Nez Perce Tribe’s Resistance to Keystone XL Pipeline is Nothing New

Renée Holt, Native News Network, Guest Commentary

As I enjoy the last day of summer break, before I return back to school, I have been thinking about the recent media publicity my tribal community has received regarding the Keystone XL pipeline.

As an enrolled member of the Nez Perce Tribe, and a mother to three beautiful children, a couple weeks ago, our community, the Nimiipuu (aka the Real People) stood in solidarity with our First Nations brothers and sisters in Canada who oppose the Keystone XL pipeline.

Keystone XL Pipeline Resistance

Our community has been protesting the Megaloads for well over two years.

 

Although regional media has highlighted the Nez Perce tribal council arrests and members of our community for their Indigenous activism, what media has failed to see is that our community has been protesting the Megaloads for well over two years. It just happens to be that we held our first town hall meeting in March 2011 and Winona La Duke shared information on the negative effects of the Keystone XL and the importance of a protest.

In collaboration with the grassroots organizations Friends of the Clearwater and Wild Idaho Rising Tide (who have worked tirelessly on this environmental issue) our tribal council made an informed decision with the intention of making it known the Nimiipuu oppose the Keystone XL pipeline and the transportation of the Megaloads through our ancestral homelands.

From the ancestral homelands of the Nimiipuu people, located in North Central Idaho, I am writing this to members of society, both Indigenous AND non Indigenous, to do more than question and challenge this global climate issue, but to also help fight the battle against the Keystone XL pipeline.

It has been shown in studies from the Environmental Protection Agency and grassroots organizations such as the Rainforest Action Network that gas emissions were toxic and communities located near these sites have higher rates of cancer and contamination of water resources. Not only do the Indigenous communities that are located near these sites suffer, but so do the plants and wild life. If there is one common thread we share as citizens of the global community, it is this, water is necessary to live. Once water is poisoned, we’re all poisoned.

Keystone XL Pipeline Resistance

We need to educate and inform citizens and look respectively at Indigenous governments who are protecting their homelands.

 

Whether in the United States or Canada, Indigenous lands and surrounding areas are continually being devastated by oil pipelines. The lives of people, wildlife and plants suffer and the Megaloads protest ought to remind us, as human beings, the value and sacredness of life is a responsibility. Whether Indigenous or non Indigenous, as humans, to oppose and protest the Keystone XL Megaloads being transported through ancestral homelands is rooted in a responsibility to community and Mother Earth. At this time, due to frustrations with the US Forest Service, the Nimiipuu community and grassroots efforts have filed a lawsuit.

If they are not stopped, the Keystone XL pipeline devastation will continue and the health and well being of those who live near these environmental hazardous areas, regardless of racial ethnicity, will be negatively affected. As an Indigenous woman, I am writing this to share with non Indigenous readers a little bit of who we are as people. Because we often make our homes where our ancestors made their homes, we also live on reserves/reservations that were at one time unwanted land. Today, the unwanted land is now sought by big oil corporations where environmental hazards have disrupted and devastated the ecosystem.

I also believe it is important to mention that the Keystone XL pipeline is an international issue. The responsibility is that of Secretary of State John Kerry to oversee international issues as appointed by President Obama.

Beyond Keystone XL: Three Controversial Pipelines You Probably Haven’t Heard Of

By Kiley Kroh, Climate Progress

While the national debate remains largely focused on President Obama’s impending decision regarding the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, communities across the U.S. and Canada are grappling with the oil and gas industry’s rapidly expanding pipeline network — cutting through their backyards, threatening water supplies, and leaving them vulnerable to devastating spills.

As production booms in Alberta’s tar sands and fracking opens up vast oil and natural gas deposits around America, companies are increasingly desperate for new pipelines to get their product to market. “We’ve so narrowly focused on Keystone that a lot of these other projects aren’t getting the scrutiny they probably need,” said Carl Weimer, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust. He explains that as production skyrockets and companies look to cash in, no one is really in charge of it all. “We’re leaving it up to these individual companies to come up with their own solutions to figure out how to move energy and we don’t have any national policy guiding those decisions.”

According to a recent analysis of federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration data, since 1986 there have been nearly 8,000 incidents, resulting in more than 500 deaths, more than 2,300 injuries, and nearly $7 billion in damage.

Here are three of the most recent pipeline controversies emerging around the country:

1. Bluegrass Pipeline

Land owners and protesters gather on the steps of the Kentucky state capitol to protest the Bluegrass Pipeline.Land owners and protesters gather on the steps of the Kentucky state capitol to protest the Bluegrass Pipeline. CREDIT: AP Photo/Dylan Lovan 

Opposition is growing to the proposed 500-mile bluegrass pipeline, which would transport flammable natural gas liquids across Kentucky to an existing line that terminates in the Gulf. Landowners and environmentalists gathered at the state capital last week to protest the project, which they fear would threaten water supplies and safety. Residents were caught off guard by the project — landowner Stacie Meyer said she noticed survey markers going up near her property and had to search the internet and consult her neighbors to find out what they were for.

Locals are concerned the company, Williams Co., could use imminent domain to seize the land if opposition proves too strong. As the Courier-Journal reported, “Brad Slutskin, a Woodford County landowner who spoke at the rally, said the pipeline companies are threatening condemnation based on a loose interpretation of Kentucky law, and most property owners don’t have the money to mount a court challenge.” Residents opposed to the pipeline — including a group of nuns and monks who are refusing to give up their land for the project — delivered a petition with more than 5,200 signatures asking Gov. Beshear to include pipeline and eminent domain-related issues in the upcoming special legislative session, which he refused.

“Knowing a pipeline is coming through, is like waiving a red flag to the creatures of the Earth. God created Earth as our land to use not abuse,” Sister Joetta Venneman told local WAVE News.

As the gas fields north and east of Kentucky boom, the state will likely find itself in the crosshairs of many battles to come. In fact, while the fifth Kentucky county was passing a resolution opposing the Bluegrass Pipeline on Wednesday, the Courier-Journal reported that the project may already have some competition — a joint venture to convert an existing natural gas line called the Tennessee Gas Pipeline.

2. Energy East Pipeline

Milo Zeankowski-Giffin, left, and Max Griefen hold signs during a Montpelier, VT tar sands protest.Milo Zeankowski-Giffin, left, and Max Griefen hold signs during a Montpelier, VT tar sands pipeline protest. CREDIT: AP Photo/Toby Talbot 

Facing resistance in the U.S. over its Keystone XL proposal, TransCanada Corp. is moving forward with plans for another tar sands pipeline project that would carry almost as much crude as Keystone. The new pipeline, the most expensive in TransCanada’s history, would run from Alberta to the Atlantic seaboard, ending where a new deep-water marine terminal would be built to export the crude overseas. In early August, TransCanada said it received the long-term contracts for about 900,000 barrels of crude per day and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has already indicated his support for the project.

TransCanada’s proposal has been met with stiff opposition from Canadian environmentalists and native leaders — particularly in Quebec, where Premier Pauline Marois has halted natural gas exploration while last month’s deadly Lac-Megantic crude oil train explosion is still being cleaned up.

The $12 billion development plan calls for converting 1,864 miles of an existing, 55-year-old pipeline currently used for natural gas to carry the oil. Though the proposed route does not cross into the U.S., it does skirt the border with Maine. Perhaps most worrisome to residents of Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, however, is that the increased shipping capacity from Alberta will impact another pipeline — the 70-year-old Portland Pipeline. Currently, the pipeline is used to ship crude into Canada but residents are concerned the flow will be reversed to bring Canadian tar sands into the U.S. As the Boston Globe explains, “this would provide Canada — whose Alberta-centered oil industry is suffering from too much supply and too little access to overseas markets — its first direct pipeline to a year-round, deep-water port.” Residents throughout New England are staunchly opposed to the region becoming a conduit for the dirtiest form of fossil fuel production, holding anti-pipeline demonstrations in Portland, while 29 Vermont communities passed resolutions banning tar sands oil from the state.

For now, residents of Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont are left with little option other than waiting to see how the Energy East pipeline development may impact the Portland Pipeline. In a statement released earlier this month, the company said, “It is uncertain to us what the entire impact of this proposed project might be on crude movements and crude supplies for the East Coast. We are continuing to evaluate this recent development.”

3. Eastern Gulf Crude Access Pipeline Project

Keystone pipeline in yellow, Eastern in blue and red. Graphic credit: Paul Horn, InsideClimate NewsKeystone pipeline in yellow, Eastern in blue and red. Graphic credit: Paul Horn, InsideClimate News 

Enbridge’s proposed 774-mile pipeline would run from Illinois to Louisiana and carry oil from North Dakota’s Bakken formation, as well as Canadian tar sands. The pipeline would be capable of transporting almost as much crude as Keystone XL and, as Inside Climate News reports, will likely sail through the regulatory process because much of the pipeline is already constructed as a natural gas line.

“Converting pipelines makes [approval] easier and riskier, too,” explains Weimer. “Keystone is brand new, state of the art pipeline with its own set of problems. Enbridge on the other hand, is converting other pipelines that have already been in the ground for years — putting in new types of crude or switching natural gas to liquid on pipelines that aren’t built to today’s standards. Those old pipes being re-purposed certainly presents a new risk.”

While the Keystone decision is momentarily stalled, Eastern Gulf is just one of many new pipelines being built to ship North American oil to the Gulf Coast for refining and export. According to Inside Climate, “Enbridge plans to build thousands of miles of pipelines over the next few years, including an expansion of its Alberta Clipper pipeline from Canada to Wisconsin. If approved, that line would ship up to 880,000 barrels of Canadian crude into the United States each day, compared to the Keystone’s capacity of 830,000 barrels per day.”

Last month, all five members of Minnesota’s Public Utilities Commission approved increasing the flow of the Alberta Clipper line while refusing concerned citizens the opportunity to testify publicly. The initial expansion still awaits approval from multiple government agencies but Enbridge already has its sights set on a second expansion, which wasn’t discussed at the meeting. The protesters, including several Native American representatives, fear their communities could soon face the same devastating impacts of tar sands development being felt in Alberta. Marty Cobenais of Bemidji, part of the Indigenous Environmental Network, told the Bemidji Pioneer that the pipeline is a major issue for his Red Lake community. “This is huge,” he said. “This is in our back yard.”

A worker cleans up oil in Mayflower, AR days after a pipeline ruptured and spewed oil over lawns and roadways.A worker cleans up oil in Mayflower, AR days after a pipeline ruptured and spewed oil over lawns and roadways. CREDIT: AP Photo/Jeannie Nuss 

These fights are just three of many being waged by citizens across the country. Alabama residents, for instance, have been protesting multiple pipeline projects — including the Plains All-American oil pipeline, which would run 41 miles to Mississippi and through a section of Mobile’s drinking water supply.

Though pipeline companies are seeking to capitalize on the Lac-Megantic tragedy to tout the safety of crude transport over rail, the devastating impacts of pipeline spills are impossible to overlook. Last week, the New York Times profiled two communities in Michigan and Arkansas that are forever changed by tar sands pipeline spills. Though it’s been three years since Enbridge’s pipeline rupture that spewed more than 840,000 gallons of tar sands crude into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River, the region is far from restored. And even despite EPA’s recent order for Exxon to dredge the river, an EPA spokeswoman estimated that 1620,000 gallons of oil will remain in the Kalamazoo.

And in March, an Exxon Mobil pipeline burst, spilling an estimated 210,000 gallons of crude into a Mayflower, Arkansas neighborhood. What’s left behind is bleak: “Four months later, the neighborhood of low-slung brick homes is largely deserted, a ghostly column of empty driveways and darkened windows, the silence broken only by the groan of heavy machinery pawing at the ground as remediation continues.” As Inside Climate News has continued to report, residents are now grappling with the long-term effects of the toxic spill, including the difficult process of relocating their families and the frightnening health complications that have begun to manifest.

In addition to re-purposing old pipelines, there are several aspects of the unchecked expansion of fossil fuel pipelines across the country that has Weimer concerned. First, pipeline regulation needs to be strengthened and clarified. He explains that right now, “regulations are written in such a way that to a vast degree, it’s left up to the pipeline companies to figure out how safe their pipelines are and what to do about it.” And it’s not just oversight — planning future pipeline routes is also dictated by the companies themselves. “The way we leave it up to each company means we could have multiple pipelines from different companies moving [their products] through the same place. Each company is just trying to capitalize and make money. State and local government really hasn’t thought about it much — is unprepared — and pipelines will go into place before there are policies to guide the construction. It can really affect the way local communities may develop and often happens before the community has any sense of what they can do about it.”

Seeping Alberta Oil Sands Spill Covers 40 Hectares, Still Leaking

Source: ICTMN

As debate rages south of the 49th Parallel over developments such as the Keystone XL pipeline, bitumen from four underground oil spills is quietly seeping into wetlands and soils in the oil sands in northern Alberta—and has been for at least three months, if not longer.

Bitumen leakage now totals at least 1.2 million liters—about 8,024 barrels, or 317,000 gallons, the Alberta Energy Regulator, a provincial agency, said in an August 16 update. And despite claims by the operator, Canadian Natural Resources Limited, that the spills are contained and being remediated, recent provincial statements indicate that that is not the case.

“It’s ongoing. The spill is still ongoing,” said Cara Tobin, a spokesperson for the provincial agency Alberta Energy Regulator, to the website DesmogCanada.com on August 6. “There is still bitumen coming up from the ground.”

The spills at Canadian Natural Resources’ Primrose facility first came to light in mid-July, but they had been ongoing for weeks, and one may even date back to last winter, the Toronto Star reported on July 19. The operations lie on the Cold Lake Air Weapons Range, which is also an active weapons-testing site for the Canadian military and thus restricted to public access.

Documents brought to light by the Star show that 26,000 barrels of bitumen combined with surface water had been removed between May, when cleanup began, and mid-July, when the spills came to light via a television station. More than 4,500 barrels were straight bitumen, the Star reported. The latest update nearly doubles that number.

“Everybody [at the company and in government] is freaking out about this,” said a whistle-blowing government scientist to the newspaper back in July. “We don’t understand what happened. Nobody really understands how to stop it from leaking, or if they do they haven’t put the measures into place.”

The company issued a statement on July 31 saying that it was remediating the spills.

“Each location been secured, clean up, recovery and reclamation activities are well underway,” the company said. “The bitumen emulsion does not pose a risk to health or human safety.”

Nearby Cold Lake First Nation, whose residents are Dene, was of a completely different mind.

“We are extremely alarmed with the environmental damage from the blow out that occurred at Cold Lake Weapons Range as this is in the federally recognized traditional territory of Cold Lake First Nations and close to CLFN Indian Reserve 149C,” said Cold Lake First Nation Chief Bernice Martial in a statement on August 7. “We contacted Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNRL) to express CLFN’s concerns and we are now demanding answers and want factual information on the contamination of four recent surface releases of bitumen emulsion from oil wells.”

Canadian Natural Resources did admit that “unfortunately some animal fatalities have occurred including 16 birds, 7 small mammals and 38 amphibians. Two beavers, two birds and two muskrats are currently being cared for prior to being returned to their natural environment.”

Critics of the process being used to extract the bitumen suspect that the leaks stem from a method of “steaming” the ground in a process not unlike fracking (hydraulic fracturing of rock that loosens oil and gas deposits in shale). Steaming entails injecting highly pressurized water into the sands to melt the bitumen so that it can be pumped to the surface. Canadian Natural Resources said that its process is not the cause—the company does not use enough pressure to cause that type of leakage, a spokesman told the Star, and blames instead improperly capped wells from other companies’ defunct operations.

The Dene are demanding not only answers but inclusion in the evaluation and cleanup process as well.

“Our community needs to be respectfully involved in the remediation of this environmental disaster as our health and safety hangs in the balance,” Martial said. “We live, hunt, fish in the area and need to know the damage that has been done to our land, water and wildlife.”

 

Read more at https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/08/18/seeping-alberta-oil-sands-spill-covers-40-hectares-still-leaking-150934

Nebraska trial could delay Keystone XL pipeline

By Lenny Bernstein, August 4, 2013. Source: Washington Post

While environmentalists, energy executives and elected officials across North America await the State Department’s critical decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, a little-noticed trial scheduled for next month in Nebraska could spell problems for the $5.3 billion project.

Despite two attempts by Nebraska’s attorney general to have the case thrown out, Lancaster County District Court Judge Stephanie Stacy has set a Sept. 27 trial date for arguments in a lawsuit that contends the state legislature unconstitutionally gave Gov. Dave Heineman (R) authority to approve the pipeline route.

A win for the plaintiffs — three Nebraska landowners who oppose the pipeline — would force TransCanada, the company that wants to build the 1,179-mile northern leg of the project, to go through the entire siting process again. Even supporters do not believe that would permanently block the project, but it could add years to the timeline. Appeals through the Nebraska court system could have a similar effect.

“I don’t think [people] realize how Nebraska is a big monkey wrench in all this,” said Brian Jorde, attorney for the three landowners.

The State Department must sign off on the pipeline because it would cross a U.S. border, bringing as much as 830,000 barrels a day of diluted bitumen crude from oil sands in Alberta, Canada, to U.S. refineries in the Gulf of Mexico. A State Department official said the agency’s review of the pipeline is continuing and would not be affected by the Nebraska litigation.

But route decisions are left to the states along the way, which gives Nebraska jurisdiction over nearly 200 miles of the proposed project. That might not have been a problem for TransCanada until the state legislature, acting in the final hours of its 2012 session, took authority over review and approval of the route away from the five elected members of the Public Service Commission and instead gave it to Heineman and the state’s Department of Environmental Quality. The bill, LB 1161, passed by an overwhelming majority.

It also authorized the governor to give TransCanada the power of eminent domain over landholders, a valuable weapon as the company seeks easements from farmers and ranchers to run the pipeline through Nebraska.

“By all appearances, that bill was written by TransCanada. . . . I think at some point in time, ordinary citizens can’t tolerate that kind of behavior,” said Randy Thompson, a small farmer and one of the plaintiffs.

Shawn Howard, a spokesman for TransCanada, said in an e-mail that the company believes the Nebraska law “is constitutional and should be upheld.” The company will continue to plan the pipeline and seek easements, even with the threat of a new route review looming, Howard said.

The plaintiffs argue that, under the Nebraska constitution, the legislature had no authority to transfer route-approval powers from the commission to the governor or to give him the ability to delegate the power of eminent domain to TransCanada. The law also does not provide for judicial review of the governor’s decision, they contend, and is essentially “special legislation” designed to benefit the pipeline company only.

“The suit claims that the PSC has the exclusive jurisdiction” to review the pipeline and set its route, “and the legislature can’t take that power . . . and transfer the right to one person, a partisan person, the governor, to become the trigger for eminent domain,” Jorde said.

A spokeswoman for Attorney General Jon Bruning declined to comment on the case, but Deputy Attorney General Katherine J. Spohn argued in her brief that the legislature had acted lawfully. Spohn said lawmakers had the legal ability to give Heineman the power to delegate eminent domain authority to TransCanada.

Stacy, the district court judge, has scheduled an hour of arguments in her courtroom and subsequently could take months to rule on the issues, Jorde said. The losing side is expected to appeal as far as the state’s Supreme Court before the issue is finally decided, he said.

“When our legislature steps over the line,” Thompson said, “I think it’s important that ordinary citizens take them to task.”

69,000 Americans Pledge Civil Disobedience Against Keystone XL Pipeline

Anti-Keystone XL protesters stage a sit-in in front of the White House in Washington, D.C. on February 13, 2013. Thousands have pledged to engage in civil disobedience along the pipeline’s proposed route. (Photo/chesapeakeclimate via Flickr)
Anti-Keystone XL protesters stage a sit-in in front of the White House in Washington, D.C. on February 13, 2013. Thousands have pledged to engage in civil disobedience along the pipeline’s proposed route. (Photo/chesapeakeclimate via Flickr)

By Trisha Marczak, Mint press News

More than 69,000 Americans are pledging to risk arrest to halt the construction of the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline. In a stand of solidarity with those living along the pipeline’s path, residents from across the U.S. are vowing to take part in historic acts of civil disobedience aimed directly at shutting down Keystone.

The actions are expected to come in many forms, including mass sit-ins at strategic locations along the route and other large-scale actions in major U.S. cities. The protests are expected to be unleashed when — and if — the State Department gives a nod of approval for the pipeline’s construction.

If the State Department recommends approval of the TransCanda pipeline, President Barack Obama will have two weeks before a decision will be made.

During that time, those living along the pipeline route — and their supporters throughout the country — are going to let Obama know they’re not going to grin and bear it. It’s not the first time anti-Keystone advocates have taken their demonstrations to the next level. In February, roughly 50 demonstrators were arrested outside the White House during a sit-in against Keystone.

 

Standing up against the giant

“Most events will be outside Washington D.C., because this decision will affect all of us, where we live,” a post by Credo Action regarding the pledge states. “So we want to see the beautiful sight of actions across the nation — including a wide variety of symbolic targets like State Department offices, TransCanada corporate lobbies, Obama Organizing for Action meetings, banks that are financing tar sands oil development, areas ravaged by Superstorm Sandy, and along the pipeline route.”

In March, the State Department released a report indicating approval of the Keystone pipeline would not contribute to global climate change, using the rationale that the extraction of Alberta tar sands — the source of carbon emissions — will continue with or without America’s involvement with Keystone XL.

In June, President Barack Obama delivered a nationwide climate change address, stating that the pipeline could be approved only if it did not result in a net increase in carbon emissions. This wasn’t taken as a good sign for anti-Keystone advocates — but for those fighting for their land, the fight isn’t over until it’s over.

“I am a firm believer in President Obama and his words to the people that we need to stand up and we need to show how a democracy works, and when you don’t agree about something and feel strongly about something, you need to stand up and speak out,” Abbi Harrington-Kleinschmidt, a Nebraska farmer whose land sits along the proposed Keystone route, told Mint Press News. “I feel it’s what President Obama is asking us to do.”

The united front against the Keystone pipeline is layered in emotion. The concerns among activists are vast, ranging from issues of climate change to problems that could arise from pipeline spills. There’s also the issue of whether a foreign corporation should have eminent domain authority to take Americans’ land.

For those living in the midst of the battle, the pledge to keep Keystone out of America is rooted in all these concerns, but protection of their own land takes the struggle to a personal level.

 

Standing in solidarity with American farmers

Harrington-Kleinschmidt’s farmland in Nebraska’s York County dates back five generations. After her father passed away, more than 2,000 acres of farmland was passed down to her and her three sisters, who now manage the farm.

Like other Nebraska farmers, Harrington-Kleinschmidt learned about Keystone XL when TransCanada submitted its first pipeline route proposal. During that time, the map didn’t impact her area — but it did impact her brother-in-law’s land, located roughly 20 miles north of her property.

“He was wrestling with TransCanada for two or three years,” she told Mint Press News. “I was aware that he was having these issues, but I felt like, well, it doesn’t affect me, so I didn’t learn any more about it at the time.”

That all changed when TransCanada changed its proposal, settling on a route that went directly through her farmland. Unlike other farmers in Nebraska, Harrington-Kleinschmidt has refused to sign any agreements with TransCanada. Instead, she’s relied on the legal counsel of the Nebraska Easement Action Team, which provides free assistance to farmers battling TransCanada and their lengthy, complicated easement proposals.

From her work with the team, Harrington-Klein learned a thing or two about the easements presented by TransCanada and discovered it wasn’t in the best interest of her or her family to sign.

“It’s a very dangerous thing,” she told Mint Press News. “It’s a perpetual easement. TransCanada would own that easement forever. They offer a one-time payment to the landowner to put that dirty thing in the ground, and it’s not like they’re going to pay you every year.”

Harrington-Klein’s land hosts corn and soybean crops, which she rotates every year to keep the soil healthy. In her eyes, it’s the most valuable farmland in the nation, if not the world, as it’s flat, sits in the midst of an area known for its fertile soil, and is near the Ogallala Aquifer, which the Sierra Club considers one of the world’s largest supplies of groundwater.

She’s concerned about the impact Alberta tar sand extraction has on global climate change, and she doesn’t like the idea of more than 800,000 barrels of thick tar sand oil running under her property every single day — not only because of what it represents, but because of the threat it poses to her land.

For Harrington-Klein and her neighbors, it’s a not a matter of if a spill will occur, but when. Aside from contaminating farmland and fertile soil, there’s concern over contamination of the Ogallala, which provides water to eight states for drinking, irrigation and livestock watering purposes, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, as noted in the Journal Star.

“It just goes right to my core, probably because of the legacy that ties to my family for five generations,” she said, “and knowing that my ancestors who worked so hard — and my sisters and I, who have shed a lot of blood, sweat and tears on that farm too. What’s so upsetting is that a foreign corporation can threaten to come and take your land from you with such a dangerous pipeline.”

 

Will America pull through with pledge?

The organizations that have paired with Credo Action to initiate the pledge are now attempting to draw the faint of heart into the nationwide campaign of peaceful civil disobedience.

“You shouldn’t make this pledge lighty,” the Credo post states. “We certainly don’t ask lightly. We ask in the belief that there are tens of thousands of people out there who feel as strongly about this as we do; who believe that these circumstances call for extraordinary action, and want to be part of that action in their community.”

Credo is joined by Bold Nebraska, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org, among other environmental advocacy organizations. To prepare residents throughout the country for what’s expected to be a two-week campaign, Credo is partnering with Rainforest Action Network and The Other 98% to host local activist training sessions, where those taking part in the pledge will learn how to lead and organize local civil disobedience actions.

As of July 12, more than 750 people throughout the U.S. had signed up to lead local actions and take part in trainings, according to a press release issued by Credo. The trainings aren’t geared toward longtime environmental activists. Rather, the people who have taken interest in the pipeline debate are those who have sympathized with their friends, family members and fellow Americans who live along the route.

Harrington-Klein has a second cousin who lives in New York City. While far from the pipeline, the stories of Nebraska’s fight remain heightened in her cousin’s heart. More than 1,300 miles from York County, a sign opposing the Keystone pipeline sits in her yard.

“After all, we are the conservatives, standing up for a safe and secure future for our families. It is those we protest, those who profit from radically altering the chemical composition of our atmosphere — and the prospects for survival of humanity — they are the radicals,” the Credo pledge states.

Pipeline approval will spark big battle

By Albert Bender, lohud.com

At a recent Native American conference held in Nashville, celebrated American Indian leader Onondaga wisdomkeeper Oren Lyons said, “If Obama approves the pipeline, this is the deal breaker.” He was referring, of course, to the Keystone XL Pipeline.

Just in the past few days, President Obama in a speech on climate change stated that the pipeline would not be approved if it resulted in more “carbon pollution.” This statement is being interpreted in different ways. For those who oppose the pipeline, Obama is setting the stage for rejection of Keystone; for those who favor the pipeline, he is hinting at approval. But one thing is certain: If Obama follows the logic of his statements, the pipeline is “dead in the water.”

The pipeline, by scientific analysis, would result in massively more “carbon pollution”; in fact, 600 parts per million CO2. The maximum safe limit for the atmosphere is 350 parts per million.

Another thing is certain, Native Americans are preparing in case Obama approves the heinous project: Native communities are set for massive civil disobedience to stop the pipeline from crossing the Northern Plains. Indian people are in special training called the “Moccasins on the Ground Tour of Resistance” from South Dakota to Oklahoma.

For Native people, the pipeline means death. The Keystone oil is extracted from tar sands in Canada. Because of the pipeline, Native people there have been exposed to contaminated water, and arsenic has been found in moose meat, a staple of their diet. In Alberta, extraction of tar sands oil already has been linked to a 30 percent elevated rate in rare cancers and rare autoimmune disorders. This pipeline means genocide!

In Rapid City, S.D., representatives of 11 Native American nations angrily stormed out of a May meeting with federal government officials in protest of the pipeline. Tribal officials refused to meet with low-level government representatives. Oglala Sioux President Bryan Brewer said, “We will only talk with President Obama.”

Also, the pipeline would run through sacred sites and traditional burial grounds, and pollute the Oglala Aquifer, which provides water to millions of citizens in the Midwest, including non-Indians.

Indian people are prepared to risk their lives by standing in front of the bulldozers, but this is not just a fight for Native people; it’s a fight for all Americans. Environmentalists, land owners and ranchers are joining with Indian nations in opposition to this abominable project.

At a recent press conference, the tribes said “Tar sands pipelines will not pass through our collective territories under any conditions or circumstances.” This is a life-and-death struggle for Native Americans.

Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

By John Upton, Grist

If the Keystone XL pipeline is built, Americans could pay as much as 40 cents more per gallon for gasoline in some parts of the country, according to a new report by the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog [PDF].

That’s because oil extracted in Canada would start to bypass traditional American markets, traveling through the pipeline to the Gulf Coast and onto tanker ships bound for international markets where oil fetches higher prices.

“The pipeline is being built through America, but not for Americans,” Consumer Watchdog researcher Judy Dugan said in a statement. “Keystone XL is not an economic benefit to Americans who will see higher gas prices and bear all the risks of the pipeline.” From the report:

The aim of tar sands producers with refining interests on the Gulf Coast — primarily multinational oil companies — is to get the oil to their Gulf refineries, which would process additional oil largely for fuel exports to hungry foreign markets. Other oil sands investors, including two major Chinese petrochemical companies and major European oil companies, have an interest in exporting crude oil and/or refined products to their markets. Such exports would drain off what the tar sands producers consider a current oversupply, and help push global oil prices higher. …

U.S. drivers would be forced to pay higher prices for tar sands oil, particularly in the Midwest. There, gasoline costs could rise by 20 cents to 40 cents per gallon or more, based on the $20 to $30 per barrel discount on Canadian crude oil that Keystone XL developers seek to erase. Such an increase, just in the Midwest, could cost the U.S. economy $3 billion to $4 billion a year in consumer income that would not be spent more productively elsewhere. The West Coast imports much smaller amounts of Canadian oil in a larger and more complicated market. Even so, a sharp price hike for Canadian oil could bump Pacific Coast gasoline prices by a few cents a gallon.

 

The report also connects a few corporate dots, showing who’s really intended to benefit from Keystone XL:

connecting-keystone-dots-1

AZ Sen. Jackson Becomes a Native Voice on Keystone XL Pipeline

Anne Minard, Indian Country Today Media Network

Arizona Democratic Sen. Jack Jackson Jr., Navajo, is resigning his post to work as a tribal liaison on environmental issues for the federal government.

Jackson had served one previous term in the state legislature between 2003 and 2005, overlapping with his father, Sen. Jack C. Jackson Sr., who served between 1985 and 2004. They became the first father and son to serve together in the Arizona State Legislature.

But the younger Jackson declined to seek re-election in 2005, and for a time worked as a consultant on tribal issues, among other roles. He returned to elected office in 2011, in the Arizona Senate, and began his second consecutive two-year term in January. But shortly thereafter, he was recruited to serve as senior advisor and liaison for Native American affairs in the State Department’s Bureau of Oceans and International Environment and Scientific Affairs.

Jackson’s new position was crafted in response to tribal leaders who have complained about improper consultation during the process to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline.

“We know that tribal leaders in North Dakota walked out of a consultation meeting with the State Department, saying that they wanted someone there like the President or Secretary Kerry to meet with them, as tribal leaders,” Jackson said, taking a break from unpacking boxes in Washington on July 4. “I believe that this new position, with someone who is Native American and has a background in dealing with tribes, hopefully that will help those tribal leaders remain at the table.”

Like all oil pipelines, the Keystone XL Pipeline falls under the State Department’s purview because of a 1968 executive order by Lyndon Johnson. Jackson’s bureau, its name often shortened to Oceans, Environment and Science (OES), works on a variety of issues besides energy. They range from water sanitation in developing countries, to climate change, to policies in space.

“For anything that deals with environmental and cultural impacts to tribes, the Department of State is trying to make sure that there’s someone there,” Jackson said.

Jackson is no stranger to Washington; he spent 12 years there after graduating from Syracuse University law school in 1989. He started as a legislative associate, and then was promoted to deputy director for the Navajo Nation Washington Office, representing the concerns of his people before the federal government. During his first stint in Washington, Jackson also worked as a legislative analyst at the National Indian Education Association and director of governmental affairs for the National Congress of American Indians.

He has been back in Arizona for 12 years, during which time he’s served on two different occasions in the state legislature and performed a variety of other roles. Most recently, he has been a senior strategist in the Blue Stone Strategy Group, a national Native-owned consulting firm that helps empower tribes in the areas of sovereignty, self-determination and self-sufficiency in the business and governmental sectors.

Even though he’s vacating his current term early, he said he’s proud of what he accomplished already this year. He was able to secure $2.4 million in emergency funding for the Red Mesa Unified School District, on a remote part of the Navajo nation near Arizona’s border with Utah. The district was threatened with financially necessary closure after it was ruled that it could not count its students from Utah when it received its Arizona state allocations.

He also worked to make tribes eligible to compete for moneys out of Arizona’s aviation fund, which go for maintenance and construction at public airports. There are 14 tribally-owned airports in Arizona. And he secured annual funding so that Navajo Technical College can build a permanent campus in Chinle, Arizona.

He said a farther-reaching effort he began in 2003 has been “inching its way” toward fruition: making sure tribes get back a fair portion of the transaction privilege taxes collected from non-Indian businesses on reservations. As it stands now, the state collects the money and divides it between the state, counties and municipalities, leaving tribes out of the equation. Finally, this year, Jackson’s legislation to remedy that formula made it out of committee – but died in the full Senate.

“I hope that next session my successor and representatives Hale and Peshlakai will be able to keep up that momentum,” Jackson said.

Jackson said he’ll miss his family and friends in Arizona, but he and his husband of five years, David Bailey, will keep a home in Phoenix to facilitate Bailey’s ongoing, Arizona-based job with U.S. Airways. So frequent travel to his homelands will be possible, Jackson said, adding that his new role is worth some sacrifice.

“Having a voice on environmental and cultural impacts on tribes is very important, especially now, with the things that our Mother Earth is facing,” he said. “As a Navajo person, my family made sure all the prayers and blessings were in place.”

 

Read more at https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/07/05/az-sen-jackson-becomes-native-voice-keystone-xl-pipeline-150295

When Drones Guard the Pipeline: Militarizing Fossil Fuels in the East

Winona LaDuke, Indian Country Today Media Network

Someone needs to explain to me why wanting clean drinking water makes you an activist, and why proposing to destroy water with chemical warfare doesn’t make a corporation a terrorist.

I’m in South Dakota today, sort of a ground zero for the Keystone XL Pipeline, that pipeline, owned by a Canadian Corporation which will export tar sands oil to the rest of the world. This is the heart of the North American continent here. Bwaan Akiing is what we call this land-Land of the Lakota. There are no pipelines across it, and beneath it is the Oglalla Aquifer wherein lies the vast majority of the water for this region. The Lakota understand that water is life, and that there is no new water. It turns out, tar sands carrying pipelines (otherwise called “dilbit”) are 16 times more likely to break than a conventional pipeline, and it seems that some ranchers and Native people, in a new Cowboy and Indian Alliance, are intent upon protecting that water.

This community understands the price of protecting land. And, the use of military force upon a civilian community- carrying an acute memory of the over 133,000 rounds of ammunition fired by the National Guard upon Lakota people forty years ago in the Wounded Knee standoff. That experience is coming home again, this time in Mi’gmaq territory.

Militarization of North American Oil Fields

This past week in New Brunswick, the Canadian military came out to protect oil companies. In this case, seismic testing for potential natural gas reserves by Southwestern Energy Company (SWN), a Texas-based company working in the province. It’s an image of extreme energy, and perhaps the times.

SWN exercised it’s permit to conduct preliminary testing to assess resource potential for shale gas exploitation. Canadian constitutional law requires the consultation with First Nations, and this has not occurred. That’s when Elsipogtog Mi’gmaq warrior chief, John Levi, seized a vehicle containing seismic testing equipment owned by SWN. Their claim is that fracking is illegal without their permission on their traditional territory. About 65 protesters, including women and children, seized the truck at a gas station and surrounded the vehicle so that it couldn’t be removed from the parking lot. Levi says that SWN broke the law when they first started fracking “in our traditional hunting grounds, medicine grounds, contaminating our waters.” according to reporter Jane Mundy in an on-line Lawyers and Settlements publication. This may be just the beginning.

On June 9, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) came out en masse, seemingly to protect SWN seismic exploration crews against peaceful protesters – both native and non-Native, blocking route 126 from seismic thumper trucks. Armed with guns, paddy wagons and twist tie restraints, peaceful protestors were arrested. Four days later the protesting continued, and this time drew the attention of local military personnel. As one Mi’gmag said, “Just who is calling the shots in New Brunswick when the value of the land and water take a backseat to the risks associated with shale gas development?”

The militarization of the energy fields is not new. It’s just more apparent when it’s in a first world country, albeit New Brunswick. New Brunswick is sort of the El Salvador of Canadian provinces, if one looks at the economy, run akin to an oligarchy. New Brunswick’s Irving family empire stretches from oil and gas to media, they are the largest employer in New Brunswick and the primary proponents of the Trans Canada West to East pipeline which will bring tar sands oil to the St. Johns refinery owned by the same family. Irving is the fourth wealthiest family in Canada, the largest employer, land holder and amasses that wealth in the relatively poor province. The Saint John refinery would be a beneficiary of any natural gas fracked in the province. In general, press coverage of Aboriginal issues there is sparse at best.

Fracking proposals have come to their territory with a vengeance, and the perfect political storm has emerged- immense material poverty (seven of the ten poorest postal codes in Canada), a set of starve or sell federal agreements pushed by the Harper administration (onto first nations), and extreme energy drives.

Each fracking well will take up to two-million-gallons of pristine water and transform the water into a toxic soup, full of carcinogens. The subsistence economy has been central to the Wabanaki confederacy since time immemorial, and concerns over SWN’s water contamination have come to the province. A recent Arkansas lawsuit against SWN charges the company with widespread toxic contamination of drinking water from their hydro-fracking.

Canada is the home to 75% of the worlds mining corporations, and they have tended to have relative impunity in the Canadian Courts. Canadian corporations and their international subsidiaries are being protected by military forces elsewhere, and this concerns many. According to a U.K. Guardian story, a Québec court of appeal rejected a suit by citizens of the Democratic Republic of the Congo against Montreal-based Anvil Mining Limited for allegedly providing logistical support to the DRC army as it carried out a massacre, killing as many as 100 people in the town of Kilwa near the company’s silver and copper mine. The Supreme Court of Canada later confirmed that Canadian courts had no jurisdiction over the company’s actions in the DRC when it rejected the plaintiffs’ request to appeal. Kairos Canada, a faith-based organization, concluded that the Supreme Court’s ruling would “have broader implications for other victims of human rights abuses committed by Canadian companies and their chances of bringing similar cases to our courts”.

In the meantime, back in New Brunswick, a heavily militarized RCMP came out to protect the exploration crews. Opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline has many faces, from ranchers in Nebraska and Texas who reject eminent domain takings of their land for a pipeline right of way, to the Lakota nation which walked out of State Department meetings in May in a show of firm opposition to the pipeline. All of them are facing a pipeline owned by TransCanada, a Canadian Corporation.

On a worldwide scale communities are concerned about their water. In El Salvador, more than 60% of the population relies on a single source of water. In 2009, this came down to choosing between drinking water and mining. In 2009, after immense public pressure, the country chose water. It established a moratorium on metal mining permits. Polls show that a strong majority of Salvadorans would now like a permanent ban. A testament to how things can change even in a politically challenged environment.

Up in Canada’s version of El Salvador, twelve people, both native and non were arrested, some detained and interrogated by investigators of the RCMP forces on June l4, and after a day of the federal military “making their presence” felt, the people of the region have concerns about how far Canada will go to protect fossil fuels.

Here in Bwaan Akiing, I am hoping that people who want to protect the water are treated with respect. And, I also have to hope that those 7,000-plus American-owned drones aren’t coming home, omaa akiing, from elsewhere to our territories in the name of Canadian oil interests.

Winona LaDuke is the Executive Director of Honor the Earth in White Earth Reservation, Minnesota. Visit their website at HonorEarth.org

 

Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/07/02/when-drones-guard-pipeline-militarizing-fossil-fuels-east

Nobel Peace Laureates Urge Obama and Kerry to Nix Keystone XL

Facebook/Nobel Women's InitiativeFounding members of the Nobel Women's Initiative, six of the 10 Peace Prize laureates who signed a letter on June 17 urging President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to reject the Keystone XL pipeline.
Facebook/Nobel Women’s Initiative
Founding members of the Nobel Women’s Initiative, six of the 10 Peace Prize laureates who signed a letter on June 17 urging President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to reject the Keystone XL pipeline.

Indian Country Today Media Network

Firmly linking the Keystone XL pipeline with climate change, 10 Nobel Peace Prize winners are urging President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry to reject the project.

“Climate change threatens all of us, but it is the world’s most vulnerable who are already paying for developed countries’ failure to act with their lives and livelihoods,” wrote the Nobel laureates in a June 17 letter to Obama and Kerry. “This will only become more tragic as impacts become worse and conflicts are exacerbated as precious natural resources, like water and food, become more and more scarce. Inaction will cost hundreds of millions of lives—and the death toll will only continue to rise.”

Indigenous leader Rigoberta Menchú Tum of Guatemala, who was awarded the peace prize in 1992, was among the signers. Besides Menchú, the letter was signed by Mairead Maguire and Betty Williams, both of Ireland, who won in 1976; Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, 1984; Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, 1980, Argentina; José Ramos Horta, East Timor, 1996; Jody Williams, United States, 1997; Shirin Ebadi, Iran, 2003; Tawakkol Karman, Yemen, 2011, and Leymah Gbowee, Liberia (2011).

This was the second time Nobel laureates had appealed to the President about Keystone XL. In September 2011, nine honorees signed a similar letter, including Menchú, Maguire, Williams, Tutu, Esquivel, Ramos Horta, Williams and Ebadi. His Holiness the Dalai Lama also signed the earlier letter. Last week’s letter was dated the same day that the outgoing U.S. Ambassador to Canada, David Jacobson, told the Associated Press it is a “very important decision.”

Just a few days earlier, former Vice President Al Gore, a 2007 Nobel Peace Prize winner for his anti–climate change activism, had called Keystone XL “an atrocity” in an interview with the Guardian. He said Obama would do well to focus his energy instead on a comprehensive climate change plan.

“This whole project [Keystone XL] is an atrocity but it is even more important for him to regulate carbon dioxide emissions,” Gore told the British newspaper, adding that curtailing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants would go far in counteracting global warming.

Gore’s sentiments were in line with those expressed in the letter to Obama, though he was not among the signers. Contending that turning down Keystone XL would curtail or limit development in the oil sands of Alberta, Canada, the Nobel laureates, too, urged the Obama Administration to take a global lead on combating climate change and spearheading the movement away from fossil fuels. Many of the signees belong to the Nobel Women’s Initiative, established in 2006 by six of the 15 women who have received the Nobel Peace Prize in the 110 years it has been awarded.

“Like millions of others, we were buoyed by words in the President’s second inaugural address: ‘We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,’ ” the letter stated. “Mr. President and Secretary Kerry, this is an opportunity to begin to fulfill that promise. While there is no one policy or action that will avoid dangerous climate change, saying ‘no’ to the Keystone XL pipeline is a critical step in the right direction. Now is the time for unwavering leadership.”

These assertions about oil sands development directly contradicted the findings outlined in the State Department’s preliminary environmental assessment report, released in March, that said Keystone XL would produce negligible effects both on climate change and oil sands development. (Related: State Department Draft Environmental Report Says Keystone XL Effects on Both Climate Change and Oil Supply Would Be Minimal)

The Keystone XL pipeline would wend its way from Canada to the Gulf coast of the United States bringing up to 800,000 of viscous crude along 1,700 miles. It would cost about $7 billion to build. Though supporters say it would create jobs, the State Department report also said that the overall economic impact would be negligible. (Related: Exaggerated Consultation Claims, Factual Errors in State Department’s Keystone XL Environment Report Rankle Natives)

 

Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/06/18/nobel-peace-laureates-urge-obama-and-kerry-nix-keystone-xl-149978