User:Evan.j.miranda/Indigenous Opposition to the Northern Gateway Pipelines

First Nations and other indigenous groups in both British Columbia and Alberta, Canada have employed a bevy of tactics to prevent the approval of the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines (NGP). These individuals fear that the inevitable leakage from the pipeline as it crosses over 1,000 streams and rives will threaten their very livelihood: it will affect their work, homes, food and overall well-being. Any spills will also be detrimental to approximately 56,000 existing jobs in British Columbian fisheries and tourism. This opposition has gained attention from various B.C. environmental groups who share the same fears, including the Dogwood Initiative, ForestEthics (with offices in B.C. and the U.S.), West Coast Environmental Law, the Raincoast Conservation Foundation, the Skeena-Wild Conservation Trust and the T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation, and "several municipalities in northern B.C. have voted to oppose the project, Terrace, Prince Rupert and Smithers." Similarly, a poll conducted in 2010 found that 50% of Canadians believed the risks involved with tar sands projects outweighed the benefits, yet expansion continues. According to Robyn Allan, an economist and prominent businesswoman who was once named one of Canada’s top 200 CEOs, the approval of the NGP “will reduce Canada's GDP, increase unemployment and put downward pressure on personal incomes because it will impose a two-to-three-dollar per-barrel increase in the price of oil - something she describes as a "price shock" that the Canadian economy can ill afford at this time. Even still, there is no legal framework within the Canadian Constitution that recognizes the principles of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), giving First Nations the right to say “No” to proposed developments. This opposition seems promising, though, as provinces such as B.C. continue to reject current proposals for the pipeline.

First Nations Involved

 * Mikisew Cree First Nation
 * Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation
 * Fort McMurray First Nation
 * Fort McKay Cree Nation
 * Chipewyan Prairie First Nation
 * Beaver Lake Cree First Nation
 * Wet’suwet’en First Nation
 * Gitga’ata First Nation
 * Skin Tyee First Nation
 * Cheslatta Carrier Nation
 * Hagwilget Village First Nation
 * Gitxaala Nation
 * Kwikwetlem First Nation
 * Tsilhqot'in
 * Heiltsuk Nation
 * Haisla Nation
 * Nadleh Whut'en First Nation
 * Nak'azdli Band
 * Saik'uz First Nation
 * Takla Lake First Nation
 * Tl'azt'en Nation
 * Kitasoo/Xaixais First Nation

Other Groups

 * Local Métis people (Canada)
 * Gitxsan (two groups)
 * Haida people

Environmental Implications
Due to the changing landscapes and weather patterns characteristic of Alberta and B.C., spills are inevitable, causing damages to ecosystems and properties as well as deaths. Since the pipeline will travel through less populous areas, remote operations will delay the initial detection of spills and prolong any cleanup efforts; this will result in proportionately greater environmental damage. This project will fragment wildlife habitats and impact fragile salmon fisheries such as the salmon abundant Fraser and Skeena watersheds. Similarly, indigenous groups will lose their primary means of subsistence as trout, ducks, geese, elk, bears, beavers and other animals come into contact with these contaminated waters. With increased pollution, boreal forest and ecosystem loss and habitat fragmentation, the cultural survival of many First Nation peoples living within the tar sands sacrifice zone is threatened. These people are simply too afraid to interact with their environment any longer. Elsie Fabian, an elder in a native community along the Athabasca River, explained that, “the river used to be blue. Now it’s brown. Nobody can fish or drink from it. The air is bad. This has all happened so fast.” A health study commissioned by the Nunee Health Board Society of Fort Chipewyan has demonstrated evidence that the governments of Alberta and Canada have been ignoring signs of toxic contamination on downstream indigenous communities.

Preventative Measures
Affected First Nations in Canada have filed a number of lawsuits to challenge  tar sands developments, building a network of allies who use education, civil disobedience, direct actions, and  social networking to end tar sands exploitation. Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs, exclaimed that there is “absolutely no way will we allow or tolerate the pipeline proposal to proceed. We will fight this through the joint review panel, in the courts, and we will oppose this proposal on the land itself." He confirmed that civil disobedience and blockades would follow if the federal government allows the development to continue. The Yinka Dene Alliance, a coalition of six First Nations, has also sworn they will not let the oil pipeline be built, claiming their territory encompasses about 25% of the proposed 1,177-kilometre route from Alberta to Kitimat. Similarly, over 130 First Nations have signed the Save the Fraser Declaration banning tar sands from being transported through their territories.

2008
The Beaver Lake Cree First Nation filed suit against the Government of Alberta due to 17,000 infringements of their treaty rights related to tar sands specifically. Similarly, the Prairie Chipewyan First Nation filed suit against the Government of Alberta for not properly consulting the community about a tar sands project located on their territory. On November 28th, 2008 the First Nations Summit “passed a resolution calling on the federal government to establish an independent First Nations Review Process for Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipeline.”

2009
Respecting Aboriginal Values and Environmental Needs (RAVEN) is started, operating out of British Columbia. This non-profit organization provides financial assistance to indigenous groups in Canada and has most notably funded the Beaver Lake Cree's impending Federal trial. "Funding is given to groups that want to work lawfully with industrial developers to ensure that any new developments on Indigenous land are reconciled with traditional ways of life and other sustainable practices."

2010
In March, nine Coastal First Nations declared a ban on tanker traffic, promising to do whatever is necessary to stop the Enbridge pipeline. In August, the indigenous hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en First Nation issued a final notice of trespassing to Enbridge. In December, representatives of 61 First Nations marched through downtown Vancouver to Enbridge Incorporated’s headquarters to deliver a signed declaration stating their opposition. Calling themselves the Save the Fraser Gathering of Nations, the indigenous groups took out a full-page ad in the Globe and Mail newspaper, declaring they will not allow Enbridge to transport tar sands oil across their lands and watersheds.

2011
In February, the Yinka Dene Alliance rejected an offer from Enbridge for ‘revenue sharing’ benefits representing more than $1.5-billion in cash, jobs, business opportunities during the next 30 years, as well as a 10% stake in the project stating that water, land and cultural heritage were more important than short-term financial gain. Chief Adam and the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation held a meeting with the Government of Alberta in January regarding the Lower Athabascan Region Plan. "They argued that the plan was unfair and said their people were worried that their way of life was dying."

2014
The Gitga'ata First Nation and the Coastal First Nations say B.C. violated their constitutional rights by failing to consult with them on a proposed pipeline when it signed an agreement to partner with the National Energy Board. They filed a petition in B.C. Supreme Court, seeking to have the 2010 deal declared invalid. Including said petition, First Nations and environmentalist groups have filed 10 applications in Federal Court against the project. Similarly, the Gitxaala Nation from British Columbia's North Coast filed a court action in July that has since been approved by the Federal Court of Appeals. The case was filed to challenge the Joint Review Panel report that the government used to justify its approval of the project. The Gitxaala Nation claims Canada "failed to provide reasonable accommodation and consultation over aboriginal rights and title." In June, the "Supreme Court of Canada recognized the Tsilhqot'in First Nation's aboriginal title over a wide area to the south and west of B.C.'s Williams Lake, which it considers its traditional territory."