Environmental

Kyle Whyte on Shifting Interactions between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Parties in US Climate Adaptation Contexts

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Kyle Whyte has posted “A Concern About Shifting Interactions between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Parties in US Climate Adaptation Contexts“on SSRN.

Here is the abstract:

Indigenous peoples everywhere are preparing for or already coping with a number of climate change impacts, from rising sea-levels to shifting harvesting seasons. It is plausible that the capacity for environmental protection of two political institutions will change in relation to certain impacts: treaties and indigenous governmental jurisdictions recognised by the federal governments of nations such as the USA or Canada. This essay explores critically whether current solutions for these changes depend far too crucially on non-indigenous parties’ coming to an appropriate understanding of indigenous culture and self-determination.

Ninth Circuit Denies Motion to Publish Opinion in Te-Moak v. Interior

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Motion for Publication of Memorandum

CA9 Panel Order Denying Motion

Panel decision here. Briefs here.

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. FMC Corp. — Tribal Appellate Court Finds Jurisdiction over Nonmember Phosphate Plant — Opinion Now Available

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

FMC – Opinion Order Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (2014)

35-3 Tribal Appellate Court Decision June 2012 Part 1

35-4 Tribal Appellate Court Decision June 2012 Part 2

Prior post here.

Temporary Stay Lifted by Nuclear Regulatory Commission in In re Powertech USA

Kate Fort

Order here.

At its heart, the dispute over a stay boils down to a disagreement over the NHPA consultation process. Intervenors argue that the process by which the Programmatic Agreement was created was inadequate, and therefore fails to fully protect the Tribe’s [Oglala Sioux] sensitive and significant historic and cultural resources. Powertech, and the NRC Staff disagree and believe the Programmatic Agreement memorialized a fair and adequate process that fully protects all potential cultural and historic resources at the Dewey-Burdock sites.

Article On the Cost of Community Protests on Extraction Industry Projects

Kate Fort

From the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Here (pdf):

In this report we investigate company–community conflict and its role in the regulation of sustainability performance in the extractive industries. We estimate the cost of conflict to com- panies and identify conflict as an important means through which environmental and social risks are translated into business costs and decision-making. The paper clarifies the relationship between the environmental and social risk experienced—and interpreted—by local communities, and the business risks experienced—and interpreted—by corporations. Findings reveal that, at least for the case of the extractive industries, these two types of risk can co-constitute each other. The central importance of corporate strategy and behavior for sustainability science is highlighted.

***

Timing in the Project Cycle. When conflict occurs within the project cycle it has a significant influence on how companies respond to it. Conflict early in the cycle is more likely to lead companies to withdraw from an investment (which may imply reduced social and environmental impact, or may also mean the transfer of impacts to another location) and to consider fundamental re- design of the project. When conflict occurs later in the project cycle, companies are more likely to adapt the design or add on social responsibility activities, the latter of which provides impact compensation rather than impact reduction.

 

 

Patton Boggs Agrees to Pay Chevron in Ecuadorian Pollution Case

Kate Fort

Here.

Previous coverage here and here.

NYTs OpEd on Unsustainable Dams

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

An excerpt:

A case in point is the Elwha River on the Olympic Peninsula in Washington, where two hydroelectric dams built early in the last century exacted huge environmental costs but were no longer important as power generators. Salmon runs that once reached about 400,000 fish a year dropped to fewer than 3,000. A year after the Elwha Dam was removed, Chinook salmon returned to the river in numbers not seen in decades, with three-quarters of them observed spawning upstream of the former dam site. Today, the river runs free from its headwaters in Olympic National Park to the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and a terrible wrong imposed on the salmon-dependent Lower Elwha Klallam tribe has been righted.

American Bird Conservancy Plans to Sue Interior over 30-Year Eagle Kill Rule

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

An excerpt:

A leading bird conservation organization—American Bird Conservancy (ABC)—has announced its intention to sue the Department of the Interior (DOI), charging DOI with multiple violations of federal law in connection with its December 9, 2013, final regulation that allows wind energy companies and others to obtain 30-year permits to kill eagles without prosecution by the federal government. The previous rule provided for a maximum duration of five years for each permit.

Notice of Intent to Sue (PDF)

Inupiat Elder Brings His Perspective to Arctic Development Debate

Victoria Sweet

While politicians, lobbyists, activists, and business leaders regularly comment on whether or not the Arctic should be developed, how it should or should not be developed, and the implications of development, the voices of the indigenous people in the area are rarely given much press time. Edward Itta, Inupiat elder, member of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission, former mayor of North Slope Borough, and Senior Advisor, Pt Capital recently wrote an article expressing this concern. As he says in the article,

Like any other community, we Iñupiat don’t speak with one voice. What matters in this debate is that our views and concerns are taken into account. We need to be heard, because our perspective is fundamentally different from that of the warring parties. We aren’t just staking a claim to the Arctic. We’re part of it, and we always will be.

Full article here.

Excerpt from article:

Ours is a communal culture. Sharing has always been a key to our survival. It’s a good thing, because now there’s a whole lot of sharing going on. Lands that once belonged to us are under siege by two warring tribes — the environmentalists and the oil companies. Neither group owns any land outright. The federal government controls the 19-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to the east of Prudhoe Bay and the 23-million-acre National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPRA) in the west. Native corporations own smaller areas, primarily around the eight villages that are home to our Iñupiat people. . . .

We are a practical people. That’s how we survived for thousands of years in the Arctic. We have supported oil development in some cases and fought against it in others. We don’t have a default position, because the well being of our people depends on both oil and protected land. Our traditional hunting culture is linked to the health of wildlife habitat, while access to decent housing, food and transportation requires us to earn a living. We don’t choose between the two — we try to balance them.

Nez Perce Tribe Dues over Federal Mine Approval

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint in Idaho Conservation League v. USFS (D. Idaho):

1 Complaint

An excerpt:

Plaintiffs Idaho Conservation League and Nez Perce Tribe challenge the U. S. Forest Service’s approval of the Golden Meadows Exploration Project (Project) for violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Project is a three-year mineral exploration project on the Payette and Boise National Forests in Valley County, Idaho, proposed by Canadian mining company Midas Gold, Inc. (MGI).