Update: Standing Rock Sioux Tribe did not receive temporary restraining order to protect Burial Site

[Donkees]

[Glassunion]

1. Duh. Couldn't see that coming.

A minority is in the way of a corporate interest. How'd you think it would turn out?

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Sad. Disappointing.

[womanofthehills]

3. However, pipeline company just decided to stop work till Friday

Friday is the day the federal judge makes his decision.

[Donkees]

4. My understanding is that the judge granted a temporary partial restraining order for east of the

highway, but not west of the highway where the burial grounds are, based on not having jurisdiction for that area.

[womanofthehills]

6. The judge did, but the pipeline company decided to stop working till Friday

Friday, Sept 9, is when the federal judge makes a decision if the pipeline violates the National Historic Prevention Act.

[Donkees]

7. "The area in which Dakota Access agreed to halt activity until Friday represented some but not all

of the area requested in the temporary restraining order. Dakota Access said in its reply to the requested restraining order that the bulldozers were operating under the company’s construction schedule and did not destroy any important historical sites.

The tribes wanted Dakota Access restrained from working on areas of “significant cultural and historic value,” pending Boasberg’s decision on an injunction they requested last month."

This is all the information I keep coming across. I hope they did have a change of heart.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-dakota-pipeline-tribe_us_57cf3702e4b03d2d4597288f?section

[Hortensis]

8. Thanks for the info, guys.

[womanofthehills]

10. It is confusing- NBC headlines: Company Agrees to Halt N. Dakota Pipeline Work Until Friday

Then goes on to say - in parts of North Dakota

On Friday, legality of pipeline will be decided.

[Lee-Lee]

5. Who actually owns that property?

This case is so muddled with misinformation out there I can't seem to find reliable sources.

[womanofthehills]

11. I'm not sure it matters who owns the land if it contains sacred sites and burial grounds.

On July 26, 2016 the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe was stunned to learn that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had given its approval for the pipeline to run within a half-mile of the reservation without proper consultation or consent. Also, the new 1,172 mile Dakota Access Pipeline will cross Lake Oahe (formed by Oahe Dam on the Missouri) and the Missouri River as well, and disturb burial grounds and sacred sites on the tribe’s ancestral Treaty lands, according to SRST officials.
Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/08/15/dakota-access-pipeline-standoff-mni-wiconi-water-life-165470

[Lee-Lee]

12. It matters in several ways

That's why I am trying to figure this all out with real information.

I see the article says it goes within 1/2 mile of the tribal boundary, so that tells me it is not on actual tribal ground where the tribe has control and legal authority.

So for many factors, such as trespass as trespass laws and much more, the issue of who actually owns that land does matter. Is it privately held? Is it government land and, if so, what agency holds it? Those answers make a difference on what the proper procedures should have been for planning the construction as far as permits, public input, etc.

I absolutely don't want any tribal burial grounds destroyed. If the company is bulldozing known and mapped archeological sites of native heritage that should be an immediate halt. But how much review they were required to do to check for those will depend a lot on the answer to who owns that land.

I know here in NC when sites of significance are found outside the Cherokee boundaries or anywhere in Lunbee territory the tribal leadership will usually either make an offer to buy the land outright or work with the landowner to see any remains are repaectfullt removed and relocated if it is private property, but if it is government land they will demand the land be protected as-is as the law requires. Two different responses based on who owns it.

[Donkees]

13. My understanding is that it's private property under easement to DAPL partners.

turbinetree shared this link with me, and mentioned page 5:

http://saige.org/words/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/NATIVE-AMERICAN-GRAVES-PROTECTION-AND-REPATRIATION-ACT-saige-2013.pdf

[Lee-Lee]

16. Private property isn't affected by the regulations you linked to

As your posted link shows, it its property under control of a Federal agency then there are a lot of steps that must be taken and this looks like a clear violation.

If it's under easement from the Feds it probably is too.

If it is state land that is another set of rules and your link doesn't apply.

If it is private property than you link doesn't apply.

That's why this matters.

[True Dough]

9. Didn't see this footage posted

Although I'm sure it's been uploaded here somewhere. Disgusting display of violence by the security contractors. Where are the real authorities (not that some of them act much better)? Hate seeing the dogs used as pawns too.

[Donkees]

15. I posted that one on Sunday in the video forum, where most of the DAPL videos and

photos are. There's a new video there today. Agree with you about the dogs : (

[TheBlackAdder]

14. Regarding those dogs: Put Vics VapoRub on your clothing--dogs avoid it at all costs.