Tribes fear consequences for Great Lakes as Trump administration fast-tracks Line 5 pipeline

Yahoo

18-05-2025

Water is sacred and central to the way of life of Indigenous tribes in the Great Lakes region.
For generations, the interconnected streams, rivers and lakes have been a source of food, transportation, and cultural identity through ceremonies and traditions.
That is why they have been fighting for over a decade to remove the Line 5 pipeline not only from land they own but also from proximity to the life-giving watershed.
Line 5, owned by Calgary-based Enbridge, transports over 20 million gallons of crude oil and natural gas liquids from Wisconsin to Ontario each day via the Straits of Mackinac, which connect lakes Michigan and Huron. And each day, the pipeline's aging infrastructure and vulnerability to anchor strikes pose a risk to the drinking water of tens of millions in the Great Lakes region, according to activists and Indigenous communities.
'I always tell people that the Straits of Mackinac is like a heart attack waiting to happen, when we've already suffered all these other injuries and risks elsewhere along the line,' said Whitney Gravelle, president of the Bay Mills Indian Community located in Michigan's Upper Peninsula, 50 miles north of the straits.
More than 1 million gallons of oil have reportedly spilled in the past 50 years along the pipeline's 645-mile route, though never at the straits. Experts say it's hard to quantify, or even imagine, the impact of that much oil spilled in varying quantities over such a long time. Operators are only required to report spills of a particular size or cost threshold.
Gravelle, who recently joined another Ojibwe tribal leader in Chicago to talk about their fight against Line 5, said a component of their resistance is rooted in tribal sovereignty.
'But if you pull the scope back, it's really about clean water,' she said. 'And for us to not respect that or want to take care of it is very shocking, especially when we're running into water issues in other parts of the country as well as other parts of the globe.'
President Donald Trump declared an 'energy emergency' the day he took office. Under the executive order, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced it would accelerate the review process for Enbridge's project to build an underground tunnel to house a new Line 5 pipeline.
In a March letter, tribal leaders said the Army Corps had failed them and said the final straw was not being consulted over the decision to expedite Enbridge's construction permit under the emergency declaration.
'How is it an emergency when (Line 5) is already operational, product is already flowing through it? You're forcing these permits through under the guise of an emergency,' Gravelle said. 'I saw it as a convenient loophole to force this project ahead.'
In an April 15 public notice about the emergency permitting procedure for the tunnel project, the Army Corps said the project would address 'an unacceptable hazard to life, a significant loss of property, or an immediate, unforeseen, and significant economic hardship.'
In a request last week for further comment, the Army Corps did not clarify what those concerns would entail.
In protest, seven Michigan tribes withdrew from negotiations a day after the public notice was posted. As cooperating agencies under the National Environmental Policy Act, they were involved in reviewing the project.
'Why would we stay a part of this when you already haven't been listening to us? And now you've demonstrated, even further, that this process that we've been participating in is essentially meaningless,' Gravelle said.
Attorneys general from 15 states, including Illinois, filed a lawsuit May 9 against the Trump administration in federal court for the Western District of Washington state over the 'energy emergency' declaration. The states are asking the court to declare the directive illegal and stop agencies from fast-tracking permits, claiming they are being rushed under false pretenses without proper environmental review.
Enbridge has also reapplied for a permit from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy. The current permit is set to expire next year. This state permit has to be granted before the Army Corps issues a decision on the federal permit in the fall.
In a recent news release, the Army Corps Detroit District announced it would shorten the public comment period from 60 days to 30 days on the environmental impact assessment that will be released May 30.
The 30-day comment period 'will provide an opportunity for meaningful public input while meeting the intent of (the executive order), which requires the Corps of Engineers to expedite its permit review of the proposed project,' said Army Corps spokesperson Carrie Fox in an emailed statement.
The agency 'maintains open communication and ongoing consultation' with Indigenous communities, she added. Previous input submitted by the tribes will still be considered in the environmental impact statement and the groups can still review and comment on the draft once it is released, she added.
'The withdrawal of Tribal Nations from cooperating agency status does not negate Tribal input,' Fox wrote. 'The Corps of Engineers has worked to achieve regular, meaningful, and robust communication with Tribal Nations throughout its review of Enbridge's permit application.'
In areas where Enbridge has assets, the company values its relationship to those communities, said company spokesperson Ryan Duffy.
'As we continue to move closer to construction,' he said, 'we remain committed to including Tribes and Tribal citizens in this incredibly important and consequential project and welcome constructive dialogue and engagement.'
But Indigenous and activist groups don't want Line 5 replaced; they say they want it shut down. Despite assurances of safety from the company, they say the route poses too big a risk. And they have expressed concerns that the accelerated project in the straits would entail a less thorough review of possible impacts on environmental and cultural resources, especially given that Enbridge's operations in North America caused more than 800 spills that dumped nearly 6.8 million gallons of oil between 1999 and 2010, according to a National Wildlife Federation report.
Experts say the complex currents could make a spill at the straits catastrophic, spreading oil rapidly and across long distances in lakes Michigan and Huron. It could pollute miles of shoreline, harm countless species and habitats, and cause billions in damages. Cleanup would also be extremely difficult.
Line 5 alone has had 33 incidents in the last five decades, spilling 1.1 million gallons of oil as reported by Enbridge to the federal agency that regulates pipelines, according to research by NWF Great Lakes climate and energy director Beth Wallace.
'The most recent signaling that we've seen from the Department of Interior, as well as from this administration, is that our natural resources are an untapped resource that we should be deriving greater benefit and profit from,' Gravelle said. 'And that's a very extractive mindset. We know better than anyone that there's only so far you can push your environment before it turns on you and we all suffer the consequences.'
Since Enbridge applied for state and federal project permits in April 2020, they have completed more than 40,000 hours of environmental and cultural surveys, according to Duffy.
'This infrastructure project will enhance the safety and reliability of energy transportation in the Great Lakes region while protecting the environment and respecting the concerns of local communities,' he wrote to the Tribune.
Another contentious Line 5 project proposal in northern Wisconsin is also eligible for emergency permitting, according to a spokesperson from the Army Corps St. Paul District. A public notice was posted on an agency database in April.
Patrick Moes, deputy public affairs chief for the district, said over email that Enbridge requested to proceed with the regular 60-day public comment timeline for this project.
While an expedited review had not been initiated as of Friday, the possibility has raised concerns among members of a tribe on the other side of Lake Superior: the Bad River Band of Chippewa Indians.
Five years ago, Enbridge proposed a reroute to remove the pipeline from tribal lands and away from Lake Superior in response to yearslong disagreements over the future of the portion that crosses 12 miles of the tribe's reservation. As erosion moves the course of the Bad River, it risks unearthing the buried pipeline. According to a federal complaint by the tribe, the river was 320 feet from Line 5 in 1963. Almost six decades later, it was no more than a dozen feet away.
Duffy previously told the Tribune that Enbridge had reached agreements with all private landowners along the proposed 41-mile reroute, which was 'chosen because it minimizes construction impacts and protects critical and cultural resources.'
But the alternative has done little to reassure the tribal citizens, who think it's still too close and would remain a threat to their way of life. A relocation would also threaten spills in other places, including the Kakagon Sloughs — the only extensive coastal wild rice bed in the Great Lakes region — and downstream into Copper Falls State Park.
'That reroute is going to take (the pipeline) through over 100 streams and tributaries that go into Bad River,' said Robert Blanchard, chairman and CEO of Bad River Band. 'It's part of our watershed, and it's going to create a bigger problem if they have a release.'
This week, the Army Corps held a virtual public hearing in response to an objection from the tribe under the Clean Water Act against Enbridge's application to discharge dredged and fill material in waterways, including wetlands, for the so-called segment relocation project.
'There are no conditions that can be imposed on the project, as designed, that will ensure that it doesn't violate the Bad River Band's water quality standards,' said Stefanie Tsosie, a senior attorney at litigation nonprofit Earthjustice who represents the tribe, during the Wednesday hearing. '(The) standards are in place to protect human health, wildlife and aquatic life … the richness and the diversity of the band's reservation waters.'
In 2013, the tribe refused to renew an easement allowing Enbridge to operate on their land after the previous one expired. Three years earlier, Enbridge's Line 6B pipeline spilled more than 1 million gallons into the Kalamazoo River system due to external corrosion after protective tape coating detached from its surface. It was one of the largest inland oil spills in U.S. history.
'We realized then that we don't want something happening here that happened there,' Blanchard recalled. 'Well, the rest is history, because it's been a big fight since, back and forth in courts — and it's still in the courts.'
Almost a decade after the easement expired, a federal judge in Wisconsin ruled the continued presence of Line 5 in the reservation meant the company was trespassing on tribal land. Enbridge was later ordered to close the pipeline segment by 2026.
'Imagine a pipeline or any other piece of infrastructure running through your yard with no easement and no permission to be there,' said Rachel Haverlock, founder and director of the Freshwater Lab at the University of Illinois Chicago.
For now, Bad River Band leaders are just waiting for the other shoe to drop if the reroute is fast-tracked.
'I think it's coming. So we have to, I guess, be prepared for that,' Blanchard said. 'But it's a battle almost every day. Something comes up every day and we have to try to put out the fire.'
Line 5 supplies almost 40% of the crude oil used at refineries in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Canada. That oil, as well as natural gas transported by the pipeline, is turned into propane and used by millions of people for cooking, heating homes and drying farm crops.
Enbridge says decommissioning Line 5 would cause refined product shortages and price hikes throughout the region. Refineries in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Ontario and Quebec would receive 45% less crude product than their current demand, according to the company. It would also mean a shortfall of about half the current transportation fuel supply in the same states and provinces.
The company also says rail provides less than 10% of the volume of light crude delivered by Line 5.
But opponents disagree. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has said prices would only go up by 5 cents to 11 cents a gallon, and expert testimony in court has indicated increases in Michigan and Wisconsin might be less than 1 cent per gallon.
Some opponents have suggested an alternative to Line 5 — moving the product through Enbridge's Line 6, which consists of two segments. Gravelle said making the switch might require some upgrades, such as pumps, to push more product through.
'But you can essentially decommission Line 5 … and remove it from the Great Lakes altogether,' she said.
The company, however, says there are no viable alternatives to transport a substantial volume of the Line 5 product currently being supplied to the Upper Midwest and Canada. 'Our other pipelines are already at or near capacity,' Duffy said.
Line 6A starts in Superior, goes down through the heart of Wisconsin and west of Chicago, then turns east near Joliet to arrive in northwest Indiana. Line 6B originates there, then cuts across southern Michigan to end up in Sarnia, Ontario. After the 2010 Kalamazoo River spill, Enbridge fully replaced Line 6B, doubling its capacity to 500,000 barrels per day.
But Line 6B is not able to transport both crude oil and natural gas liquids like Line 5 currently does, according to Duffy.
'Line 5's continued operation is the solution to the region's energy needs,' he said. 'It will help us keep energy safe and affordable for all families as we embark on a just energy transition.'
Even as the Trump administration prioritizes energy projects, clean water was the top environmental concern for most Americans as recently as 2024, according to a Gallup poll. And protecting the Great Lakes, one of the world's largest surface freshwater ecosystems, has become urgent as population growth and human-made climate change cause water shortages in parts of the United States.
It's almost unfair to call them lakes, Gravelle said. They're more like inland seas. But despite its abundance here, water in the Great Lakes is not an infinite resource and demands care, she said.
'We want our land. We want to be able to hunt, to fish, to gather and to harvest. Things that my grandfather did, things I'm doing, things I want my grandkids to do,' Blanchard said. 'That's what it's about. For me, anyway. For a lot of us, actually.'
[e-mail]