February, 21 2019, 11:00pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Leonard Forsman, Suquamish Tribe, 360.340.0986
Francesca Hillery, Tulalip Tribes, 206.395.4048
Debra Lekanoff, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, 360.391.5296
Kurt Russo, Lummi Nation, 360.312.2292
Stephanie Tsosie, Earthjustice, 206.343.7340, ext. 1023
Northwest Tribes Respond to Canada's Continued Push for Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion
Canada’s Energy Board shows disregard for Tribal concerns in second decision to green-light pipeline
WASHINGTON
A Canadian federal agency today formally recommended approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion, a move strongly condemned by Coast Salish Tribes on both sides of the U.S.-Canada border.
In November 2018, representatives from U.S. Coast Salish Tribes joined Canadian First Nations in Victoria, British Columbia, to testify before Canada's National Energy Board as part of a review of the proposed pipeline expansion.
Despite testimony and legal arguments presented by First Nations and U.S. Tribes describing the significant harms the pipeline expansion project will cause for their communities, the Canadian federal government made a determination to push ahead with the project. The Trans Mountain expansion will triple oil tanker traffic through the Salish Sea -- imperiling endangered orcas, increasing navigation risks for fishermen, and increasing the risk of a major oil spill.
"The NEB found that the Trans Mountain Pipeline will harm Indigenous people and endangered orcas, but it still recommended the project," said Stephanie Tsosie, an Earthjustice attorney representing the U.S. Tribes before the Energy Board. "It has twisted the definition of public interest to sacrifice the Salish Sea, the people who rely on it, and even the air we breathe."
Quotes from U.S. Coast Salish Tribes
"We are in danger of losing our relatives the southern resident killer whales," said Lisa Wilson of the Lummi Nation. "We know the impact of vessel traffic, we know the impact of the noise, and we know what the impact would be if there is an oil spill - the major devastation that's going to wipe out all of the species in the Salish Sea."
"Salmon is one of the resources that has sustained our people since time immemorial," said Swinomish Senator Jeremy James Wilbur. "We've always relied on salmon, clams, halibut, shrimp, prawns, diving. Usual and accustomed fishing areas are places our tribes have fished for many, many generations. And to impact that would be a major disaster."
"We are very concerned about the Trans Mountain Pipeline's impact on the orcas, and also on the rest of the food chain in the Salish Sea," noted Chairman Leonard Forsman of the Suquamish Tribe. "Everything interrelates. The orca's just an alarm bell -- there are other places where we have a lot of other problems with salmon habitat, shellfish habitat, water quality and all those things that impact the food web. Also, the promotion of fossil fuel use and combustion will contribute more to climate change, which is bringing warming waters and raising sea levels."
"You don't poison where you get your food. You just don't do that," said Noel Purser, of the Suquamish Tribe. "I understand in British Columbia, this pipeline will provide a way of having an income. But is it worth the potential of a spill, that risk? Is it really worth that? Because that will impact everybody, not just here in British Columbia. It will impact us in Suquamish; it will impact our relatives in Alaska."
"As Coast Salish people, we do not recognize the imaginary line that divides us from First Nation relatives," said Chairwoman Marie Zackuse, from the Tulalip Tribes. "The Salish Sea does not recognize this border. Our relatives, the salmon and the killer whales do not recognize this border. Pollution, industrial waste, and climate change do not recognize this border. Impacts to these species are felt throughout the Salish Sea on both sides of the border, and they are cumulative effects. This Trans Mountain expansion may just be the project that brings us past the point of no return."
The National Energy Board decision disregarded these and other comments shared during the November 2018 oral testimony. For media interviews, reporters should reach out to Tribal contacts listed above.
Background
In 2013, four Northwest U.S. Tribes -- the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, Tulalip Tribes, Suquamish Tribe, and Lummi Nation -- intervened in Canadian permit proceedings over the new tar sands pipeline, joining scores of Canadian First Nations and conservationists, the cities of Vancouver and Burnaby, and the Province of British Columbia in opposition to the pipeline. The U.S. Tribes' position before Canada's National Energy Board represented a critical call to safeguard the Salish Sea from increased oil tanker traffic and greater risk of oil spills.
The Trans Mountain Pipeline Project calls for tripling the amount of oil shipped from tar sands fields in Alberta to approximately 890,000 barrels per day to the British Columbia coast. The pipeline would cause an almost seven-fold increase in oil tankers moving through the shared waters of the Salish Sea, paving way for an increase in pollution, noise, groundings, accidents, and oil spills.
The proposed tar sands pipeline expansion is one of several projects that could dramatically increase the passage of tankers and bulk carriers through the Salish Sea on both sides of the U.S.-Canada border.
Read the press release online.
Reporter Resources
- Take a look into the fight to protect the Salish Sea.
- View our case page for additional files.
- Photos of U.S. Coast Salish Tribal testimony before Canadian National Energy Board. Credit: Alex Harris for Earthjustice.
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
Green, Indigenous Groups Warns Arctic Still at Grave Drilling Risk When Trump Returns
"Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is all risk with no reward," said one advocate.
Dec 09, 2024
Wildlife protection groups and Indigenous leaders in Alaska said Monday that they would push to discourage bidding in an oil and gas lease sale just announced by the U.S. Interior Department for part of the Arctc National Wildlife Refuge.
Under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which opened the refuge for oil and gas drilling, the Biden administration announced the second of two lease sales, set to be held on January 9, 2025.
The first Trump administration held the initial lease sale in 2021, but with banks and insurance companies increasingly reticent to back drilling projects in the area, it generated little interest and led to less than 1% of the projected sale revenue.
Releasing its final record of decision, the Interior Department said Monday that 400,000 acres of wilderness in the refuge's 1.6-million-acre northwest Coastal Plain would be put up for bidding at a minimum price of $30 per acre—despite vocal opposition from the Gwich'in Nation and the Iñupiat Alaska Natives.
The land supports local communities as well as porcupine caribou herds and polar bears.
"Our way of life, our food security, and our spiritual well-being is directly tied to the health of the caribou and the health of this irreplaceable landscape," Kristen Moreland, executive director of Gwich'in Steering Committee, toldBloomberg News. "Every oil company stayed away from the first lease sale, and we expect them to do the same during the second."
The record of decision concludes the Bureau of Land Management's process for developing a supplemental environmental impact statement, which was required after President-elect Donald Trump's first administration completed an analysis with "fundamental flaws and legal errors," as the Sierra Club said Monday.
Selling the drilling rights just before Trump takes office could complicate the GOP's plans to hold a more expansive sale later on, but Dan Ritzman, director of Sierra Club's Conservation Campaign, emphasized that regardless of who is in office when the sale takes place, "oil and gas development in the Arctic Refuge is a direct threat to some of the last untouched landscapes on Alaska's North Slope and to the caribou herds that the Gwich'in people rely on."
"The 2017 tax act, forced through Congress by Donald Trump and his Big Oil CEO allies, opened up the Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing," said Ritzman. "Letting him oversee a lease sale over these pristine lands would be beyond irresponsible. In the meantime, President [Joe] Biden should listen to the Gwich'in and do all that he can to preserve these lands and waters. His legacy is on the line."
Erik Grafe, an attorney at environmental law firm Earthjustice, said the group is "committed to going to court as often as necessary to defend the Arctic Refuge from oil drilling and will work toward a more sustainable future that does not depend on ever-expanding oil extraction."
"Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is all risk with no reward," said Grafe. "Oil drilling would destroy this beautiful land, held sacred by Gwich'in people, and would further destabilize the global climate, but it offers zero benefit to taxpayers or consumers."
Defenders of Wildlife called on Congress to repeal the 2017 tax law's mandate for leasing sales in the "iconic American landscape" of the Arctic Refuge.
"Turning the coastal plain into an oilfield will obliterate the pristine wilderness of the Arctic Refuge," said Nicole Whittington-Evans, Alaska senior program director for the group, "directly threatening the future of the Porcupine caribou herd and the physical, cultural, and spiritual existence of the Gwich'in people who depend on them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
To Thwart Trump Killing Spree, Biden Urged to Commute Death Penalty Cases
The former president, warned a broad rights coalition, "executed more people than the previous ten administrations combined."
Dec 09, 2024
A large and diverse coalition of broad coalition of rights organizations on Monday sent a letter to U.S. President Biden Monday, urging him to commute the sentences of all 40 individuals who are on federal death row.
The letter adds to a chorus of voices—including prosecutors and law enforcement officials—advocating for Biden to use his clemency powers to issue such commutations before he departs office.
The calls for Biden to issue pardons and commutations have only grown since the president issued a pardon for his son, clearing Hunter Biden of wrongdoing in any federal crimes he committed or may have committed in the last 11 years.
The joint letter to Biden was backed by over 130 organizations, including the ACLU, Brennan Center for Justice, and The Sentencing Project, commends his administration's "actions to repudiate capital punishment, including imposing a moratorium on executions for those sentenced to death, and for publicly calling for an end to the use of the death penalty during your 2020 campaign. In the face of a second Trump administration, more is necessary."
"President Trump executed more people than the previous ten administrations combined. Of those he executed, over half were people of color: six Black men and one Native American. The only irreversible action you can take to prevent President-elect Trump from renewing his execution spree, as he has vowed to do, is commuting the death sentences of those on federal death row now," the letter states.
The letter cites additional reasons that Biden ought to commute the sentences, including that the death penalty "has been rooted in slavery, lynchings, and white vigilantism."
A separate letter to Biden—sent in November by group of attorneys general, law enforcement officials, and others—argues that "condemning people to death by the state does not advance public safety. The death penalty fails as an effective deterrent and does not reduce crime. As an outdated, error-riddled, and racially-biased practice, its continued use—and the potential for its abuse—erodes public trust in the criminal legal system and undermines the legitimacy of the entire criminal legal system."
Matt Bruenig, president of the People's Policy Project think tank, directly tied Biden's inaction on this issue to the pardon he issued for his son in a blog post last week, writing that "if Biden does not act, there is little doubt that Trump will aggressively schedule executions in his next term. Their blood will primarily be on Trump's hands, but, if Biden does not act to prevent it, his hands will be bloody too."
The call for commutations for death row prisoners aligns with a wider push for the President to use his clemency powers before he leaves office.
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), who has been particularly vocal on this issue, said Sunday on social media that President Biden "must use his clemency power to change lives for the better. And we have some ideas on who he can target: Folks in custody with unjustified sentencing disparities, the elderly and chronically ill, people on death row, women punished for crimes of their abusers, and more."
Pressley was one of over 60 members of Congress who sent a letter to Biden last month, encouraging Biden to intervene to help these groups.
Several lawmakers have specific pardons or commutations in mind, according to Axios. For example, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has urged Biden to pardon Julian Assange of WikiLeaks, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has called for a pardon of Indigenous activist Leonard Peltier, per Axios.
So far, Biden has granted far fewer clemency petitions (161 total) than former President Barrack Obama, according to the Department of Justice's Office of the Pardon Attorney, and a few dozen less than President-elect Trump did during his entire first presidency. However, in 2022, Biden did grant full and unconditional pardons to all U.S. citizens convicted of simple federal marijuana possession—a move that was cheered by advocates.
According to The New York Times, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said last week that Biden was expected to make more clemency announcements "at the end of his term."
"He's thinking through that process very thoroughly," she said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
62% of Americans Agree US Government Should Ensure Everyone Has Health Coverage
The new poll shows the highest level of support in a decade for the government ensuring all Americans have healthcare.
Dec 09, 2024
Public sentiment regarding the nation's for-profit healthcare system—an outlier among wealthy nations—has dominated the national news in recent days following last week's killing of an insurance executive in New York.
On Monday, just hours before a suspect in the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was arrested by police, a new Gallup poll found a 62% majority in the U.S. believe the government should ensure all Americans have healthcare coverage—the highest percentage in more than a decade.
Just 42% of people in 2013 believed it was the government's responsibility to make sure everyone in the country had health coverage—a low since the beginning of this century.
The poll found that a majority of Republicans still believe ensuring health coverage is not the government's job, but the majority has shrunk since 2020.
That year, only 22% of Republican voters believed the government should ensure everyone in the country has healthcare, but that number has now grown to 32%.
The percentage of Independents who think the issue is in the government's purview has also gone up by six points since 2020, and Democratic support remains high, currently at 90%.
Americans have vented their frustrations about the current for-profit health insurance system in recent days as police searched for a suspect in the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, before arresting Luigi Mangione in Pennsylvania on Monday. Mangione, according to claims by police, was found with a manifesto that railed against the insurance industry.
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield last week also faced public outcry and was forced to reverse a decision to slash coverage for anesthesia care, with U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) saying the move indicated that "the current system is broken."
"Democrats will regain trust by standing up to special interest insurance companies and fighting for Medicare for All," he said.
President-elect Donald Trump and other Republicans, who are set to control both chambers of Congress starting in January, have indicated that they would go in the opposite direction, working to weaken the popular, government-run Medicare program by promoting Medicare Advantage, which is administered by for-profit companies like United and is already used by half of Medicare beneficiaries.
But one of Trump's top allies, billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, waded into the debate last week about the current healthcare system, questioning why the U.S. pays far more in administrative healthcare costs than other wealthy countries and suggesting Americans don't "get their money's worth."
Another poll released last Friday found Americans' positive opinion of the nation's healthcare quality has declined to its lowest point since 2001, with most agreeing the U.S. system dominated by private insurers has "major problems."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular