 |
Location of Sioux Tribes
prior to 1770 (dark green) |
FAQ on the Dakota Access Pipeline Protests and the PC(USA)
What is the history
of the land?
The Standing Rock Sioux Reservation
was originally established as part of the Great Sioux Reservation. Article
2 of the Treaty of Fort
Laramie of April 29, 1868 described the boundaries of the
Great Sioux Reservation, as commencing on the 46th parallel of north latitude
to the east bank of Missouri River, south along the east bank to the Nebraska
line, then west to the 104th parallel of west longitude. (15 stat. 635).
The
Great Sioux Reservation comprised all of present-day South Dakota west of the
Missouri River, including the sacred Black Hills and the Missouri River. Under
article 11 of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, the Great Sioux Nation retained
off-reservation hunting rights to a much larger area, south to the Republican
and Platte Rivers, and east to the Big Horn Mountains. Under article 12,
no cession of land would be valid unless approved by three-fourths of the adult
males. Nevertheless, the Congress unilaterally passed the Act of February 28,
1877 (19 stat. 254), removing the Sacred Black Hills from the Great Sioux
Reservation. The United States never obtained the consent of three-fourths
of the Sioux, as required in the Treaty of Ft. Laramie. The U.S. Supreme
Court concluded that "A more ripe and rank case of dishonorable dealings
will never, in all probability, be found in our history." United
States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371, 388 (1980).
 |
Lands Opened to development and
sale by the Dawes Act of 1889 |
The Standing Rock Sioux Reservation
was greatly reduced through the Act of March 2, 1889, also known as the Dawes
Act and the Allotment Act. This opened up the reservations throughout the
United States to settlement by non-Indian entities, thus creating
checker-boarded land ownership within the Standing Rock Reservation. The tribe
maintains jurisdiction on all reservation lands, including rights-of-way,
waterways, and streams running through the reservation; this in turn leads to
on-going jurisdictional disputes in criminal and civil court. Recent cases such
as Nevada vs Hicks have contributed to the contentious issues in this iron
triangle between the Federal, State, and Tribal governments.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe stands
by its right to self-government as a sovereign nation, which includes taking a
government-to-government stance with the states and federal government
entities. The Tribe signed treaties as equals with the United States Government
in 1851 and in 1868, which established the original boundaries of the Great
Sioux Nation. The tribe staunchly asserts these treaty rights to remain
steadfast and just as applicable today as on the day they were made.
Text from the Standing
Rock Sioux Tribe website
 |
Proposed route of the
Dakota Access Pipeline |
To learn
more about the federal government’s trust doctrine with the tribes that put the
government and the tribes in a guarantor/trustee relationship, refer to this
reporting from High Country News.
What is the history of the
conflict?
For a full timeline, please
refer to the Sacred Stone Camp website
The Dakota Access
Pipeline (DAPL), in a pipeline project operated by Dakota Access LLC, a
subsidiary of Houston based corporation, Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. The
DAPL, also known as the Bakken Pipeline, would transport 450,000 barrels of
crude oil per day from the Bakken fields of North Dakota to Patoka, Illinois.
Despite strong objections from the
Tribe from the first time they heard of the project, on July 25, 2016, the U.S
Army Corps of Engineers granted authorization to the Dakota Access Pipeline to
cross Lake Oahe. The current route of construction takes the pipeline less than
one half mile from the Tribe’s reservation border, and thus the Tribe maintains
a sovereign interest in protecting its cultural resources and patrimony that
remain with the land. The pipeline would cross the Tribe’s traditional and
ancestral lands and the construction of the pipeline jeopardizes many sacred
places.
According
to Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairman, David Archambault, the tribe was
presented with already completed plans for the pipeline during consultation. In
contrast, he noted that other federal agencies such as the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) share early notification of projects before
embarking on construction. “Tribes should be at the steering level of such
infrastructure projects,” Archambault said.
On
April 1, 2016 the Sacred Stone Camp was established by Standing Rock Sioux
tribe members and allies with the goal of protecting the tribe’s drinking water
and their sacred lands. Since that time, the protest has grown to include
several camps of peaceful and prayerful protestors who employ non-violent
direct action tactics to stop the construction of the pipeline.
 |
| Photo Credit to Tomas Alejo |
The
response by law enforcement to evict and repress water protectors has escalated
over the past months. Police and private security representatives have unleashed dogs, pepper spray, and military grade weapons on
protestors and tribe members, including children. The camps have seen increased
military and militarized police presence, which tribe members say is an
unnecessary display of force against peaceful protestors. Those arrested have reported being strip searched and intimidated. David
Archambault II, Chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, has written a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch
in which he notes, “state and local law enforcement have increasingly taken
steps to militarize their presence, intimidate participants who are lawfully
expressing their views, and to escalate tensions and promote fear.”
What is the current
status of litigation to stop the pipeline?
There are two broad
issues of concern to the Standing Rock Sioux. First, the pipeline would pass
under the Missouri River (at Lake Oahe) just a half a mile upstream of the
tribe’s reservation boundary, where a spill would be culturally and economically
catastrophic. Second, the pipeline would pass through areas of
great cultural significance, such as sacred sites and burial grounds that
federal law seeks to protect.
The Tribe sued
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which
is the primary federal agency that granted permits needed for the pipeline to
be constructed. The lawsuit alleges that the Corps violated multiple federal
statutes, including the Clean Water Act, National Historic Protection Act, and
National Environmental Policy Act, when it issued the permits.
Because the Corps owns
land on either side of Lake Oahe, Dakota Access must get an “easement” from the
Corps to dig the tunnel for the pipeline underneath federally owned lands.
Dakota Access only needs the easement for the drilling underneath Lake Oahe; it
has permits to construct everything else, such as the access road and pipeline
route up to the Lake Oahe crossing site.
For a litigation timeline and to read key documents pertaining
to the case, please refer to the Earth Justice website:
http://earthjustice.org/features/faq-standing-rock-litigation
What is the PC(USA)’s
stand on the protests taking place against the Dakota Access pipeline on the
Standing Rock Sioux Reservation?
Recognizing
the call of Jesus to stand with those who seek justice, Presbyterians have
supported the water protectors in prayer. We have traveled to Standing Rock and
have made financial contributions and provided supplies. We have signed
petitions, made phone calls, and written letters to public officials and
corporate leaders. Strong support for the land defense
effort by the Standing Rock Sioux is one step towards right relationship with
Native people who are on the frontlines of protecting God’s good creation.
This show of
support is a timely response to actions of the 222nd General Assembly in
Portland Oregon in June 2016, which approved:
·
An apology to Native American’s for
the church’s involvement and administration of boarding schools during the late
19th and early 20th centuries whose purpose was the “civilization” of Native
American children.
·
A repudiation of the Doctrine of
Discovery: this “doctrine” derives its authority from Pope’s and European royal
decrees stating “explorers” may seize lands and convert “non-Christians” in
their name and for the good of the Christian Church. It remains the basis, as
late as 2005, for Indian Law and Supreme Court decisions against Tribes.
The Rev.
Dr. J. Herbert Nelson III, Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), in
conjunction with the Rev. Irvin Porter, associate in the Office of Native
American Intercultural Congregational Support, issued a statement in support of the Standing Rock Sioux on August 29, 2016.
Thousands of Presbyterians across the U.S. have personally
reached out to welcome refugees and asylum seekers. They have seen first hand the struggles and
the determination of our new neighbors to rebuild their lives in dignity. We have also seen how difficult it is to focus
on survival while worrying about family members who are still overseas waiting
for the chance to be reunited. We know that family separation impacts family
members on both sides of the ocean as those who are here must divide their
attention and their resources between establishing themselves here and helping
their loved ones stay safe.
