Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 1

Fractured Land Module 2: Fracking and LNG in BC Fracking and LNG industries are part of a long history of resource extractive industries throughout BC’s and Canada’s history.

This module draws on and reviews what students may have already learned about previous resource development and land rushes in Canada’s history (such as the gold rush, the push to settle and develop agriculture in BC by Europeans, and the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway) and connects it to the present moment of the fracking and LNG industries. Students will also explore the different stakeholders in the fracking and LNG industries. It also looks at the risks, rewards, and responsibilities of the sector and who takes them on. Finally, the students will create a Video Blog, talking about the issues from the perspective of someone 100 years in the future, and framing the industry and current moment within a historical context.

A possible companion to this lesson is module 5 of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Climate Justice Project Lesson Resource, entitled Fracking Town Hall. It can be found at: www.teachclimatejustice.ca/the-lessons/module-5-fracking-town-hall/#part1

Time allocations are approximate and should be adapted to individual classroom situations.

OBJECTIVES

Students will make connections between land and resources rushes that have happened in BC’s past and the province’s current development of fracking and LNG

Students will identify the different stakeholders within BC’s fracking and LNG industry

Students will explore the risks, gains, and responsibilities associated with the fracking and LNG industry in BC, as well as who is most vulnerable to the risks and who is mostly like to reap the rewards

Students will demonstrate and understanding of the current resource rush for fracking and LNG within the context of BC’s history

COMPONENTS

1. A history and the continuing story of resources rushes in BC 2. Dot-Polling - Fracking and LNG in BC: Who risks, who benefits, and who is responsible 3. Project: VLog from the future

CURRICULUM CONNECTIONS

Social Studies 8, 9, 10, 11; Civic Studies 11; Comparative Civilizations 12; Social Justice 12

English Language Arts 8, 9, 10, 11, 12; Communications 11, 12

First Nations 12

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 2

TOTAL SUGGESTED TIME

3.5 hours

RESOURCES REQUIRED

Whiteboard

Dry erase makers

Regular sized computer paper (15 to 20 sheets)

Small post it notes (three colours, enough for three colours for each student)

Dot stickers (two colours, enough for four stickers of each colour for each student)

Paper and writing utensils (one per student)

Computer lab OR ipad lab OR student cell phones and access to the internet

Part 1 – Resources Rushes in BC

SUGGESTED TIME: 45 minutes

DELIVERY

Read aloud: In the film, Caleb speaks about the BC Government selling parcels of land belonging to Indigenous people to private companies for the purpose of fossil fuel development. He says, “Fracking was facilitating a new land rush.”

You may have learned about some of the other land rushes in BC or Canadian history. They have come to BC several times. The BC gold rushes were land rushes. There were also land rushes that happened as a result of the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway.

Instructions: Split the class into groups of two people. For half of the groups, assign the topic of the BC gold rushes, and for the other half assigned the topic of the land rushes spurred by the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway

For their topic, ask students to draw a picture depicting how it impacted the people who were involved in the rush / who lived in the surrounding area, or depicting one of the results of their assigned land rush on the province, country, or environment.

After 5–7 minutes to draw their picture, ask students to share and discuss the picture they drew with another group of two. Then, debrief a representative sample of pictures from both land rushes as a class.

Below are vignettes that can be distributed to each pair to help prompt them in creating their picture.

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 3

The Fraser Canyon Gold Rush (1857–1860) Vignette The Fraser Canyon gold rush began in 1857 after gold was discovered on the Thompson River in British Columbia at what is now present-day Lytton. Victoria until then a "sleepy English village" of a few hundred people, was transformed into a tent city of some 30,000 within weeks in the spring of 1858 due to prospectors coming in search of gold. The tens of thousands of prospectors from California flooded into the region and disrupted the established balance between the Hudson's Bay Company's fur traders and indigenous peoples. The rush was one of the major factors that instigated European-Canadian settlement on the mainland of British Columbia. It was the catalyst for the founding of the Colony of British Columbia, the building of early road infrastructure, and the founding of many towns and to assert British authority and governance over the territory.

The mining population, split in thirds about evenly between Americans, Chinese, and a mix of Britons and Europeans who had been in California, entered into conflict when two French miners violated a Nlaka'pamux girl near Lytton, then called "the Forks", and their beheaded bodies were seen floating down the river. In the ensuing unrest, known as the Fraser Canyon War, most of the mining population fled the Canyon for Spuzzum and Yale, and war parties composed of Americans, Germans, French and others (many who had been mercenaries in Nicaragua, or in service of France in Mexico), forayed up the canyon and made a peace with the Nlaka'pamux, though many were killed on both sides. Competition and interracial tensions between European Americans and non-white miners erupted on Christmas Eve 1858, with the beating of Isaac Dixon, a freed American black slave. Dixon was beaten by two men from Hill's Bar, the other main town in the southern part of the goldfields. Because of growing violence and unrest, the governor to send newly appointed Chief Justice Begbie, the colony's chief of police Chartres Brew and a contingent of Royal Engineers and Royal Marines to intervene. The team also dealt with the corruption of British appointees in the area, which had contributed to the crisis. Although some people found gold, tens of thousands of men failed to stake claims, or were unable to because of the summer's high water on the river, and pronounced the Fraser to be "humbug". By 1860, the gold-bearing sandbars of the Fraser were depleted. Many of the miners either drifted back to the U.S. or dispersed further into the British Columbia wilderness in search of unstaked riches References

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraser_Canyon_Gold_Rush

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_gold_rushes

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 4

The Canadian Pacific Railway Land Rush Vignette As part of British Columbia's 1871 agreement to join Canadian Confederation, the government had agreed to build a transcontinental railway linking the Pacific Province to the eastern provinces. Call the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) it was one of the key events that contributed to Canada becoming what is today. The CPR had many obstacles to being built. The first obstacle to its construction was political. The route that the Canadian government wanted was through mountains and rough terrain. To ensure this routing, the government offered huge incentives including vast grants of land in the West. In 1873, Sir John A. Macdonald and other high-ranking politicians resigned as a result of a bribery scandal. Called the Pacific Scandal, it was found that MacDonald and the Conservative party of Canada granted federal contracts to Hugh Allan's Canada Pacific Railway Company in exchange for political donations of $360,000. Because of this scandal, the Conservative Party was removed from office in 1873.

Another obstacle to the building CPR was that various groups of First nations people were living

on the west and in the path of the proposed railway. The first series of numbered treaties

signed by between various First Nations and the British Crown facilitated the building of the

railway. The numbered treaties 1 through 7 from 1871-1877 (sometimes called the first wave of

number treaties) were key in advancing European settlement across the Prairie regions as well

as the development of the CPR.

For Treaties 1-7, there was some resistance from members of the First Nations to the treaty process and growing anxiety that it would allow a flood of settlers, but many saw it as a way to secure much needed assistance. The First Nations at this time were suffering due to the changing dynamics of the west including disease, famine, and conflict. First Nation people were being decimated by disease, specifically smallpox, and tuberculosis which had catastrophic ramifications for several groups.

Many thousands of people worked on the railway. Many were European immigrants. In British Columbia, government contractors hired workers from China, known as "coolies". A white worker received between $1 and $2.50 per day, but had to pay for his own food, clothing, transport to the job site, mail and medical care. After 2½ months of hard labour, they could net as little as $16. Chinese labourers in British Columbia made only between 75 cents and $1.25 a day, paid in rice mats, and not including expenses, leaving barely anything to send home. They did the most dangerous construction jobs, such as working with explosives to clear tunnels through rock. The families of the Chinese who were killed received no compensation, or even

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 5

notification of loss of life. Many of the men who survived did not have enough money to return to their families in China, although Chinese labour contractors had promised that as part of their responsibilities. Many spent years in isolated and often poor conditions.

References:

www.cpr.ca/en/about-cp/our-history

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Pacific_Railway

www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/railway-history/

www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbered_Treaties

Threads to explore during the class debrief

Land grabs from indigenous people, and the impacts and existence of colonialism

The impacts on and exploitation of foreign workers, and the racism and discrimination that often comes out of it

Some people who participated in the land rush made money or gained benefit, but others lost their lives or livelihoods

There were government subsidies and changes in systems/infrastructure that greatly benefited those in power or those in politically favourable position

Discuss:

During the gold rush or the land rush during the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway, who benefited? Who was exploited or suffered because of it?

What were the lasting effects on people, places, and cultures because of those industries/rushes?

How are these land rushes similar to that of the land rush for fracking/LNG development? How are they different? Think about what you saw Fractured Land if you need some help with the comparisons.

Part 2 – Dot-Polling - Fracking and LNG in BC: Who risks, who benefits, and who is responsible

SUGGESTED TIME: 1 hour 15 minutes

DELIVERY

As a class, brainstorm the potential stakeholders (people who would be impacted by or have an interest in) for a fracking or LNG project in Dene territory. Your list might be something like this:

Oil and gas companies

The BC Government

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 6

Resource workers looking for employment

Members of local First Nations communities

Non-First Nations people in nearby communities

Animal life and the surrounding ecosystem

People in other cities in BC

Environmentalists

Investors or business people in other countries

Write the name of each stakeholder on blank pieces of printer sized paper (one piece of paper for each stakeholder). Use a thick writing utensil, such as a felt, or a whiteboard marker. As you complete each stakeholder, have a student tape it on a wall around the room.

Distribute a collection two different colours of dot stickers (four stickers of each colour) and three different colours of small post it notes to each student.

An example may be:

Colours provided below are for example purposes only.

4 green dot stickers

4 red dot stickers

1 green post-it note

1 red post-it note

1 yellow post-it note

Instructions to students

Colours provided below are for example purposes only.

Put your green post-it note on the stakeholder you think would gain the most if a fracking/LNG project goes through.

Put your green dot stickers on the four (different) stakeholders who you think would gain the most if an LNG project goes though (one of your four dot stickers should be placed on the stakeholder you labeled with your green post-it note).

Put your red post-it note on the stakeholder you think risks (or would lose) the most if a fracking/LNG project goes though.

Put your red dot stickers on the four (different) stakeholders who you think risks (or would lose) the most if a fracking/LNG project goes though (one of your four dot stickers should be placed on the stakeholder you labeled with your red post-it note).

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 7

Put your yellow post-it note beside the stakeholder who you think should be responsible for damages or restitution if something goes wrong or people or the environmental are negatively affected.

Discuss:

Who does the class thinks assumes the most risk? What kinds of risks does a fracking project introduce? (This can draw from the film, or from students’ own lives and information) What do you notice about who we think assumes the most risk in a project?

Who does the class think gains the most from a potential project? What kinds of benefits does a fracking project introduce? (This can draw from the film, or students’ own lives and information) What do you notice about who we think gets the most benefit from project?

For the stakeholder who the class feels is most responsible for damages if something goes wrong:

o Why did people choose this stakeholder as the group most responsible?

o How confident is the class that this stakeholder has either ability or drive to address a major problem or situation if it comes up?

Methane, one of the waste bi-products of fracking, is a major contributor to climate change and is 74 to 100 times more potent as a green house gas than carbon dioxide. With this information in mind, does affect your perception of the amount of risk associated with the fracking industry? If yes, how so?

References:

o www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs-carbon-dioxide-a-greenhouse-gas-showdown/

o www.bclnginfo.com/learn-more/methane-emissions-from-natural-gas-systems).

Some people who stand to gain (in some ways) may be against the project. Why might this be?

Some people who stand to lose or risk (in some ways) may support part of the project. Why might this be?

Why do some places in the world ban fracking, while others allow it?

If your descendants were looking at the fracking/LNG industry BC today from 100 years in the future, what do you think they would say? What do you think will happen to the industry over the next 20 years? 50 years? 100 years? Consider how this current land rush may be similar to or different than land or resources rushes of the past [Optional activity – expand this last set of debrief questions to a paired role play activity]

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 8

Part 3 – VLog Assignment

SUGGESTED TIME: 1 hour 30 minutes

FUTURE HISTORY VLOG ASSIGNMENT

Create a VLog (Video blog), posing as someone 100 years in the future. Talk about the history of today and the impacts and history of the LNG industry in BC over the next 50 to 75 years. Note: If the video equipment to create a VLog is not available to students, this project could also be done as a class presentation. Stage 1: Preplan your VLog with a draft timeline of the “history” that you are going to talk about in your video blog. You will hand this draft into your teacher as a part of your assignment, and it will make up 25% of your grade. Stage 2: Record your VLog. This can be done with a web camera, or a cell phone. Your VLog must: 1. Be at least 3:30 minutes in length. 2. Include some sort of futuristic aesthetic as a part of the presentation. This can include, but

is not limited to, clothing, backgrounds, or hairstyle. 3. Cover at least three topics or events within the future “history” of Fracking and LNG in BC

over a 50-year period. Stage 3: Email your VLog to your teacher at __________________________. If your timeline is in digital format you can also email it to your teacher. If your timeline is in a paper format, submit it to your teacher in class.

Created by Ryan Cho (ryanacho@gmail.com)

Editable digital versions of this lesson are available at http://bit.ly/2b2f5uv

This material is CopyLeft. It may be used, modified, and distributed freely on condition that it remains free and

open source. Please also cite the original author (and send him an email if you are using the material). 9

Fractured Land VLog “History” Assignment Rubric

Student’s Name: _____________________________________________ Grade: ___________ Date: ______________________________________ Block: ___________

Assessment: ( / 16)

Written Comments:

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

Category Excellent (4) Good (3) Fair (2) Developing (1) Pre-planning timeline

Student’s writing and/or visual representations are consistently clear and outline three “historical” developments that have depth and detail to them.

Student’s writing and/or visual representations are generally clear and outline three “historical” developments that have some depth and detail to them.

Student’s writing and/or visual representations are clear and outline three “historical” developments.

Student’s writing and/or visual representations lack clarity and/or do not outline three “historical” developments.

VLog Completeness

VLog includes discussion of at least three “historical” developments that have depth and detail to them.

VLog includes discussion of at least three “historical” developments that have some depth and detail to them.

VLog include discussion of at least three “historical” developments.

VLog does not outline three “historical” developments..

VLog Presentation and aesthetics

VLog is engaging, entertaining, uses some sort of props or background to create an aesthetic.

VLog is engaging and uses some sort of props or background to create an aesthetic.

VLog uses some sort of props or background to create an aesthetic.

Student does not make an attempt to create a future aesthetic in the VLog.

VLog Demonstration of Knowledge

“History” told demonstrates an understanding of the potential risks and benefits of fracking and LNG, as well as well as its impacts on different people. It also reflects historical paths of non-renewable resource industries / land rushes, and explores LNG’s relationship with climate change.

“History” told demonstrates an understanding of the potential risks and benefits of fracking and LNG, as well as well as its impacts on different people. It also reflects historical paths of non-renewable resource industries / land rushes.

“History” told demonstrates an understanding of the potential risks or benefits of fracking and LNG. “History” recanted is feasible or realistic.

“History” told does not demonstrate an understanding of the potential risks or benefits of fracking and LNG. “History” recanted is feasible or realistic.