by Deep Green Resistance News Service | Jun 6, 2012 | Biodiversity & Habitat Destruction, Colonialism & Conquest, Indigenous Autonomy, Toxification
By Kavitha Chekuru / Al Jazeera
The sun pierces through thin slices of halibut that lie drying across cylindrical pieces of wood as Christopher Stuart continues to delicately cut more of the freshly harvested fish for the sun to bake.
Stuart, a member of Canada’s Gitga’at First Nation, is performing the task for the first time at the tribe’s annual spring harvest on Princess Royal Island, just off the coast of British Columbia. But it’s not his first time at the seasonal camp called Kiel. He has come every year since he can remember to gather with other Gitga’at to harvest halibut and seaweed.
Helen Clifton, an elder of the Gitga’at, watches him from inside a small house on the rocky shore, as she begins her 70th year at the spring harvest.
“The tide is moving on this coast, up and down,” she says. “The tide does not stand still.”
It’s an apt description for so many situations the Gitga’at and other First Nations, Canada’s indigenous communities, find themselves in, as they work to preserve their traditions while living alongside Canada’s quest to exploit the natural resources of the land that was once theirs. While the tide helps bring in the seaweed they harvest, it could just as easily be the same tide that takes away that food if the waters become Canada’s highway to global energy markets.
Calgary-based energy firm Enbridge has proposed building a pipeline from Canada’s oil-rich province of Alberta to carry crude to the port of Kitimat. From there, the crude would be loaded onto tankers bound for Asia, traversing the forested coast of British Columbia.
First Nations and many other communities in British Columbia and Alberta find themselves in the middle of supply and demand – between Canada’s expanding oil industry, home to the world’s third-largest oil reserves; and the rapidly growing economies in East Asia, particularly China. Enbridge’s proposed pipeline, the $5.5bn Northern Gateway, would be the bridge. But the project would cut through the Great Bear Rainforest, a treasured nature preserve and one of the largest intact coastal rainforests in the world. This, in addition to safety concerns from environmental groups and First Nations, have been at the heart of much of the opposition to the project.
Environmental worries
Trees overwhelm the hilly islands that thread through the waterways here, a stunning confluence of mountain and sea, whales and wolves. The forest had been at risk from logging until 2006 when the provincial government, industry, environmentalists and First Nations came to an agreement to preserve large parts of the forest – a rare alliance between opposing sides.
“It’s a model for the scale of conservation that’s required to maintain ecosystem health, while at the same time supporting communities with revenue and jobs that don’t damage the ecosystem we depend on,” says Caitlyn Vernon, a campaigner with the Sierra Club of British Columbia. “Over a decade of work developing this model would be put in jeopardy by an oil spill.”
Vernon and other conservation groups say that if oil makes its way into the waters of the forest, it would cause a ripple effect through the intricately connected marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Even if there is no spill, environmentalists say increased tanker traffic could still cause damage by possibly introducing new bacteria from other waters.
The Gitga’at say they know the risks of a spill all too well. In 2006, a ferry boat travelling near their main village of Hartley Bay ran aground and sank. The ship sits at the bottom of the water just south of the bay to this day and still leaks diesel fuel into the waters in which the Gitga’at fish.
“All the promises were made and nothing happened,” says Clifton. “And today it’s still bubbling and burping.”
Enbridge acknowledges the risks of its project, but insists it has taken both the pipeline and tanker routes into serious consideration and can protect both the land and marine ecosystems.
“We’re planning on putting in place a number of risk mitigation factors. On the marine side, that includes that all tankers coming into port will be vetted by third-party experts,” Todd Nogier, an Enbridge spokesman, told Al Jazeera. “All will be boarded by British Columbia pilots who understand the area and how it behaves.” Nogier says there will also be state-of-the-art technology used for the pipeline and navigational aides installed along the tanker route to increase safer tanker traffic.
“It’s a smart way to enable Canada to move forward in an industry that is very important to the country and do something that’s an important priority for the country. And that’s finding a new market for this energy resource.”
But Enbridge faces a number of hurdles in marketing the proposal to British Columbia. One of the main selling points has been economic benefits. The firm says thousands of jobs would be created through Northern Gateway and that the project would contribute $270bn to Canada’s GDP over 30 years. But the majority of jobs would be short-term employment in the pipeline’s construction. Only a few hundred long-term jobs are expected, primarily at the marine terminal in Kitimat. Critics of Northern Gateway say far more jobs in fishing and tourism are at stake if there is a pipeline breach or oil spill.
First Nations concerns
While there has been vocal opposition from many First Nations, Enbridge says it has support from a number of bands in Alberta and British Columbia. The company is also offering communities that would be affected a 10 per cent stake in the project, in addition to a large percentage of the local jobs. It’s still a hard sell to some First Nations, such as the Haisla, who live by the port of Kitimat.
“I think that there’s definitely an area where our people need to take advantage,” says Gerald Amos, a Haisla elder. “We’re no different than other people where we require a way to sustain ourselves in today’s reality. However, there are limits to that.”
“This water was described as the dinner plate of the Haisla people,” Amos continues. “The richness here has been pretty much constant over my lifetime, but we’re now seeing a decline that I’m afraid will lead to extinction for some stocks.” Some species have already seen sharp drops, like the eulachon and salmon, particularly after restrictions on indigenous fisheries and industrial pollution over the past century. With fish as their main source of sustenance and income, the loss of key species has had a pronounced effect on their culture.
“When I’ve got some of my grandchildren out here with me, I’m always tempted to point out the places that were important for our harvesting. And they’ve got Haisla names,” says Amos, as he gestures to the vast waters surrounding his boat and village. “Once we have a generation that doesn’t understand what that is, what else is left? That’s why I’m pretty certain that an oil spill would take away whatever culture we have left.”
Read more from Al Jazeera: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/06/201263729350592.html
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | May 31, 2012 | Toxification
By Nathan Vanderklippe / The Globe and Mail
A huge spill has released 22,000 barrels of oil and water into muskeg in the far northwest of Alberta.
The spill ranks among the largest in North America in recent years, a period that has seen a series of high-profile accidents that have undermined the energy industry’s safety record. The Enbridge Inc. pipeline rupture that leaked oil near Michigan’s Kalamazoo River, for example, spilled an estimated 19,500 barrels.
The most recent spill was discovered May 19 emanating from pipe belonging to Pace Oil & Gas Ltd. , a small energy company that produces about 15,000 barrels a day, roughly half of that oil.
The spill has yet to be contained, although “we’re very close,” Pace chief executive Fred Woods said in an interview Wednesday.
The spill took place roughly 20 kilometres southeast of Rainbow Lake, which is 165 km south of the Northwest Territories border. It came from above-ground piping connecting an underground pipeline to a well used for wastewater injection. The pipe was carrying an emulsion that was roughly 70 per cent water and 30 per cent oil.
As with many recent pipeline accidents, Calgary-based Pace did not detect a problem, but was informed of the leak by another company after the spill was spotted from an aircraft. The spill, which killed one duck, now covers 4.3 hectares. Mr. Woods declined comment on how long it was leaking before detection.
The company is now setting up a 50-person camp near the spill site, and has hired contract workers to clean it up. By Monday, it had recovered some 3,700 barrels of emulsion. It’s unclear how long it will take to clean up. Alberta’s Energy Resources Conservation Board is investigating the spill.
The province has seen a spate of recent leaks. Last year, for example, the 220,000 barrel-a-day Rainbow pipeline belonging to Plains All America Pipeline L.P., spilled 28,000 barrels in northern Alberta.
The province has also seen a series of accidents on smaller gathering and distribution pipelines, which are typically run by oil and gas companies and may not receive the safety scrutiny applied to longer-haul pipes such as Rainbow. On May 8, a farmer discovered a spill of a very light oil, called condensate, in a field in central Alberta. That oil had leaked from an AltaGas Ltd. pipe delivering raw natural gas to a processing plant.
Last June, 500 barrels of oily product spilled from a pipe gathering system run by Pengrowth Energy Corp.
The water injection well connected to the leaking Pace pipe was used to dispose of waste.
From The Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/pipeline-spill-sends-22000-barrels-of-oil-mix-into-alberta-muskeg/article2447765/
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | May 27, 2012 | Obstruction & Occupation
By Tim Groves / Toronto Media Co-op
Environmental justice protestors temporarily shut down a hearing into a proposal to have tar sand oil piped through Ontario. The hearing took place place in London, Ontario, on Wednesday.
The three day hearing, held by the National Energy Board (NEB), is examining a proposal by Enbridge to reverse the flow of an existing pipeline (Line 9), which currently carries imported overseas oil west. Enbridge wants to instead use the pipeline to bring tar sands oil east. This oil may then be exported to Europe.
After entering the hearing, protestors employed the People’s Mic, where the crowd would echo back whatever was said by a spokesperson in order to project their voices. After a few minutes of the People’s Mic commencing, most other attendees at the hearing exited the room. The NEB hearing was shut down for approximately an hour.
The spokesperson who led the Peoples Mic was arrested and then removed from the room. She was later released with a ticket for trespass.
The protestors raised concerns about the environmental impacts of the Alberta tar sands, the possibility of a spill in Ontario and the lack of prior and informed consent being sought from First Nations in Ontario.
“Six Nations rights already have been violated in this review process,” stated Wes Elliot, a resident of Six Nations in a press release. “Free, prior, and informed consent is not a factor in these hearings.”
Line 9 cuts through the Haldimand Tract, land which was deeded to Six Nations in 1784.
“We also must object to the illegitimate and anti-democratic conduct of the officials who are fast-tracking this review,” said Elliot in the release.
Following the protest, demonstrators held what they dubbed an unofficial “People’s Hearing on the Tar Sands Pipeline.”
“The current framework of the National Energy Board hearings does not allow us to draw connections between tar sands extraction, toxic refineries and upgraders, and various other downstream consequences,” said Taylor Flook a member of Occupy Toronto who attended the event in London. “The People’s Hearing was arranged as a more open forum, where anyone can share any of their concerns about relevant issues.”
“The tar sands industry is attempting to build as many pipelines as they can,” said Flook. “We should not accept the fast-tracking of these projects,” she said. “No tar sands operations should proceed without the consent of everyone who may be impacted.”
As the extraction of tar sands from Alberta has increased, a series of new pipeline projects have emerged to bring the dirty oil to refineries and ports across Canada and the US.
The Harper government has loudly endorsed these projects. But following a series of protests against TransCanada’s XL pipeline, which would send tar sands oil south, President Obama delayed approval for a section of the project that goes through the United States until after US elections, which will take place in November.
Opposition by First Nations and environmentalists to Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, which would bring oil from Alberta to the BC coast for shipment overseas, has garnered attention across Canada.
Protestors worry the Line 9 Reversal could be rushed through before there is time to build awareness and opposition to the pipeline. But they say many of the concerns with the Northern Gateway Pipeline also apply to the Line 9 reversal.
The Line 9 approval process is taking place in two phases. The London hearing deals with bringing oil from Sarnia, Ontario, to Westover, Ontario. The second phase regards oil transport from Westover to Montreal, Quebec.
From The Dominion: http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/4482
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | May 11, 2012 | Colonialism & Conquest, Indigenous Autonomy, Lobbying, Mining & Drilling, Toxification
By Fawzia Sheikh / Inter Press Service
An indigenous group in the Amazon rain forest took its anti-oil message to Canada in a case rife with accusations of social and environmental damage that highlights the issue of securing consent prior to commencing exploration operations.
Peas Peas Ayui, president of the National Achuar Federation of Peru (FENAP), told IPS through an interpreter that Calgary-based Talisman Energy Inc. is operating within its ancestral territory, covering one million hectares, without first seeking approval. The Achuar people live on both sides of the Peru- Ecuador border in the rain forest.
“The communities affiliated with FENAP reject the presence of the company” and have no interest in the “additional help or benefits” that Talisman can offer at the risk of environmental contamination, Ayui said.
During three previous visits to Canada, the indigenous leader has issued this message, in some cases meeting directly with Talisman management. The most recent trip featured discussions with government opposition leaders and members who expressed “solidarity” with FENAP’s aim to shut down the Calgary firm’s venture into its homeland, noted Ayui, buoyed by legislators’ resistance to the activities in the Amazon.
The delegation was accompanied by Amazon Watch, a San Francisco-based non-profit organisation that supports indigenous people and aims to protect the rain forest. Discussions with key stakeholders and interested parties in Canada took place from April 21 to May 8.
Talisman, however, shot back at Ayui’s trespassing claim and pointed to the Peruvian government’s permission to engage in oil exploration in certain regions.
Moreover, FENAP lands are based 25 kilometres east of the oil company’s activity area known as Block 64, said media relations adviser Berta Gomez, adding that her employer has used about 115 hectares for exploration activities representing .015 percent of the total area. The oil giant started working in the block in 2004.
“We respect that some communities are opposed to oil development and we will not work there,” Gomez emphasised.
Obtaining consent
While Amazon Watch purports to represent the voice of the Achuar in Peru, it actually speaks only for the FENAP, an Achuar federation comprised of a number of communities opposed to Talisman’s activities, she argued.
Within Block 64, the energy interest has won the support and approval of the FASAM and OSHAM Achuar federations, added Gomez, referring to two new offshoot organisations. Overall, she said, Talisman has agreements with eleven organisations representing 66 directly and indirectly affected communities, more than 1,800 families and five different ethnic groups.
“We are committed to early and ongoing engagement with all stakeholders to share plans and address concerns,” including key authorities, the ombudsman and third-party representatives who act as observers, she said.
Ayui, the FENAP leader, said he has asked that Talisman President and CEO John Manzoni attend a meeting in the Amazon where his company is exploring, but the company has requested discussions be held in a nearby town, requiring the indigenous group to travel for three days.
Gomez confirmed that a March 30 meeting took place for the first time among Talisman’s country manager and corporate affairs manager and indigenous leaders against oil and gas development in San Lorenzo, Peru, with a promise to attend a local indigenous assembly, probably in May, to establish a final agreement regarding land boundaries.
The case spurs important questions about the nature of free, prior and informed consent, which is rooted in the United Nations (U.N.) Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, according to a 2011 report by Sustainalytics, a sustainability research and analysis company headquartered in Amsterdam.
The report questions what exactly constitutes the consent of affected indigenous communities – a band council resolution, a referendum, the agreement of community leaders or the approval of all constituents?
Complicating matters is the fact that the Peruvian government awarded concessions and blocks to oil companies without consulting or informing the Amazonian communities, which it has traditionally regarded as “second-class citizens”, states a report published last year by the Ottawa-based think tank, the North-South Institute.
Fostering strife among communities
Among the FENAP’s objections, moreover, is a claim that Talisman triggered social problems within the Amazon’s indigenous population.
FENAP leaders raised grievances with the Peruvian courts about Talisman’s creation of “conflicts and divisions” in connection to a May 2009 confrontation among Amazon groups that “almost ended in violence,” Ayui recalled, but there has been no response. Demands that the Peruvian Congress force the company to vacate the rain forest have also been unanswered.
In his view, the energy firm’s exploration operations have torn apart communities, as eight have opted to sign agreements granting permission to work on their land in exchange for development assistance, while 44 have not.
Based on the needs of federation leaders, Talisman offered “social contribution programs” to improve living standards, Gomez, the spokeswoman, said. Last November, she noted, Talisman signed social community agreements with 11 federations, providing $3 million in resources to fund education, health care, access to electricity, capacity building and local job-generation initiatives in 2012.
Despite the oil firm’s investment in communities, Gregor MacLennan, Amazon Watch’s Peru program coordinator, questioned its interpretation of gaining the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples. He accused the company of winning approval in any way it can – even after indigenous groups initially say no – by presenting more money and resources.
For its part, Talisman has always engaged with all stakeholders in a direct and peaceful manner in full adherence to human rights principles, Gomez stated. However, she said, the oil firm also asks that “the rights of the people to choose to work with us, in an open and transparent fashion, also be respected”.
Talisman plans to maintain dialogue efforts with federations and communities opposing its activities.
Damaging the environment
Rounding out indigenous allegations against Talisman is environmental contamination. The Calgary firm touted new technologies with no risk of repeating the damage done by oil industry players operating in the Amazon in the 1970s and 1980s, but Ayui refuted the claim.
The exploratory wells have affected his community’s hunting and fishing grounds by producing waste which leaks into streams during the rainy season, he charged, and poisons birds and other animals. His people’s ancestors also died on the lands Talisman is now exploring, he added.
MacLennan told IPS that he addressed the drilling fluids issue during a February meeting with Talisman, which acknowledged the problem but explained it will take “several months” for the arrival of a subcontractor and the adequate equipment to undertake the clean-up to a specific standard, a task that includes correcting the poor waste-disposal job carried out by another oil company in the past.
Talisman meets, and in many cases surpasses, environmental regulations outlined by the Peruvian government, Gomez insisted. Waste products, or cuttings, are normally generated during drilling activities and have been “properly managed and stored according to environmental regulations and protection measurements” dictated under the oil firm’s environmental impact assessment, she said.
During the drilling of oil wells, the waste is stored in a “cuttings pit” complete with a roof to shield against rain water and a pit bottom protected with a “geomembrane” to prevent the direct contact of soil and waste, she noted, adding that the whole drilling pad is surrounded by an external ditch collecting fluid, mainly rain water, before it is released into the environment.
During Talisman’s drilling activities, known as SC3X and SN4X, there were no environmental incidents or claims from communities in the area of influence of its operations, Gomez said.
Talisman incorporates an indigenous environmental monitor from the local communities during the drilling projects. The monitor performs daily environmental inspections, immediately communicates problems, participates in monthly environmental monitoring and field environmental audits by regulatory agencies, helps to supervise the handling and shipping of waste and takes part in the abandonment activities and reclamation works, she added.
The company’s abandonment plan for the SC3X project, which details techniques for the treatment and final disposal of cuttings and an outline for re-vegetation and reclamation of the area, is awaiting Peruvian government approval, Gomez said.
Still, Amazon Watch and the FENAP are dissatisfied with Talisman’s environmental precautions and explanations. They dismissed oil companies’ tendencies to blame damage on subcontractors or on the challenges of working in the rain forest.
As the Canadian energy firm heads into a production phase within the next year, there are concerns that a potential spill due to human error would render the area “virtually irrecoverable”, MacLennan warned, spawning “an environmental disaster” destroying the livelihoods of thousands of people in the rain forest.
From Inter Press Service: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=107718
by Deep Green Resistance News Service | May 7, 2012 | Indigenous Autonomy, Obstruction & Occupation
By Murray Bush / Vancouver Media Co-op
The Musqueam First Nation has vowed to shut down condo construction to protect a major ancient burial site at the Marpole Midden. Infant graves were unearthed by heavy excavating equipment at the Vancouver location this week.
More than 100 Musqueam and supporters marched to the construction project at 1338 SW Marine on Thursday, May 3. The marchers included representatives from several First Nations. Musqueam are now occupying outside the site and say they will remain until protection for the site is assured.
The move to protect their 4,000-year-old village site come after more burials were dug up by the condo developer. Construction stopped six weeks ago when the developer first disturbed intact burials. Musqueam leaders say promised talks with the developer, the city and the province have gone nowhere.
The Musqueam reportedly offered a swap with developer Century Holdings for nearby land, but to no avail. The Marpole Midden is considered one of the most important in Canada and was named a National Historic Site in 1938.
Union of BC Indian Chiefs Grand Chief Stewart Phillip announced that the site will “remain shut down until the province is prepared to come to the table and discuss a resolution to this situation.”
Musqueam Chief Ernest Campbell warned “never question our resolve or the resolve of our fellow First Nations, or of any one else for that matter, when it comes to protecting our sacred burial rights.”
Musqueam spokesperson Cecilia Point said supporters are welcome to come down and join the protest on the sidewalk or bring a tent and stay.
From The Dominion: http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/4460
