and decrease the economic value of the region.
Social Factors
The report presented by Berger depicted that the region chosen for the construction of the pipeline was home to a considerable number of the population in the region and was also developing into an area of importance for the markets in the south of Yukon. Research also showed that pipeline projects which had taken place previously were usually worked on without any consideration for the natives of the region. This posed a threat to the population living in the region that was doomed to be devastated, according to Berger’s surmise. He clearly stated that if any such project was to go through, then it would have to conform to the conditions presented by the natives of the region. Berger’s report especially highlighted the issues that were to be faced by the aboriginal population in the region and how already there were considerable cases presented in the court pertaining to their rights on their land and property. Development efforts taken in the region were already not in favor of the aboriginals, and this pipeline project was going to add to the problems being faced by them. The claims for such cases were some of the issues that were presented by Berger in his report that needed to be discussed regardless p0f the pipeline project being constructed or not.
Gender bias and Epistemological
The social aspect of the report covers the epistemological issues. The report states that the native people of Yukon have been important for foreign trade due to their vast knowledge of the geography and zoology of their homeland. They were often employed by foreign industries to harvest natural resources. They were especially sought out when matters came to the fur industry. The building of a pipeline through the region would lead to the destruction of the natural resources to make way for the pipeline. Thus the region will also be tremendously changed zoologically. This would take away the one main foreign industry that was present. The natives of the Yukon will not be essential to the oil and gas industry, and they know it. The outside world may need the oil and gas of the area, but they need no help from the locals to obtain it. The contributing companies know exactly how they will build a pipeline and how they will use it. The labor can be carried out by professionals from outside, and the operation can be done by engineers who have dedicated their lives to just this sort of work. Thus the experienced natives will be left with no benefit and with no say in this project. The attitude of the white people towards these natives is also a thinly veiled determinism. They want industrial progress and furthermore want the natives to present no protest, rather prepare for the upcoming challenge by changing their very mode of life. There should no longer be any native villages but rather white towns. And the Locals of theNorthh must become like the whites if they want to survive. This sort of attitude obviously produces extremely sexist feelings from both the north and south of Yukon.
Supporting Information
Another report on a pipeline project came about around the time of Berger’s report. This report was presented by Kenneth M. Lysyk and related to the highway pipeline in Alaska. The features of this report were very similar to those of Berger’s report. The conclusions of this report also stated that the economic benefits that were to be reaped with the pipeline project were going to affect the people outside of the Yukon region more than the people residing in the Yukon region. Both the reports pleaded to the government to delay the project to allow the claims made on the land to settle and benefit the native population in the region.
Reference
(1977), The Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Commission Report, National Energy Board Canada. Web.