There’s always another snag in effort to complete pipeline

SOON after assuming the presidency last month, Donald Trump signed an executive order to complete construction of the Dakota Access pipeline in North Dakota. That good news was followed in short order by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers granting an easement allowing the project to move forward.

But now that action is being challenged in court by groups opposed to the pipeline’s construction. This is, unfortunately, par for the course with so many fossil fuel-related infrastructure projects in this country.

In their federal court filing Tuesday, opponents of Dakota Access asked the court to issue a partial summary judgment that says the Corps of Engineers violated the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act when it issued the final permit. A day earlier, the Standing Rock Sioux and Cheyenne River Sioux lost their bid for a temporary restraining order.

The tribes have led the fight against construction, citing concerns about the impact on tribal lands as well as concerns about potentially damaging the water in the area. The easement granted by the Corps will allow the pipeline to be completed by tunneling under a reservoir that forms part of the Missouri River.

This flap appears to now have the attention of Pope Francis. Although he didn’t cite the Dakota Access case by name, Francis said Wednesday that a key issue facing indigenous peoples is how to reconcile the right to economic development with protection of their land and cultures.

“In this regard, the right to prior and informed consent should always prevail,” he said. The pope said governments must recognize “that indigenous communities are a part of the population to be appreciated and consulted, and whose full participation should be promoted at the local and national level.”

These remarks will buoy Dakota Access opponents. Yet what’s generally been lost in this dispute is that almost all of the pipeline’s route is on private land. And that Energy Transfer Partners, the company building the 1,170-mile pipeline, modified the route 140 times in North Dakota alone to try to avoid potentially sensitive cultural areas. And that the pipeline’s route under the reservoir runs adjacent to a gas pipeline that’s been in place since 1982, thus lessening the chances that any tribal features will be impacted.

And, most importantly, that the tribes were given plenty of notice about plans for the pipeline. As The Wall Street Journal noted in an editorial in September, the Corps of Engineers “bent over backward to consult the Standing Rock Sioux, only to be ignored or rejected. The tribe ignored agency letters requesting comment and belatedly canceled meetings.”

In ruling that construction should proceed, a federal judge said in September the Corps had met its legal obligations and the tribe was unlikely to succeed with its lawsuit. That was five months ago. Obama administration officials then worked to gum up the process, insisting an environmental study be done before pipe could be laid. Trump’s executive action made those moves moot. Yet the fight drags on.

Ideally, the rights of protesters and developers would receive equal protection. But that hasn’t been the case so far.