The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) project has caused significant controversy since August. Clashes between fracking firm Energy Transfer Partners, Native Americans, environmentalists and police have erupted in North Dakota.
A movement called #NoDAPL has since emerged, with protestors led by the Standing Rock Sioux tribe arguing that the project encroaches on Native American sacred grounds and would threaten the local environment.
The project, which aims to construct a 30-inch diameter pipeline that is over 1,000 miles long, will transport crude oil from the Bakken and Three Forks Shale formations in North Dakota to oil refineries in Illinois and other states.
The current route passes within a mile of the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, but not on land the tribe formally owns. Both peaceful and violent protests have occurred at a camp along the pipeline’s path as part of the #NoDAPL movement.
The Hopkins community has expressed nearly unanimous support for the protestors.
Sociology graduate student Valentina Dallona, who studies labor and social movements, believes that protestors view DAPL as a government attempt to infringe on indigenous rights.
“First of all, the struggle of the indigenous people against the Dakota pipeline project must be inscribed within the long-lasting battle of the native people against the encroaching of U.S.’ government and business into their land,” Dallona wrote in an email to The News-Letter. “It is well known how the seizure of land from native people — together with all the resources it holds — and their (mal)integration within the domestic and world economy has led to enormous social dislocations in those communities, the effects of which we see in the sky-high rates of unemployment, drug abuse, chronic health conditions that affect native territories.”
Those who oppose development projects similar to DAPL have historically promoted “Not In My Backyard (NIMBY), feelings that such projects encroach on land that is too close to home.
However, Dallona emphasized that the movement against DAPL has spread beyond Native Americans and NIMBYism to include other activists who are concerned about sustainable energy.
Protesters, who call themselves ‘water protectors,’ are concerned that the pipeline poses a threat of spilling oil into water supply and harming environmentally sensitive lands.
“It has now grown into an heterogeneous movement. The struggle of the Native people is therefore embedded within and supported by a range of other actors,” Dallona wrote. “According to these views, fracking is an environmentally and socially unsustainable practice of ‘extreme extraction,’ generating high carbon emissions and irreversibly contaminating groundwaters and air, not to talk about the array of health issues suffered by communities living in proximity of these projects.”
Graduate student Yarelix Estrada echoed the sentiment that the government takeover of Native American land is consistent with the country’s oppressive past. Estrada believes that Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind DAPL, should respect Native American land.
“If they want to do a pipeline they shouldn’t do it through the reservation,” she said. “They should comply with the laws they had before. Native Americans are already a vulnerable population. They’re taking advantage of them. They’re not rich. They’re not powerful stakeholders on those issues.”
Senior Cera Hassinan, whose mother is a member of the Sioux tribe protesting DAPL, leads an indigenous people’s group at Hopkins. She emphasized that the tribes oppose the construction of any pipeline near their ancestral land.
“You can’t build a pipeline that can be built under sacred ground. If this pipeline were to burst, it would poison the river and that water,” Hassinan said. “They’re saying ‘water is life.’ There are previous accounts of pipelines breaking hurting land, life and hurting the environment. The Native American land is being given by the government and they’re being told to build a pipeline without permission of the native people.”
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is now expected to complete a full Environmental Impact Statement on DAPL. The opposition has sued the agency on grounds that it is violating the National Historical Preservation Act.
However, the pipeline has already gained approval by the federal government and is expected to be complete in early 2017. Unlike the fourth stage of the Keystone XL pipeline, which President Obama vetoed after it passed through Congress, the White House continues to monitor the situation.
Opposers of DAPL, including some Hopkins students, have used Facebook’s check-in feature to report that they are at the Standing Rock Indian Reservation. The trend arose as a method to confuse law enforcement who used Facebook to monitor the protestors.
“I’m not sure the check-in really helped, but the fact that they’re getting [the word out on] social media... helps [by] letting as many people know what’s going on,” Hassinan said.
Sophomore Vahni-Bernard Vishala was one of thousands who checked in to Standing Rock Indian Reservation on Facebook to support the cause. She believes that given the history of Native American displacement in the country, government and businesses should not impose themselves onto their sacred spaces.
“[The pipeline] intrudes upon their culture, and it’s such a violation of their basic human rights,” she said. “We have certain things granted to us in the constitution through our culture. It’s disrespectful to the Native Americans and [implies] that are they not American citizens too. You don’t see anyone saying let’s build a pipeline through a church.”
On the other hand, Hopkins graduate student Jackie Choi posted on Facebook in response to the growing online movement, stressing that it is equally important to partake in activism in addition to showing solidarity on social media.
“I think it’s ‘slacktivism’ to post and not donate and claim you’re doing something. A lot of people said they were ‘checking in’ for solidarity, and, up front, that’s fine,” Choi said. “Even sharing for the sake of boosting knowledge about the issue for those who don’t know about it is even fine. But to make the claim that they’re making a huge difference because of the check-in? That’s ridiculous. A lot of people don’t donate, they just post, and that’s frustrating.”
Dallona argued that the project rewards oil companies while disadvantaging the already marginalized native populations.
“The crucial question here is who pays for and who reaps the benefits from this project. As we’ve seen there is a long history tracking the perpetual defeats of the Native Americans in these processes,” she wrote.
The DAPL project is projected to be completed by Jan. 1, 2017.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The News-Letter.