Part 2 – Rough Waters & Divided Valleys: Voices from the route of the Northern Gateway Pipeline

Welcome to the home of a special edition of Terra Informa. We are pleased to present our two part radio documentary ‘Rough Waters & Divided Valleys: Voices from the route of the Northern Gateway Pipeline’.

Download or Stream Part 1 Here

Download Part 2-Rough Waters & Divided Valleys: Voices From the Route of the Northern Gateway Pipeline

Subscribe to Terra Informa on Itunes

Like Terra Informa on Facebook

Follow Terra Informa on Twitter

In the summer of 2011, members of Terra Informa set out on a journey to follow the path of the proposed Northern Gateway from its starting point in Edmonton to its terminus in Kitimat, on the coast of British Columbia. When we started our journey and our research, it was clear that this pipeline was going to create a storm of debate. Media coverage would be extensive, and probably influential. But we also wondered whether it would really capture the full range of thoughts and feelings held by those directly affected. This documentary is our attempt to delve a little deeper. It is the result of conversations we had over thousands of kilometers traveled, in communities with the most to gain, and the most to lose. What we found is that a seemingly simple pipeline is creating turbulence in some communities, while building solidarity in others.
For more on the Northern Gateway Proposal and our documentary, including FAQ’sreports on the project and bonus audio,  check out our special section of the website.


  1. It is interesting that Stephen Harper’s Conservative government is very much in favour of resource companies getting investment funding (including the US and China) to apply Best Practices for profitable resource extraction, but are against any environmental groups from also getting international funding to expand Best Practices in good environmental stewardship.

  2. “Georges Erasmus wrote in the forward of DRUMBEAT: Anger & Renewal in Indian Country – ISBN#0-929091-03-5 ( page1):

    “As people of the First Nations of Canada we have a vision of the sort of country we want to live in & to build in collaboration with other Canadians. It is certainly not the sort of country we have now… To do so we have to go back to the agreement made in the Two-Row Wampum Treaty signed between First Nations & the newly arrived Europeans in 1664. All across North America today First Nations share a common perception of what was then agreed: we would allow Europeans to stay among us & use a certain amount of our land, while in our own lands we would continue to exercise our own laws & maintain our ouw institutions & systems of government. We all believe that that vision is still very possible today, that as FN we should have our own governments with jurisdiction over our own lands & people. WE SHOULD DECIDE ABOUT AND BENEFIT FROM THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT WE WANT IN OUR OWN TERRITORIES, NOT HAVE SUCH DEVELOPMENT FORCED ON US TO SERVE OUTSIDE INTERESTS.””

  3. January 21, 2010 – The Union of BC Indian Chiefs (UBCIC) urgently calls upon the Government of Canada to adopt the findings of today’s Supreme Court of Canada decision of MiningWatch Canada v. Canada and apply the findings immediately to all mining, oil and gas proposals in British Columbia that are subject to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. (the Supreme Court of Canada ruled the federal govenrment should have done a full envionmental assessment, but also the high court decision allows the Red Chris project in northern British Columbia to proceed) “Given the virtual collapse of the BC Treaty process, the demise of the Recognition legislative reform initiative and the rising tide of litigation, the Government of Canada must heed the court’s warning that procedural shortcuts are unacceptable,” said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs. “This decision provides hope for Indigenous communities, such as those of the Tahltan Central Council, who call for full and rigorous studies to adequately assess the impacts on both the environment and our people. Proposals like Taseko’s Prosperity Mine, Terrane Metals’ Mt. Milligan Project and Enbridge’s Northern Gateway certainly come to mind.

  4. “

    The wisdom of messy, democratic assessments


    Making development decisions democratically can be a
    ponderous exercise, but it?s the best way.

    Northern Gateway, Prosperity Mine, Jumbo Glacier: Balancing
    environmental protection against economic and social benefits of big
    projects is seldom easy. It?s often ponderous, complex and messy. And
    that?s if the assessment is done properly.

    The new environmental regime outlined in the federal budget on March 29
    will likely expedite and tidy up assessments. But if history is correct,
    it will ultimately lead to greater conflict and lower standards of
    environmental protection.

    Under the new ?streamlined? federal process, only one environmental
    assessment would be conducted, by the federal or provincial government.
    The new regulations also limit the length of time for reviews and
    restrict who can speak at them. Add to this the weakening of fish
    habitat protection, by limiting Fisheries Act protection to major bodies
    of water used for commercial, recreational or aboriginal fisheries, and
    strengthening of the hand of the federal cabinet and environment
    minister in decision-making, and you have an unravelled environmental
    assessment process.”


    The federal government announced on April 17, 2012 its plan for “Responsible Resource Development” which contains a number of proposals to reform key aspects of the review process for federal environmental assessments.

    Simplified and Set Timelines for Environmental Assessments

    The government’s plan proposes to simplify the current structure of environmental assessments and replace it with two kinds of reviews:

    1) a standard environmental assessment, or

    2) a review panel.

    Though details on this proposal are currently lacking, it appears this reform is meant to allow appropriate projects to proceed in a more streamlined fashion through a standard environmental assessment.


    The Yinka Dene Alliance is sending 30 people on the Freedom Train ranging in age from youths of 16 to elders up to age 67. The Yinka Dene delegation will be joined on the train by representatives of other First Nations who are also deeply involved in the fight to keep their territories and waters free from Enbridge’s proposed tar sands oil pipelines and supertankers.


    Sign the Petition and stand in solidarity with others who oppose the Enbridge pipeline/tanker project including:

    Over 100 First Nations who have banned tar sands pipelines and tankers using their own Indigenous law

    Over 130 First Nations who oppose the Enbridge pipeline/tanker project

    Over 100,000 people that signed a petition supporting a ban on oil tanker on the North Coast of BC

Join the discussion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s