DNR seeks pipeline impact comments
Enbridge changing route to go around reservation
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources is asking for feedback on the environmental impact of an oil pipeline owned by a Canadian company through the northernmost part of the state.
The potential impact of the proposed Enbridge Energy pipeline reroute could affect bodies of water, forests and animals, the DNR says in a recent environmental impact report.
Enbridge Energy is rerouting Line 5 at the request of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. About 12 miles of the active pipeline pass through the Bad River reservation, but easements for the line have begun to expire. The tribe filed a lawsuit in 2019 to have the pipeline removed.
The company has proposed a new 41.2-mile section that would go around the reservation. Construction for the new line would be in Ashland and Iron counties, although the pipeline also crosses Douglas and Bayfield counties as well.
As the lawsuit moves forward, there has been constant pushback against the proposed new route. Residents and organizations fear leaks and spills, and they want the DNR to deny the company permission to reroute its line.
The 645-mile-long pipeline transports 545,000 barrels a day of light crude oil, light synthetic crude oil and natural gas liquids from eastern Canada through Wisconsin and Michigan and into western Canada. The products Line 5 carries are used to make transportation fuels, as well as fuel used to heat homes and businesses.
The pipe is 30 inches in diameter and has been in operation since 1953.
The reroute of the line is expected to cost about $450 million, according to DNR documents.
The long-debated Enbridge line has reached a critical point, with the DNR completing the analysis of the potential environmental impact, which regulators will consider as they decide whether to issue permits.
The DNR report lays out the potential effects from the proposed reroute, including impact to water bodies, forest land and the environmental justice implications.
Here’s a look at some of the major consequences from the project, and what opponents have to say.
Impacts water bodies, wetlands across the length of the reroute
The DNR review, released last month, says the project would affect 135 acres of wetlands, though only a small portion of wetlands would be
permanently filled. The project would also affect more than 180 waterways, including the Bad River, Marengo River and White River. No lakes are along the route of the proposed line.
Ashland Mayor Debra Lewis pointed to the efforts by the Bad River Band to remove the pipeline from the watershed, which was supported in a resolution of the City Council in early 2020.
“The Resolution cites as reasons for this position the history of leaks and spills of Enbridge Line 5 during its operational lifetime and the interdependency of the economies and communities of the City of Ashland and Bad River that would bear the costs of a pipeline failure into the watershed,” Lewis said.
“The Bad River ends in the Kakogon-Bad River Sloughs which are some of the most extensive and pristine coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes, supporting rare plants and animals, migratory birds, fish spawning habitat, and manoomin (wild rice) beds. An oil spill in the Bad River watershed could irreparably damage natural and cultural resources of our region.”
The risk of spills doesn’t improve with new pipeline
The environmental review also outlined the risk of future spills or leaks along the pipeline route, with data showing that spills will continue to occur on an annual basis, but safety protocols and operational standards for pipelines have reduced the frequency. The review said that spills could affect surface waters, impairing them for several weeks to months, depending on the severity.
The Brothertown Indian Nation, located along the shores of Lake Winnebago in Fond du Lac, said the pipeline will endanger water resources, which is an essential element to life.
“There have been over 30 documented spills on Line 5. This evidences that it is not if, rather when, more spills will occur. Every spill will expeditiously reach our waterways and wetlands, causing extensive damage to Land, Plans, Animals, and Humans,” vice chair Jessica L. Ryan said in a 2020 letter. “Even after cleanup, vital cultural, food, medicinal, environmental, ecological, and economic resources will continue to suffer for generations.”
Environmental organizations have also weighed in on the spill risk.
“Pipeline construction in the Bad River watershed could cause significant environmental harm that must be prevented,” Midwest Environmental Advocates Staff Attorney Rob Lee said in a release. “This project would also facilitate the continued operation of the entire pipeline, which is nearly 70 years old and has already spilled at least a million gallons of oil.”
Because the line would not be larger in circumference than it currently is, and therefore won’t be transporting a greater amount of oil, the DNR review said that the reroute won’t result in increased greenhouse emissions.
Construction is likely to generate additional greenhouse gases, though, even though the process won’t take long.
“The incremental release of greenhouse gasses from the construction and maintenance of the route would not result in measurable direct, indirect longterm or cumulative impacts on the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases,” the report said.
Impact to plants and animals won’t be limited
A number of endangered and threatened species could potentially be affected by the reroute, including some species of bumblebees, wood turtles, several species of birds, several species of bugs and some rare plants. The DNR said Enbridge will work to avoid certain seasons to protect endangered species or develop other plans with the agency.
General wildlife will also be affected by the project as well, the report said. Construction noise and human activity will cause a displacement of wildlife, altering the habits of animals until they can reestablish at the end of the project. Some construction activities, such as clearing or grading, could also injure or kill smaller animals, such as amphibians, reptiles and small mammals, or damage wildlife burrows, dens and nests.
The pipeline could also become a temporary barrier to wildlife movements during construction, and the DNR recommended taking steps to ensure small animals can get out of trenches dug for the pipeline to prevent them from becoming stranded.
In addition to animals living in the forests, fish could also be at risk from the pipeline. The DNR said in the report that trout populations are likely to be affected by construction, due to habitat loss and alteration, barriers to movement and entrapment in construction water intakes.
Impact to forests along the route
The pipeline would also greatly affect forests in the area of the reroute, according to DNR documents. A large portion of the affected forest would be permitted to regrow after construction, but the 50-foot right-ofway along the pipeline would be kept clear.
Though the impact to most of the forest area would be temporary, the report notes there will be long-term impact to the forestland ecosystem, due to the length of time it will take for community to mature to preconstruction conditions.
Though some of the forest loss will eventually regrow, the DNR said in the report the loss of forest to the pipeline will further exacerbate a loss of native woodlands due to agricultural use, levee construction and urban development.
Environmental justice implications
The report also notes that the pipeline could cause environmental justice issues for native nations and low-income residents in the area, which range from 11% to 28% of the population across the areas impacted by the population.
“Loss of access and/or degradation of natural resources would have the potential to impact Native American and low-income populations in the vicinity of the spill. These populations may depend on subsistence fishing and hunting or may have cultural practices associated with fishing, hunting and gathering,” the report said.
“While recreational anglers and hunters would be able to shift to unaffected locations in the event of a spill, low-income populations may have limited access to transportation to reach unpolluted areas.”
In addition to subsistence fishing, wild rice beds would be affected by a spill within the watershed, and those beds are an important tribal resource, both as a source of food and income through sales.
The document also included information about how influxes of oil workers have correlated with growing numbers of missing and murdered Indigenous women in areas where other pipeline work has been done, namely the Bakken oil fields of North Dakota and Montana and 2021 arrests of four contractors working on Enbridge’s Line 3 in Minnesota for sextrafficking.
“Enbridge indicates that they would employ approximately 700 workers for the proposed project and that many of these would be hired from the local area. Notwithstanding, Enbridge plans to establish a Human Trafficking Awareness and Prevention Program for the proposed project, similar to the program developed for the Enbridge Line 3 replacement project in Minnesota,” the report said. “That program requires all Enbridge employees and contractors working on Line 3 to complete awareness training on how to identify and report suspected trafficking.”
The DNR will accept written comments on the pipeline reroute until March 4, with a virtual public hearing on Feb. 2, where members of the public can register to share their thoughts and concerns. A time has not yet been set for that hearing.
Written comments can be sent to DNROEEACOMMENTS@wi.gov.