Fracking Argument Analysis

Shots fired, officer vehicles set ablaze, and groups of protesters pepper sprayed; all hell broke loose on the date of October 17, 2013 when the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) showed up to stop anti-fracking protesters in New Brunswick, Canada. Hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking, has long been a controversial topic. Many argue that fracking allows us access to better and cleaner burning fossil fuels, while others argue that the process in which these gases are obtained are bad for the environment. On this specific day in New Brunswick, protesters were protesting in the belief that fracking would cause contamination to their drinking water supply. But in order to find the truth, it is important to dive a little deeper into

The article begins with letting us about torched police cars and dozens of arrested people, then quickly moves on to tell about how at least 100 RCMP “moved in to arrest demonstrators and remove a blockade” (Winter para.2). Protesters were arrested on a multitude of different offenses. According to the RCMP, “At least one shot was fired at Mounties;” according to protesters, “police fired rubber bullets and used pepper spray,” (Winter para.6) though there were no reported injuries. The RCMP claimed to be working with all sides in order to find a peaceful resolution, but Native leaders argued that them arriving with drawn guns provoked the confrontation to begin with. The RCMP were surrounding the people and the people were surrounding the RCMP. Chief Sock “was manhandled a bit and all hell broke loose,” tribal councillor Robert Levi said to The Canadian Press. Despite the injunction, Levi said protesters would remain because “this is what our people have been fighting for” (Winter para.15). By giving information on both side’s actions, this article manages to remain intermediate between liberal and conservative. The protesters were unjustifiably wrong in their actions, such as destroying officers’ cars, but so were the officers in their sole purpose for showing

Fracking Protest and the Fight for Aboriginal Rights, David Shwartz and Mark Gollom of CBC News begin by providing the information that it is Canada’s “duty to consult and accommodate aboriginal people when the development is on their traditional land.” Non-aboriginal people in New Brunswick also opposed fracking in the area. Because of this, the county’s council “voted nearly unanimously for a moratorium on shale gas exploitation” (Shwartz & Gollom para.8). Stephen Augustine, principal of Unama’ki College, explained how the rights to lands or resources of the Mi’kmaq and Maliseet people were never surrendered in treaties, but that the treaties were of “peace and friendship,” which the Canadian government has acknowledged. Bill Gallagher, the author of Resource Rulers: Fortune and Folly on Canada’s Road to Resources who spent the first third of his life in New Brunswick, believed this protest was a part of a continuum; that there are issues the government must go back to address, and a cooling-off period is needed. Many protests across the country erupted in the following days after the one on October 17, in an act of solidarity from other First Nations people (Shwartz & Gollom para.21). Being directly from Canada, this is a foreign article. Instead of being given information solely on the events of one day, a plethora of information regarding the history and circumstances that led up to the situation. The history spanning back hundreds of years before