Viewing entries in
Line 5 Coalition

Indigenous women leaders say Line 5 reroute project would be cultural, environmental ‘genocide’

Indigenous women leaders say Line 5 reroute project would be cultural, environmental ‘genocide’

Indigenous water protectors from Great Lakes tribes and their supporters are calling on a federal agency to fully review and reject a Line 5 project in northern Wisconsin, which they say would be “an act of cultural genocide” if permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).

The embattled Line 5 pipeline originates at the tip of northwest Wisconsin and continues for 645 miles into Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, under the Straits of Mackinac and out into Canada near Detroit.

Enbridge, the Canadian pipeline company that owns the oil infrastructure, is seeking to remove a 12-mile section of Line 5 from the Bad River reservation and replace it with a 41-mile section outside of the reservation.

DNR files $2.2M bill for policing during Enbridge Line 3 construction

DNR files $2.2M bill for policing during Enbridge Line 3 construction

The Department of Natural Resources is the largest recipient of MNPUC funds that paid $2.2 million for policing of Water Protectors instead of the Line 3 construction operations ignoring frac-outs, aquifer breaches and gifting 510 million gallons of water during a historical drought.

"There is a tremendous conflict of interest," said Winona LaDuke, head of Minnesota-based Honor the Earth, an Indigenous environmental group.

The Fight Against Line 3 Isn’t Over Yet By Abe Usher, The Progressive

The Fight Against Line 3 Isn’t Over Yet By Abe Usher, The Progressive

The Fight Against Line 3 Isn’t Over Yet

Though the pipeline is now operational, Native activists and allies continue to resist its impacts, despite a wave of criminal charges.

BY ABE ASHER

FEBRUARY 28, 2022

Fibonacci Blue (flickr) via Creative Commons

Shanai Matteson grew up in Palisade, Minnesota, a small town of several hundred people set on the banks of the Mississippi River as it winds from its headwaters in northern Minnesota toward the border with Wisconsin and south all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. As a child, Matteson swam in the Mississippi. 

When the coronavirus pandemic began, she decided to return to Palisade from Minneapolis—in part so her family could help her with childcare and rent, but also because the Canadian multinational corporation Enbridge was building a tar-sands pipeline through her hometown. She wanted to fight it. 

“[The police] saw it as a way to get new gear. They all bought new boots, and they got new guns, and they get to keep all that stuff now—and they were able to evolve a way of policing protest movements.” 

One-and-a-half years later, on July 6, 2021, with the appeals process exhausted and pipeline construction underway, Matteson and a group of water protectors, including Native American writer and activist Winona LaDuke, arrived at the site where Enbridge was drilling a tunnel for the pipeline beneath the nearby Willow River. What they saw was disturbing. 

“We had gone into the river channel basically to witness, and we ended up discovering a frac-out where they had spilled drilling mud into the river channel and hadn’t reported it yet to the pollution control agency,” Matteson recalls.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has a presence in the vicinity, but was of little help. “They sent more police to arrest the protesters than they did monitors,” Matteson says. “There were no monitors.” 

In October, Enbridge completed construction on the new Line 3 pipeline, which crosses the Willow River next to the land where Matteson’s grandmother was born. Tar-sands oil from Canada has been flowing through the 1,097-mile pipeline ever since. 

But for the activists who fought the pipeline’s construction in Minnesota for nearly a decade—a collection of local Indigenous activists and non-Native allies—the fallout from their battle is still ongoing. 

Scores of activists face ongoing legal cases, and many more are processing what they learned about the nature of state power and capital, the intricacies of movement building, and the lessons they’ll take into the climate fights to come. 

For Joshua Preston, a movement attorney and member of the Minnesota National Guard, the experience of representing Line 3 protesters has been a crash course in understanding real world power dynamics. 

“It’s one thing to engage with these ideas in the abstract,” Preston says. “It’s very different when you see it for yourself—when you actually begin litigating these cases and you see how much power differential there really is and how little accountability there is on the part of law enforcement.”

Preston says the Stop Line 3 legal movement has documented some 950 incidents in which the state arrested or cited a protester; he said there has only been one instance, in Itasca County, where a county attorney voluntarily dropped a charge related to Line 3 opposition. 

Maybe we didn’t win this one, but we’re going to be better situated to win the next one.”

In a number of cases, those charges appear excessive. As The Guardian reported earlier this month, one protester who chained herself peacefully to a vehicle in the middle of a road last June was charged with felony theft—a charge that carries up to five years in prison.

Trials are ongoing. Michelle Naar-Obed, a member of the Catholic Workers who was arrested on the Prairie River in March of last year, appeared in court on February 25. Matteson has a court date set for April 11. 

Many protesters have faced recurring court dates and decisions over whether to plead guilty to crimes in exchange for reduced penalties, or to go to trial and risk the possibility of hefty fines and incarceration. They see the prosecutions as emblematic of how the state’s criminal justice system has served Enbridge’s interests during the Line 3 fight. 

In 2020, for instance, Enbridge set up an escrow account to be distributed to law enforcement to cover costs associated with policing the pipeline route ranging from overtime pay to riot gear. The corporation quickly poured millions into the account. 

“[The police] saw it as a way to get new gear,” Matteson says. “They all bought new boots, and they got new guns, and they get to keep all that stuff now—and they were able to evolve a way of policing protest movements.” 

For Matteson, who intends to stay in Aitkin County long-term, the experience on the Willow River that July day was instructive: People cannot rely on the state, let alone Enbridge, to ensure the relative health of the land and water. 

Matteson is now part of a group that does regular water testing at sites across northern Minnesota as activists attempt to keep track of how the pipeline is affecting their rivers and streams. 

Kerem Yucel via Creative Commons

Winona LaDuke (left) talks to the Hubbard County Sheriff near the stock pile of the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline in Park Rapids, Minnesota.

LaDuke, meanwhile, has turned her attention in part to several other fights threatening waterways and ecosystems near the White Earth Reservation and throughout the Upper Midwest. 

In January, Tesla announced that it had reached an agreement with Talon Metals to purchase 165 million pounds of nickel over the next six years in a $1.5 billion deal. Talon Metals, a partner of the multinational mining corporation Rio Tinto, wants to develop a mine in Aitkin County just miles from the site of the Willow River frac-out.

In early February, the U.S. Department of Energy awarded Talon a multi-million dollar research and development grant to explore carbon storage potential at the Tamarackwww.talonminerisks.com/ site. LaDuke calls the entire plan “the most absurd idea we’ve ever heard.” 

“That’s our heartland over there,” LaDuke tells The Progressive. “They’re very shallow lakes that are full of wild rice, and the dewatering that they propose for that mine in fact would affect the viability. They are going to draw down those lakes. So we’re going to fight them.”

Despite the setback with Line 3, the fight against Enbridge continues. The corporation’s plans to build a new Line 5 pipeline through Wisconsin and Michigan are facing resistance both from Indigenous tribes including the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and government officials, including Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer

But just as Enbridge and law enforcement have built their strategies for surveilling, policing, and countering protest movements over successive campaigns, the movements to stop them are getting smarter, too. 

“Much in the same way that all the oil companies learn from every fight, from Keystone to Standing Rock to Line 3 . . . we’re also doing that as well,” Preston says. “Maybe we didn’t win this one, but we’re going to be better situated to win the next one.”

Activists also want to hold onto the energy and ideas of the “Stop Line 3” movement. 

“What stuck out to me most, early on, was the importance and the power of handmade things and how much love and energy you can put into making something by hand then having it used in a movement that is human-led,” says Dio Cramer, a Twin Cities-based illustrator and designer. 

LaDuke remains confident, too—not only because so many people “woke up” during the Line 3 fight, but also because the future of the oil and gas industry is so uncertain. 

“These bad ideas are running out of steam, because you and I know what’s going on” regarding the long-term outlook for the fossil fuel industry, she says. “The party is over.”

For many who fought against Line 3, the mission remains the same even as the conditions of the fight evolve and change.  

“We have to heal the land,” Matteson says. “Then the land will heal people.”

Canadian Report Poses Alternatives to Line 5 Pipelines

Canadian Report Poses Alternatives to Line 5 Pipelines

"Line 5 is almost 20 years past its useful engineered life, according to the experts that originally constructed the pipeline," said Wallace. "The location itself, 20% of the world's freshwater, drinking water for millions of people, it should have never been put there to begin with."

Earth Justice: How a Shoddy Environmental Review Could Cause a Catastrophic Oil Spill in Wisconsin

HOW A SHODDY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COULD CAUSE A CATASTROPHIC OIL SPILL IN WISCONSIN

Wisconsin’s inadequate environmental analysis of Enbridge’s rushed and haphazard Line 5 pipeline reroute does grave injustice to frontline Tribal communities.

By Bala Sivaraman | January 31, 2022

“The White River and Bad River power the fisheries of Lake Superior and inside the watershed itself,” says Bad River Band Chairman Mike Wiggins, Jr. “If you’re trying to protect Lake Superior for the future, you have to start right in Bad River.” 

How does Line 5 threaten people, waters, and fisheries in Wisconsin?

While national attention on Line 5 has focused on the legal battle in Michigan, another segment of the pipeline is posing an increasingly grave threat farther north in Wisconsin. 

Along the northern Wisconsin border lies Odanah, home to the Bad River (Mashkiiziibii) Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, a Tribal Nation that has lived along the banks of Lake Superior for thousands of years. The Tribe’s Reservation sits within the Bad River watershed, a critical Lake Superior tributary that spans over 1,000 miles of interconnected rivers including the White River (Waabishkaa-ziibi) and the Bad River (Mashkiigon-ziibi). The watershed is the cultural epicenter of the Bad River Band, and keeping it healthy has major environmental and economic significance.

“The White River and Bad River power the fisheries of Lake Superior and inside the watershed itself,” says Bad River Band Chairman Mike Wiggins, Jr. “If you’re trying to protect Lake Superior for the future, you have to start right in Bad River.” 

Enbridge received easements from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to construct the 12-mile segment of Line 5 through the Bad River Reservation in 1953.

“At the time, government consultation with tribes about how they might be impacted by such a project was non-existent”, says Edith Leoso, the Bad River Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. "The Tribe was told ‘this pipeline would be going in’”.

Line 5 runs only a few miles from Lake Superior, and is increasingly likely to rupture in the Lake due to its age and a heightened frequency of severe storms brought on by climate change. The Band had been trying to access information from Enbridge in order to evaluate the pipeline’s risks to treaty resources, safety, and the environment since several of its easements expired in 2013. In 2017, following a 500 – year flood in the watershed in 2016, the Bad River Tribal Council denied the easements, requiring Enbridge to remove the 12-mile segment of the pipeline from the Reservation and watershed because of the health and safety risks it presented. But in the five years since, the segment has remained and oil continues to flow.

Instead of removing the pipeline, Enbridge drafted two relocation plans: one within the Reservation boundaries and a second that situated the pipeline around the Reservation but still within the surrounding Bad River watershed. This second re-route does little to prevent the impacts of construction or an oil spill, and poses an even greater threat given the geography of the watershed: the surface water shares an intimate hydrological connection with the groundwater along the pipeline’s relocation, so construction or any leak will quickly contaminate tribal drinking water. The Tribe’s Reservation is located downstream, so discharges from construction, fill changes to water quality, or a spill anywhere upstream will make its way through the watershed and empty into the Reservation.

“I can’t overstress how devastating a spill in the watershed would be,” says Naomi Tillison, Director of the Bad River Mashkiiziibii Natural Resources Department. “The Bad River hatchery is the largest producer of walleye fingerlings in Lake Superior. If the waters that our hatcheries and wild rice beds rely on were contaminated with oil, not only would our supply of food, water and medicines be depleted, our coastal wetlands would be devastated and all of the businesses and people in the region who depend on our fisheries would suffer.”

What’s wrong with Wisconsin’s environmental analysis?

In December 2021, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of Enbridge’s proposed pipeline relocation route, which did not consider how the new route would impact Tribal rights.

“The state’s environmental review was egregiously inadequate at outlining the threats that the re-route poses to the Bad River Band,” says Earthjustice attorney Stefanie Tsosie, who is working with the Bad River Band to challenge the environmental review. “The state has failed to analyze any of the environmental impacts the new pipeline will have on watersheds.”

The state’s review failed to:

  • Analyze the impacts the project will have on Bad River’s treaty rights and cultural resources;

  • Accurately analyze impacts to rare species;

  • Discuss cumulative impacts that construction and operation would have to the area;

  • Analyze water quality impacts that construction and operation of the pipeline would have, including if proposal will meet Bad River Band's downstream water quality standards"

  • Disclose impacts from the current operation of the aging Line 5 pipeline;

  • Disclose or analyze the likelihood of and the impacts from an oil spill on the area’s waters, including groundwater aquifers and rivers;

  • Analyze and disclose how construction and operation will affect the area’s wetland ecosystems

READ MORE


Enbridge puppets “honor” Bad River; get schooled by Mike Wiggins Jr.

February 6, 2022

Barbara With

Excerpts from Wisconsin DNR hearing on February 2, 2022 regarding Enbridge Line 5 draft environmental statement:

Citizens expose gross inadequacies in Enbridge Line 5 draft EIS, tell DNR to do their job

Citizens expose gross inadequacies in Enbridge Line 5 draft EIS, tell DNR to do their job

Citizens expose gross inadequacies in Enbridge Line 5 draft EIS, tell DNR to do their job

February 6, 2022

Barbara With & Rebecca Kemble

The Bad and White rivers flow through the Bad River Reservation and into Lake Superior in northern Wisconsin. Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline crosses both rivers and threatens the Bad River watershed and reservation.

JAIDA GREY EAGLE FOR EARTHJUSTICE

On February 2, 2022, over 250 people attended the Wisconsin DNR public hearing to respond to the Enbridge Line 5 draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The replacement pipeline is being proposed to be built through the Bad River watershed on the shores of Lake Superior.

The 10-hour hearing revealed an overwhelming opposition to the project, with 147 people (88%) testifying against, and 20 (12%) in favor.

Headwaters of the Kakagon Sloughs, Bad River. Photo: David Joe Bates, tribal member of Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians.

Citizens who oppose the building of the pipeline through the Bad River watershed commented on the 400+ page statement, bringing to light the fatals flaws of Enbridge’s plan. There were repeated demands that the DNR do their job to address the myriad of deeper problems in the EIS.

These are some of the complaints about what is lacking in the draft EIS and what the DNR failed to do:

  • No meaningful consultation with all the Tribes

  • No consideration of treaty rights

  • Did not wait for cultural surveys to be completed

  • Does not address water withdrawals required for construction and pipeline testing

  • Failed to take into consideration the ramifications of the 20-year life span of the pipeline

  • Fails to adequately address impacts on endangered species

  • Failed to address the impact of blasting through bedrock

  • Failed to address water quality standards

  • Failed to verify the claims made by Enbridge

  • Failed to address the climate change impact of Line 5

  • Failed to address Enbridge’s history of spills

  • Failed to address Enbridge’s track record of environmental damage in Minnesota from Line 3 construction

  • Failed to address Enbridge’s refusal to abide by Michigan law

Enbridge seemed to have prepared a handful of construction trade unions, industry associations and pipeline contractors who read the corporation’s statement, repeating the same talking points. Although the purpose of the hearing was to receive comments on the draft EIS, none of those testifying in support addressed the EIS itself. Instead they spoke another on the potential economic impact of Line 5, focusing only on “700 ‘good-paying’ jobs,” “$6 million in taxes paid” and “$36 million in potential tax revenue.”

Enbridge Line 3 damage at the Mississippi in Clearwater, MN. Photo: Ron Turney

They also insisted that Enbridge is “honoring” the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa by moving the pipeline outside of “Tribal boundaries.” However, according to Bad River Chairman Mike Wiggins Jr.:

Bad River Chairman Mike Wiggins Jr., the Line 5 re-route is potentially even more harmful to the Bad River people. He said, “The crux of the issue is that they are in our hydrologically connected waterways and water aquifers.”Whatever it is, the way you tell your story online can make all the difference.
— Bad River Chairman Mike Wiggins Jr.

In 2019 Bad River filed a federal lawsuit against Enbridge demanding it shuts down its more than six decade-old pipeline running through the tribe’s reservation. That case is ongoing. In response to US Congressman Tom Tiffany, Wiggins said:

“With all due respect to the congressman, he says this reroute proposal honors our request. The only thing we have ever asked of the oil company is to get out of our water. That has been rejected, that has been disrespected, and essentially ignored. It’s a simple request. We told them to take their $24 million they offered us to exist in our drinking water and put it into the reroute project out of our water shed, out of our hydrological connectivities.

That underscores the essence of our defense and our resistance.”

TAKE ACTION

The DNR is accepting written comments regarding the draft EIS through March 18, 2022. Concerned citizen can read the document here or visit the Enbridge EIS Tool Kit to learn more.

Comments can be emailed or mailed:

Email: dnroeeacomments@wi.gov

U.S. mail:
Line 5 EIS Comments
DNR (EA/7)
101 South Webster Street, Madison, WI 53707

AND

Army Corps of Engineers accepting comments on Enbridge’s Line 5 Proposal

On January 6, the Army Corps of Engineers (a federal Agency within the Biden Administration) announced that it would be doing an individual permit on Enbridge’s application for a permit to fill wetlands and do horizontal directional drilling on the White River.  

Read Enbridge’s Application and the Army Corps Notice here.

The Army Corps is accepting public comments through March 7. Comments can be sent to:

  • Electronic comments may be submitted via email: CEMVP-L5WSR-PN-Comments@usace.army.mil
    OR

  • St. Paul District Corps of Engineers,

CEMVP-RD

180 Fifth Street East, Suite 700

Saint Paul, MN 55101 1678.


FOLLOW Wisconsin Citizens Media Cooperative ONLINE OR SOCIAL MEDIA