Minnesota Outdoorsman - Minnesota Fishing and Hunting Reports
* *

Author Topic: Not anudder controversy?  (Read 163 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Lee Borgersen

  • AKA "Smallmouthguide"
  • Pro-Staff
  • Master Outdoorsman
  • *
  • Posts: 11616
  • Karma: +23/-9
  • 2008 & 2011 MNO Fishing Challenge Champ! 2017 next
    • Lee's Lake Geneva Guide Service
Not anudder controversy?
« on: September 11, 2017, 09:07:26 AM »
  :bonk: Not another controversy please :cry:


:cry: Two prehistoric Indian sites found in path of FM diversion route :doofus:

Sep 10, 2017 at 2:51 p.m.

 :mad1: ....
FARGO—Two campsites used by prehistoric Indians for butchering animals lie in the path of the diversion channel designed to provide flood protection for Fargo-Moorhead.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is well aware of the sites and is hiring a firm to conduct extensive archeological studies of the locations in consultation with area American Indian tribes. :doah:

 :popcorn:
One of the sites, with a surface area of about 15 acres, is along the Sheyenne River near Argusville in northern Cass County. The other, with a surface area of about 20 acres, is along the Maple River in southern Cass County.

John Strand, a Fargo city commissioner, briefed the city's Native American Commission on the two sites. Corps representatives have been invited to present their findings to the Native American Commission in October.

The two sites don't appear to pose a threat to the $2.2 billion diversion project, Strand said. :taz:


"I think the intent is to open the communication clearly, up front," he added. Although the tribes are concerned, "I didn't get the impression it was anything like Standing Rock,"(don't count on it)   :banghead: a reference to massive protests against the Dakota Access oil pipeline in central North Dakota.

Federal law requires the corps to identify cultural sites and, when possible, to build around them. When that isn't possible, the corps is required to mitigate the loss through extensive study and documentation, including photographs.

"In the case of these two sites, they are in the path of destruction," said Susan Malin-Boyce, an archeologist for the corps in St. Paul.

About 330 sites have been identified by the North Dakota State Historic Preservation Office within the diversion project area. The route of the 36-mile diversion channel has been surveyed, but not all of the upstream staging area has been reviewed, she said.

Walking surveys along the diversion route include those by representatives of area tribes, Malin-Boyce said.

"They walked the relevant sections of the diversion channel looking for cultural properties," she said.

Consultations with both Ojibwe and Dakota-Lakota tribes from the region started in 2009, and the walking investigations were performed in 2011 by American Indians, who searched for potential burials and other sacred sites.

Archeologists have surveyed more than 26,000 acres of project land, looking for artifacts and remnants of historical buildings visible on the surface. A second phase of surveys in 2013, focusing on areas where artifacts were found, identified the two campsites, apparently used by hunting parties.

The site along the Sheyenne River, near Argusville, which has been known since 1939, has yielded thousands of bone fragments as well as arrowheads and other points made from Knife River flint, quarried from western North Dakota and traded over a vast area.

Also, three feet below the surface, it contains an area with evidence that a large mammal carcass was burned, she said.

The actual archeological sites are probably much smaller than 15 or 20 acres. Bone fragments and stone artifacts have been spread out over time by frost upheavals, animals burrowing and farming, Malin-Boyce said.

Both sites are about 2,000 years old, placing them within the Middle Woodland era, a period when seminomadic ancient Indians occupied much of the eastern United States, including the Red River Valley. The Woodland Indians can't be traced to individual contemporary tribes, but likely have descendants among many tribes today, Malin-Boyce said.

The two campsite locations, both along rivers, apparently offered advantages in hunting, primarily buffalo and deer, she said. It's likely the sites were occupied seasonally for weeks or perhaps even months at a time.

Teams of specialists will begin investigating and documenting the sites soon, with field work to be completed by Veterans Day, Malin-Boyce said. The teams will include archeologists as well as paleo ethnobotanists, ceramicists and professional photographers, she said.

Following the field work, laboratory analysis likely will take a year.

On the surface, the two campsites, long obscured by time and the elements, are unremarkable.

"They just look like fields," Malin-Boyce said. "They don't look like anything." :angry2:
Proud Member of the CWCS.
http://www.cwcs.org

Member of Walleyes For Tomorrow.
www.walleyesfortomorrow.org

              2012 BWCA Report
http://leeslakegenevaguideservice.com/boundry_%2712.htm

If you help someone when they're in trouble, they will remember you when they're in trouble again.

Offline LPS

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 2829
  • Karma: +39/-6
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #1 on: September 11, 2017, 09:11:49 AM »
Oh boy, here we go again...

Offline Rebel SS

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 6171
  • Karma: +55/-17
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #2 on: September 11, 2017, 09:23:42 AM »
Hell, there's people buried everywhere out there. Cowboy's and Injuns alike. Might be some sodbusters that got killed by da Injuns...who knows?  Back in those days, no Happy Haven Cemetery's around....
"You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself''   Rick Nelson/SCB

Offline Steve-o

  • Xtreme Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 189
  • Karma: +4/-1
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2017, 09:33:58 AM »
How did anything in this country ever get built?!?

Heaven forbid you should ever find an arrowhead next to a creek or in a plowed field.

Offline Rebel SS

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 6171
  • Karma: +55/-17
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2017, 09:34:57 AM »
Thats on my bucket list...never ever found one!  :mad1:
"You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself''   Rick Nelson/SCB

Online Lee Borgersen

  • AKA "Smallmouthguide"
  • Pro-Staff
  • Master Outdoorsman
  • *
  • Posts: 11616
  • Karma: +23/-9
  • 2008 & 2011 MNO Fishing Challenge Champ! 2017 next
    • Lee's Lake Geneva Guide Service
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #5 on: September 12, 2017, 12:19:57 PM »
 :bs:And da beat goes ON...an ON ....and...ON!  :doah:

 :reporter; Dis jest in!.........

    Environmentalists  and Native Americans fighting to stop pipeline!     :taz:                                           

9/11/17
                                                   
 :coffee: ....
  Enbridge Line 3 replacement not needed, Minn. commerce department says.

 :reporter;
ST. PAUL — The Minnesota Department of Commerce has come out against the Enbridge Line 3 replacement, raising the stakes in an already contentious battle over the oil pipeline’s fate.

“In light of the serious risks and effects on the natural and socioeconomic environments of the existing Line 3 and the limited benefit that the existing Line 3 provides to Minnesota refineries, it is reasonable to conclude that Minnesota would be better off if Enbridge proposed to cease operations of the existing Line 3, without any new pipeline being built,” the agency wrote in testimony submitted to the Public Utilities Commission on Monday, Sept. 11.

The testimony, written by Kate O’Connell, manager of the Energy Regulation and Planning Unit of the Department of Commerce, comes ahead of evidentiary hearings on the oil pipeline replacement that will see the project debated in a trial-like setting in November. A new round of public hearings across the state will kick off at the end of the month.

Separately, the adequacy of the pipeline’s final environmental impact statement is under review. Comments are being accepted on that issue through Oct. 2.

Enbridge wants to lay 340 miles of new pipe across Minnesota on its route from Alberta to the company’s terminal in Superior. The pipeline would carry 760,000 barrels of oil per day and take a new route across much of the state compared to the company’s other lines. The existing Line 3, which is about 50 years old and operating at half its original capacity, would be cleaned out and largely left in the ground.

 :scratch: ....
Intervenors in the state’s permitting process — with some for and many standing against Line 3 — had to turn in initial testimony on Monday. Environmentalists and Native American tribes are fighting to stop the pipeline from going forward while Enbridge and its allies assert safety will be improved by replacing Line 3.

In a statement released late Monday, Enbridge responded that “the Department of Commerce opinion is only one view which we and other energy consumers will respond to in detail through this process. We’re confident in our evidence and we’re confident in the Minnesota regulatory process which requires weighing of all evidence by a judge followed by her recommendations to the Minnesota PUC.”

Commerce spokesman Ross Corson said that “unlike the environmental impact statement, which was an impartial fact-finding document,” the department and other stakeholders are now taking sides and making cases for or against the pipeline’s approval, which ultimately rests in the hands of the Public Utilities Commission.
An economic analysis by London Economics International included in Commerce’s testimony said that regional refineries “have been operating at high levels of utilization, which indicates both they are not short of physical supplies of crude oil, and that they have little room to increase total crude runs.”

The department also found the expansion of Line 67 from 500,000 to 800,000 barrels per day would meet the need claimed by Enbridge for Line 3.

Some self-described water protectors who have been actively protesting the pipeline in recent weeks cheered the agency’s testimony.

“The authorities are beginning to take into account things we have been saying all along — that this project doesn't make sense,” Korii Northrup of Cloquet said. “We feel Line 3 should be removed and the land restored.”

In other testimony filed Monday, environmental scientist Chris Joseph wrote on behalf of Friends of the Headwaters that “the evidence provided by Enbridge itself as well as industry authorities indicates that the project is not needed. Further, Enbridge has not provided nor demonstrated that the costs of the project are outweighed by the actual, incremental benefits of the project.”

Filing testimony in favor of the project, David Barnett of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry wrote: "The Line 3 Replacement Project presents a significant opportunity for the creation of several different types of jobs within Minnesota as well as other economic benefits for the state and its residents."

For Shippers for Secure, Reliable and Economical Petroleum Transportation, Paul Kahler of Conva Energy wrote: “Failure to construct the project at full capacity would result in shippers continuing to be unable to ship volumes nominated to meet market demands. … Shippers would have to seek alternative transportation arrangements, including other pipelines and rail, to move their oil supply to markets.”

The $6.5 billion Line 3 replacement project is already under construction in Canada and Superior. Enbridge wants the pipeline online by 2019, though a recommendation from the PUC is not expected until next spring.

Gov. Mark Dayton said in a statement Monday he will wait for the process to play out “before expressing my personal views.”

“I note that, under statute, the PUC is completely independent of my administration,” he added. “I am confident that it will make its decisions based upon all the evidence and its judgment about the best interests of all of Minnesota.”

Republican state House of Representatives Speaker Kurt Daudt blasted the Department of Commerce findings in a countering statement.

“I urge Gov. Dayton to support this needed infrastructure improvement and instruct his staff to quit blocking Minnesota jobs," Daudt said.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2017, 12:57:32 PM by Lee Borgersen »
Proud Member of the CWCS.
http://www.cwcs.org

Member of Walleyes For Tomorrow.
www.walleyesfortomorrow.org

              2012 BWCA Report
http://leeslakegenevaguideservice.com/boundry_%2712.htm

If you help someone when they're in trouble, they will remember you when they're in trouble again.

Offline LPS

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 2829
  • Karma: +39/-6
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2017, 01:07:06 PM »
So much bickering on these projects that it is hard to tell what to do.

Online Lee Borgersen

  • AKA "Smallmouthguide"
  • Pro-Staff
  • Master Outdoorsman
  • *
  • Posts: 11616
  • Karma: +23/-9
  • 2008 & 2011 MNO Fishing Challenge Champ! 2017 next
    • Lee's Lake Geneva Guide Service
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2017, 07:23:51 AM »
:police:  Two charged for blocking entrance at Enbridge pipeline contractor.

Sep 15, 2017 at 9:22 p.m. 


 
 :police: .....
SUPERIOR, Wis.—Two people have been charged after a protest blocked the entrances at an Enbridge pipeline contractor in Superior, Wis., on Thursday.


 


Amber Mae Duvall, 30, of University City, Mo., and Alexander Emery Good-Cane-Milk, 23, of Cloquet, Minn., were each charged Friday in Douglas County Circuit Court with one count of obstructing an officer and one count of misdemeanor bail jumping. Both charges carry a maximum sentence of nine months or $10,000 fine. :happy1: :happy1:



 :banghead: .....
Duvall was previously charged with resisting/obstructing and trespassing on Sept. 8 and Good-Cane-Milk was previously charged with resisting an officer, disorderly conduct and trespass to land on Aug. 30 in connection with protests that stopped work on a segment of Enbridge's Line 3 pipeline construction in rural Douglas County. The criminal complaint noted that both of them were ordered to have no contact with Enbridge property or employees, nor interfere with Enbridge operations.

 :Clap: .....
Five people were arrested during Thursday's protest. A series of worksite protests began Aug. 21 southwest of Superior on the construction site of the Line 3 replacement pipeline. Thursday's protest was the first within the city of Superior's limits. Enbridge is constructing a new pipeline to replace the existing 50-year-old Line 3 that crosses northern Minnesota on its route from Alberta to Superior. The replacement is currently under construction in Canada and Wisconsin, and awaiting the outcome of a review process in Minnesota.


Enbridge spokeswoman Jennifer Smith said that workers were on the site before dawn on Thursday for a safety meeting and encountered the blocked exits upon their departure. Workers eventually drove around the blockades. Smith said workers endure long and hard days, and wished the protesters would accept the company's offer to talk rather than :censored: delay work.

According to the criminal complaint:

Superior police officers responded to a call about protesters blocking an entrance to an Enbridge pipeline work yard, 5300 Stinson Ave., at 6:17 a.m. Thursday. Occupants of two vehicles, a silver Toyota and a red minivan, had positioned their vehicles in front of the gates to the work yard and deflated the vehicles' tires. About a dozen people were chanting and recording the situation from across the street.

 :popcorn:
The occupants had chained themselves inside the vehicles. A man, later identified as Good-Cane-Milk, had attached himself to the rear cargo area of the van and his arms were inside a large metal tube while he laid on his stomach facing the ground across the rear bumper. An officer attempted to get him out of the van, but he refused and officers had to use power tools to cut him out of the van.





An officer saw a woman at the scene who was believed to have been previously arrested and ordered to have no contact with Enbridge property. The woman, later identified as Duvall, was recording the incident while walking along the road, in addition to participating in the protest. When asked by the officer if she had a no-contact order, she said she didn't, and when she was asked if she was Duvall, she said she wasn't. :confused:
« Last Edit: September 16, 2017, 07:27:29 AM by Lee Borgersen »
Proud Member of the CWCS.
http://www.cwcs.org

Member of Walleyes For Tomorrow.
www.walleyesfortomorrow.org

              2012 BWCA Report
http://leeslakegenevaguideservice.com/boundry_%2712.htm

If you help someone when they're in trouble, they will remember you when they're in trouble again.

Offline Rebel SS

  • Master Outdoorsman
  • Posts: 6171
  • Karma: +55/-17
Re: Not anudder controversy?
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2017, 11:26:15 AM »
And YET anudder one!! "Will disrupt their way of life".....what, doing nothing??!!  :angry2:



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-s-border-wall-could-carve-path-though-native-american-n801691
"You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself''   Rick Nelson/SCB