Internet activists have promulgated a series of myths for months about the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline, which ultimately helped activists bring the project to a screeching halt.
American Indian groups and environmentalists have relentlessly blasted the nearly 1,200-mile-long pipeline, arguing the DAPL’s construction would trample on tribal lands and destroy ancient tribal artifacts. They also believe it could potentially poison waterways, including rivers such as the Missouri River and Lake Oahe.
The multi-billion dollar DAPL, which is expected to bring 470,000 barrels of Bakken crude oil per day from western North Dakota to southern Illinois, was rejected by the Army Corps of Engineers on Dec.4 after initially approving it in July.
The project, once completed, will create up to 12,000 construction jobs, and provide millions in state and local revenues during the construction phase and an estimated $129 million annually in property and income taxes, according to the Army Corps.
Much of the criticisms directed at the DAPL, and Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), are built upon several myths that have made the rounds during the months-long protest. Here is a list of the five most commonly held myths associated with the pipeline.
The Government Never Properly Consulted With Standing Rock
The Army Corps attempted more than a dozen times between 2014 and 2016 to discuss the DAPL route with Standing Rock Sioux tribe. Its members either failed to respond to requests for consultation or dragged their feet during the process.
The Corps was seeking feedback on the line’s construction: i.e. to determine whether the DAPL would violate the tribe’s sacred ground.
On Oct. 24, 2014, for instance, the government sent a letter to the tribe with information about the proposed pipeline routes as well as maps documenting the known cultural sites the Corps had identified.
Federal Judge James Boasberg eventually denied the motion for a preliminary injunction to the tribe, arguing it could not show how the pipeline would damage the group’s sacred ground.
“In addition,” he wrote, “the letter requested that any party interested in consulting on the matter reply within thirty days. No response was received from the Tribe”
There are other examples of the tribe delaying the process, including on Feb. 12, 2015, when the Corps Senior Field Archaeologist Richard Harnois emailed tribe preservation officer Waste Win Young to solicit comments on the issue of pipeline drilling – but, again, no reply.
State regulators also contend the Standing Rock neglected to take seriously the pipeline’s construction.
Julie Fedorchak, who serves as the chairman of the North Dakota Public Service Commission, told National Public Radio in a November interview that the Standing Rock Sioux did not participate in the nearly 30 hours of meetings held to determine the pipeline’s southern route.
The DAPL Cuts A Swath Through The Standing Rock Reservation
The DAPL route does not cut through Standing Rock’s reservation — in fact, the southern route (the route currently under dispute) is located several miles north of the tribe’s ancestral land.
Opponents also believe the pipeline has trounced all over the tribe’s ancient burial grounds and artifacts, but reports show the line was modified more than 141 times to satisfy those concerns.
The tribe has attempted to meander around that problem by arguing the land is theirs under the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851.
“This demolition is devastating,” Standing Rock Chairman David Archambault II told reporters in October. “These grounds are the resting places of our ancestors.”
The treaty was forged between the U.S. government and the American Indian chieftains in the Great Sioux Nation, not Standing Rock.
It has been violated numerous times throughout the years by miners hunting for gold in the Black Hills, and tribes searching for fertile hunting grounds.The constant violations make it difficult to determine original ownership of the land.
Not every member of the Great Sioux Nation agreed to the stipulations etched out in the treaty – legendary warrior and Standing Rock Sioux ancestor Chief Sitting Bull, for one, refused to sign both the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty.
Sitting Bull’s great-great grandson, Chief Delbert Black Fox Pomani, opposes the line and has made several public pleas for the DAPL to be rerouted.
The tribe is challenging the treaty and others like it in court for not being honored, despite the legal complexities connected to tribal treaties.
A Leaky Pipeline Could Poison Standing Rock’s Water Supply
Protesters and Standing Rock members believe the pipeline could spring a leak and poison the tribe’s water supply. But government reports show safety precautions were made that greatly reduce such concerns.
Developers of the pipeline offered to install water quality sensors, and construct a fresh water storage facility to store water in case of a pipeline leak to the Standing Rock, according to a report published in November.
The Army Corps deemed the new pipeline route crossing over Lake Ohae safe in an environmental assessment, because ETP has “developed response and action plans, and will include several monitoring systems, shut-off valves, and other safety features to minimize the risk of spills and reduce…any potential damages.”
Standing Rock also finalized a years-long plan to build a brand new water treatment system 70 miles downstream of the project. Environmental analysts acknowledge the new system will likely dispel concerns associated with the project.
Standing Rock currently gets its water 20 miles away from the so-called DAPL.
The Pipeline Reroute Was A Result Of Environmental Racism
The New York Times suggested in November that perhaps environmental racism played a part in ETP’s decision to reroute the line from its previous spot, near Bismarck, to the area buttressing Standing Rock’s land.
Perhaps the pipeline should be rerouted, the NYT added, “closer to Bismarck — maybe that will prompt a full, meaningful discussion of the pipeline’s merits, with a fairer assessment of its true costs.”Anti-fossil fuel activists like Bill McKibben have made similar suggestions.
The actual reasons for the reroute are not as nefarious as McKibben and the NYT let on.
ETP moved the project South near the Standing Rock, in fact, because the route was 11 miles shorter and considered less damaging to the environment – the northern route would have required significant modifications to avoid waterways. It also cost $23 million less than the initial route.
The Corps eventually concluded the Bismarck route was not a viable option because of its proximity to the capital’s municipal water supply wells. The agency also determined the northern route would have made it difficult to stay 500 or more feet away from homes, a policy required in North Dakota.
The DAPL Protesters Were Entirely Peaceful, Victims Of Police Brutality
One commonly held myth is that those hunkered down in Standing Rock campsites used non-violent means to protest.
Law enforcement officials arrested 141 people on Oct. 28 after violent confrontations with Standing Rock members and various out-of-state activists. Another person was arrested as October bled into November, bringing the total number of arrests to 411, according to local law enforcement officials.
Meanwhile, agitators set nine vehicles ablaze, and destroyed construction equipment, leaving debris and burned out vehicles strewn across a bridge, which resulted in the closure of one of the state’s main highways. A woman was arrested in another incident after pulling a pistol from her waistband and firing shots at the police.
Many of the activists at the campsites were outsiders not affiliated with the Standing Rock tribe – these rogue agents roughed up a slew of journalists in October who were reporting from the campsite.
The protesters threatened to slash journalists Phelm McAleer and Magdalena Segieda’s tires and seize their filming equipment. They were conducting interviews at the Sacred Stone Camp, and were forced to flee to their vehicle after the action got too heated.
The protesters then pounced on McAleer’s vehicle, pounding on its windows and demanding the crew inside turn around and head toward the press tent so they could confiscate his camera footage.
McAleer and Segieda managed to escape, unscathed. They have since filed lawsuits against several of those identified at the campsite.
Follow Chris on Facebook and Twitter
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.