TransCanada Keystone Pipeline
Posted: May 09, 2008
by: Stephanie Woodard
What's missing?
Cultural preservation director demands tribal participation
POPLAR, Mont. - Pipe has already been delivered to a North Dakota depot, and
the U.S. Department of State has signed off on a permit to begin
construction on the TransCanada Keystone Pipeline. Meanwhile, the State
Department has not completed government-to-government consultations with
affected tribes about the underground line, which will cross seven states
from North Dakota to Oklahoma, bringing heavy crude oil from the oil sands
of Alberta, Canada, to U.S. refineries.
Along the way, the line will traverse ancestral homelands - though not
reservations - of many Native communities, potentially disrupting sacred
sites, rivers, aquifers and more.
As tribal historic preservation officers prepared for a May 14 meeting with
a State Department representative at Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, in South
Dakota, Indian Country Today spoke with Curley Youpee, Minicoujou and
Hunkpapa Lakota/Pabaksa Dakota. Youpee, who is director of the Fort Peck
Tribes' Cultural Preservation Office, in Poplar, has been vocal in demanding
that tribes be included in the planning.
Indian Country Today: Can you explain the tribes' sense of urgency about the
pipeline?
Curley Youpee: The line comes down rivers, including the Red River Valley,
and crosses other areas that have a lot of cultural information for us. When
cultural sites are destroyed, we lose history; we lose the pages of our
existence. This vital legacy must be maintained and enriched for future
generations.
ICT: What about the Programmatic Agreement [a final document that sets out
procedures for dealing with burials and other cultural resources discovered
during construction of a project]?
Youpee: We want to be signatories to the agreement. The State Department has
treaty and trust obligations to ensure we're fully involved, and so far we
haven't been. When tribal preservation officers went to Washington in
December 2007 to look at a draft, we left without them showing it to us.
ICT: When did the tribes be-come a part of this process?
Youpee: We were contacted one year after it was under way. We had no time to
pave a way for interacting with the State Department; we also did not have
complete information on certain stages of the process. Huge binders of
documents would arrive right before meetings. Many tribes were contacted in
ways they couldn't access technologically - using computer programs they
don't have or via cell phone coverage that's unreliable in their areas, for
example. Here's one example of what we're missing: construction is supposed
to be under way soon, and the project doesn't even have a confidentiality
agreement for sacred sites that are identified.
ICT: Have decision makers been involved on all sides - the State Department
and the 31 tribes who are consulting parties to the project?
Youpee: No. It's been an arrogant, fast-tracked process, with a lot of
negative rhetoric from the State Department. The legal mandate that requires
federal agencies to consult with Indian tribes on a government-to-government
basis has existed for more than 200 years via the Commerce Clause of the
Constitution and numerous statutes, executive orders and ongoing policies.
ICT: Is State familiar with the analysis for such a large project,
particularly when dealing with tribes and traditional cultural properties?
Youpee: No. This is one of the few times they've ever done this. Further,
the outside consultant doing the archaeological surveys appears to have no
expertise as far as traditional cultural properties are concerned and did
the surveys before contacting the tribes, which do have expertise. That
includes elders, who must be contacted in their home communities. We can't
take 80- and 90-year-olds to Washington.
ICT: What's your response to the project's economic analysis?
Youpee: All the tribes have terrible unemployment problems and can't get
information that would allow us to start training programs in particular
skills that the project needs. Tribes need time to develop strategies that
address real problems in Indian country.
ICT: Has this project proceeded differently from others you've been involved
with?
Youpee: In the past, we've developed a relationship with the federal agency
responsible for a particular project. In this case, it feels like the
outside consultant has done the work on behalf of the energy company that
wants to build the pipeline, and the State Department is signing off on
those findings without including what's mandated or ethically correct for
the affected tribes.
ICT: Bottom line?
Youpee: Paying homage to our cultural sites is beneficial for Native people.
So we're looking for a process that honors the sacred places and ensures the
pipeline includes some benefit for us.
© 1998 - 2008
Indian Country Today. All Rights Reserved To subscribe or
visit go to:
http://www.indiancountry.com |