
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - cinquemb
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/joint-statement-department-justice-department-army-and-department-interior-regarding-standing
======
e12e
Some more coverage, that people might find relevant:

Democracy Now! was on-site reporting on the use of pepper spray and attack
dogs:

"FULL Exclusive Report: Dakota Access Pipeline Co. Attacks Native Americans
with Dogs & Pepper Spray"
[http://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/6/full_exclusive_report_d...](http://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/6/full_exclusive_report_dakota_access_pipeline)

And was rewarded with an arrest warrant for their reporter: "North Dakota
issues arrest warrant for Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman"
[https://usuncut.com/news/amy-goodman-charged/](https://usuncut.com/news/amy-
goodman-charged/)

Comment on ruling (linked in this hn story), from the activist side: "Erased
By False Victory: Obama Hasn’t Stopped DAPL":
[https://transformativespaces.org/2016/09/10/erased-by-
false-...](https://transformativespaces.org/2016/09/10/erased-by-false-
victory-obama-hasnt-stopped-dapl/)

------
neolefty
> Furthermore, this case has highlighted the need for a serious discussion on
> whether there should be nationwide reform with respect to considering
> tribes’ views on these types of infrastructure projects.

I find this whole statement strangely moving for a government memo.

I'm sure there will also be a popular cynical reading of this, and I can
understand given the history, but hope springs eternal.

> Therefore, this fall, we will invite tribes to formal, government-to-
> government consultations on two questions:

------
jnordwick
Tl;Dr

Therefore, construction of the pipeline on Army Corps land bordering or under
Lake Oahe will not go forward at this time. I hope this is the start of
mineral and property rights for the land. We have people living and dying
because they cannot use their land productively. This is socialism people. It
kills people.

As a Sioux native, let us use out land white men do, collateral on loans, to
build business, but you string us up telling us what we can and cannot do with
our land. I why can we not be allowed to do what the white man does?

As a Sioux I approve.

~~~
Waterluvian
Can you explain what you mean by this being socialism? It doesn't appear to be
the socialism I'm familiar with here in Canada.

~~~
cpursley
I imagine he means that the natives/first peoples don't have full property
rights like those outside of reservations have. If I understand correctly,
much of the land on reservations is "communal" (communist or the extream end
of "socialist"). Apparently, there's a big issue getting title to land which
according to the following article, explains the abundance of mobile homes on
reservations:

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoppisch/2011/12/13/why-
are-...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoppisch/2011/12/13/why-are-indian-
reservations-so-poor-a-look-at-the-bottom-1/#739b8eee337a)

Part of the typical "bundle of rights" in property ownership is the ability to
abstract natural resources (plant, animal, mineral, energy). Without true
property rights and ability for land to serve as collateral, the risk of
capital lending is very high. You can't finance a home, you can't invest in a
manufacturing plant, you can't get a farm loan, you can't mine the land, (both
due to lack of mineral rights and that no bank will loan money for the
equipment).

This is why reservations are poor; same reasons socialist/communist states
were/are poor: Tragedy of the commons. This type of land socialism should not
be confused with "social" safety nets like health care and social security. If
I were a native, I'd be pretty pissed if the "white man" were running his
pipelines through my territory, ancestral or not, while I got little in
return. In my opinion, the reservations should be brought under the legal
jurisdiction of the United States and treated as US territories.

Also, learning about Russell Means, a Lakota libertarian activist, is
worthwhile:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Means](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Means)

------
themartorana
I'm not sufficiently versed to have this opinion probably, but why are we
building pipelines all over the place? Isn't oil a dinosaur (heh heh) at this
point? I mean, no, obviously the world runs on it, but I expect to in my
lifetime see insane leaps in solar tech and rollout, huge jumps in the
percentages of electric cars on the roads, driverless cars reconfigure if and
how people buy cars, and so on.

Is the US really growing its oil use so much we need two or three new
pipelines?

~~~
naterr
This pipeline removes 7 unit trains a day from the rails through Minnesota to
Illinois, the bakken makes about a million+/\- bbls a day, and will for quite
some time.

~~~
toomuchtodo
The solution seems to be to drive the price of oil up then, no?

~~~
zrail
Higher oil prices are _good_ for the Bakken. It's not economically feasible to
get at that oil at lower prices, which is one possible reason for the recent
over production from the Middle East. Drive the price down low enough and the
companies working in the Bakken fold, send their workers home, and it takes a
long time to build back up.

~~~
koverstreet
But higher oil prices do drive down the use of oil in general.

~~~
zrail
Oil has highly inelastic demand in the short term. People need to drive to
work. Goods need to be transported either by train, ship, or truck. Planes are
still jam packed with people.

In the long term high oil prices will modify demand because people will start
buying more efficient vehicles. You can see this happening in the decade
starting in 2001 because prices spiked and stayed above $3/gal for the entire
decade and fuel efficiency rose to match it.

~~~
e12e
Not to forget one of the most "insidious" uses/dependencies of oil: food
production in general and agriculture in particular. No oil, means, as far as
I know, without radical change, less (as in not enough) and (much) more
expensive food. That's even before one considers transport etc.

~~~
08-15
I really wonder why farmers don't run their equipment on biodiesel or
bioethanol.

(Actually, the answer is bloody obvious. Admittedly somewhat off-topic, too.)

~~~
e12e
AFAIK there's been some success in Germany with being able to combine a big
enough crop devoted to biodisel along side a meaningfully size crop for food -
but oil, especially subsidized oil, is _really_ cheap energy.

But there was recently a big scare connected to farmers taking subsidies to
produce biodisel - and biodiisel production out-competing food production
and/or leading to hike in food prices... so yeah. If you have X square meters
in which to grow food, you can't readily use some large percentage of that for
"growing" biodiesel, without cutting into your food grow area.

I'm sure there are certain biomass that will work as both, but it's not
trivial to "just use biodisel".

------
mixermf
"...construction of the pipeline on Army Corps land bordering or under Lake
Oahe will not go forward at this time."

------
gragas
I'm almost certain that construction will continue at some point in the
future.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Lots of ways still to prevent it.

------
merpnderp
I've been trying to find more details on the tribe's claim of burial cairns in
the pipeline's path. Anyone have any links? How is it possible that these were
missed after 15 years of court battles and planning?

------
transfire
Wow! What was going on over there? It must have gotten pretty big. Of course,
the mainstream news barely mentions it.

Anyway, some Good news, for a change.

