Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Return to the valley

On May 9, 1977, a report called Northern Frontier, Northern Homeland by B.C. judge Thomas Berger was released by the Trudeau government in Ottawa.

On May 9, 1977, a report called Northern Frontier, Northern Homeland by B.C. judge Thomas Berger was released by the Trudeau government in Ottawa.

Thirty-five years later, the report continues to loom large in Canadian history, for the role it played in aboriginal rights and resource development.

Whether Enbridge and enthusiastic backers of the Northern Gateway pipeline like it or not, Berger's report has framed the entire discussion surrounding whether the pipeline should connect the Alberta tar sands to the Pacific Ocean.

Back in 1975, proponents were excited about the prospect of a gas pipeline linking the Beaufort Sea north of Inuvik with southern markets hungry for the fuel available under the seabed.

After the Mackenzie Valley Dene protested, Berger was appointed to prepare a report on the impact the pipeline would have on the

people of the Western Arctic.

Berger took his job far more seriously than anyone ever imagined. He travelled extensively across the region, meeting Dene, Inuit and Metis leaders, along with white residents. He met them during formal hearings in Yellowknife but he also met them in more informal indoor settings, such as log cabins and tents, as well as outdoors, at events that featured food and dancing.

Berger shocked government and industry leaders with his report, where he chronicled the intense opposition to the project among First Nations residents, as well as the profound effect it would have on the people and the sensitive environment. He recommended a 10-year delay in the project, so these concerns could be addressed before going forward. He further added that no pipeline should ever be built across the fragile northern Yukon, linking up to the Alaskan north shore oil fields.

Although the Mackenzie pipeline would have moved gas, compared to oil heading west and condensate heading east in the Northern Gateway pipeline, there are many similarities

between the two projects.

Both proposed running a 1,200-kilometre pipeline through pristine northern environments, crossing numerous creeks, rivers and mountains. First Nations and white residents alike feared the effects on the environment - both during construction and in the event of a spill - and the relatively short-term economic benefit. Enbridge has made a concerted effort to get First Nations support across northern B.C., in stark contrast to the racist and patronizing discussions held 35 years ago with the aboriginal population living along the Mackenzie River. No doubt Enbridge is familiar with what has happened since Berger's report.

While the Mackenzie project died for much longer than 10 years, soaring oil and gas prices have put it back on the table, although cost is actually seen as the biggest remaining stumbling block now.

Young and educated native activists opposed to the Mackenzie pipeline in 1977 are now major aboriginal leaders (one of them a former territorial premier) and supporters of the same project. Many land claims in the Western

Arctic have been settled, as well.

In other words, First Nations concerns were eventually taken seriously, starting with addressing their most basic assertions about sovereignty over their land. It took an entire generation to happen but government and industry, working with aboriginal leaders, are closer than they've ever been to seeing the Mackenzie pipeline become reality.

Meanwhile, aboriginal title continues to be an open sore in B.C. It's unlikely many of the region's First Nations will ever support the Northern Gateway pipeline through land they are still claiming as their own.

While another application is already in to build the Keystone XL project through the U.S., less than a year after it was rejected by the Obama administration, the same won't happen with Northern Gateway, should the project be turned down. It will be dead for decades, perhaps forever, just like the Mackenzie pipeline.

Even if, another generation from now, everyone is on side of Northern Gateway, development costs, energy demand and economic uncertainty could further delay the project, just like it has in the Mackenzie delta.

-- Managing editor Neil Godbout