What’s Next for the Dakota Access Pipeline?
Members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and their supporters opposed to the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). Photo courtesy of Robyn Beck/Getty Images.

What’s Next for the Dakota Access Pipeline?

On Tuesday, Jan. 24, President Donald Trump signed executive orders to revive the Dakota Access and Keystone XL oil pipelines.

Construction on the 1,170 mile Dakota Access Pipeline has been on standstill since last year when former President Barack Obama instructed the Army corps to explore other possible route options.

The Standing Rock Sioux tribe and other Native American groups have been protesting the line which would both endanger their water supplies and disturb burial and archaeological sites.

An article by the Washington Post states that the Standing Rock Sioux tribe plans to fight the pipeline easement in court if necessary.

The tribe has already asked a court to compel Energy Transfer Partners to make oil spill and risk assessment records public.

In a statement, Tom Goldsmith, executive director of the Indigenous Environmental Network said, “Expect mass resistance far beyond what Trump has seen so far.”

Keith Benes, a former State Department lawyer who helped oversee pipeline permitting decisions under the Obama administration, said in an interview that opponents of the pipeline could make a strong argument because the Army’s only justification for terminating its environmental review was the President’s Jan. 24 decision.

Many American Indians and members of the tribe believe that the land where the current pipeline is set to be installed belongs to them under treaties signed with the federal government in the 1800s.

Opposition to the pipeline has come not only from members of the Sioux tribe but environmentalists who argue that limiting pipeline construction will restrict the extent to which fossil fuels can be burned.

Jesse Montoure, senior wildlife ecology major, said, “I think the biggest problem I have with this is that it sets a precedent at least for the next four years that being environmentally conscious isn’t important.”

Chris Yahnke, professor of biology, acknowledged that running a pipeline through a delicate ecosystem is a big risk. The stronger argument against pipelines comes from the tribe that lives there because it is their land and their burial grounds that will be affected if the line were to spill.

Those in favor of the pipeline argue that the pipeline is the most effective means of transporting crude oil on the Great Planes, while also strengthening the economy and creating jobs.

Whether opposed or in favor of the pipeline, the action taken sends a strong message to the public about the Trump administration.
Olivia De Valk

Reporter

odeva199@uwsp.edu

About pointer

Avatar

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*