Here is the order in Yount v. Jewell (D. Ariz.):
Environmental
Short Video on the Recent Tar Sands Healing Walk
TransCanada’s South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Permit to Build KeystoneXL Expires
Canadian Supreme Court Issues Decision in Tsilhqot’in First Nation Land Claim
Decision here
Held: The appeal should be allowed and a declaration of Aboriginal title over the area requested should be granted. A declaration that British Columbia breached its duty to consult owed to the Tsilhqot’in Nation should also be granted.
***
In finding that Aboriginal title had been established in this case, the trial judge identified the correct legal test and applied it appropriately to the evidence. While the population was small, he found evidence that the parts of the land to which he found title were regularly used by the Tsilhqot’in, which supports the conclusion of sufficient occupation. The geographic proximity between sites for which evidence of recent occupation was tendered and those for which direct evidence of historic occupation existed also supports an inference of continuous occupation. And from the evidence that prior to the assertion of sovereignty the Tsilhqot’in repelled other people from their land and demanded permission from outsiders who wished to pass over it, he concluded that the Tsilhqot’in treated the land as exclusively theirs. The Province’s criticisms of the trial judge’s findings on the facts are primarily rooted in the erroneous thesis that only specific, intensively occupied areas can support Aboriginal title. Moreover, it was the trial judge’s task to sort out conflicting evidence and make findings of fact. The presence of conflicting evidence does not demonstrate palpable and overriding error. The Province has not established that the conclusions of the trial judge are unsupported by the evidence or otherwise in error. Nor has it established his conclusions were arbitrary or insufficiently precise. Absent demonstrated error, his findings should not be disturbed.
APTN story here.
CBC here.
Complaint Challenging New 30-Year Eagle Permit Rule
Here is the complaint in Shearwater v. Ashe (N.D. Cal.).
Plaintiffs are challenging a final nationwide regulation promulgated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS” or “Service”) and the U.S. Department of the Interior (“DOI”) on December 9, 2013 that “extend[ed] the maximum term for programmatic permits” to kill or otherwise “take” bald and golden eagles from five years to thirty years. 78 Fed. Reg. 73704. This major rule change – the “thirty-year eagle take rule” – applies to industrial activities of all Case5:14-cv-02830 Document1 Filed06/19/14 Page1 of 23 kinds that incidentally take federally protected eagles in the course of otherwise lawful activities
but, as acknowledged by the Service, was promulgated specifically to respond to the wind power industry’s desire to facilitate the expansion of wind energy projects in areas occupied by eagles. Id. at 73709. However, the rule was adopted in flagrant violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4370f (“NEPA”) because the Service did not prepare any document analyzing the environmental impacts of the rule change, as required by NEPA and its implementing regulations. In addition, the rule change violates the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 668-668d (“BGEPA”), and the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2), because the rule subverts the basic eagle protection purposes of BGEPA and eliminates crucial procedural and other safeguards for eagle populations without any adequate explanation. Accordingly, the regulation should be vacated and remanded to Defendants for compliance with federal law.
Northern Michigan Pipeline Symposium, June 24
Here.
This free event is designed to help concerned citizens learn more about pipelines in Northern Michigan and how they can help protect our water resources from the devastating impacts of a pipeline failure. The public is welcome and encouraged to attend. Tip of the Mitt Watershed is hosting a Northern Michigan Pipeline Symposium to provide valuable information on pipelines in our region plus the opportunity for citizens to have their questions and concerns regarding pipelines operation and safety issues addressed. A panel of representatives will be on hand to provide information to the public, including Enbridge, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The event will involve brief presentations on pipeline safety and Enbridge’s Line 5, and a question and answer session.
Summary and Pictures from Finland, Sacred Sites Conference
I was lucky to be invited to give a keynote presentation at an International Conference titled “Experiencing and Protecting Arctic Sacred Sites and Culturally Important Landscapes – Creating Partnerships with Mutual Respect”. The 3 day event was held at The Saijos Cultural Centre; the Siida Museum, and Saami Educational Institute, Inari, Lapland, Finland. The purpose of the workshop was to launch the multidisciplinary participatory educational research project “Indigenous Peoples’ Sacred and Cultural Sites – Building Partnerships for Safeguarding and Transmitting Unique Arctic Heritage for Future Generations (ISACUS)”.
The participants included elders, scholars, knowledge holders, poets, drum makers, story tellers, politicians, healers, and traditional singers from Saami Land, North America, Siberian tribes, Russian association of Indigenous Peoples, Komi Republic, Canada, Vienna, Germany, and Finland. Issues were addressed during the conference regarding the proposed diamond mine in Utsjoki (near an important Saami sacred site); a proposed mine near Jokkmokk, Sweden, which threatens traditional reindeer grazing grounds; vandalism and desecration at sacred sites in Finland, Canada, North America and Siberia; International Law; and also the revival of Indigenous culture and traditions around the world.
Look for publications as well as more collaborative projects in the future from this group as it works to both raise awareness and encourage collaboration to protect sacred sites in this region. Thanks to the organizers from Arctic Centre, University of Lapland; Arctic Law Thematic Network; Université de Montréal; Sámi Education Institute; Sámi Museum of Finland for this great event.
Traditional Saami drum maker playing for us in the opening session.
View from one of the sacred islands.
With some of my new friends from Russia.
More beautiful views.
Demonstrating a traditional yoik (joik).
A sacred spring that is said to never freeze even in the coldest winter temperatures. Sweetest water I have ever tasted.
Young Finnish Saami posing in front of protest art, trying to raise awareness of the fight against mining developments within Saami territory that threaten sacred sites and traditional livelihoods.
Outside of the Saami parliament building where keynote presentations were given on the first day.
Press Release: “Keweenaw Bay Indian Community stands 500 strong at Eagle Mine Court of Appeals Hearing”
Keweenaw Bay Indian Community stands 500 strong at Eagle Mine Court of Appeals Hearing (PDF)
For Release: June 5, 2014
Contact: Donald Shalifoe, Sr., Tribal President
Phone: 906-353-6623
Baraga, MI — About 500 members of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC) 
stood united around the importance of keeping their waters clean from contamination associated with sulfide mining on June 3, 2014 at the Michigan Court of Appeals. Oral arguments were heard involving the Eagle Mine, Michigan’s first permitted sulfide mine in the Upper Peninsula.
“This is the first time in our generation that the community as a whole came together to fight for true sovereignty and engage in spontaneous government participation. The goal of the new moving-forward Tribal Council is to bring transparency and involvement to the Anishinaabeg (the people),” said Donald Shalifoe, Sr., KBIC’s Ogimaa (Chief).
Many tribal members carpooled and traveled about eight hours to line up for the 10:00 a.m. Lansing hearing. KBIC’s remarkable presence overwhelmed the Michigan Hall of Justice whose staff reported it was their largest turn out ever for a court hearing.
Tribal leaders and elders observed the hearing from within the court room, while hundreds watched and listened to the proceedings in an overflow video conferencing room. Traditional drumming and singing resounded outside the building following the hearing.
KBIC’s Vice President Carole LaPointe remarked “it was a very educational experience for our membership and youth.”
The Anishinaabeg band has opposed the Eagle Mine development, located on Treaty of 1842 ceded homeland, since it was first permitted by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) in 2006.
Unsettled concerns involve the mining regulatory process, improper permitting and inadequate assessment of impacts to the area environment, cultural resources and water quality, including groundwater contamination and the potential for perpetual acid mine drainage upstream from Lake Superior.
Tribal member Jeffery Loman said “the hearing today is another testimony to the fact that inadequate regulation and collusion between industry and government results in endless litigation.”
One aspect of the evolving case questions what qualifies as a “place of worship” under Michigan’s sulfide mining statute. An initial ruling by Michigan Administrative Law Judge Richard Patterson recommended mitigation of impacts to an Anishinaabeg sacred place, Migi zii wa sin (Eagle Rock), but the MDEQ made a final permit decision asserting only built structures are places of worship.
Discriminatory enforcement of Michigan law has led to substantial degradation to KBIC’s sacred site. This includes obtrusive mine facilities and a decline access ramp into the base of Eagle Rock, non-stop noise and activity, and hindered traditional access and use. Spiritually significant high places like Eagle Rock are used in solitude by the Anishinaabeg for multi-day fasting, vision quest and ceremony.
Despite the passage of the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, Native people still struggle to protect their remaining sacred places in the face of extractive development agendas. “It is a shame that the United States of America, proudly founded upon values of religious freedom, has trouble guaranteeing this right to all of its nation’s first people,” said tribal member Jessica Koski.
KBIC anticipates a decision from the Michigan Court of Appeals within six months. The Eagle Mine’s timeframe for production start-up is the end of 2014. “While the court deliberates, it is important to remember that regardless of the outcome, we are in the right for standing up for the Yellow Dog Plains. We hope the court understands their decision will have long lasting implications for this place, as well as other areas that are slated for mining,” said Emily Whittaker of Big Bay, Michigan who gathered alongside KBIC and other locally affected residents.
The Michigan Court of Appeals ruling will be an important precedent for additional sulfide mining proposals threatening Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and waters of the Great Lakes.
###
Briefs in Phillip v. State of Alaska — Yup’ik Fishers Case
Here:
Victoria Sweet posted the Atlantic Monthly profile of this case here.
“When Global Warming Kills Your God,” 23 Yup’ik Men Defying a Fishing Ban for Their Traditional Beliefs
This well-written article (link) paints a powerful picture about the devastating impact that a warming climate is having on Alaska Natives. Cited is the fact that an estimated 86% of Alaska Native villages will require relocation over the next 50 years because of climate changes.
In addition, the article looks at the case of 23 tribal members who were punished for defying a fishing ban. Briefs available here. Their case will be heard in the Alaska Court of Appeals, possibly sometime this summer. According to the article, “the fishermen’s civil disobedience has been framed as a First Amendment issue: The Yup’ik believe they have an obligation to continue their ancestral traditions.” In an amicus brief, the ACLU stated
A Yup’ik fisherman who is a sincere believer in his religious role as a steward of nature, believes that he must fulfill his prescribed role to maintain this ‘collaborative reciprocity’ between hunter and game. Completely barring him from the salmon fishery thwarts the practice of a real religious belief. Under Yup’ik religious belief, this cycle of interplay between humans and animals helped perpetuate the seasons; without the maintaining of that balance, a new year will not follow the old one.
While the trial judge appeared sympathetic, he still felt the state had sufficient reason for imposing the ban. It will be interesting to see how the court of appeals deals with this defense, particularly under current changing conditions.
There, [in the Court of Appeals] state-appointed judges will grapple with the same question the court faced in 1979, when an indigenous hunter named Carlos Frank was charged with illegally transporting a newly slain moose. Frank argued that he had needed the animal for a religious ceremony. Two lower courts found him guilty, but the Alaska Supreme Court reversed the verdict, calling moose meat “the sacramental equivalent to the wine and wafer in Christianity.”
This, in the end, is what’s at stake for the Yup’ik fishermen. Their villages may be swallowed up by the sea, but the people themselves won’t float away. They’ll relocate en masse or drift into the urban diaspora of Anchorage. But if they stop fishing king salmon, the Yup’ik believe they’ll lose something far more fundamental than their homes.
H/T to TH.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.