|
|
 Extreme Veteran
Posts: 595
 
Location: North Dakota | Living in ND I hear about the Dakota Access Pipeline(DAPL) almost daily and the riots going on there. Anyone else around the other parts of the country hearing about it?
If you don't know... there is tons out there on it. A simple google search will fill you in right quick. Celebrities have come to help the protesters and the size of the crowd out there hasn't weakened even in our now freezing temps. This has been going on for months out there... things only seem to be getting worse with a state wide call of all available law enforcement sent out tonight as things are turning even more violent.
Would love to hear some opinions from others around the country. | |
| | |
 BHW's Lance Armstrong 
Posts: 11134
  
Location: Somewhere between S@%&# stirrer and Saint | I try to see it from both sides but I tend to lean more towards the pipeline going under the river. There are millions of miles of pipelines in the USA. It is the safest way to transport liquids. Yes there are leaks and they get cleaned up.
The tribes had more land in the 1851 treaty and for some reason the Government reduced land and reservations for some reason. I know my tribes land was reduced also. I think most reservations were reduced. This pipeline is going north of the reservation but they are protesting that it may affect drinking water but a new water plant is being put in for the reservation. This pipeline will paralell a gas line under the river 100 feet deep.
I think they have the right to protest but not damage private property, stop traffic or harrass locals.
I personally did not like when the natives were going across Cannon river to go up on Turtle Hill supposedly to pray and the cops stopped them from crossing the river and mased them. This Turtle Hill is no where close to the pipeline and I felt the cops were over doing their power. The Natives and supporters are trepassing on some properties and that should not allowed. They can't claim 1851 treaty land until that is proven in court so they have to abide by current boundries. The pipeline will go through. I personally look at it as a bunch of PC Indians | |
| | |
 BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25351
Location: Bastrop, Texas | I'm not following real closely, but I see that they used a water cannon last night with the temperatures in the 20's. | |
| | |
I just read the headlines
Posts: 4483
| I just saw where the protesters set trucks on fire. I asked some one supporting the protesters if the protesters had set the trucks on fire and was told they were just trying to stay warm and were on protester land and that is when they water cannoned them. Was this done on the protester's land? We are not hearing about this here | |
| | |
 Porta Potty Pants
Posts: 2600
| 1DSoon - 2016-11-21 7:29 AM
small pox worked the first time.
Really? This is a very sad statement reflecting on your character and is not funny at all - even if you were being sarcastic.
Edited by azsun 2016-11-21 10:10 AM
| |
| | |
Porta Potty Pants
Posts: 2600
| I have followed this story. The tribe started to protest because tribes have a right to meaningful consultation when an action concerns the tribe, treaty or reservation land or potentially impacts the health, safety and welfare of the tribe. Here, there was no meaningful consultation when the decision was made to reroute the pipeline from it's original route near the city of Bismark to it's current proposed route. The pipeline was rerouted because the residents of Bismark objected because a leak could potentially impact their water supply. The exact same reason the tribe is objecting. Secondarily, the route was proposed to dig up the tribe's sacred sites and burial grounds. Construction started before permits were properly received and the tribe objected. The company didn't care and started to dig anyway. When the tribe tried to use legal recourse, citing the sacred sites, the company jumped ahead to the sites and destroyed the burial grounds. This is oil that is not intended for US consumption but will be sold out of the country by a private company. The Army Corps of Engineers has issued a ruling that construction should halt until meaningful consultation can occur. Instead, the company brought in a drill and is attempting to continue construction. The "protestors' are not armed. They are concerned about a leak that could impact the water supply not only for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe but for all of those millions of people whose water supply is the Missouri River. It's really a sad situation. LE agencies from surrounding areas have assisted and then pulled back because what was reported is not what was happening. Last night, they were using water cannons and rubber bullets against the 'protestors'. I would urge anyone to look at all sides of the story before judging or suggesting that "small pox worked last time". Think about all the earthquakes that are going on around the country that have been attributed to fracking. This is in addition to the potential risk of harm to the drinking water. It has been suggested that the pipeline be re-routed, but the company involved in under a timeline to get it done or lose financing. Thus the tactics.
Edited by azsun 2016-11-21 10:09 AM
| |
| | |
 Elite Veteran
Posts: 933
Location: north dakota | From what I understand standing rock leaders were given the chance for 2 years to meet with the corp of engineers and the pipeline company and gave them the run around. Here is an article with links to follow to verify the authors claims
https://m.facebook.com/notes/scott-gates/on-the-standing-rock-tribes...
I feel bad for all the ranchers and farmers in the area that have been effected by the protestors. I also feel bad for law enforcement that is not getting the federal help to help with upholding the law in the area.
Edited by ndcowgirl 2016-11-21 10:38 AM
| |
| | |
 Hummer's Hero
Posts: 3071
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle | azsun - 2016-11-21 10:06 AM
I have followed this story. The tribe started to protest because tribes have a right to meaningful consultation when an action concerns the tribe, treaty or reservation land or potentially impacts the health, safety and welfare of the tribe. Here, there was no meaningful consultation when the decision was made to reroute the pipeline from it's original route near the city of Bismark to it's current proposed route. The pipeline was rerouted because the residents of Bismark objected because a leak could potentially impact their water supply. The exact same reason the tribe is objecting. Secondarily, the route was proposed to dig up the tribe's sacred sites and burial grounds. Construction started before permits were properly received and the tribe objected. The company didn't care and started to dig anyway. When the tribe tried to use legal recourse, citing the sacred sites, the company jumped ahead to the sites and destroyed the burial grounds. This is oil that is not intended for US consumption but will be sold out of the country by a private company. The Army Corps of Engineers has issued a ruling that construction should halt until meaningful consultation can occur. Instead, the company brought in a drill and is attempting to continue construction. The "protestors' are not armed. They are concerned about a leak that could impact the water supply not only for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe but for all of those millions of people whose water supply is the Missouri River. It's really a sad situation. LE agencies from surrounding areas have assisted and then pulled back because what was reported is not what was happening. Last night, they were using water cannons and rubber bullets against the 'protestors'. I would urge anyone to look at all sides of the story before judging or suggesting that "small pox worked last time". Think about all the earthquakes that are going on around the country that have been attributed to fracking. This is in addition to the potential risk of harm to the drinking water. It has been suggested that the pipeline be re-routed, but the company involved in under a timeline to get it done or lose financing. Thus the tactics.
I'm curious as to where you've found some of these things, because I have been doing my research and not found any of what you stated...
My knee jerk reaction was to side with tribe members. But, I'm a realist and know that not only do we need oil to function in our everyday lives, but that this oil WILL be brought to market one way or the other, so what is the safest way?
My research revealed that all "sacred" sites were identified and the pipeline was re-routed to avoid them. The company constructing the pipeline has self imposed above industry standard protocols to insure water safety and land respect.
A US district court confirmed that the tribe has failed to prove any of it's claims.
The tribe was offered ample time to consult with the US Army Corps of Engineers, but refused, instead opting to boycott the entire process.
There is ALREADY and existing pipeline on the same land, parallel to the new one.
The DAPL's path is on privately owned land, not the Sioux Reservation, and 100% of the ND land owners signed contracts allowing the pipeline to be built.
Now these land owners are experiencing criminal trespassing, destruction and defacement of land and personal property, stress and death to livestock, and more from these "peaceful" protestors. Landowners have stated that the actual tribe members have remained peaceful for the most part...it is the protestors that do not have personal stake that are causing the problems. I saw pictures of cattle that had arrows or spears hanging from their sides, and reports of bison being butchered and barbequed. Pictures of a pickup that was parked on railroad tracks and set on fire in order to stop transport trains. How is that unarmed and peaceful?
Edited by RockinGR 2016-11-21 10:36 AM
| |
| | |
Location: Not Where I Want to Be | azsun - 2016-11-21 11:06 AM I have followed this story. The tribe started to protest because tribes have a right to meaningful consultation when an action concerns the tribe, treaty or reservation land or potentially impacts the health, safety and welfare of the tribe. Here, there was no meaningful consultation when the decision was made to reroute the pipeline from it's original route near the city of Bismark to it's current proposed route. The pipeline was rerouted because the residents of Bismark objected because a leak could potentially impact their water supply. The exact same reason the tribe is objecting. Secondarily, the route was proposed to dig up the tribe's sacred sites and burial grounds. Construction started before permits were properly received and the tribe objected. The company didn't care and started to dig anyway. When the tribe tried to use legal recourse, citing the sacred sites, the company jumped ahead to the sites and destroyed the burial grounds. This is oil that is not intended for US consumption but will be sold out of the country by a private company. The Army Corps of Engineers has issued a ruling that construction should halt until meaningful consultation can occur. Instead, the company brought in a drill and is attempting to continue construction. The "protestors' are not armed. They are concerned about a leak that could impact the water supply not only for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe but for all of those millions of people whose water supply is the Missouri River. It's really a sad situation. LE agencies from surrounding areas have assisted and then pulled back because what was reported is not what was happening. Last night, they were using water cannons and rubber bullets against the 'protestors'. I would urge anyone to look at all sides of the story before judging or suggesting that "small pox worked last time". Think about all the earthquakes that are going on around the country that have been attributed to fracking. This is in addition to the potential risk of harm to the drinking water. It has been suggested that the pipeline be re-routed, but the company involved in under a timeline to get it done or lose financing. Thus the tactics.
mostly they are concerned they are not getting paid.
| |
| | |
 The Original Cyber Bartender
Location: Washington | azsun - 2016-11-21 7:56 AM 1DSoon - 2016-11-21 7:29 AM small pox worked the first time.
Really? This is a very sad statement reflecting on your character and is not funny at all - even if you were being sarcastic.
This takes some kind of special....W0W! | |
| | |
 Straight Shooter
Posts: 5725
Location: SW North Dakota | RockinGR - 2016-11-21 9:33 AM azsun - 2016-11-21 10:06 AM I have followed this story. The tribe started to protest because tribes have a right to meaningful consultation when an action concerns the tribe, treaty or reservation land or potentially impacts the health, safety and welfare of the tribe. Here, there was no meaningful consultation when the decision was made to reroute the pipeline from it's original route near the city of Bismark to it's current proposed route. The pipeline was rerouted because the residents of Bismark objected because a leak could potentially impact their water supply. The exact same reason the tribe is objecting. Secondarily, the route was proposed to dig up the tribe's sacred sites and burial grounds. Construction started before permits were properly received and the tribe objected. The company didn't care and started to dig anyway. When the tribe tried to use legal recourse, citing the sacred sites, the company jumped ahead to the sites and destroyed the burial grounds. This is oil that is not intended for US consumption but will be sold out of the country by a private company. The Army Corps of Engineers has issued a ruling that construction should halt until meaningful consultation can occur. Instead, the company brought in a drill and is attempting to continue construction. The "protestors' are not armed. They are concerned about a leak that could impact the water supply not only for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe but for all of those millions of people whose water supply is the Missouri River. It's really a sad situation. LE agencies from surrounding areas have assisted and then pulled back because what was reported is not what was happening. Last night, they were using water cannons and rubber bullets against the 'protestors'. I would urge anyone to look at all sides of the story before judging or suggesting that "small pox worked last time". Think about all the earthquakes that are going on around the country that have been attributed to fracking. This is in addition to the potential risk of harm to the drinking water. It has been suggested that the pipeline be re-routed, but the company involved in under a timeline to get it done or lose financing. Thus the tactics. I'm curious as to where you've found some of these things, because I have been doing my research and not found any of what you stated... My knee jerk reaction was to side with tribe members. But, I'm a realist and know that not only do we need oil to function in our everyday lives, but that this oil WILL be brought to market one way or the other, so what is the safest way? My research revealed that all "sacred" sites were identified and the pipeline was re-routed to avoid them. The company constructing the pipeline has self imposed above industry standard protocols to insure water safety and land respect. A US district court confirmed that the tribe has failed to prove any of it's claims. The tribe was offered ample time to consult with the US Army Corps of Engineers, but refused, instead opting to boycott the entire process. There is ALREADY and existing pipeline on the same land, parallel to the new one. The DAPL's path is on privately owned land, not the Sioux Reservation, and 100% of the ND land owners signed contracts allowing the pipeline to be built. Now these land owners are experiencing criminal trespassing, destruction and defacement of land and personal property, stress and death to livestock, and more from these "peaceful" protestors. Landowners have stated that the actual tribe members have remained peaceful for the most part...it is the protestors that do not have personal stake that are causing the problems. I saw pictures of cattle that had arrows or spears hanging from their sides, and reports of bison being butchered and barbequed. Pictures of a pickup that was parked on railroad tracks and set on fire in order to stop transport trains. How is that unarmed and peaceful?
RockinGR, your statement is absolutely correct. The out-of-state "hired" protestors are really the heart of the problem and they are NOT peaceful. The protestors, IMO, are different from the Protectors. Although, the tribal protectors failed to participate in ANY of the public comment periods, they (for the most part) started with peaceful prayer and minor tresspassing. This thing has since elevated, with the protestors causing more harm to the environment at this point than the construction crew. They are burning tires and trash, dumping used oil at the capital grounds, slaughtering livestock... the list goes on.
The DAPL doesn't cross the reservation. All of the required archey surveys were done, including SHPO and THPO, as part of the arduous NEPA process- which takes YEARS for permitting. As RockinGR stated, the line runs right beside an existing line- that was installed in the 80s.
The whole thing is messy and confusing. The media is making it worse, and facebook is a NIGHTMARE- please don't take the Facebook crap as gospel! Look at the public records, if you want to know the "truth." Please!
| |
| | |
 Experienced Mouse Trapper
Posts: 3106
Location: North Dakota | Is there anyone on this site that knows what is north of Bismarck? Besides the wetlands and Bismarcks water intake?? I am seriously irritated with the idea that the "ONLY" sacred sights seem to be located RIGHT where the pipeline is going UNDER the river. Please people OPEN your eyes and minds to what is REALLY going on here!!!!!
http://www.history.nd.gov/historicsites/doubleditch/index.html | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25351
Location: Bastrop, Texas | fatchance - 2016-11-21 12:02 PM
azsun - 2016-11-21 7:56 AM 1DSoon - 2016-11-21 7:29 AM small pox worked the first time.
Really? This is a very sad statement reflecting on your character and is not funny at all - even if you were being sarcastic.
I don't think you understand what he was really saying. What he was saying is factually correct, but I don't believe that's the sort of thing he was suggesting. | |
| | |
 Owner of a ratting catting machine
Posts: 2258
| First of all, if I didn't know about the years put into the surveys, assemblies, and thousands and thousands of man hours put into getting a project like this permitted, I might be against it.
Secondly, if I didn't know that this line parallels an existing line, I might be against it.
Thirdly, if I didn't know how an HDD (horizontal directional drill) works to pull the pipe 80-90 ft below the river bed, I might be against it.
Fourthly, if I didn't know a company's response to supe up environmental and construction standards in areas of contention, I might be against it.
Fifth, if I didn't know about the hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in third party professional inspectors during construction, who insure absolute and total compliance to every industry standard, along with landowner, county, state, and federal requirement, I might be against it.
Sixth, if I hadn't personally been present during HDD activity under rivers that are the drinking water source of several major US cities, I might be against it.
Seventh, if I hadn't read and watched interviews of local Native Anericans regarding the pipeline, who basically indicated they're not concerned and they're sick of the community upheaval, I might be against it.
Eighth: If I didn't know the huge budget of maintenance, corrosion professionals, and monitoring that goes on after the line is built, I might be against it. These lines aren't just left to their own devices to leak and pump product into the surrounding area. All the whistles and bells and flashing lights go off at any change in pressure, and the emergence shut down system takes over.
Stories like this aren't about a pipeline, they're about war on American oil. People that protest here against our industry are protesting against American regulation and American cleanup and spill management practices, which are absolute. People don't get that when we buy foreign oil, there's little to NO environmental requirement. The Middle East is fine with destroying major ecosystems, at the cost of water, plants, air, and wildlife, not to mention civilian and worker safety.
I'd rather drill and transport here at home, under heavy regulations and a more principled industry, then buy oil and gas from somewhere that probably did poison somebody to get it, with no chance of remedy.
Edited to add the eighth.
Edited by classicpotatochip 2016-11-21 1:46 PM
| |
| | |
 Transplant Okie
Posts: 1206
Location: Always on call..... | I am very interested to hear from people who live in the area - what their thoughts and perceptions of this situation are. RockinGR and I have debated it a bit on FB. :-).
As a Native American my first impulse is to side with/believe all the reports of the Natives. However I am trying to be objective and find true facts. I agree with others to not just believe all you see on social media about the situation, but that goes for both sides.
I do have personal friends who have been there protesting. One of which was tasered by police while he was kneeling in the water praying. I don't know if he was on private land at the time. I believe it was during the protest at Turtle Hill.
Also from my research I thought the new pipeline was going to run parallel to an existing natural gas line? Not another oil pipeline? Not sure this makes a difference but just curious.
What I can't seem to find for sure is if the Standing Rock tribe actually did voice their concerns during the planning period? I've read accounts both ways - that they did and their concerns were ignored, and I've read that they didn't they never objected to the pipeline during that planning period. I found the proposal for the pipeline that the private company submitted to the Army Corp of Engineers for approval (it's on theACOE website). I didn't read all of it (70+ pages) but it inferred from that document the tribes concerns were addressed. If someone has proof one way or another I'd love to see it.
My main question at this time is why is Energy Access Partners (the private company building the pipeline) is still going ahead with construction if the Army Corp of Engineers has asked for a temporary halt? Is that legal? I understand from a business standpoint they lose of money if they stop, but this is such a charged issue it seems to be in their best interest to follow the ACOE requests.
The use of water cannons in 25 degree weather seems excessive and brutal.
| |
| | |
Location: Not Where I Want to Be | classicpotatochip - 2016-11-21 2:30 PM First of all, if I didn't know about the years put into the surveys, assemblies, and thousands and thousands of man hours put into getting a project like this permitted, I might be against it. Secondly, if I didn't know that this line parallels an existing line, I might be against it. Thirdly, if I didn't know how an HDD (horizontal directional drill) works to pull the pipe 80-90 ft below the river bed, I might be against it. Fourthly, if I didn't know a company's response to supe up environmental and construction standards in areas of contention, I might be against it. Fifth, if I didn't know about the hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in third party professional inspectors during construction, who insure absolute and total compliance to every industry standard, along with landowner, county, state, and federal requirement, I might be against it. Sixth, if I hadn't personally been present during HDD activity under rivers that are the drinking water source of several major US cities, I might be against it. Seventh, if I hadn't read and watched interviews of local Native Anericans regarding the pipeline, who basically indicated they're not concerned and they're sick of the community upheaval, I might be against it. Stories like this aren't about a pipeline, they're about war on American oil. People that protest here against our industry are protesting against American regulation and American cleanup and spill management practices, which are absolute. People don't get that when we buy foreign oil, there's little to NO environmental requirement. The Middle East is fine with destroying major ecosystems, at the cost of water, plants, air, and wildlife, not to mention civilian and worker safety. I'd rather drill and transport here at home, under heavy regulations and a more principled industry, then buy oil and gas from somewhere that probably did poison somebody to get it, with no chance of remedy.
 | |
| | |
Straight Shooter
Posts: 5725
Location: SW North Dakota | Dr. J - 2016-11-21 12:30 PM I am very interested to hear from people who live in the area - what their thoughts and perceptions of this situation are. RockinGR and I have debated it a bit on FB. :-).
As a Native American my first impulse is to side with/believe all the reports of the Natives. However I am trying to be objective and find true facts. I agree with others to not just believe all you see on social media about the situation, but that goes for both sides.
I do have personal friends who have been there protesting. One of which was tasered by police while he was kneeling in the water praying. I don't know if he was on private land at the time. I believe it was during the protest at Turtle Hill.
Also from my research I thought the new pipeline was going to run parallel to an existing natural gas line? Not another oil pipeline? Not sure this makes a difference but just curious.
What I can't seem to find for sure is if the Standing Rock tribe actually did voice their concerns during the planning period? I've read accounts both ways - that they did and their concerns were ignored, and I've read that they didn't they never objected to the pipeline during that planning period. I found the proposal for the pipeline that the private company submitted to the Army Corp of Engineers for approval (it's on theACOE website). I didn't read all of it (70+ pages) but it inferred from that document the tribes concerns were addressed. If someone has proof one way or another I'd love to see it.
My main question at this time is why is Energy Access Partners (the private company building the pipeline) is still going ahead with construction if the Army Corp of Engineers has asked for a temporary halt? Is that legal? I understand from a business standpoint they lose of money if they stop, but this is such a charged issue it seems to be in their best interest to follow the ACOE requests.
The use of water cannons in 25 degree weather seems excessive and brutal.
There was a journal artical that posted the timeline and notes during the NEPA process; it documented the communication with all parties during the process of completing the EIS. The notes from either the communication or the attempts were all listed.
I grew up near another ND reservation, and have many dear friends who still live there. They have been active in supporting the Standing Rock Water Protectors. While, I can appreciate their viewpoint, but I have yet to be able to wrap my mind around the emotions. Probably because I am familiar with the depth and difficulty of getting a FONSI through the NEPA process, and I work in the O&G industry. I want to sympathize with the Protectors, but from sifting through the propaganda to get to the facts, there is no part of me that supports the protestors.
I think the Supreme court overruled the "cease" on ETP, and they are cleared for work, but as I can't site the source, I will just leave it as a thought.
I have largely kept very quiet about the DAPL, but it's getting harder as I see all of the impact to my friends who live in the area. It is BAD. The protestors are way outside their legal rights, IMO.
| |
| | |
Straight Shooter
Posts: 5725
Location: SW North Dakota | classicpotatochip - 2016-11-21 12:30 PM First of all, if I didn't know about the years put into the surveys, assemblies, and thousands and thousands of man hours put into getting a project like this permitted, I might be against it. Secondly, if I didn't know that this line parallels an existing line, I might be against it. Thirdly, if I didn't know how an HDD (horizontal directional drill) works to pull the pipe 80-90 ft below the river bed, I might be against it. Fourthly, if I didn't know a company's response to supe up environmental and construction standards in areas of contention, I might be against it. Fifth, if I didn't know about the hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in third party professional inspectors during construction, who insure absolute and total compliance to every industry standard, along with landowner, county, state, and federal requirement, I might be against it. Sixth, if I hadn't personally been present during HDD activity under rivers that are the drinking water source of several major US cities, I might be against it. Seventh, if I hadn't read and watched interviews of local Native Anericans regarding the pipeline, who basically indicated they're not concerned and they're sick of the community upheaval, I might be against it. Eighth: If I didn't know the huge budget of maintenance, corrosion professionals, and monitoring that goes on after the line is built, I might be against it. These lines aren't just left to their own devices to leak and pump product into the surrounding area. All the whistles and bells and flashing lights go off at any change in pressure, and the emergence shut down system takes over. Stories like this aren't about a pipeline, they're about war on American oil. People that protest here against our industry are protesting against American regulation and American cleanup and spill management practices, which are absolute. People don't get that when we buy foreign oil, there's little to NO environmental requirement. The Middle East is fine with destroying major ecosystems, at the cost of water, plants, air, and wildlife, not to mention civilian and worker safety. I'd rather drill and transport here at home, under heavy regulations and a more principled industry, then buy oil and gas from somewhere that probably did poison somebody to get it, with no chance of remedy. Edited to add the eighth.
100% agree. Great post. | |
| | |
Transplant Okie
Posts: 1206
Location: Always on call..... | ndcowgirl - 2016-11-21 10:31 AM
From what I understand standing rock leaders were given the chance for 2 years to meet with the corp of engineers and the pipeline company and gave them the run around. Here is an article with links to follow to verify the authors claims
https://m.facebook.com/notes/scott-gates/on-the-standing-rock-tribes...
I feel bad for all the ranchers and farmers in the area that have been effected by the protestors. I also feel bad for law enforcement that is not getting the federal help to help with upholding the law in the area.
Good link, very informative. That helped answer several of my questions. Thanks for sharing. | |
| | |
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1079
| I live in ND. I have NOTHING nice to say on the topic except:The media sucks and winter can't come soon enough. period. | |
| |
| |
Folks on-line