#dakotaaccessprotest

It would be easy to sum up the Dakota Access Pipeline controversy as another cliché “man versus nature” conflict. It would also be completely unfair. It would be easy to make the issue fit a straightforward narrative: “Greedy business doesn’t give two hoots about the environment, people protest to protect it.” Again, not quite.

While these summaries have some validity, they boil down the situation out west until the truth is diluted. Forget what you think you know about the confrontation on the plains, and here’s what you need to know. Part of our aim in helping the environment is not just standing by it but helping our readers understand why some people don’t.

KEY POINTS

Announced in July 2014, the project is 1,172-mile underground oil pipeline and costs $3.78 billion.

It crosses four states: North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois.

It could carry a capacity of 470,000-570,000 barrels of oil per day.

It will create up to 40 permanent jobs and 8,2000-12,000 temporary jobs.

The construction company is Dakota Access, LLC, a subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.

There has been controversy over its necessity, its disregard for Native American lands and its environmental impact.

Increased domestic crude oil production translates into greater energy independence for the U.S.

About 70 percent of crude oil in our country is shipped by pipeline. More than two million miles of pipeline carry energy products across America everyday. They are heavily regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation.

There have been large protests at the Lake Oahe crossing over potential water contamination and the damage of sacred tribal sites. The Missouri River is the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s primary source of drinking water.

The Standing Rock tribe believes the 1,200-mile pipeline to transport North Dakota oil through the Dakotas and Iowa to a shipping point in Illinois threatens drinking water and cultural sites.

Dallas-based pipeline developer Energy Transfer Partners has denied that and said the pipeline will be safe.

The segment under Lake Oahe is the only remaining big chunk of construction left

TIMELINE

Dakota Access’s process of getting voluntary easements (essentially, securing the land) and meeting with landowners in affected counties began in 2014.

Sept 2014: David Archambault II, the tribal Chairman of the Standing Rock Indian Reservation in North Dakota, indicates the tribe’s opposition to any pipeline within treaty boundaries at a meeting with Dakota Pipeline, LLC.

October 2014: Iowa Governor Terry Branstad rejects pleas from a coalition of Iowa community and environmental activists who asked him to block plans.

March-April 2016: EPA, Department of Interior and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation asked the Army Corps to conduct a formal Environmental Impact Assessment. They had only conducted a limited review of the route.

April 2016: Standing Rock Sioux elder establishes a camp near the Missouri River at the site of Sacred Stone Camp, located within the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, as a center for cultural preservation and spiritual resistance to the pipeline. The camp grew to thousands of people.

July 2016: Army Corps fast-tracked a disputed section. ReZpect Our Water, a group of Native American youth, ran from Standing Rock in North Dakota to Washington, DC to raise awareness of what they perceive as a threat to their people's drinking water.

Aug. 2016: Protest camp was set up near the Mississippi River crossing. Lasted until construction there was completed.

Sept. 2016: Yankton Sioux Tribe files a lawsuit against the Army Corps of Engineers, challenging the authorization of the pipeline construction. U.S. Dept of Justice receives more than 33,000 petitions asking for a full environmental review.

October 2016: armed soldiers and police with riot gear and military equipment cleared an encampment that was directly in the proposed pipeline's path

Nov. 2016: Protesters set up an encampment to block construction near the Des Moines River crossing.

QUESTIONS

What are the environmental concerns?

Safety: What will the impacts be on air, water, wildlife and farming if the pipeline breaks?

Necessity: Are there real economic benefits, or just a lot of risk?

Missouri River: A source of drinking water for thousands could be contaminated

Farmers: Disturbance of the land and soil quality.

Tribal opposition

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe have stated their opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline on the grounds that the pipeline and its construction threatens the tribe's way of life, water, people, and land

United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues: “The project was proposed and planned without any consultation with the Standing Rock Sioux or others that will be affected by this major project. But according to the U.S. Army Corps data there had been 389 meetings with more than 55 tribes, including nine meetings with The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.

What about the president-elect?

Trump supports the pipeline, but has not said whether he will reverse the Army’s decision once in the White House.

According to his federal disclosure forms, filed in May 2016, President-elect Donald Trump held between $15,000 and $50,000 in stock in Energy Transfer Partners. This creates a conflict of interest when making presidential decisions affecting the pipeline project.

Where are we at right now?

Dec. 4, 2016: The project was halted at 87 percent completion.

The Department of the Army announced on Sunday that it would not approve the crossing of the pipeline under the Missouri River near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, signaling a major victory for the tribe following months of protests.- NYT

Dec. 5, 2016: Federal government-set deadline for the people to leave the camp that's on federal land. 

Authorities have said they won't forcibly remove anyone. Hundreds of people describing themselves as "water protectors" have been staying in the Oceti Sakowin, or Seven Council Fires, protest encampment along the pipeline route in southern North Dakota. Archambault, anticipating no changes for months, on Monday urged them to go home as dangerous wintry weather sets in.

CONCLUSION

We hope that having a greater understanding of the facts and thoughts on all sides will allow you to join the national conversation about environmental projects that invade Native American sacred lands and pose risks for all people.

Though the Army's decision doesn't end the debate over the pipeline, the project has been stalled. Use this time to use your voice and sign the petition here: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stop-construction-dakota-access-pipeline-which-endangers-water-supply-native-american-reservations

Learn more here:

@spabg: Asked about the possibility of rerouting the pipeline to avoid crossing under key waterways —one of the primary reasons for the protests at Standing Rock and elsewhere— Earnest replied, “The President’s hope is that both sides will sit at the table in a constructive spirit.” . “The President’s view,” he said, was that the Native Tribes would sit down “to resolve these differences as soon as possible to let the project go forward.” . “…Resolve these differences as soon as possible to let the project go forward.” — White House Statement on Dakota Pipeline, Nov. 28, 2016 .

Pressed by a reporter about taking if Obama might take further actions, “He has no plans to get personally involved at this point?” .

Earnest replied, “Uh, at this point I’m not aware of any impending Presidential actions, but if that changes we’ll let you know. Ok?” .

Meanwhile, thousands of military Veterans are descending on Cannon Ball, ND this week to bring much needed supplies and stand in solidarity with the so-called “Water Protectors” encamped there. .