Latest news with #waterprotection
Irish Times
4 days ago
- Health
- Irish Times
Ireland's plan to weaken legal protections for waterways will push many of them beyond recovery
If I went to my doctor with a cancerous tumour that was treatable and curable, and he shrugged it off and told me to accept it – knowing that without treatment, it would eventually kill me – I'd think he had lost his mind. Yet this is how the Irish State plans to treat some of our most treasured rivers, lakes and estuaries. According to a proposal from the Department of Housing , certain iconic stretches of waters on the likes of the Shannon, Boyne and Blackwater rivers will no longer be viewed as needing restoration. Instead, they will face a future as engineered channels. In the 1980s and '90s, Europeans began to recognise that their rivers were in severe decline due to decades of neglect. Naturally meandering waterways were straightened, drained and dammed; chemicals, pesticides and untreated sewage poured into them unchecked. The problem was cross-border: the Danube, which flows through 10 countries, became saturated with pollution. In 1986, a fire at a chemical warehouse near Basle, Switzerland, caused the Rhine river to turn red with mercury and dyes, as vast amounts of toxic waste flowed hundreds of kilometres downstream into Germany and the Netherlands. Drinking water supplies were shut off, and aquatic life, such as European eels, was decimated. What was clear was that Europe needed a unified, legally binding approach to water protection that set out common rules, clear responsibilities and shared goals. By 2000, a plan was in place that aimed to safeguard waterways not only for aquatic life but also as a source of drinking water, transport and leisure for humans. This law, known as the Water Framework Directive, has a clear objective: to ensure all waterbodies reach at least 'good status', meaning they are clean, healthy and safe for swimming and drinking. Built into the plan is a legal recognition that some waterbodies, especially in highly industrialised countries such as Germany, have been altered so extensively that returning them to their natural state would be impossible or potentially harmful to human interests and security. These are placed in a special category, called 'heavily modified water bodies', and are legally exempt from the requirement to achieve 'good' status. They include reservoirs supplying drinking water, canals designed for navigation or drainage, urban rivers confined within concrete channels or culverts, ports, harbours and rivers drained for agricultural use. READ MORE While they cannot be used as dumping grounds for pollutants, the law accepts that these waters will never be restored or naturalised. For that reason, the principle guiding 'heavily modified' designation should be balanced and factor in whether it serves the widest possible interest: their number should be kept to a minimum, and where ongoing engineering and management is necessary – for example, in a reservoir or port – they must deliver significant benefit to the public. Ireland has 33 heavily modified water bodies, including Poulaphouca reservoir, which provides drinking water to Dublin; Cork Harbour for industrial activity; and New Ross Port in Wexford, run by the council as a transport route. But under the department's proposal, released in March, this number will increase by 1,312 per cent. It includes 122 waterbodies that run through some of Ireland's unique natural areas. It includes stretches of the Nore, Brosna, Maigue, Liffey, Fergus, Mulkear and Carrowbeg rivers; lakes such as Lough Corrib and Lough Derg; and estuaries like Lower Suir. [ Pollution on the Liffey: Algal blooms at Blessington a threat to Dublin's drinking water Opens in new window ] Why does the State want to all but give up on these waters? The problem stems from a law dating back to 1945, the Arterial Drainage Act, which gives the State sweeping powers to carry out large-scale drainage works, such as deepening, widening, dredging and straightening. Eighty years ago – when we knew nothing about climate warming – the law was viewed as progressive; today it clashes with the Water Framework Directive because this extent of drainage causes severe damage, irreversibly stripping rivers of their natural life and course. Ireland cannot abide by one law with the other. As long as these waters are drained, they will never meet the standards set by EU water law. Reservoirs, ports, canals and harbours must be operational, and as such, designating them as 'heavily modified' is in the public interest, as their functional demands cannot be fulfilled while simultaneously attempting restoration. But in the future, who'll benefit from the continual dredging of the Clare river in Galway, once one of our most natural rivers and now, in many parts, a canalised channel? Or the river Brosna, whose waters followed a meandering course through Offaly before its curves were straightened and its channel deepened? And how is it justified in the public interest, given that drainage makes our towns and cities more – not less – vulnerable to flash flooding? Instead of reshaping drainage policy so that it's fit for the critical challenges we face – not least, the chaotic mix of water shortages and drought, extreme weather events and rapidly warming waters – what's proposed is simply remove these waters from any hope of being restored to full health. Never before have our waterways needed climate and nature-proofed policies more. Our waters are warming at levels never seen before – for example, in Lough Feeagh in Mayo, the heat in the water has been above the long-term average (recorded since 1960) since January. Sea temperatures have soared. This is the future for which we need to rapidly prepare. Under the Nature Restoration Law, we're required to restore at least 20 per cent of our land and sea areas by 2030, increasing to 90 per cent by 2050. That includes rewetting organic soils, like those at the headwaters of the river Boyne, which are currently drained. Instead of giving up on our waters and relegating them to a lower standard – all for the sake of an outdated, 80-year-old law – now is the time to put energy into nature-based solutions, which are proven to be effective and cheap as a way to reduce flood risk, improve soil health and meet climate, nature and water goals without abandoning the land. We can't ignore the facts: our waterways are facing immense pressure, and some are already critically ill. Even if our only concern was water security, the urgent need for restoration is clear. This proposal to weaken their legal protections will only speed up their deterioration. Across Ireland, communities are volunteering to revive the life in their local waters. If this legal loophole is allowed, their efforts will be in vain. In effect, the State would be like a doctor unfit to practice – turning its back on the patient instead of providing care. As a result, many of our most treasured rivers and lakes will, without question, slip beyond recovery.
CBC
03-06-2025
- Business
- CBC
Pictou County council votes to ask province to pause uranium plans
The issue of uranium exploration landed in the laps of the Municipality of Pictou County council on Monday night. Members were faced with two motions suggested by a member of the public related to the province's recent push for uranium exploration. One motion called for council to request that the provincial government pause before granting any leases for uranium exploration, in order to give council and residents time to learn more about the potential impacts. The other was for council to begin a process to protect the River John watershed and to ask the province not to permit any activities that would not be allowed in a protected water area. Both motions passed, the first by a vote of 11-1 and the second by a 7-5 vote. River John resident Barbara Harris brought the motions to council. "Watersheds are not being protected adequately," she told councillors. "What does this mean for rural communities all across the province if we don't protect our water? "And how does that impact all sorts of things — how does it impact agriculture, fishing, commercial fisheries, property values, all sorts of things? There's a lot we need to learn, and the next few weeks is not enough." In a letter Harris wrote to council, she outlines concerns that uranium exploration can release radioactive matter that can harm the environment, including drinking water and living organisms. Push for development The Nova Scotia government has been prioritizing the development of natural resources in recent months, overturning a long-standing ban on uranium exploration and mining, lifting a moratorium on fracking and adding to its critical minerals list. Last month, the province issued a request for proposals from companies interested in exploring for uranium in three designated areas of Nova Scotia — Louisville in Pictou County, East Dalhousie in Annapolis County and the Vaughan area in Hants County. Many municipal politicians and property owners were surprised to learn that their areas were chosen. A letter from the Natural Resources Department to the warden of the Municipality of Pictou County dated May 27 characterizes the potential for exploration in Louisville as "likely to take place." 'It doesn't hurt to ask' At the meeting on Monday night, Pictou County councillors voted on the motions as an emergency resolution, since the council's following meeting isn't scheduled to take place until July 7, which is the date the province expects to announce successful exploration bids. "There's not the time to fool around with this. This has got to be stopped," said Coun. Chester Dewar. In an interview with CBC News on Tuesday, Coun. Ronald Baillie, who represents the Louisville area, said although he supported both motions, he's not confident they will actually slow the province down in its push for exploration. "I think they have made a decision that they're going to move ahead with it regardless of what. But anyway, it doesn't hurt to ask," Baillie said. Coun. Andy Thompson voted against both motions, noting that he didn't feel he had enough information. "I think we need to hear both sides of the story. I don't think one side of the story is how you make decisions, so I can't support this motion," Thompson said. Watershed protection is not without precedence in Nova Scotia. In 2022, the province approved a request from the Municipality of the County of Colchester to designate the French River watershed as a protected water area after the community and council raised concerns about mining exploration. The designation means the municipality can ban activities that could affect water quality, such as new garbage dumps or mines. Next steps Harris said in an interview with CBC on Tuesday that she is pleased with council's support. "The ban that we've had for 44 years was arrived at through a very broad and painstaking public consultation and evaluation of the risks, and the ban was repealed without either of those things," she said. "To me, a pause is the only responsible next step for the government to take, and having the backing of our council for that is really helpful." Community members have planned a public meeting on Thursday night at 7 p.m. at the fire hall in River John. The province has set a June 11 deadline for companies to submit exploration proposals. The government will evaluate the bids, and if there is a successful applicant, that will be announced on July 7. Exploration licences could be issued as soon as July 11.
CBS News
12-05-2025
- General
- CBS News
Colorado tribe calls out state, petroleum company for pipeline spill
Southern Ute Indian Tribe leadership recently urged the state of Colorado and a Texas energy company to step up the monitoring and cleanup of a five-month-old fuel spill on the southwestern Colorado tribe's land. Tribal leadership called the response by both the state and the company "inadequate." In a May 5 social media post, it criticized the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) for not sending any personnel to the area in the months since the spilled happened. It also blamed the company for what it claimed was the lack of a contingency plan in the event the spill advances through groundwater to the near Animas River. "We will not stand by while our ground and surface water, Tribal resources, and the health of our Tribal Members are put at risk," stated Southern Ute Chairman Melvin J. Baker in the post. "Enterprise must treat this with the seriousness and urgency it deserves—not just from a regulatory standpoint, but from a moral and environmental one. Failure to move now will impact our water rights, wildlife, cultural sites, and properties for years to come. It is our duty as leaders and original stewards to protect the land that has been home to our ancestors since time immemorial and will be home for our future generations to come." A remediation site near Durango where a third-party contractor is monitoring the impacts to groundwater after a pipeline spill in December. Jeremy Wade Shockley/The Southern Ute Drum The spill occurred on Dec. 5. Beginning on that day, a spill at an Enterprise Products pipeline near the intersection of La Plata County Road 219 and Riverview Ranch Road (about four miles south of Durango) was reported by an unidentified person at 4:50 p.m. The pipeline was clamped and leak stopped at 3:40 p.m. on Dec. 7, according to an early CDPHE report. An estimated 544 barrels, or 23,000 gallons, of fuel was released. A worker at a monitoring and remediation site on Southern Ute Indian Tribe land near Durango. A Texas-based petroleum company is paying a contractor to monitor groundwater contamination following a fuel spill in December 2024. Jeremy Wade Shockley/The Southern Ute Drum Three days after the first report of the leak, a groundwater measurement taken 275 feet south-southwest of the leak site detected concentrations of benzene, tuloene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes at 13 micrograms per liter. Four days later, the same test well measured 300 micrograms per liter. Pond water at a nearby property also detected those four elements, plus acetone and styrene. But, according to that early CDPHE report about that pond, "None of the concentrations exceed their most protective EPA or CDPHE water standard." A property on Southern Ute tribal land that is affected by contaminants released by a pipeline spill in December 2024. Jeremy Wade Shockley/The Southern Ute Drum In the months since, however, a dozen residences have had high contamination readings in the their water wells. Water must now be hauled in, according to the tribe, and stored in cisterns installed by Enterprise Products. Filtration systems are also being provided. The contamination has now migrated away from the leak site. The tribe - which is doing its own monitoring beyond the several monitoring wells drilled by a remediation team hired by the energy company - said a spring within .3 mile of the Animas River is now showing increased measurements of benzene. "If the spill were to reach the nearby Animas River in elevated concentrations, the danger to plant, animal, and human life in the local area and potentially downstream along the river could be widespread," the tribe stated on its social post. "Despite this, Enterprise still does not have a site-specific contingency plan in place to protect the Animas River." Southern Ute Indian Tribe/Facebook According to CDPHE documents, Enterprise Products is required to publicly post monthly bulletins about the spill's monitoring data, submit quarterly reports to the CDPHE, and provide a contingency plan to the state for dealing with contamination reaching the Animas River. That deadline for that contingency plan was April 30. Leaders of the Southern Ute Tribe learned of the contingency plan's delay during a meeting the next day. "[T]he response from Enterprise has lacked the urgency and transparency this situation demands to minimize impacts and risk to the Animas River and Tribal resources," the tribe stated. A remediation site where temporary drinking water systems have been installed for residents near the site of a petroleum spill on Southern Ute tribal lands. Jeremy Wade Shockley/The Southern Ute Drum The Southern Ute social media post claimed the recent spill to be Colorado largest ever. But the CDPHE told CBS Colorado the spill is the sixth-largest petroleum-based release it has dealt with. Through a spokesperson, the agency said it is committed to requiring Enterprise Products to fully investigate and clean up the spill. This includes remediation of all contaminated groundwater and soils until state and federal environmental standards are met. CDPHE indicated additional work is starting this week with new wells. Some will be installed downhill from the current lowest sites to fully define the extent of the contamination. Others, called sentinel wells, will form a line between the leak site and the Animas River. Aside from contaminant detection, the sentinel wells will be able to pull up and recover petroleum product and perform other cleanup functions, per CDPHE. In a statement, Patrick Cummins, Director of Environmental Health and Protection, said, "At CDPHE, we are committed to protecting public health, holding polluters accountable, and partnering with impacted communities and governments. We take the Southern Ute Indian Tribe's concerns seriously and are providing ongoing oversight of the cleanup. That oversight will continue until Enterprise Products meets all applicable environmental standards and affected residents are protected." A portion of Enterprise Product's Texas Western pipeline system through Colorado and neighboring states. The pipeline delivers refined petroleum from a Galveston, Texas, refinery to northeastern Utah. Enterprise Products Enterprise Products is based in Houston. The company announced upgrades and retrofits of existing pipelines in its Texas Western system in March 2024. The TW system pushes gasoline from its Galveston refinery to Grand County, Utah. Along the way are four terminals - two in New Mexico, one in Grand Junction, another in Moab, Utah - that allow fuel tanker trucks to draw and haul locally. The second phase of the system, the Grand Junction and Moab terminals, went online in late October - five weeks before the spill near Durango. The spill did not occur within the Southern Ute reservation's boundaries, but on adjacent property called "fee land." Tribal fee land can exist inside and outside of reservation boundaries, is zoned by the tribe, and is often owned by Native Americans and non-natives who depend on the reservation and tribal government for services. Fee land differs from trust land, which is distinctly owned by Native Americans and their families within reservation boundaries. The Southern Ute Indian Tribe was awarded $4.9 million in September 2024 by the EPA for implementation of a program to reduce emissions of methane and other harmful air pollutants from oil and gas sources located on its reservation. In January, it received $4.25 million from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, money which the tribe tagged for improving drinking water quality, water storage, and irrigation infrastructure.
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Why the Greenpeace trial is a lesson for us all
Winona LaDuke Barn Raiser The preamble for the next war over water is here. Aggressive corporations are coming after the few remaining pristine places on Mother Earth—mainly on the land of Indigenous people. Nowadays, it's not just Native people being targeted, it's our month, two separate court decisions highlighted the repression being leveled on our Water Protector allies. On June 28, 2018 in St. Paul, Minnesota, author Winona LaDuke speaks out against the Enbridge Energy Line 3. (Richard Tsong-Taatarii, Star Tribune via AP Photo) On March 19, a jury in Mandan, North Dakota, in Morton County, leveled a blistering $660 million verdict against Greenpeace for its part in the Standing Rock resistance against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Anyone who was at Standing Rock knows that Greenpeace was barely there, but they have a name, and Energy Transfer, the pipeline's owner, made an example out of them. I was in the courtroom when the verdict came in. It was sickening. On March 10, Marian Moore, a Water Protector who had participated at a gathering to pray for healing, had her charges reversed by a Minnesota Court of Appeals. Her story: Marian, 67, a long-human rights advocate and environmentalist, was the daughter of Paul Moore Jr., the Episcopal bishop of New York from 1972 to 1989 who had walked with Martin Luther King Jr. during the Civil Rights Movement. In this century, Marian had been active in opposing Enbridge's Line 3 pipeline, which crosses northern Minnesota, on its way from Calgary, Alberta, to Superior, Wisconsin, on lands that are subject to Native treaty rights and through waters full of wild rice, an essential food to the Anishinaabe. On January 9, 2021, Moore was among the more than 100 Water Protectors who gathered on state Highway 169 for a prayer ceremony near a Line 3 construction site in Aitkin County. For that, she caught three charges, including trespass on critical infrastructure (a gross misdemeanor), unlawful assembly and, rather redundantly, presence at an unlawful assembly (both misdemeanors). I was a witness in her defense. In November, 2023, an Aitkin County jury found her guilty of gross misdemeanors and sentenced her to six months in county jail, but with a stay of execution for nine months, allowing her to appeal. 'I had to not trespass on any Enbridge property and be law-abiding, or I would be in Aitkin County jail for six months,' she explains to me. Six months seems like a long time for someone who stood on a state highway to pray, looked at a construction site and left once a dispersal order was given. 'I think they targeted me because I was friends with Indigenous people and [was] bringing money to the movement against the pipeline,' says Marian. Meanwhile out in Morton County, Greenpeace is getting socked with that ridiculous verdict. $660 million is a lot of money for some folks who were barely at Standing Rock. Aitkin County, Minnesota, and Morton County, North Dakota, are trying to teach a lesson; or, more appropriately, through these cases, corporations are trying to stifle resistance and discourage allies. Welcome to the New Order, the one where corporations are now considered legal 'persons,' protected by law enforcement and the judicial system as they press the law's boundaries and extract precious resources. The entire trial against Greenpeace was shameful. Here's how it went: The law firm Gibson Dunn carefully picked Mandan in Morton County, an oil-friendly jurisdiction where Judge James Gion denied most important motions made by Greenpeace. Four motions to change the venue from Mandan were denied. Gion would not let Greenpeace tell the jury of Energy Transfer's terrible safety record. According to a report by Greenpeace and Waterkeeper Alliance, the Pipeline Hazardous and Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued 106 safety violations to Energy Transfer and Sunoco between 2002 and 2018, including failures to conduct corrosion inspections, to maintain pipeline integrity and to repair unsafe pipelines in a timely manner within five years. Greenpeace was not allowed to tell the jury that Energy Transfer's identical federal lawsuit against Greenpeace was dismissed by a federal judge. The judge effectively limited defense evidence. Gion would not allow live streaming, so if you wanted to 'see justice' you had to go to Mandan. It's said that justice is blind, and, in North Dakota, justice is literally blind and asleep. I saw jurors asleep while on duty in the court room. 'Greenpeace did not manipulate Standing Rock, but Energy Transfer has manipulated Morton County,' Janet Alkire, Chairwoman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, said in a statement shortly after the verdict. As I drove toward Bismark from my own reservation, White Earth, a verse from the Rolling Stones' 'You Can't Always Get What You Want' stuck in my head: I went down to the County Courthouse to get my share of abuse. At least that's how I sing it. I've had my share. That's what it's like being on trial in the Deep North, especially if you're a Water Protector. The chances for a Native person to get justice in North Dakota or northern Minnesota are probably pretty small. Native people represent a third of the people in jail in Becker, Hubbard and Aitkin counties. Yet, we represent only 5.2% of the population. Standing Rock Tribal Chairwoman Alkire was appalled at the state of justice in Mandan: I take offense to the jury verdict. … We expect more from North Dakota judges and members of the jury from our neighboring communities. … Neither Greenpeace nor anyone else paid or persuaded Standing Rock to oppose DAPL. … Energy Transfer's false and self-serving narrative that Greenpeace manipulated Standing Rock into protesting DAPL is patronizing and disrespectful to our people. We understand that many Morton County residents support the oil industry. … But we are your neighbors, and you should not be fooled that easily. The lawsuit against Greenpeace is called a SLAPP suit, or Strategic Litigation against Public Participation. It is intended to silence opposition. There are anti-SLAPP laws in 35 states, including Minnesota. Fundamentally, this is a question of free speech. When Energy Transfer sues people for so-called defamation, they send a clear message: If you stand up, you will be punished in a lawsuit. 'To me, this is a freedom of speech case and freedom of association case,' attorney Sarah Vogel, twice-elected former North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner, told the North Dakota Monitor before the case went to trial. Vogel, who grew up in Mandan, said, 'As residents of a small state without a whole lot of power, we'd better be able to speak up. Who knows? I mean, this time, it's Greenpeace, but who will it be next time?' The case in Aitkin County was a little different but had some of the same premises. The idea that 'outside agitators' came and did not do nice things was a theme. Greenpeace fits that narrative for Energy Transfer, and Marian Moore, who is a striking six feet two inches tall, does not quite look like a local gal. Trey Cox is Energy Transfer's lead attorney from Gibson Dunn (the same law firm that brought us the Chevron Donziger verdict). Cox kept referring to Water Protectors as outsiders and paid protesters. One might wonder, where Energy Transfer is from? Certainly not from Mandan. They are from Texas. Where was TigerSwan, the private security company hired by Energy Transfer from? North Carolina. And where was Frost Kennels, the company whose employees unleashed dogs on Water Protectors, from? Ohio. In other words, mercenaries. In Minnesota, remember that Enbridge is a foreign corporation from Canada, with big swaths of pipeline networks across our north country, including aging pipes and the dirtiest oil in the world that poses a major threat to the Great Lakes, repository of a fifth of the world's freshwater. Yet, Enbridge received priority policy protection in Minnesota during the Covid-19 pandemic and was allowed to bring in 4,300 people to build Line 3 as a part of 'essential industry' in the state. These companies also want to censure and erase any mentions of their abysmal safety records. Energy Transfer has a multitude of fines for spills, and Enbridge has the two largest oil spills on the U.S. mainland to its name. In the North Dakota trial, Greenpeace could not bring up Energy Transfer's safety record, while in Aitkin County, the judge did not allow Marian Moore to say 'treaty rights' or allude to the Minnesota case where Anishinaabe Water Protectors' charges were dismissed in September 2023, based on the treaty and cultural beliefs, and 'in the interests of justice.' The Trump administration intends to further criminalize Water Protectors, and certainly protests in general. That much is clear. This is on top of the more than 300 anti-protest bills introduced in state legislatures since 2017, according to the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, 54 of which have been enacted and currently undermine the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and assembly. Moreover, over the past half-century, a dangerous doctrine of 'qualified immunity' has been hatched up, underwritten by the Supreme Court, to limit the ability of individuals to hold police officers accountable for violating their constitutional rights. Qualified immunity basically gives officers expanding impunity to injure, or even kill, civilians like Water Protectors. In April 2024, North Dakota Federal Judge Daniel Traynor dismissed Sophia Wilansky's case against North Dakota law enforcement on the grounds that law enforcement had 'qualified immunity.' A blast from an 'explosive munition' was leveled at her in the early hours of November 21, 2016. Law enforcement had constructed a barricade across Backwater Bridge on North Dakota Highway 1806 to prevent unarmed Water Protectors, including Wilansky, from using the road. Morton County Deputy Jonathon Moll, had positioned himself on the turret of a Humvee and fired a flashbang grenade from his 12-gauge shotgun, hitting Wilansky, nearly severing her hand and destroying almost all of the arteries, skin, tissue, muscles, nerves, tendons and bone in her left forearm. 'At 21-years-old, I lost the use of my arm because a police officer shot me from a gun turret with an exploding grenade at a protest. My life will never be the same, but I will also not be scared away from fighting for what is right,' Wilansky said in a Civil Liberties Defense Center media release on April 6, 2024. An additional statement read: 'The doctrine of Qualified Immunity is repulsive in that it allows police officers to … shoot protestors with anything they want without repercussions.' Yes, there will be appeals. Marian Moore won on appeal. And a Greenpeace spokesperson told Barn Raiser the nonprofit will appeal the verdict, but the timing and process of the appeal has yet to be determined. But what's so sad is that the North Dakota jury couldn't even stand up for the water, the land and the people. Instead, that jury gave a Texas oil pipeline company, founded by Trump-supporting billionaire Kelcy Warren, everything it wanted and then some. That was shameful. And, without that appeals court, an Aitkin County jury would have been content to let Marian Moore sit in the slammer. Marty Garbus is a trial attorney who has represented, among others, Nelson Mandela, Leonard Peltier, Daniel Ellsberg, Lenny Bruce, Elie Wiesel, Cesar Chavez and Vaclav Havel. Garbus is also a member of the Energy Transfer v. Greenpeace Trial Monitoring Committee, a group that followed the trial day in and day out. Here is what he said when the jury returned its shameful verdict: In my six decades of legal practice, I have never witnessed a trial as unfair as the one against Greenpeace that just ended in the courts of North Dakota. This is one of the most important cases in American history. The law that can come down in this case can affect any demonstration, religious or political. It's far bigger than the environmental movement. Yet the court in North Dakota abdicated its sacred duty to conduct a fair and public trial and instead let Energy Transfer run roughshod over the rule of law. Greenpeace has very strong case on appeal. I believe there is a good chance it ultimately will win both in court and in the court of public opinion. What to do? Stand our ground. Make the solutions. And keep working together. In Minnesota, we call ourselves the Home Team, and we are many colors. Marion and thousands of others told their stories and faced a lot of police for the sake of protecting water. I, for one, am grateful to them, and the new work underway by groups like Rise and Repair in Minnesota that does multi-racial organizing work around climate justice. Weweg bi azhe giiwewag. The snow geese return. There is greatness in the flocks of birds returning to these lands of water. Each year, they return and remind us of the life that is here, a life which needs water. I am reminded that's who I work for. Greenpeace was inspired by a story called the Rainbow Warrior, where people of all colors would come together to protect Mother Earth. Critics say the story wasn't a real prophecy, but I see it happening today. People of all colors coming together to protect Mother Earth is a good story for epic times. Thank you, allies. Update: On April 23, in a long-awaited decision, a federal judge ordered the U.S. government to pay North Dakota $28 million in damages for expenses the state made on police in response to the Standing Rock demonstrations.
CBC
07-05-2025
- CBC
After her friends drowned, she fought for better signage along the Grand River
Calls for stronger safety measures along the Grand River watershed have been answered by the Region of Waterloo. Amy Haertel led the push for better protection for water users after two women died on the river last summer. She spoke to CBC K-W's Aastha Shetty about what is now being done to ensure people are safe when they swim or boat along the Grand River.
