Luutkudziiwus to Launch Court Challenge to Prince Rupert Gas Pipeline

Luutkudziiwus to Launch Court Challenge to Prince Rupert Gas Pipeline

VANCOUVER – Luutkudziiwus, a Gitxsan Nation House Group, will file a legal challenge in regard to the BC regulatory permits awarded to the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (PRGT) pipeline that would supply gas to the Petronas LNG plant on Lelu Island which threatens to decimate Skeena River wild salmon. Luutkudziiwus Hereditary Chiefs travelled down to Vancouver to make the announcement today, while government and industry are gathered at the 2015 LNG Conference in BC.

“We are taking the government to court over the lack of consultation, inadequate baseline information presented, a weak and subjective impact assessment, and the current cumulative effects from past development. People from all over northern BC are now outraged about the $40 billion Petronas LNG project. It is unbelievable that they claim they consulted with us,” says Luutkudziiwus spokesperson Richard Wright.

TransCanada’s proposed 900 km PRGT pipeline, contracted under Petronas, is slated to cross 34 km of Luutkudziiwus traditional Madii Lii territory on its way from massive fracking operations in Treaty 8 territory to the proposed Petronas-led (Pacific Northwest) LNG plant on Lelu Island in the Skeena estuary. Lelu Island is the tribal territory of the Gitwilgyoots of Lax Kw’alaams.

“Our Madii Lii territory is not to be played with by the province of BC in their LNG game. Clark’s LNG dream is a nightmare for us. While she tries to maintain a shiny picture of LNG in their conference this week, the reality is that First Nations are being bulldozed, and we have had enough,” says Hereditary Chief Luutkudziiwus (Charlie Wright).

Luutkudziiwus will ask BC Supreme Court to quash the Environmental Assessment Certificate and the BC Oil and Gas Commission permit to construct and operate the PRGT pipeline. These permits were not based on any substantive consultation, infringe upon Luutkudziiwus’ rights and title by allowing a pipeline which will cause adverse effects to fish and their habitats, wildlife and their habitats, terrestrial and aquatic resources, including cumulative effects, as well as to social, cultural, and economic values. In bringing their lawsuit, Luutkudziiwus is looking for consultation from BC government and will also ask the court to direct the Province of BC to consult with them before any permits are issued.

“The province has been stealing from our territory and culture for 150 years, and this needs to end. The proposed pipeline and LNG project is in deep conflict with core Luutkudziiwus interests and values,” said Hereditary Chief Xsim Wits’iin (Lester Moore).

“We want the BC government to respect our constitutionally protected Aboriginal rights with a true reconciliation process that honors healthy families and increases community health and education. Development within our traditional territories must have our Free, Prior and Informed Consent and stop tearing apart our communities” says Luutkudziiwus spokesperson Pansy Wright.

A delegation from Luutkudziiwus will be in Vancouver on Oct 14th, and will be available for interviews downtown or near the Vancouver Convention Centre on request.

– 30 –

For more information, photos, or to arrange interviews, please contact:

Richard Wright
Luutkudziiwus spokesperson
250.842.8974
richardwright_8@hotmail.com

Greg Horne
Media coordination
250 634 1021

Mary Macaulay
Legal Counsel
604 899 5227
mlmacauly@emlawyers.ca

Coal’s Dark Alliance Defames Lummi Nation

Coal’s Dark Alliance Defames Lummi Nation

NATIVE AMERICAN TREATY RIGHTS UNDER ATTACK
By Sandy Robson, Coal Stop

On her September 12, 2015 program, Whatcom Tea Party board member and host for the weekly “Saturday Morning Live” (SML) talk radio show on KGMI, Kris Halterman, interviewed Northwest Jobs Alliance (NWJA) President Brad Owens. Halterman’s program afforded Owens a platform to promote the same idea that NWJA previously purported in its August 20, 2015 letter to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Jo-Ellen Darcy, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works). That idea advanced by NWJA in the letter, is that there is “an apparent motive behind the Lummi Nation’s opposition to the Gateway Pacific Terminal project (and completion of the EIS process) not connected with treaty rights.” [italicized emphasis theirs]

NWJA attached documents in its letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“the Corps”), that its group maintains show an “apparent motive” in what NWJA’s letter claims is a “ploy to snatch non-tribal land.” The letter stated:

“By any standards of basic fairness, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should not allow itself to be manipulated into aiding what would amount to a devaluation and confiscation of privately-owned, non-tribal lands. Please publically [sic] disassociate yourself from this scheme, ensure that the normal EIS process is completed, and encourage the Lummi to engage in good faith discussions with the proponents of GPT to explore win-win possibilities.”

Signatures of John Huntley and Brad Owens on the Northwest Jobs Alliance, August 20, 2015 letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Signatures of John Huntley and Brad Owens on the Northwest Jobs Alliance, August 20, 2015 letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

DISCREDITING TACTICS

NWJA’s August 20 letter to the Corps demonstrated an attempt to taint the Lummi Nation’s rightful assertion of its treaty rights relating to the proposed GPT project, and an attempt to influence the Corp’s decision on that subject. NWJA, in its advocacy efforts for SSA Marine/PIT and its GPT project, continues to interfere with the government-to-government relationship between the Lummi Nation and the U.S. federal government—a relationship in which it does not belong. There is a trust relationship and obligation of federal agencies, such as the Corps, to ensure the protection of the Lummi Nation’s treaty rights.

Northwest Jobs Alliance Director and GPT spokesperson Craig Cole speaking at the October 9, 2013 Whatcom Tea Party, GPT Forum

Northwest Jobs Alliance Director and GPT spokesperson Craig Cole speaking at the October 9, 2013 Whatcom Tea Party, GPT Forum

The signers of the letter are NWJA’s President Brad Owens and Chair John Huntley. The listed Director of the NWJA is Craig Cole, SSA Marine’s paid consultant for the Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT) project. Cole was not a signer on the letter to the Corps. NWJA was created in May 2011 to advocate for the GPT project, and it was filed as a non-profit in October 2014.

According to its original mission statement, which had been displayed on its Facebook page, “The Alliance focuses their efforts on supporting the Gateway Pacific Terminal. . .” Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT) is a 48 million metric ton per year coal export terminal proposed at Xwe’chi’eXen (Cherry Point) in Whatcom County, Washington, along the Salish Sea shoreline. The terminal applicant is Pacific International Terminals (PIT), a subsidiary created for the GPT project by SSA Marine, the world’s largest independent, privately-held marine terminal operator.

A NATION STANDS TALL TO PROTECT ITS TREATY RIGHTS

Steadfastly opposed and standing squarely in the path of SSA Marine/PIT’s plan for the coal export terminal, is the Lummi Nation, a self-governing nation which is the third largest tribe in Washington state. The Lummi, a Coast Salish people, are the original inhabitants of the state’s northernmost coast and southern British Columbia. GPT, if permitted and built, would be sited at Xwe’chi’eXen (Cherry Point), along the shoreline, which is part of the Lummi Nation’s traditional fishing area. Xwe’chi’eXen (Cherry Point) was an important village site for Lummi ancestors, and is considered culturally and historically significant to the Lummi people.

The Lummi Nation’s treaty rights are secured to them by the U.S. federal government in the Treaty of Point Elliott of 1855. Article 5 of the Treaty provides that, “The right of taking fish from usual and accustomed grounds and stations is further secured to said Indians in common with all citizens of the Territory. . .”

Lummi Nation has devoted significant time and resources to analyzing, evaluating, and carefully deliberating the impacts associated with GPT. The Nation concluded that the adverse impacts to the exercise of its tribal treaty rights, along with the impacts to the natural resources and the continued impacts to significant Lummi cultural properties are unacceptable, and simply cannot be avoided, minimized, or mitigated.

That conclusion led to Lummi Indian Business Council (LIBC) Chairman Tim Ballew II sending a January 5, 2015 letter to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District Commander, Colonel John G. Buck, asking the Corps to take action and immediately deny SSA Marine/PIT’s permit application for the proposed GPT project due to the project’s adverse impact to the Nation’s treaty rights. The Corps is still in the process of making a determination on that request.

MISINFORMING LISTENERS

KGMI’s SML radio show host, Kris Halterman testifying at July 7, 2015 Whatcom County Council meeting

KGMI’s SML radio show host, Kris Halterman testifying at July 7, 2015 Whatcom County Council meeting

SML host Kris Halterman told listeners during her September 12 show: “The, the Lummis have asked the Army Corps of Engineers to just say no, just say no, we don’t care what your study says, we want you just to say no.”

NWJA’s Brad Owens told SML listeners of that same show, “…you know, we absolutely and unequivocally respect the Lummi treaty rights and the Lummi people, and you know, the things that they, that they stand for. However, at this point in time without a study being done and completed relative to their concern of the impact on their fishing, we just don’t know. And you know, as I mentioned earlier, there’s 1.9 or an estimated 1.9 million acres of usual and accustomed fishing grounds, and that’s a lot! Certainly they don’t fish it all, but we need a scientific report that specifically pertains to the area in which the terminal is going to be constructed and how that might impact, if, if at all, their fishing.”

Halterman and Owens neglected to inform the SML audience that actually, a scientific report that pertains to the area in which the terminal is going to be constructed, and how that might impact Lummi fishing had already been conducted, and was released in November 2014. The Vessel Traffic and Risk Assessment Study (VTRAS) of the additional vessel traffic (487 vessel calls annually) that would be brought on by the newly proposed GPT was conducted for SSA Marine/PIT, by Glosten and Associates, with oversight by the state Department of Ecology. Gateway Pacific Terminal [SSA Marine/PIT] and the Lummi Nation also participated in the VTRAS. In the VTRAS, it states that the study is expected to be used by CH2M Hill, the third-party consultant, in preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed GPT project.

The VTRAS states: “The siting of the wharf and trestle at the proposed GPT and the potential anchorage use by bunkers will interfere with Lummi access to fishing sites. . .The analysis predicts that GPT would increase the Lummi fishing disruption by 76% in the Cherry Point area.” LIBC Chairman Ballew pointed to that significant scientific evidence of the adverse impacts to Lummi Nation’s fishing in the LIBC’s January 5, 2015 letter to the Corps:

Review of the impacts associated with this project, including, but not limited to, those analyzed in the Gateway Pacific Vessell [sic] Traffic and Risk Assessment Study lead to the inescapable conclusion that the proposed project will directly result in a substantial impairment of the treaty rights of the Lummi Nation throughout the Nation’s ‘usual and accustomed’ fishing areas. The Lummi have harvested at this location since time immemorial and plan to continue into the future.

BROADCASTING RUMORS

Getting back to Halterman’s September 12 SML show that focused largely on the documents NWJA had received—these documents were attached to an NWJAAugust 12, 2015 letter to the Whatcom County Planning Commission. NWJA’s “Document Summary,” had the following insinuating header at the top: “Lummi Nation Regulatory and Treaty Rights Strategies for the Taking of Non-Tribal Private Property for the Purpose of Accomplishing a Reservation Annexation.”

NWJA also sent out an August 27, 2015 advertisement to its email subscribers announcing its August 12 letter to the Planning Commission. The inflammatory and unsubstantiated headline on the ad was: “Alliance Weighs in to Protect Cherry Point Jobs: Opposes Lummi Takeover of Heavy Industry Zone.” The advertisement linked to a set of the documents. There was no evidence provided by NWJA to support its headline claim of a supposed “takeover of heavy industry” by Lummi Nation.

The documents were also introduced, with little fanfare, earlier this year, in a June 13 blog post by Kris Halterman on her “Saturday Morning Live—Liberty Road” web site. The post stated that “Saturday Morning Live—Liberty Road” received the documents, although the person or entity which originally obtained the documents was not disclosed.

Comprising the bulk of the documents is a February 7, 2012 letter from the Center for Salish Communities Strategies (CSCS), a non-profit public interest group whose mission was “to promote innovative policy actions that bring the community together in a shared vision of a strong regional economy reflective of the beauty of our surrounding natural world. . .”  According to the Washington Secretary of State,CSCS was dissolved (“not active”) as of December 1, 2014, and its original filing date had been August 11, 2011. The website for CSCS, comes up as “server cannot be found.” However, neither of these facts are mentioned during Halterman’s September 12 SML show, and since she referred to the organization in the present tense, listeners were likely to see CSCS as still active, which was, and still is, not the case.

The CSCS letter presented the Lummi Nation with a possible vision of an alternative use of Cherry Point lands and tidelands specific to the proposed GPT site, and outlined some ideas on how to go about that. The potential strategies suggested by CSCS were, at the core, about protecting and preserving the Lummi Nation’s archaeological properties, its cultural heritage and natural resources with the guiding principle of protecting and enhancing the inherent rights and interests of the Nation pertaining to Xwe’chi’eXen (Cherry Point).

Excerpt from September 10, 2015 NWJA press release

Excerpt from September 10, 2015 NWJA press release

That context was omitted from a September 10, 2015 NWJA press release which featured another insinuating headline, “US Army Corps Asked to Avoid Involvement in Lummi Land Scheme,” sent to The Bellingham Herald. The press release was linked-to in the online Herald’s September 11 article.

Halterman referenced the September 11 Herald article during her September 12 SML program and said, “the Herald had an article, I don’t know if it was front page or not, because I just looked at the online version, stating that these were false and fabricated documents.” Her statement is inaccurate. What was actually reported in the story, was that in response to NWJA’s allegations that Lummi Nation plans to “take over” and “de-industrialize” the Cherry Point industrial area, LIBC Chairman Tim Ballew said, “They’re [NWJA] fabricating a false conspiracy.”

Additionally, the Herald story referenced a single-page document that is best described as a chart outlining a strategy, which NWJA sent to the newspaper with its press release. The article reported that Ballew reviewed the document and said it did not come from the tribe. Ballew told the Herald: “What they [NWJA] presented definitely has not been produced by the Nation.”

In comparing the single-page document presented by the NWJA and the samesingle-page document posted on Kris Halterman’s June 13 “SML—Liberty Road” web site, there is a noticeable difference. On the document posted on Halterman’s “SML—Liberty Road” web site, there are no identifying marks to denote the producer of the document, and the top of the page was blank. However, on the document presented by NWJA to the Corps and to the Whatcom County Planning Commission, there were words placed inside brackets written at the top of the page; a label of sorts, which read: [Lummi Nation Planning Document – August 2012].”

PAC AND RADIO SHOW USED TO TARGET LUMMI AND ITS TREATY RIGHTS

Those words at the top of the single-page document appear to have been added since the time that document was originally posted in June, on the SML website. Because that label is in brackets one would assume it was not on the original document. A phone call to NWJA Chair John Huntley to inquire about that was not returned.

Kris Halterman is listed as Committee Chair and Campaign Manager on the SAVEWhatcom Political Action Committee (PAC) registration form. She and Dick Donahue, who also hosts a KGMI talk radio show, “Wealth Wake Up,” started the SAVEWhatcom and the affiliated Whatcom First GPT interest-funded PACs in August and September 2013.

February 5, 2015 post from the SAVEWhatcom Facebook page

February 5, 2015 post from the SAVEWhatcom Facebook page

In February of this year, SAVEWhatcom, after the news of the Lummi Nation’s January 5 letter to the Corps requesting a GPT permit denial, placed a February 5 post on its Facebook page that appeared to be an attempt to drive public opinion against the Lummi Nation’s strong oppositional stance to GPT. That post was referenced in a February 20, 2015 article published on the “Coal Stop” blog; however that post is no longer displayed on SAVEWhatcom’s Facebook page. It should be noted that the SAVEWhatcom Facebook page name was changed to “Liberty Road” on June 17, 2015.

In that February 5 Facebook post, SAVEWhatcom made a defamatory statement saying that the Lummi Nation’s Silver Reef Casino’s “purpose” is to take people’s wages and social security checks. Statements like this create resentment, and/or can fuel the already present resentment from individuals and groups about Lummi Nation and its efforts to protect its treaty rights.

Besides using her SML talk show on KGMI radio as a promotional platform for the GPT project, SAVEWhatcom PAC Campaign Manager Halterman used her radio show to host anti-tribal treaty and tribal sovereignty guests such as Elaine Willman, a board member and former chair of the Citizens Equal Rights Alliance (CERA), and former Whatcom County Council member Marlene Dawson, who has worked tirelessly to undermine the Treaty of Point Elliott between local Indian tribes and the United States

Halterman and fellow KGMI radio host Dick Donahue promoted the April 6, 2013 “Citizens Equal Rights Alliance Educational Conference” on Federal Indian Policy, held by CERA and its sister organization, Citizens Equal Rights Foundation (CERF) on their radio programs. The conference was held at the Lakeway Inn, in Bellingham, Washington. Terri Hansen, an award-winning Native American journalist and correspondent for Indian Country Today Media Network, reported, “CERA and its sister, Citizens Equal Rights Foundation (CERF), are the foremost anti-sovereignty, anti-treaty organizations in the U.S. anti-Indian movement.” CERA has been called the “The Ku Klux Klan of Indian Country.”.

CERA board member Elaine Willman speaking at the September 26, 2015 CERA “Regional Education Conference” held at the Red Lion Hotel in Kalispell, MT

CERA board member Elaine Willman speaking at the September 26, 2015 CERA “Regional Education Conference” held at the Red Lion Hotel in Kalispell, MT

Charles Tanner, a longtime civil and human rights activist who has conducted research and public education on white supremacist and anti-Indian movements, authored an April 26, 2013 report on the CERA/CERF conference in Bellingham. Tanner reported that, “KGMI talk show hosts Kris Halterman and Dick Donahue both attended the conference. . .A broadcast of Halterman interviewing CERA leaders played as attendees trickled into the conference room.”

RALLYING RESENTMENT

The recent efforts by GPT advocate NWJA, are illustrative of an escalated pattern of rallying resentment of tribal treaty rights, specifically those of the Lummi Nation, and undermining the government-to-government relationship between their Nation and the U.S. government. A copy of NWJA’s August 20, 2015 letter to the Corps was attached to NWJA’s equally inflammatory September 10, 2015 press release in a set of documents linked-to in the previously mentioned September 11 Bellingham Herald article. The underlined (by NWJA) language in both the letter to the Corps and the press release call for a second look. Those excerpts, italicized in this blog’s format, are below.

From the September 10, 2015 NWJA Press Release:US Army Corps Asked to Avoid Involvement in Lummi Land Scheme” (headline)“The Northwest Jobs Alliance has asked the US Army Corps of Engineers and other government officials to disassociate themselves from a plan by the Lummi Nation to annex Cherry Point to its reservation.

From the August 20, 2015 NWJA letter to the Army Corps:While the Lummi people themselves and their treaty rights deserve great respect, this ploy to snatch non-tribal land is just plain wrong.

Lummi Nation has every right to avail itself of any legal avenue its people have to protect their treaty rights, tribal sovereignty, culture, and archaeological and natural resources. In spite of this, NWJA made allegations in the above excerpts that are unsubstantiated, using words that seek to paint Lummi motives for invoking their treaty rights as unscrupulous.

Section of “Our Painted Responsibilities,” a collaborative participatory mural created during the 6,000 mile, 2014 Totem Pole Journey by people from many different tribal nations

Section of “Our Painted Responsibilities,” a collaborative participatory mural created during the 6,000 mile, 2014 Totem Pole Journey by people from many different tribal nations

Kris Halterman acknowledged on her September 12, 2015 KGMI radio show that the documents and the allegations that accompanied them, presented by NWJA to these government agencies, were based only on a suspicion: “. . .in order for, for us to ever have a, a pathway to progress for any of the, the public needs here, we have to have open honest and truthful discussions. And when you find documents that, that, that lead you to suspect, not know one hundred percent, but suspect, that part of the reason they’re, they’re [the Lummi] trying to stop this project, would be for some other alternative, you know, purpose.”

It is hard to view such actions as anything but an anti-Indian campaign. Along with taking its maligning and unfounded accusations made against a Native American Nation to the public, Owens’ Huntley’s and Cole’s Northwest Jobs Alliance has brazenly asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to take action that would serve to diminish or abrogate Lummi treaty rights.

***

This article was first published at Coal Stop.  Please see the Coal Stop Posts Page for a list of title links for all Coal Stop blog posts.  No one’s views expressed here represent that of any collective on Coal Stop.  We are all just saying what we, as individuals, think and believe after our research and consideration.  We offer references when appropriate and encourage our audience to check facts, research more, and contribute their own views.  

Indigenous Peoples of Yaigojé Apaporis Victorious as Court Ousts Canadian Mining Company

Indigenous Peoples of Yaigojé Apaporis Victorious as Court Ousts Canadian Mining Company

By  / Intercontinental Cry

After five years of legal contests and uncertainty, the Colombian Constitutional Court has confirmed that Yaigojé Apaporis, an indigenous resguardo (a legally recognized, collectively owned territory), also has legitimate status as a national park.

The decision is cause for celebration for Indigenous Peoples who call the region home. But it is less welcome news for Canadian multinational mining corporation Cosigo Resources, the company contesting the area’s national park status. The court’s ruling immediately and indefinitely suspends all mining activities in the park, including Cosigo’s license to mine gold from one of Yaigojé’s most sacred areas.

In the broader context of Colombia’s push to expand mining activities in the name of development, the court’s decision is seen as a significant precedent.

Since the 1980s, Colombia has protected more than 24 million hectares of the Amazon, placing an area the size of Britain back in the hands of its traditional owners. By choosing the rights of Indigenous Peoples and a new national park over multinational mining interests, the court’s decision safeguards Colombia’s achievements rather than undermining them.

THE BATTLE FOR YUISI’S GOLDEN LENS

Straddling Amazonas and Vaupés states, comprising a million hectares of the Northwestern Colombian Amazon, the pristine forest region of Yaigojé Apaporis is rich in both biological and cultural diversity.

The area hosts endangered mammals such as the giant anteater, jaguar, manatee and pink river dolphin. It is also home to the Makuna, Tanimuka, Letuama, Barasano, Cabiyari, Yahuna and Yujup-Maku Indigenous Peoples, who share a common cosmological system and rich shamanistic traditions. Together these populations act as Yaigojé’s guardians, a role that was strengthened in 1988 when, with the assistance of Colombian NGO Gaia Amazonas, they successfully established the Yaigojé Apaporis resguardo over their traditional territory. But this status has recently been tested.

Under Colombian law, a resguardo recognition grants its inhabitants collective ownership of and rights to the soil, but the subsoil remains in the control of the state and vulnerable to prospecting. With companies seeking to exploit this loophole, the Colombian Amazon has seen a tidal wave of mining interest since the mid-2000s, with the government declaring mining an “engine for development.”

Riding at the crest of this wave, in the late 2000s Canadian mining multinational Cosigo Resources made clear to local communities in Yaigojé its intention to mine for gold at a site within the resguardo known as La Libertad or Yuisi.

Local indigenous leaders say Cosigo became known to them when company representatives visited their malocas (traditional riverside houses). The indigenous leaders allege that officials offered them money in return for assurance of support the company to mine in Yuisi. These offers were rejected.

At Yuisi, a wide stretch of the Apaporis river cascades over rocks, forming roaring rapids. To the people of Yaigojé it is a vital sacred site, inextricably tied to their story of origin, identity and ability to care for the territory and the planet as a whole. Elders say “Yuisi is the crib of our way of thinking, of life and power. Everything is born here in thought: nature, the crops, trees, fruits, everything that exists, exists before in thought.”

Local shaman describe the gold and other minerals that form the bedrock of their territory as ‘lenses’ that allow them to see into the Earth, divine or diagnose any problems and correct them through rituals, prayer and thought. If gold were to be removed from Yuisi, they would lose their ability to cure and manage their territory as they have done for millennia. This is because an integral part of the territory itself would be lost. The notion that territory stops at the soil “as deep as the manioc’s root” is alien.

With negotiation with Cosigo out of the question, the traditional authorities in Yaigojé called an urgent congress of the Asociación de Capitanes Indígenas del Yaigojé Apaporis (ACIYA), an indigenous organization formed of groups living along the Apaporis River, in the area of Yaigojé that lies in Amazonas State. Having discussed the dangers posed by Cosigo’s presence and plans, ACIYA agreed that they must seek help from outside sources to further protect their territory.

“The best way to shield the territory was to call upon the state. In other words: Western disease is cured by Western medicine. If all mining licenses are given by the state, it is necessary to call on the state to defend the territory,” says Gerardo Macuna, a representative of ACIYA.

Advised that achieving national park status would extend protection to the subsoil, ACIYA and its supporters formally requested that the Colombian Government create a national park over their resguardo and traditional territory.

The people’s effort to add a third layer of protection for their territory was successful. In October 2009, Yaigojé Apaporis became Colombia’s 55th national protected area, but celebrations were short lived. Just two days after the area was awarded national park status, Cosigo Resources was granted a mining title for the Yuisi area, catalysing an epic struggle between Colombia’s will to protect the Amazon, with the help of indigenous inhabitants, or exploit it at their expense by prioritizing mining.

DEEP IN THE AMAZON, A SMOKING GUN

Map of Yaigojé-Apaporis Resguardo / National Park (Fundacion Gaia Amazonas, 2014)

Despite having been granted a license, Yaigojé’s new status as a national park remained an obstacle to Cosigo. The national park status, and its accompanying legal protections for the subsoil, would need to be revoked before mining could begin.

Facing stiff opposition from both ACIYA and the Colombian National Parks authorities just as Cosigo appeared to be fighting an uphill battle, the company got what seemed an almost impossible stroke of luck. A few months after Yaigojé was declared a national park, members of indigenous organization ACITAVA from the region of Yaigojé lying in Vaupés State launched a legal challenge to Yaigojé’s status at the Colombian Constitutional Court. Led by a local settler named Benigno Perilla, the challengers said that they had not been fully or adequately consulted in the process of creating the national park and it therefore violated their right to Free Prior and Informed Consent.

With an apparently complex conflict unfolding between Yaigojé’s Indigenous Peoples and the area’s national park status–its ecological and social integrity held in the balance–a legal deadlock ensued. This situation persisted for three years, until January 2014, when in an unprecedented move, three judges from Colombia’s Constitutional Court made the decision to travel to the heart of the Colombian Amazon to hold a hearing and consult with communities first hand.

Jorge Iván Palacio, president of the court, explained the court’s decision to make the journey by stating that “there is no justice unless we know what they think in the communities.” The ensuing hearing thoroughly vindicated his observation.

Before 160 indigenous inhabitants from along the Apaporis River and the judges, Benigno Perilla publicly admitted that his and ACITAVA’s legal strategy was encouraged, organized and paid for by Cosigo Resources. In what would prove the critical turning point in the case, the indigenous members of ACITAVA who had supported the challenge made a public apology, said they had been misled and declared their support for the creation of the national park.

A NEW DAWN FOR INDIGENOUS-LED CONSERVATION

Although it has been more than another year coming, the Colombian Constitutional Court has ousted Cosigo and legitimized the declaration of Yaigojé Apaporis as a national park. The decision recognizes the authority of the area’s Indigenous Peoples and protects their fundamental rights to culture, identity and consultation.

The decision is regarded as a significantly positive precedent for future conflicts between mining operations, protected areas and their indigenous inhabitants, at a time when Colombia has declared mining to be in the national interest.

The judges found sufficient evidence of wrongdoing by Cosigo to ask Colombia’s Justice Minister to open an investigation into the company’s consultation processes and interactions with communities in the Yaigojé area. Recently published revisions to Colombia’s projects of national interest have seen Cosigo’s project removed from the list. The company is said to be reviewing its legal options.

Confirming the compatibility of indigenous resguardos and national parks, the court has also opened up the possibility for others to follow Yaigojé’s example and enhance the protection of their territories from destructive or unwanted “development.”

Since Yaigojé was declared a national park, and in spite of the legal wrangle over its future, ACIYA and local indigenous youths have been pioneering a powerful new conservation paradigm that values indigenous knowledge and places it at the root of national park management.

ACIYA’s work to find a method of conservation that both works for them and allows for close collaboration with Colombia’s national park authorities is the subject of a recent film and won the group the prestigious UNDP Equator Prize in 2014. Their approach stands in stark contrast to technocratic, neo-colonialist conservation norms founded on a misplaced belief in pristine, unmanaged wilderness. These have been criticized by Indigenous Peoples and rights groups for excluding and forcibly displacing indigenous communities, fencing them out of their own lands and so obstructing their right to practice their cultures.

As part of their program, 27 young indigenous leaders from nine communities in Yaigojé have engaged in a deep process of cultural research. Advised by their elders, they have documented, mapped and recorded their peoples’ traditional practices for safeguarding and conserving the forest. In the words of one researcher, the aim has been to “transmit traditional knowledge to the younger generations and protect our ancestral territory.” So far, they have succeeded in doing both.

The research produced by ACIYA will now be used to define the management of the Yaigojé Apaporis National Park, further legitimizing local indigenous knowledge systems that have protected the life-support capacities of this rainforest region for generation after generation.

“Indigenous people are the natural allies of the rainforest and the whole environmental movement,” says former director of Gaia Amazonas Martin Von Hildebrand. “They have the traditional knowledge, they are organized. We just need to support them with what they need to run their own territories.”

Territories of Life: A Free Video Toolkit for Indigenous Peoples About Land and Rights

Territories of Life: A Free Video Toolkit for Indigenous Peoples About Land and Rights

By Intercontinental Cry

Territories of Life is a video toolkit with a purpose. It’s aim: to bring stories of resistance, resilience and hope to indigenous communities on the frontline of the global rush for land.

Produced by our friends at LifeMosaic, a non-profit based in Scotland, the Territories of Life toolkit consists of ten stories that were filmed in communities across Indonesia, Philippines, Guatemala, Ecuador, Colombia, Paraguay, Tanzania and Cameroon.

world_map_countries_English_slider

“The videos in the Territories of Life toolkit share inspirational stories of communities that are successfully organizing to defend their territories and their futures,” reads a press release from LifeMosaic. They include “The story of Maasai indigenous women in Tanzania who used awareness raising, protests and political pressure to lead a movement in defense of their territory; and the Misak indigenous people in Colombia who have developed and are carrying out their Plan de Vida, a long‐term vision for self-determined development.”

The toolkit also includes a few primers on land rights, land grabs, and common tactics that companies use to convince communities to accept and support their projects.

LifeMosaic goes on to say that, “The video toolkit and accompanying facilitators’ guide are intended to support indigenous peoples as they exercise their right to free, prior and informed consent; advocate for their rights; participate more actively in local spatial planning; and draw up village action plans for self‐determined development and for protecting their territories, forests and resources.”

It’s more than mere lip service. LifeMosaic is actively working with hundreds of local partners to facilitate the free distribution of Territories of Life to indigenous communities and supporting organizations around the world.

To order a copy of the toolkit, visit www.lifemosaic.net. If other groups request a DVD, LifeMosaic recommends a donation of $11 (£10). The videos can also be downloaded online at their website.

 

Re-learning the Land: A Story of Red Crow College

Re-learning the Land: A Story of Red Crow College

By Intercontinental Cry

 

RE-LEARNING THE LAND is the story of a Blackfoot community in southern Alberta, Canada, and how they have re-taken control of their education system within Red Crow Community College. The film traces the decolonization of their learning and the development of an innovative program, Kainai Studies, within Red Crow College, the same site as a former Residential School. The Kainai Studies program is reclaiming and teaching to a new generation the Blackfoot knowledge system that sustained their community on their land for thousands of years.

The film raises a host of important questions related to the purpose of education and what it takes to create a deep ecological consciousness and connection with our local environment. By witnessing how students and faculty within Red Crow College are re-building relationships with the land around them, we see a greater sense of purpose, confidence and identity from amongst those participating and learning within the Kainai Studies program.

RE-LEARNING THE LAND explores how education can be used both to wipe out particular ways of knowing and lead to suffering, as in the case of residential schools, or else to promote healing and a transformation of individual and community through a reconnection to history and place. Based on a very different cosmology, set of values and ways of teaching, RE-LEARNING THE LAND is a subtle exploration of how an indigenous way of learning can create transformational relationships with the land, its beings, the community and one’s own self.

RE-LEARNING THE LAND

  • Produced by: Enlivened Learning
  • Directed, filmed and edited by: Udi Mandel, Kelly Teamey
  • Additional Footage by: Narcisse Blood, Ryan Heavy Head
  • Artwork by: Ali Hodgson, Manuela Pereira
  • Official Website: films.enlivenedlearning.com

Why did the Australian aborigines never adopt agriculture?

by Kim Hill, Deep Green Resistance Australia

Why did the Australian aborigines never develop agriculture?

This question was posed in the process of designing an indigenous food garden, and I could hear the underlying assumptions of the enquirer in his tone. Our culture teaches that agriculture is a more desirable way to live than hunting and gathering, and agriculturalist is more intelligent and more highly evolved than a hunter gatherer.

These assumptions can only be made by someone indoctrinated by civilization. It’s a limited way to look at the world.

I was annoyed by question, and judged the person asking it as ignorant of history and other cultures, and unimaginative. Since many would fit this label, I figured I’m better off answering the question.

This only takes some basic logic and imagination, I have no background in anthropology or whatever it is that would qualify someone to claim authority on this subject. You could probably formulate an explanation by asking yourself: How and why would anyone develop agriculture?

First consider the practicalities of a transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture.

What plants would be domesticated? What animals? What tools would they use? How would they irrigate?

Why would anyone bother domesticating anything that is plentiful in the wild?

To domesticate a plant takes many generations (plant generations, and human generations) of selecting the strongest specimens, propagating them in one place, caring for them, protecting them from animals and people, from the rain and wind and sun, keeping the seeds safe. This would be incredibly difficult to do, it would take a lot of dedication, not just from one person but a whole tribe for generations. If your lifestyle is nomadic, because food is available in different places in different seasons, there is no reason to make the effort to domesticate a plant.

Agriculture is high-risk. There are a lot of things that could destroy a whole crop, and your whole food supply for the year, as well as your seed stock for the next. A storm, flood, fire, plague of insects, browsing mammals, neighbouring tribes, lack of rain, disease, and no doubt many other factors. A huge amount of work is invested in something that is likely to fail, which would then cause a whole community to starve, if there isn’t a back-up of plentiful food in the wild.

Agriculture is insecure. People in agricultural societies live in fear of crop failure, as this is their only source of food. The crops must be defended. The tools, food storage, water supply and houses must also be defended, and maintained. Defended from people, animals, and insects. Growing and storing all your food in one place would attract all of these. Defence requires weapons, and work.

Agriculture requires settlement. The tribe must stay in one place. They cannot leave, even briefly, as there is constant maintenance and defending to do. Settlements then need their own infrastructure: toilets, water supply, houses, trading routes as not all the food needs can be met from within the settlement. Diseases spread in settled areas.

Aboriginal people travel often, and for long periods of time. Agriculture is not compatible with this way of life.

Agriculture is a lot of work. The farmers must check on the crop regularly, destroy diseased plants, remove weeds, irrigate, replant, harvest, save seeds, and store the crop. Crops generally are harvested for only a few weeks or months in the year, and if they are a staple, must be stored safely and be accessible for the rest of the year.

Domesticated animals require fencing, or tethering, or taming. They would be selectively bred for docility, which is a weakness not a strength, so a domesticated animal would be less healthy than a wild animal.

The people too become domesticated and lose strength with the introduction of agriculture. The wild intelligence needed to hunt and gather would be lost, as would the relationships with the land and other beings.

Agriculture requires a belief in personal property, boundaries, and land ownership. Australian aborigines knew that the land owned the people, not the other way around, so would never have treated the land in this way.

Agriculture needs a social hierarchy, where some people must work for others, who have more power by having more wealth. The landowner would have the power to supply or withhold food. Living as tribal groups, aborigines probably wouldn’t have desired this social structure.

Cultivated food has less nutrition than wild food. Agriculturalists limit their diet to plants and animals that can easily be domesticated, so lose the diversity of tastes and nutrients that make for an ideal human diet. Fenced or caged animals can only eat what is fed to them, rather than forage on a variety of foods, according to their nutritional needs. Domesticated plants only access the nutrients from the soil in the field, which becomes more depleted with every season’s crop. Irrigation causes plants to not send out long roots to find water, so domesticated plants are weaker than wild plants.

Agriculture suggests a belief that the world is not good enough as it is, and humans need to change it. A land populated with gods, spirits or ancestors may not want to be damaged, dug, ploughed and irrigated.

Another thought is that agriculture may develop from a belief in scarcity – that there is not enough food and it is a resource that needs to be secured. Indigenous belief systems value food plants and animals as kin to be in relationship with, rather than resources to exploit.

Agriculture isn’t an all-or-nothing thing. Indigenous tribes engage with the landscape in ways that encourage growth of food plants. People gather seeds of food plants and scatter them in places they are likely to grow. Streams are diverted to encourage plant growth. Early explorers witnessed aboriginal groups planting and irrigating wild rice. Tribes in North Queensland were in contact with Torres Strait Islanders who practiced gardening, but chose not to take this up on a large scale themselves.

A few paragraphs from Tim Low’s Wild Food Plants of Australia:

The evidence from the Torres Strait begs the question of why aborigines did not adopt agriculture. Why should they? The farming life can be one of dull routine, a monotonous grind of back-breaking labour as new fields are cleared, weeds pulled and earth upturned. The farmer’s diet is usually less varied, and not always reliable, and the risk of infectious disease is higher…It is not surprising that throughout the world many cultures spurned agriculture.

Explorer Major Mitchell wrote in 1848: ‘Such health and exemption from disease; such intensity of existence, in short, must be far beyond the enjoyments of civilized men, with all that art can do for them; and the proof of this is to be found in the failure of all attempts to persuade these free denizens of uncivilized earth to forsake it for tilled soil.’

After all this, I’m amazed that anyone ever developed agriculture. The question of why Australian aborigines never developed agriculture is easily answered and not as interesting as the question it brings up for me: why did twentieth century westerners never develop hunter-gatherer lifestyles?

 

From Stories of Creative Ecology January 5, 2013