Protesters, officers gird for pipeline ruling, but restarting construction may wait regardless


Category:  Fields and Streams

Via:  community  •  7 years ago  •  16 comments

Protesters, officers gird for pipeline ruling, but restarting construction may wait regardless



NEAR CANNON BALL, N.D.—Construction won't immediately restart on a $3.8 billion pipeline if a judge rules against the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe after a court hearing Wednesday, Aug. 24.



Dakota Access LLC, which temporarily stopped construction last week amid growing tribal protests near the pipeline's planned crossing of the Missouri River, will wait for law enforcement to determine it's safe to resume construction, Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier said Wednesday morning.

That call will depend on how protesters react to the ruling, if it's favorable to Dakota Access, Kirchmeier said.

"We've done everything we possibly could to make sure this stays safe," he said.


Law enforcement officers met with tribal leaders and protest organizers Wednesday morning and had a "positive dialogue," the sheriff said. There are 40 officers on site near the confluence of the Missouri and Cannonball rivers, which has drawn 2,000-some protesters camped nearby, many from tribes across the region and the country. Fargo police officers and deputies from Cass and Grand Forks counties are among the agencies assisting Morton County deputies.

Standing Rock members oppose the river crossing, fearing a pipeline leak would contaminate their water supply and other sacred sites. The tribe is represented by the environmental law group Earthjustice in the lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over permits issued for the pipeline, which would cross the Missouri River a half-mile north of the reservation and be the largest oil pipeline from the Bakken oil fields, moving 450,000 barrels per day to Patoka, Ill.


Dakota Access temporarily stopped construction near the river crossing site as protests ramped up, leading to 29 arrests for trespassing or disorderly conduct.

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., will consider Wednesday the tribe's request for an injunction that would effectively halt construction of the 1,172-mile pipeline. A lawyer for the tribe said the judge has indicated he will rule from the bench or shortly after the hearing.




jrDiscussion - desc
Larry Hampton
Professor Participates
link   seeder  Larry Hampton    7 years ago

When asked what will happen if the judge denies the injunction and Dakota Access tries to resume construction, Camp said, "Then we'll start blockading."

"We'll do what we can with our bodies to keep the machines from coming in," he said.

Professor Principal
link   Kavika     7 years ago

Currently there are busloads of Natives in D.C. waiting for a ruling on this.

It should be pointed out that there has been NO violence by the protestors.

See link for more information and photos.

Numerous tribe and non Indian allies have joined the protest or expressed support of the Standing Rock Sioux.

The Ojibwe Nation which has representatives at the protest site.

The Cherokee Nation

The Navajo Nation

The Nez Perce Nation

The Great Sioux Nation

  Oneida Nation of Wisconsin and the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska

National Council of American Indians

A short list, there are many more.

Masters Quiet
link   Enoch  replied to  Kavika   7 years ago

Dear Friend Kavika: I wish them success in their protests.

Morality was always on their side.

Over time, environmental stewardship will show them to be in the right as well.


Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.    7 years ago

I think that there should be outreach to the eastern tribes. The more cohesive a group, the more traction. This is about future generations to come and the rights to our lands. 

Professor Principal
link   Kavika   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A.   7 years ago

Perrie, the Iroquois nation is represented with members at the site.

In addition many more of the eastern nations have representatives there.

It's spreading and they are becoming stronger by the day.

Professor Principal
link   Kavika     7 years ago

A letter from the people of Wales.

Greetings to Chante tin’sa kinanzi Po in the spirit camp Iŋyaŋ Wakháŋagapi Othí .

We write to you from Wales in support of your brave and principled stand against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). We believe that people who wish to defend the Earth and its valuable resources must stand shoulder to shoulder worldwide. We believe that your values as a people are vital to you, as they are for us. Respect for the Earth, respect for people, respect for your language, respect for your traditions, and resilience to survive despite the harsh blows of history.

Wales – Cymru in our language – is our country. Many have never heard of us! Wales is a small country neighbouring England, with its own language and traditions. It ceased to be a free country centuries ago, and is now part of the United Kingdom. We don’t control many of the things which are important to us.

Many aspects of your battle and history strike a chord with us here in Wales. Here are some examples which we believe strengthen our solidarity with you.

As in your case, but in a different way, water has played an important part in our history. Half a century ago, Capel Celyn was drowned to create Tryweryn reservoir for Liverpool in England, even though virtually everyone of note in Wales was opposed to the act. The whole community had to move from their homes. For many, it seemed like the end of the world. One of us (Eddie Ladd) has created a performance combining dance, words and music, with reference to the Ghost Dance of your people to convey the hopelessness of the inhabitants of the drowned valley.

We’ve seen attacks on our language. Children were punished for speaking the language, which is similar to what happened to your children in the Indian Boarding Schools. The Welsh Language Society is a non-violent organisation which works to defend and restore the language, and backs similar organizations in other countries which fight for minority languages. One of us (Sioned Haf) has been to the fore in this work .

At present the United Kingdom Government wishes to build a new nuclear power station at Wylfa on the Isle of Anglesey in Wales. This could lead to radioactive contamination over a wide area. Like you we worry about the effects of pollution on ourselves, our children, and on unborn generations. We are also aware that much of your land, and that of other nations in North America have been polluted following mining for uranium. One of us (Robat Idris) is active with the organisation PAWB ( People Against Wylfa B ) which opposes the Building of the new power station, and like you has to fight against the corporate strength of a large company.

We believe that the brave stand taken by you, the Lakota of Standing Rock, together with your friends from other nations, is of great importance. No water, no life.

Best regards and Tókhi wániphika ní!

Eddie Ladd

Sioned Haf

Robat Idris



Buzz of the Orient
Professor Expert
link   Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Kavika   7 years ago

"Wales – Cymru in our language – is our country. Many have never heard of us!"

That doesn't include me. I drove through North Wales from the border to the sea more than 4 decades ago. I took this photo there:


Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
link   Perrie Halpern R.A.    7 years ago

The good people of Wales have spoken and they know first hand when by proxy your home is stolen from you. I have been to Wales many times, and have seen the Tryweryn reservoir. There was once a beautiful and ancient town there. Liverpool on the other hand, is a toilet of a city, with the only good thing that came out of it was the Beatles, and they left as soon as they could. Why should one people's needs outweigh another's? It's port. Money has always talked. 

Professor Participates
link   1stwarrior    7 years ago

PIERRE, S.D. - South Dakota's Public Utilities Commission ruled that an environmental impact statement will not be a permit prerequisite for the proposed 1,143-mile Dakota Access Pipeline, which would transport crude oil across South Dakota from the Bakken Oil Fields in North Dakota to existing infrastructure in Illinois.

As usual in SD, "what laws - futch the government - we'll do it our way."

Federal laws and regulations require the federal government to evaluate the effects of its actions on the environment and to consider alternative courses of action.  The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)  specifies when an environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared. NEPA regulations require, among other things, federal agencies to include discussion of a proposed action and the range of reasonable alternatives in an EIS. Sufficient information must be included in the EIS for reviewers to evaluate the relative merits of each alternative. Council for Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations provide the recommended format and content of Environmental Impact Statements.

The following are summaries of the key statutes that require consultation with Indian tribes or accommodation of tribal views and practices. This is not an exhaustive list of requirements nor does it imply that each of these statutes is applicable to each proposed project.

  • The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, codified at 54 U.S.C.300101 et seq. is the basis for the tribal consultation provisions in the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's (ACHP) regulations. The two amended sections of NHPA that have a direct bearing on the Section 106 review process are:
    • Section 101(d)(6)(A), which clarifies that historic properties of religious and cultural significance to Indian tribes may be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, and
    • Section 101(d)(6)(B), which requires that Federal agencies, in carrying out their Section 106 responsibilities, consult with any Indian tribe that attaches religious and cultural significance to historic properties that may be affected by an undertaking.
    • Section 106 of NHPA requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties and to seek comments from the ACHP. Also known as the Section 106 review process, it avoids unnecessary harm to historic properties from Federal actions. Its procedure for meeting Section 106 requirements is defined in the ACHP's regulations, 36  CFR  Part 800, “Protection of Historic Properties.” The ACHP's regulations incorporate these provisions and reflect other directives about tribal consultation from Executive orders, Presidential memoranda, and other authorities. The regulations include both general direction regarding consultation and specific requirements at each stage of the review process. (Section 106 is discussed more fully in the next section, “Consultation with Indian Tribes Under Section 106 of NHPA.”)
  • The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) for any proposed major Federal action that may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The statutory language of NEPA does not mention Indian tribes. However, the Council on Environmental Quality regulations do require agencies to contact Indian tribes and provide them with opportunities to participate in various stages of preparation of an EIS.
  • The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 establishes the policy of the Federal Government “to protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express, and exercise the traditional religions of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians, including, but not limited to, access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites.”
  • The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA) requires agencies to consult with Indian tribes regarding planned activities on Federal and tribal land that might result in the excavation of Native American human remains or other cultural items as defined in NAGPRA. When there is an inadvertent discovery of human remains or cultural items on Federal or tribal lands, work in the area must cease, the land-managing agency must notify the appropriate tribe(s), and consultation must be initiated. On tribal lands, the consent of the appropriate Indian tribe is required for planned excavation or removal human remains and cultural items. Because FHWA is not a land-managing agency, it is not directly subject to the requirements of NAGPRA. In instances where a proposed project is funded through the Federal Aid Highway Program, the land-managing agency is ultimately responsible for compliance. NAGPRA also imposes requirements on entities that receive Federal funds from any source and have possession of Native American human remains and protected cultural items. In certain instances, State Transportation Agencies (STAs) that receive Federal Aid Highway funds may be subject to this provision NAGPRA usually applied to museums and other institutions.

None of the above was done because SD sez it ain't necessary.  Sorry dudes, but if ANY Fed agency is involved with Dakota Access (EPA, Energy, USFWS, Commerce, etc..), an EIS IS REQUIRED.

Professor Principal
link   Kavika     7 years ago

Latest news regarding the ruling.

Resolution of construction issues involving the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation has been postponed until at least September 9, as a U.S. District Court judge announced at a Wednesday, August 24 hearing that he would need until then to deliver a decision on a motion filed by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and Earth Justice, an environmental law group.

Despite the postponement, SRST Chairman David Archambault said the court hearing was a victory in its own right.

“For our children that are not even here yet, this is something that is very powerful, very special,” he told Indian Country Today Media Network after Judge James E. Boasberg said he needed time to weigh the evidence presented at Wednesday’s hearing on the lawsuit brought by the SRST against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. “Whatever the result is, know that we won, because we’re changing policy on how pipelines are put in. These projects encroach on Indian country, so we’re setting a precedent that’s very powerful. And it’s only done because we’re able to unite and we’re able to do it with prayer.”

More than 4,000 people have gathered at change to camps along the MIssouri River) in an attempt to stop Dallas-based company Energy Transfer from piping Bakken oilfield crude underneath the Missouri River, the main source of drinking water for the tribe.

As hundreds of protesters rallied outside U.S. District Court in Washington D.C., Judge James E. Boasberg said he would need until September 9 to weigh all the evidence presented at a hearing on the lawsuit brought by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (SRST) against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The tribe sued over the Army Corps’ approval of the pipeline without a comprehensive environmental and archeological review.

September 8 is the day that Archambault and other defendants appear in court to answer a lawsuit filed by Dakota Access Partners against the water protectors. Dozens, including Archambault, were arrested last week during demonstrations at the construction site near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in North Dakota. Dakota Access brought a lawsuit against Archambault soon after.

The August 24 hearing hinged on whether the tribe had been adequately consulted during the permitting process, and whether due diligence had been performed. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers approved permits for the project at the end of July despite written objections by three federal agencies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Construction has started in all four states that the 1,172-mile-long pipeline will run through amid protests from citizens opposing the project.

“Out of 359 miles of pipeline we only had an opportunity of two sites to look at,” argued EarthJustice Legal Defense Fund attorney Jan Hasselman on behalf of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, referring to the consultation process. “That was not enough, and the scope was too narrow.”

Further, he said, Dakota Access’s archaeologists did not know enough history to even identify what constituted a sacred site.

“The site could be registered right now as a historical site with what they have found,” Hasselman said, quoting the tribe’s archaeologist. “Meanwhile, the Dakota Access archeologist had walked right over it.”

Dakota Access attorneys said the tribes had been given ample opportunity to visit pipeline sites and that since the company wants to have oil running by January of 2017, any halting of the construction would be unfair to people with vested interests. Construction is continuing elsewhere along the route.

But history and culture must transcend such concerns, Archambault said in a statement read during the hearing by one of the tribe’s attorneys.

“Our history connects us, and all of our spiritual connections are lost when sites are destroyed, even when they do not have access to them.”




Professor Participates
link   1stwarrior    7 years ago

"halting of the construction would be unfair to people with vested interests."

Sorry dudes - the money people don't have standing in a cultural/natural environmental quagmire.  You didn't perform an EIS - you didn't conduct tribal consultation - you violated the law - at this point, your money is worthless.

Larry Hampton
Professor Participates
link   seeder  Larry Hampton  replied to  1stwarrior   7 years ago

Vested interests huh. Any American should have a say in whether or not a harmful substance is piped through their home, not some third party who doesn't make that place their home, merely wanting to use it to make money. If I don't want a huge pipe carrying oil going over, under, or through my yard, there sure as hell shouldn't be a pipe going through my yard! Why is that so hard to understand?

Professor Principal
link   Kavika   replied to  Larry Hampton   7 years ago

Follow the money, Larry.

Larry Hampton
Professor Participates
link   seeder  Larry Hampton    7 years ago

The protests are being painted more and more in our local media as trouble makers. There are also cops from all over the Dakotas converging on the site to lend a hand.


Professor Principal
link   Kavika   replied to  Larry Hampton   7 years ago

Typical Larry.....I've seen the same shit time after time.


Sophomore Quiet
link   Dowser    7 years ago

I hope for a peaceful conclusion, first.  Then, I hope that their voices are heard!!!

I wish them the very best of luck in this!!!


Who is online

Jeremy Retired in NC
Drinker of the Wry

30 visitors