As far as I know, nobody's proposing a railroad through there, so asking why they aren't "protesting the railroad" is ridiculous in this case, although it might be a legitimate question in other cases.
My question is, why do you think there's a need
to run this pipeline? There's certainly a financial interest for the people who would operate or use the pipeline. You could probably make an argument that this pipeline would serve the collective good.
But that doesn't necessarily identify a need. I see an argument over conflicting interests and rights, and as usual that's a complicated and difficult process.
And it deserves honest consideration, and IMO ridiculing the protesters for building campfires doesn't cut it in the honesty department.