Line 3 Debate and the Anthropocene

On my recent trip to Grinnell College, I noticed a tree trunk displayed in the Noyce Science Center. There were plaques around the trunk pointing to the different tree rings. The plaques were engraved with a story/benchmark about the college’ history in relation to a tree ring. One of the plaques read “this tree was cut down in the expansion of this building” and pointed to a tree ring. On one level, reading this was saddening because a tree that had been there since the 1800s was cut down to expand a building. On another level, this reminded me of what glaciologist Lonnie Thompson found in 2008. In examining a Tibetan glacier, Thompson found that “the radioactive particles that fell out from the atomic tests of the 1960s, were missing. The glacier had melted back through that history, wiped it away” (McKibben 19). In many ways our history is embedded in the very land we inhabit.

In this paper, I will explore the ways in which humans’ relationship to land is described in videos published by Honor the Earth, a non-profit organization focused on Native environmental justice, by Enbridge, a multinational energy company and by Native activists. The videos are focused on the construction of Line 3, a pipeline built in 1961 by Enbridge that “ships Tar Sands crude from Alberta to Superior, WI, spanning over 300 miles across Northern Minnesota, crossing the Leech Lake and Fond du Lac reservations and the l855 and l842 treaty areas” (Line 3 Pipeline Abandonment: What You Need To Know). First, I will provide a brief overview of the debate surrounding Line 3. Secondly, I will conduct an analysis of the language and framing used in videos published by Enbridge, Honor the Earth and Native activists. Through my analysis of the videos, I found that Enbridge focused on the economic benefits of the construction of the new Line 3 while activists focused on the environmental, cultural and spiritual impacts of the pipeline project. While both parties agree that the existing Line 3 has structural problems, their solutions and concerns are representative of a different way of thinking and interacting with the land and its resources.

In 2014, Enbridge proposed the “Line 3 Replacement Project” in order to address the corroding and aging pipeline. However, this project would not actually replace Line 3. Instead it would build another pipeline to continue transporting oil through the existing line while construction was underway (Nelson & Kraker). The project outlines that once the new pipeline is built, Enbridge will deactivate and clean the existing pipeline but would not remove it from the land. Native activists and environmental justice organizations are concerned about “a leaky pipeline left underground to decay [as it] is a major threat to surrounding ecosystems” (“MN350.Org — Enbridge In Minnesota”). These concerns were echoed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement Line 3 Project by the Minnesota Department of Commerce on August 17, 2017. The Minnesota Department of Commerce notes “potential environmental risks and adverse impacts of unknown existing contamination surrounding the pipe that would never be discovered and remediated if the line was abandoned” (Minnesota Department of Commerce 8–1). Additionally, activists are concerned about the construction of a new pipeline route.

While the new route would be off tribal land, it “will intersect Ojibwe treaty lands near White Earth Reservation in Ogema, MN” (Nelson & Kraker, Edwards). In an article published in the Mac Weekly, Macalester student Zoe Allen ’22, “who has lived on White Earth Reservation for the past 10 years, says the line will pose a particular problem for the wild rice sources in her community” (Edwards). The new pipeline route would be built on wild rice lakes. Allen told the Mac Weekly:

“wild rice grows in Anishinaabe country and it’s one of our main traditional foods, sacred to Ojibwe people….For some people, [wild rice] is their main source of income….Everybody goes out in September and harvests it, parches it and sells it… it’s very crucial and sacred to us, as a people. And it’s not everywhere, either. It’s only in specific spots. If those specific spots are polluted, or the pipeline cracks — which it probably will — then we’d be kind of screwed” (Edwards)

Similarly, in their Impact Statement the Department of Commerce wrote:

“wild rice, fish, and other treaty resources are sources of income and subsistence for tribes in the area. Treaty rights and tribal resources are important to American Indian tribes as both natural and cultural resources that reinforce their cultural identity. Additionally, the mental well-being of American Indian tribal members is linked to their tribal resources and access to their treaty rights.” (Minnesota Department of Commerce 11–15)

Abandoning the existing pipeline, regardless of the deactivation and cleaning of the line has environmental risks. It is unknown whether there is contamination underneath the existing line, but regardless allowing the pipeline to remain underground would eventually pose environmental threats to the land and water. Additionally, the construction of the new pipeline route would put wild rice beds at risk of pollution and contamination. As noted above wild rice is a “source of income and subsistence” but wild rice is has spiritual and cultural significance for the Native community in Minnesota (Minnesota Department of Commerce 11–15, 9–24). The Department of Commerce notes:

“Many elders teach that the practice of Indian spirituality requires undisturbed access to culturally significant places and their resources. These specific places derive their power and sacredness from their natural state that was provided by the Creator. The Lakota/Dakota hold the earth sacred, and its places and associated ceremonies are a necessary expression of Indian spirituality and often are a key to wellness and public health” (Minnesota Department of Commerce 9–24).

Furthermore, the Department writes:

“Natalie Weyaus of the Mille Lacs Band, for instance, noted her connection to the physical the world by saying, “We are not alone in this world. We are not above anything else. We’re just part of the environment, and not better or not worse, just here with the environment. (Minnesota Department of Commerce 9–25)

This quote captures the way in which some Native activists think of their relationship to the land. During the TEDxTC (Twin Cities) event in 2012, Winona LaDuke talked about land in a similar way.

LaDuke opened her talk by stating that “food has culture, it has history, it has stories, it has relationships that tie us to our food” (LaDuke, TEDxTC). LaDuke tells us that her community was instructed by prophets to travel “where the food grows upon the water,” referring to the wild rice that grows in the lakes of Minnesota. In his book Eaarth, Bill McKibben describes a similar process of human migration. He notes that human civilizations settled in strategic ways:

“We built our great cities next to seas that have remained tame and level, or at altitudes high enough that disease-bearing mosquitoes could not overwinter…Every aspect of our civilization reflects that particular world,” that world with the “‘correct’ temperature” to “grow grain… [to] provide drinking and irrigation water” (McKibben 15).

We accommodated to nature’s flows and were “just part of the environment” as Weyaus says. We recognized the different aspects of earth and non-human species that exist and determined where we would most benefit from earth’s resources. We designed our systems with the same strategy in mind. “We refined the farming that has swelled our numbers to take full advantage of that predictable heat and rainfall” (McKibben 15). McKibben argues that “we no longer live on that planet” and that we “have already [been] taken out of the sweet spot where humans so long thrived” and benefitted from earth’s natural resources (McKibben 16). McKibben would argue that we have entered the anthropocene, which beyond being a label for the current geological age, explains the ways in which humans interact and influence land and how humans think of earth’s resources. After examining various videos published on Enbridge’s website, I noticed that they justify their project by focusing on the economic benefits of the construction.

The videos by Enbridge explore the ways in which the construction of the pipe would help the local and regional economy. Aside from the videos and countless statistics on the economic benefits of construction, Enbridge highlights their contribution to property taxes that help fund rural schools (Enbridge, “Economic Benefits”). They also include testimonials from hotels and restaurants around the site of construction. The images of “ordinary” Minnesotans and small-business owners seek to humanize the corporation’s project and demonstrate how the construction of the pipeline benefits local businesses and local economy. These statistics and testimonials attempt to address the safety of the pipeline as being the company’s “core value” with phrases that describe their maintenance activities as “integrity digs.”

Not all videos focus on the economic benefits of the pipeline; some address environmental concerns. In one of the testimonials published by Enbridge, an environmental consultant says “I am from a rural part of MN…I’ve hunted these lands, I’ve fished these lakes, I’ve gone wild ricing. This is a background playground for all of us” (“L3RP and the Minnesota PUC hearings: Caring about land, water and people”). While the video is meant to serve as a local’s approval of the Enbridge project, it demonstrates how the company and how people who support the construction of a new route view the land. The consultant refers to the land as a “background playground” (“L3RP and the Minnesota PUC hearings: Caring about land, water and people”). The land is not seen as merely existing but as property. The freedom to use land and treat it as a “playground” implies a sort of ownership over the land, “land as real estate” (Minnesota Department of Commerce 9–26). In her TEDxTC talk, LaDuke mentions that ownership of seeds is also concentrated within fewer large corporations. Land is no longer merely inhabited but owned. This change can be attributed to the United States’ consumer and capitalist economy.

After examining videos published by Honor the Earth and music videos from local indigenous artists, like Jayanthi Kyle and Thomas X, I noticed greater concern and appreciation for the land and its resources. Honor the Earth as well as Jayanthi Kyle and Thomas X, talk about the environmental damage that pipelines cause and will continue to cause with the construction of Line 3 with a focus on how the pipeline contaminates the land which the indigenous community rely on for food. In her TED talk, LaDuke notes that up until about 100 years ago the Ojibwe people were entirely self-sufficient in food and that food economy constitutes “one-fourth of tribal economy.” Access to natural resources, like clean water, wild rice watersheds provides the community with both subsistence and economic resources. Maintaining these resources free of contamination goes beyond the benefits that the community receives from them. As noted above, wild rice and the land have cultural and spiritual significance. In “That’s How the River Flows,” Jayanthi Kyle sings “I will shout and give thanks to the water that’s a giver.” Kyle recognizes the land and the river as a provider, rather than something that needs to be controlled or exploited.

Large corporations and many Native activists have different ways of utilizing nature’s resources and different ways of inhabiting the land. Today, corporations don’t just build around earth’s resources, they build on top of them or remove land altogether (as seen with deforestation projects). Enbridge promotes itself as providing “reliable energy” which sounds positive, however, reliable does not mean sustainable or environmentally-friendly. It’s claims that it provides “reliable energy” should not be confused for responsible energy and much less sustainable or environmentally-friendly. They are responsible for the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history. Reliable for them means easy and cost-efficient.

These opposing views to the construction of Line 3 demonstrate how different communities, with different interests and needs, engage with the natural world around them. Enbridge promotes the creation of jobs and their contribution to the local economy. The company claims to be an environmentally-friendly company, however, the very fact that they’re abandoning a corroding pipeline to avoid financial costs proves that they don’t care about the environment. The company’s relationship to nature is one concerned with exploiting the land for monetary gain. Activists, however, realize that the human impact on earth is “‘essentially irreversible’” (McKibben 21). Historically, indigenous communities are disproportionately affected by climate change and corporations like Enbridge. This is an ongoing problem. It is not a problem that will affect the community “‘100 or 200 years from now’” nor is it “yesterday’s” problem; it is a problem of the now that should be faced today (McKibben 23).

Works Cited

“About Us.” Honor The Earth. N.p., 2018. Web. 14 Nov. 2018.

“Economic Benefits.” Enbridge.com. Enbridge Inc., 2018. Web. 21 Oct. 2018.

Edwards, Rebecca. “Students, Alums Step Up Efforts To Stop New Pipeline.” The Mac Weekly

2018. Web. 14 Nov. 2018.

Honor the Earth. What Is Line 3?. 2016. Web. 21 Oct. 2018.

Line 3 Pipeline Abandonment: What You Need To Know. Callaway: Honor the Earth, 2018. Web.

14 Nov. 2018.

“Line 3 Replacement Project: Testimonial Videos.” Enbridge.com. Enbridge Inc., 2018. Web. 21

Oct. 2018.

Minnesota Department of Commerce. Final Environmental Impact Statement Line 3 Project. St.

Paul: Minnesota Department of Commerce, 2017. Print.

“MN350.Org — Enbridge In Minnesota.” Mn350.org. N.p., 2018. Web. 14 Nov. 2018.

Nelson, Cody, and Dan Kraker. “Minnesota’s Line 3 Oil Pipeline Proposal: The Basics.”

Mprnews.org. N.p., 2018. Web. 15 Nov. 2018.

“News.” Stop Line 3. StopLine3, 2018. Web. 21 Oct. 2018.

Stromberg, Joseph. “What Is The Anthropocene And Are We In It?.” Smithsonian. Smithsonian

Magazine, 2013. Web. 21 Oct. 2018.

TEDxTalks. TEDxTC — Winona Laduke — Seeds Of Our Ancestors, Seeds Of Life. 2012. Web. 21

Oct. 2018.

“Testimonials.” Enbridge.com. Enbridge Inc., 2018. Web. 21 Oct. 2018.

Twin Cities PBS. Jayanthi Kyle: That’s How The River Flows. 2015. Web. 21 Oct. 2018.

X, Thomas. #Noline3 — Thomas X Ft. DJ AO. 2018. Web. 21 Oct. 2018.