Working to stop the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline

Joint Review Panel Blog

DAYS EIGHT AND NINE: PRINCE RUPERT

(February 18, 19 2012)

As the oolichan begin to run at the mouth of the Skeena River, the Joint Review Panel met in Prince Rupert. The proceedings were marked by more tension than we have seen thus far. Both Enbridge and the panel attempted to rein in presenters on the issue of 'oral evidence'.

Repeatedly, intervenors were interrupted and reminded that oral evidence entails stories of the land and histories of the land, like, for example, traditional aboriginal knowledge. Oral evidence must accounts which cannot be submitted in writing. It does not entail political arguments or knowledge that strays from direct personal experience. The Rupert proceedings showed us the difficulty in maintaining this hard line of 'evidence'. For all parties it has been difficult to separate experience of the land, waters and communities that would be impacted from the project, from a political argument. Strict adherence to procedural direction has had the effect of silencing certain voices.

 

 

Metlakatla Drummers opened the proceedings. We were generously welcomed to Metlakatla territory and again panel members provided elders with gifts.

Nearly everyone in the audience donned their blue wild salmon scarves and was vocal in their support of presenters, clapping, beating drums and yelling encouragement, despite warnings discouraging such behaviour.

Whereas in other communities, this first round of hearings has heard primarily from First Nations groups, Prince Rupert presenters represented both the native and non-native community. In fact, these boundaries were repeatedly de-emphasized to promote an inclusive community centred around the sea, the land and its valuable resources.

Nathan Cullen, MP for the Skeena-Bulkley Valley, was the first to speak. “He's one of us.” Someone shouted from the audience.

Cullen addressed the issue of trust, or rather the lack trust; trust in Enbridge, trust in pipelines, trust in the panel and process and trust in the federal government. Cullen began to relate what he has seen of Enbridge negotiations in the region- of unequal and disingenuous engagement with his constituents.

The Enbridge lawyer raised her objection- “this is not oral evidence but a political argument”. Cullen’s response was apt. “How a company engages a community is also evidence as to how the project will be manifest”.  He said that we cannot simply consider the pipeline in terms of its physical engineering but that we must consider Enbridge and the way they have entered into relationship in the Northwest; the way the company conducts itself in conversation with local communities. Cullen believes this is inseparable from the way the company will conduct itself if there is a spill.

Later in the day, Gary Coons, MLA for the North Coast sat before the panel. Coons spoke knowledgeably of the traditions of people of the coast whom he represents, situating his own arrival in Rupert in the late 1970’s. Coons depicted the vitality and resiliency of coastal peoples, aboriginal and non-aboriginal alike, whose culture and livelihoods are dependent on the lands and waters threatened by Northern Gateway.

Coons was interrupted continually, by both the panel and the Enbridge lawyer, asking him to stick to oral evidence. Unswayed, Coons concluded with an important lesson he has learned from his years on the coast, “I listened. The less I said, the better”.

Leaders from Metlakatla established the clear and integral link of the waters and lands of their traditional territories and to their governance structures, culture, and well-being as a nation. Fanny Nelson is granny to her village. She learned how to harvest and process foods by her mother, a strong woman who raised ten children on her own. When processing salmon, “whatever you don’t use you put back in the ocean, more will come back next year”.

Metlakatla shared stories of abundance, of clams, cockles, halibut, salmon, crab, herring, seaweed, sea cucumber, only some of the foods on their doorstep. Hereditary Chief Clarence Nelson emphasized that Metlakatla needs the knowledge and security of a healthy environment for future generations. “I will always have this traditional knowledge but it will be useless if there is nothing left to harvest,” he said.

Des Nobles and Jennifer Rice from T. Buck Suzuki Foundation addressed the panel. Nobles has over forty years of experience on the coastal waters. Nobles spoke about erratic tides and winds and the powerful nature of the coast which has provided him with a full and rewarding, if not at times challenging, life.

Glenn Naylor is a journeyman carpenter, longshoreman and man of many trades who has spent most of his life exploring the coast. He spoke with emotion about discovering an ancient grove of sitka spruce on Haida Gwaii and of witnessing eagles communicating across unimaginable distances. He warned the panel, that “even the highest standards of engineering have their limitations”.

Day two began with a gracious feast of moose, deer, salmon, fresh crab and canned crab and clear mountain water, provided by Marty Bowles and his wife May. The audience, the panel and Enbridge representatives were able to taste what speaker after speaker has been attempting to relate.

Lee Brain, is a 26 year old, born in Fort MacMurray to an oil executive, who has spent most of his life in Prince Rupert. He articulated the contradictions and paradoxes inherent in Northern Gateway through his experience of working in an oil refinery in northern India. “I fully respect the power of oil,” he said. “I forgive these people (Enbridge) for their lack of awareness and heart.”

A panel of the United Fishermans and Allied Workers Union were the last to address the panel. As Joy Thorkelson, described: “The union is a collection of people. It does not represent fish. It represents people but people who depend on the health of fish and fish stocks to make a living.”

One after another, the shoreline workers and fisherpeople related decades of experience in the fishery which continues to be the center of life in Prince Rupert.  They spoke of skilled jobs that are dependent on a healthy fishery. “The wellbeing of the environment is linked to the wellbeing of the fish which is linked to the wellbeing of our communities... Our industry has a bright future... but it only has a bright future if we continue to have fish,” Thorkelson concluded.

The proceedings ended and the room emptied save for a small group of locals who articulated their discontent with the process and the desire to speak and have their voices heeded. There was a strong sense that the JRP is not enough, that community members need to come together to decide their own future.

In the words of Lee Brain, “It's time to transition. It's time to journey into a new dream.”

 

DAY SEVEN: FORT ST. JAMES

(February 2, 2012)

Yesterday morning more than a hundred people gathered at the Chief Kwah Memorial Hall in Fort St. James to march together to the Legion where the Joint Review Panel hearing was taking place. The drumming started just as the sun came out and with a prayer from Nak’azdli elder, Charlie Sam the protestors began to march.

 

Terry Teegee, Vice Tribal Chief of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council rustled enthusiasm in the crowd, “When I say no you say Enbridge. No! Enbridge! No Enbridge!”. Nak’azdli Band members were joined by others from the Yinka Dene Alliance and the Fort St. John community. Grand Chief Phillip Stewart of the BC Union of Indian Chiefs was present in an expression of solidarity with his wife Joan.

The protestors ambled along the main street of town and were greeted by enthusiastic honking from local traffic and logging trucks. In view of the protest was Stuart Lake, the one of the largest freshwater lakes in BC and the headwaters of the Fraser. The lake hasn’t frozen this year, following a recent trend in warming winters.

The march culminated at the steps of the Royal Canadian Legion with speeches and drumming which emphasized the strength of community in this fight and the need to work together. Grand Chief Stuart Phillip offered the continued support of the UBCIC, "the Union of BC Indian Chiefs will continue to proudly stand in solidarity with all of you through this part of the battle, through the legal battle that come, and through the struggle on the land that will follow that," he said.

On the night prior to the hearing the local sustainability group organized a “No Pipelines, More Poetry” event at the Legion. The event was a successful attempt to claim the space of the JRP as a community space and to imbue it with the stories, voices, and concerns of the region. The morning of the hearing, this sense of the Fort St. James community remained strong in the words of those who addressed the panel and the attitudes and presence of audience members.

The pipeline would cross in close proximity to Fort St. James and the impacts here would be closely felt. Larry Sagalon, a Keyoh holder was the first to address the panel. His words were echoed by the pounding drums outside. Sagalon spoke of his territory, the trapline that he knows intimately and of the direct impacts that he fears from the pipeline. Sagalon emphasized that as a Keyoh holder, he is not only responsible for trapping but for taking care of his lands.

Victor Sam, Dick A’huille, Lillian Sam and Jim Munroe gave a very strong presentation, representing the Daiya-Matess Keyoh. Victor Sam explained that the Keyoh is much more than a trapline. It is how their community is organized politically and economically.

With the use of maps they described in detail the current and past use and occupancy of their territory which would be transected by the proposed pipeline. A’huille, now a respected elder, has been using the trapline since the age of 15 and he knows every inch of his lands. The yearly round of the beaver is directly beside the path of the proposed pipeline. “There are just too many creeks and beaver. We’ve got lots of traps in there,” A’huille concluded.

Jim Munroe spoke to the aboriginal rights and title of the Keyoh group and the need to obtain permission and consent for the use of their territory. He ended by describing the family’s alternative plan for their Keyoh, the potential of carbon sequestration and alternative modes of development. 

“It’s so important for us to be heard, to be recognized for who we are and to allow us to live as we lived. Not to have someone give us money and take our land,” said Lillian Sam.

Gary Ducommun of the Métis Nation of BC again addressed the panel. The Métis position on the project has become increasingly stronger and though Ducommun was clear in stating that they have not made an absolute decision on the project, “I haven’t spoken to a single Métis in favor of this project,” he said. Ducommun spoke of the need to trace the impacts of development back to projects approved by government and raising his gaze to the panel, emphasized the importance of cumulative impacts, especially of Stuart River Sockeye, the furthest upstream Sockeye runs in the Fraser watershed.

The panel is continuing to travel to BC communities; they will be in Prince Rupert of February 17th and 18th.

Chief Jackie Thomas of the Sai’kz First Nation spoke on the steps to the legion, “I invite you to gather your friends and neighbours to come stand with us.” she said, “Thank you for showing up and let’s continue on”.

DAY SIX: PRINCE GEORGE

(January 18, 2012)

We (about 100 of us in my estimation and according to the CBC news clip this morning on Daybreak North) met at the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC) office where coffee and donuts were provided while we waited to march.  Many First Nations folks there including some from Nadleh Whu'ten and Saikuz as well as a healthy number of non-aboriginals.  We left CSTC's office about 20 minutes to six to walk the few blocks to the JRP session at the Ramada.  Terry Teegee of the CSTC led the chants and the drummers led the march with folks joining on the songs and clapping to the drummers' beat. It was very upbeat with lots of signs even though around -30 C.


When we got to the Ramada, Terry led some final chants, folks put their signs in the hotel entrance and we proceeded inside.  The ballroom was packed, sitting and standing room only....more than 200 I think.

At the (first stage..oral intervenors only) Enbridge hearing last evening in PG(Jan.18th) the Ramada Hotel ballroom was full to overflowing...many standing and sitting...probably more than 200.  According to CBC Radio, 100 of us gathered at CSTC offices, wore blue scarves with an aboriginal fish design and marched, drummed and sloganed our way the few blocks to the hotel. 

Only two presenters.  One was from the BC Metis Society...quite general and historical, the speaker detailed the story of Metis people accompanying explorers and settling along and hear the pipeline route and expressed concern re destruction of the salmon fishery and the environment.  The Society will take an official position on the pipeline in March 2012.

The second was Chris Peters (and his colleague) of a local engineering firm.  They analyzed the energy efficiency of tar sands oil going through the pipeline and on to China. Chris did a great job (a few of us Sands to Sea folks met him just before Xmas when he was finalizing his talk...very bright and very committed to green energy and opposed to the pipeline).  He and his colleagues came up with a figure that it takes the equivalent of one barrel of oil to produced 2.41 barrels of useable energy once extraction, pipepline pumping, tanker shipping and refining the bitumen in China to the point where it is equivalent to conventional crude.  This is considered an extremely low ratio...normal crude is considered to be 1:6.  There main point was to show, through extensive calculations, that it is not energy efficient to ship bitumen to Asia.

The JRP chair, noted, after the second presentation, that it was not really oral evidence (that is, not information that could not be presented in writing).  As the engineering firm has also made a written submission, we assume their evidence will be considered.  With their powerpoint and explanation, many more people were exposed to their energy analysis than would read the info on the website.

From a Sea to Sands represenative

 

DAY FIVE: BURNS LAKE

(January 17, 2012)

Neither the bitter cold nor the early afternoon weekday commencement deterred stopped people from coming to hear and support Intervenors’ presenting oral evidence to the NEB’s Joint Review Panel at a hearing in Burns Lake on Tuesday January 17.

After moving opening ceremonies, the long session launched into presentations from some twenty chiefs and hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en peoples, Lake Babine Nation, Ned’u’ten Nation, and a representative of the Métis Nation of BC.

Holding high his pelts, a beautiful timber wolf and pine marten, Hereditary Chief Frank Alec explained that “This is who I am.” Elevating his salmon, he proclaimed “We cannot live without this”, that without his peoples’ connection to and with their territorial lands “We will become nothing.”

During the proceedings, linguistic and cultural differences were acknowledged, and ongoing grievances about destructive and unethical industrial and social practices were examined. We heard how all creatures within ecosystems must be included in concepts and discussions of title and rights, and how governments and all who share the land must live up to the “honour in the ground”. After rejecting insulting paternalism, we were reminded that our First Nations do know their right and title, that First Nations’ laws are valid in unceded territories, and that genocidal threats to territory, lands and people cannot be acceptable.

Every presenter powerfully illustrated their inalienable, immutable connection to their land. Repeatedly, we were shown how important is homeland and people’s interconnectedness with it. Symbiotic fungal mycorrhizae, connecting and nourishing all plants, provided a great image of the reliance of everything upon everything else – a concept central to the sustainable economy and society practiced by these nations.

As Tyler Mccreary expresses so eloquently in his recent article “Songs and stories of a land without pipelines”, “The Wet'suwet'en speakers passionately expressed their connection to their territories. The Wet'suwet'en word for territory is "yintakh." Yintakh encapsulates not only the physical landscape but also fundamental interconnectedness of the ecosystem. For the Wet'suwet'en, their yintakh is not distinct from the people but includes the people. Similarly, the land is part of the people. Destroying the land not only strips the people of resources but also tears at the heart of the Wet'suwet'en people."

From John Phair

 

 

 

An essay on respect- previously published on rabble.ca

 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T. That word "respect" has come up at all of the community hearings that we've had. In her opening remarks on the fifth day of review hearings for the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline on Jan. 17 in Burns Lake, B.C., Sheila Leggett, the Joint Review Panel (JRP) Chair, noted how the word respect had been repeated in each community they visited.

However, Leggett's remarks, focusing on the need for the presenters "providing oral evidence to be respectful of all parties involved in this proceeding in their evidence," inverted the meaning of the term respect. While Haisla, Tsimshian, and Wet'suwet'en presenters had spoken of the need for the government and industry to respect for their traditional laws, Leggett employed the term as a thinly veiled criticism of First Nations refusal to bound their comments to accepted "Oral Traditional Knowledge" and government timelines.

On the morning of the 16th, the Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs had opened the meeting by singing a song composed for the hearing. The song expressed the depth of their connection to their territory, the chorus "noh' y'in tah way atsaan tsun" translated to "our territory is our livelihood." But the song also clearly expressed their opposition to the pipeline, closing with the line, "Enbridge noh' y'in tah wagga way sow' ye'h" (Enbridge don't step onto our land).

Prior to the hearings in Burns Lake on the 17th, representatives of the National Energy Board organizing the review panel indicated that they did not want the Wet'suwet'en chiefs to open with an anti-Enbridge song again. While the review panel presumably considered this prerequisite respect for Enbridge, dictating the terms of traditional opening ceremonies to Wet'suwet'en chiefs on Wet'suwet'en land disrespected those chiefs and their authority.

There was a buzz amongst the hereditary chiefs about the gall of the government folk who sought to dictate proceedings on Wet'suwet'en land. The chiefs, however, did not cede control of the opening. The panel was convened to hear their testimony, and would begin in accordance with their process. The chiefs paraded into the room in full regalia, assembled before the crowd, and again performed their oppositional anthem.

While the details of this performance were conveniently quieted in the official record, which only recorded this demonstration as the "Opening Ceremony," numerous cameras and cell phones captured events and the words and images of Wet'suwet'en protest circulated through social media.

The official record began with hereditary chief Frank Alec describing the final portion of the opening ceremony, the rattle cry. He describes how this rattle performance "signifies the start of serious business of talking straight and talking in an appropriate manner." He indicated that invocation of the rattle, as well as the feather, "means whatever that has been spoken about, that whatever that is mentioned needs to be listened to."

The chiefs spoke seriously, detailing not only their traditional use of the territories but also the system of traditional jurisdiction they used to govern the use of the land. Wet'suwet'en society, like their Nat'oot'en and Gitxsan neighbours, is traditionally organized into clans. Within each clan are a number of houses, based on small groups of extended families, each headed by a hereditary chief.

Each house possesses its own territories. The hereditary chiefs are responsible for managing the wise use of their territories. These chiefly titles and responsibilities pass down the generations. The succession of chiefs' names and their associated territorial rights and responsibilities is enacted through the balhats, a feast system often referred to as the potlatch in English. With authority based in the feast hall, the hereditary chiefs work to ensure the continuation of their traditions into the future, protecting their territories and grooming future generations of leaders.

David deWit, a Wet'suwet'en member of the Tsekalbaiyex (House on Top of a Flat Rock) of the Laksilyu (Little Frog Clan), stated, "our laws, are based on principles such as wiggus, respect for all living beings, and yintakh, which we refer to as a land, but it's not a word for our land. It's a philosophy. It speaks to all natural elements, and the humans are one of those, and their interconnectedness. It speaks to any action we have will affect those other natural elements."

Speaking in Wet'suwet'en, Henry Alfred, chief Wah tah K'eght and leader of Tsekalbaiyex, described the teachings he received from his grandfather. "Granddad told us to respect all living things. That's how they brought us up. We hunt animals for food, and also for the potlatch. To let people know where this bounty came from ... it is also spoken of in the potlatch."

In the potlatch, people also recounted relationships to their territories. People remembered their territories in story and song in the feast hall. Clans and houses strictly defended their territories. Chief Wah tah K'eght, Henry Alfred, discussed how his grandfather, who also held the name Wah tah K'eght, caught a person trespassing on his territory. Ron Austin provided the translation of Alfred's story, which was originally told in the Wet'suwet'en language.

"The first time he gave him a feather and, then, the next season, his grandfather came back, the person was trapping again on his territory, so he told him to stop, gave him a second feather. 'I don't' -- he told the person -- 'I don't want to hurt you.' Third season, Wah tah K'eght went into his territory, again, the person was still on the trap line so he took a rope out of his pack -- the person didn't know he was coming -- wrapped it around his neck, killed him and tossed him into the river. They were strict about their territory."

Although the Wet'suwet'en speakers recognized that killing people for trespass was no longer practised, they strongly asserted that their laws had never been voided. Mike Ridsdale, a Tsayu (Beaver Clan) member, emphasized, "the Wet'suwet'en have never ceded or surrendered any of our traditional lands and waters. We have, through the generations, fought wars to keep our territory. We will not cede any of it."

However, the panel had limited respect for the Wet'suwet'en jurisdiction and traditional mode of storytelling. After listening to hours of testimony from dozens of speakers, the panel indicated their desire to hurry things along. Panel Chair, Sheila Leggett, suggested the final five Wet'suwet'en speakers "finish up with the next half hour of your presentation and, then, I would suggest that, at that point, we take a break and we move on to the rest of the parties who are here ready to speak."

In a limited exercise in fairness, the panel offered the final Wet'suwet'en speakers the option of returning to speak late in the evening, after all the other presenters. However, many of the Wet'suwet'en lived hours from Burns Lake in the communities of Smithers, Moricetown, and Hagwilget. Needing to drive home, the procedural pressure of the panel compressed the final Wet'suwet'en speakers' time.

When Tsayu (Beaver Clan) chief Namox, John Ridsdale, rose to speak, there was heat in his voice. After traveling two and half hours from his home community of Hagwilget to present in Burns Lake, through frigid conditions with temperatures 30 degrees below zero, John Ridsdale had expected to receive more than a token five minutes to present.

"With five minutes to speak, I will only say a few words," he began. "It's highly insulting, you tell a Chief that, 'you're only going to say a few words,' when he stands on his own land. I am Wet'suwet'en. I carry the name of Namox and I know my authority. I know my rights and I know our title."

He noted that for centuries the Wet'suwet'en "protected our lands from any form of incursions," a trend he suggested would continue "now with this threat that's on hand." But stripped to the barest outline of a speech, he articulated a simple commitment to continue to uphold and respect Wet'suwet'en law in the face of the threat posed by the Enbridge pipeline.

"When we speak in the feast hall, we tell the truth. When I swore on the Rattle, the Rattle is hundreds of years old. I did not plan on coming here and telling lies. I did not plan on coming here and saying these are things that we will allow. I did plan on coming here and tell you that this threat to our territories, to our lands, to our culture, to our people is cultural genocide, and we would not allow that."

From Tyler McCeary

DAY FOUR: SMITHERS

(January 16, 2012)

We saw, at the Smithers JRP hearing, a strong, proud and unified Wet’suwet’en Nation. A long line of Chiefs and membership in full regalia were drummed powerfully into the meeting hall at the Hudson Bay Lodge.

Chief Wil’at, Susie Alfred, and her daughters Delores Alfred and Marg Dumont had written a song specifically for the occasion.

“Our territory is our livelihood.
We live off our land.
We survive on the wildlife on our land.
Law, Language, Land…
Enbridge do not step on our land.
Enbridge do not step on our land.”

There was never a doubt in the day as to the Wet’suwet’en position on the project. All 22 members who spoke emphatically stated that the project risks their territory and the river but also their culture, the root of their community.

The Wet’suwet’en who addressed the panel, chiefs, elders, trapline holders, younger adults and the first youth to speak in these hearings, Tieasha Pierre, a girl of 10, were chosen as representatives by their clans; itself evidence of healthy Wet’suwet’en traditional governance. It was vital that everyone selected be given a chance to speak.

 

This approach was more in line with the feast system than the bureaucratic panel meetings. Chair, Sheila Leggett, politely noted that the Wet’suwet’en had gone over their allotted time of 3.5 hours and reminded those to speak that information should not be repeated. “They need to learn this is Wet’suwet’en-Gitxsan time,” said Chief Wil’at.

The Wet’suwet’en spoke passionately and knowledgeably about their Yintakh, the Wet’suwet’en word for territory. Yintakh signals the physical land but, more than this, it expresses the interconnectedness of all aspects of the ecosystem; Yintakh encompasses
the people as well. Impacts to Wet’suwet’en lands are impacts to the Wet’suwet’en community.

The ancestors were continually evoked, giving meaning and reason to speaking to the panel. “It is the words of our ancestors that I speak to you today. That is why we say no,” said Chief Likh Dilye, Russell Tiljoe. Marg Dumont thanked her ancestors for giving her the courage to speak and looking openly at the panel, said, “we ask the creator that you make recommendations based on our stories”. These stories were told in the Wet’suwet’en language as well as in English.

Richard Sam asked the panel that they respect the decision of the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs and deny the project, “show our young people that what our chiefs say matters,” he pleaded.

Lorena Morris spoke emotionally of a lifetime of community healing from residential schools, the reserve system, alcohol abuse, suicide, “I’m tired of listening to broken promises,” she said. Her clan members stood behind her in support, pausing reassuring
hands on her shaking shoulders.

Tieasha Pierre, told the panel about the rules of hunting: “When I go hunting with my uncle, we never kill what we will not eat”. The pipeline, she insisted, would be like killing an animal you will not eat. This is not following Wet’suwet’en law.

Gary Ducommun of BC Métis Nation continued his presentation from Kitimat and Terrace to emphasize Métis concerns in the Smithers area.

MLA, Doug Donaldson spoke poignantly about the wild salmon economy and ecosystem of the Northwest. If you move oil you spill oil. This is a fact that local residents understand and it is driving their resistance to Northern Gateway. Opposition is about
protecting this wild salmon ecosystem. Northwest residents are standing up to safeguard wild salmon on behalf on their families, their communities, but also the province and all Canadians. This is not a selfish act, but an act of citizenship.

Tomorrow the panel moves to Burns Lake to hear more from the Wet’suwet’en as well as Lake Babine First Nation. The blue scarves are mobilizing. See you there.

 

 

Songs and Stories of a land without pipelines- previously published on rabble.ca

 

"The truth about stories," declares Native author Thomas King, "is that's all we are." Wet'suwet'en people know their identities and territories through the songs and stories that connect their people to their land, history and ancestors. These stories and songs are evidence that the Wet'suwet'en people have occupied the land since time immemorial.

The Wet'suwet'en term for oral history is kungax. Literally translating as "trail of song," the kungax allows Wet'suwet'en to trace the tracks of past generations across their territories and map the path of their people into the future.

On January 16, members of the Wet'suwet'en presented in Smithers, B.C., before a federal panel reviewing a proposed pipeline to transport tar sands bitumen across their traditional territory. Entering the hearing, a long line of Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs and members filed into the meeting room at Hudson Bay Lodge in full regalia. As they entered, the room filled with the powerful echo of the Gidimt'en clan song.

Wet'suwet'en society is traditionally organized into five clans: the Gidimt'en (Bear Clan), Likhsilyu (Small Frog Clan), C'ilhts'ekhyu (Big Frog Clan), Tsayu (Beaver Clan), and Likhts'amisyu (Fireweed Clan). The clans are broken up into houses, based on small groups of extended families, each headed by a hereditary chief.

Before the panel, the Wet'suwet'en spoke with a unified voice. Together, all the clans declared a resounding "no" to the proposed Enbridge pipeline. Assembled at the front of the room, the Wet'suwet'en then began to sing a song specially composed by hereditary chief Wil'at, Susie Alfred, and her brother George William and her daughters Delores Alfred and Marg Dumont.

Noh' y'in tah way atsan nay
[We live off our land]

Noh' y'in tah way atsaan tsun
[Our territory is our livelihood]
Ha ya ha haa. Hey ya haaaii (((rattle)))

Noh' y'in tah way ha naaay, way ha nay badats t'sa naaay
[We survive on the wildlife on our land]

Noh's y'in tah way atsaan tsun
[Our territory is our livelihood]
Ha ya ha haa. Hey ya haaaii (((rattle)))

A'nuk no'eten, h'anic, yin tah
[Law, language, land]

Noh's y'in tah way atsaan tsun
[Our territory is our livelihood]
Ha ya ha haa. Hey ya haaaii (((rattle)))

Yin' tah lha a'nay lhkiy si ohn lee
[Connection of land and animals]

Noh's y'in tah way atsaan tsun
[Our territory is our livelihood]
Ha ya ha haa. Hey ya haaaii (((rattle)))

Enbridge noh' y'in tah wagga way sow' ye'h
[Enbridge don't step onto our land]
Noh' yin tah wagga way sow'ye'h
[Don’t step onto our land]

Noh's y'in tah way atsaan tsun
[Our territory is our livelihood]
Ha ya ha haa. Hey ya haaaii (((rattle)))
Ha ya ha haa. Hey ya haaaii (((rattle)))

The Wet'suwet'en position on the pipeline was clear. Over the subsequent hours, 22 Wet'suwet'en witnesses testified to the risks the proposed Enbridge pipeline posed to their territory. The Wet'suwet'en people also recounted the stories of their connection to the land.

Stories are wondrous things. Stories are powerful. Stories tell us where home is. They tell us how we relate to one another. Stories communicate our responsibilities. They tell us who we are and where we belong.

When the Wet'suwet'en people sat before the federally appointed panel reviewing the Enbridge pipeline, they opened their box of stories. Hereditary chiefs and elders, fishers and trappers, grandparents and children, recounted how they learned to use the land. They talked about connection and they talked about responsibility.

Each speaker began by respecting their ancestors, recognizing their forebearers. The Wet'suwet'en are matrilineal people. This means each Wet'suwet'en child belongs to his or her mother's clan. The names of chiefs pass through the generations, following the mother's side. The father clan, however, also provides vital support, and Wet'suwet'en speakers recognized both sides of their lineage.

Marg Dumont thanked her ancestors for giving her the courage to speak. Looking directly at the panel she said, "we ask the creator that you make recommendations based on our stories."

The Wet'suwet'en speakers passionately expressed their connection to their territories. The Wet'suwet'en word for territory is "yintakh." Yintakh excapsulates not only the physical landscape but also fundamental interconnectedness of the ecosystem. For the Wet'suwet'en, their yintakh is not distinct from the people but includes the people. Similarly, the land is part of the people. Destroying the land not only strips the people of resources but also tears at the heart of the Wet'suwet'en people.

The interveners described memories of spending time on the territories: hunting moose, running trap lines, fishing for salmon, harvesting berries and medicinal plants. People remembered how their grandparents and parents, aunts and uncles, taught them about their traditions, how to get food and how to show respect. Speaking in the Wetsuwet'en language, Russell Tiljoe (Likh Dilye) stated, "It is the words of our ancestors that I speak to you today. That is why we say no."

From Tyler McCreary

 

DAY THREE: TERRACE

(January 12, 2012)

The sportsplex was overflowing on day three of the Northern Gateway JRP hearings in Terrace. Those unable to find a seat crowded at the open doorway, looking on as members of the Kitsumkalum Band entered the room drumming and singing. 

Following an opening prayer by Elder Mildred Roberts, Chief Councilor Donald Roberts turned to the audience to give a warm welcome to Wolf Clan territory. The panel showed their appreciation by giving gifts to these two members. The audience was noticeably touched by this expression of gratitude. 

Chief Roberts proceeded with an impassioned and detailed presentation relating Kitsumkalum uses of their territory and their continued reliance on the Skeena River and the sea for sustenance. He spoke of the difficulty in maintaining commercial and sustenance fisheries in the present day and the prosperity of old times. 

Roberts described the harvest of herring, cod, oolichan, salmon, steelhead, octopus, crab, sea urchins, cockles, sea cucumber and seaweed, emphasizing the great wealth that is at risk by the Enbridge project. The Kitssmkalum are a people who depend on the sea and on the river with traditional activities that extend from freshwater valleys all the way out to Hecate Straight. Their identity and culture relies on their ability to protect these waters for future generations. 

The Kitselas Band followed their neighbors. Though Kitselas expressed concerns about the project, the regulatory process and infringements to rights and title, they have not yet made a decision on Northern Gateway. They are awaiting the completion of additional studies, sponsored by Enbridge, to elaborate on impacts to their lands and people.

Despite indecision, Kitselas spoke strongly about the unique value of their traditional territory and excessive potential impacts of the project. They warned the panel that the region is particularly susceptible to disturbances, to landslides, floods and rain events; it is risky for development. Furthermore, they are concerned that Northern Gateway would open up a corridor for future developments and the uncertainty of cumulative impacts. 

Gary Ducommun of BC Métis Nation, addressed the panel for the second time. Ducommun is underlining the threat of the project to Métis across the pipeline and tanker route. We will hear more from Ducommun in all hearing locations. 

The first week of hearings has come to a close. Join us next week in Smithers, Burns Lake and Prince George. Energy is mobilizing around these meetings and the crowd in Terrace shows that for Northwest residents it is important to participate in this process and bare witness to it.

 

DAY TWO: KITAMAAT VILLAGE

(January 11, 2012)

We are the radical environmentalists.” With these words, Murray Minchin of Kitimat group, Douglas Channel Watch addressed the Joint Review Panel for the Northern Gateway project. Minchin is a father, nature-lover, long-time Kitimat resident and Canada Post employee, whose presentation to the panel was highlighted by photographs he has taken of coastal islands, forests and rivers that would be impacted by the pipelines and tanker traffic. He told the panel about being out in the bush and “becoming a little more aware”, about his young daughter’s excitement at trying huckleberry for the first time and how that experience has helped to shape who she is. Minchin was one of many voices in support of safeguarding northwestern ecosystems and communities through their opposition to the Enbridge project.

The second day of the JRP hearings in Kitimaat Village heard presentations from Peter G. King, Douglas Channel Watch, Métis Nation of BC, Kitimat Valley Naturalists and Randy Halyk. The overall message was emphatic: the non-Haisla community of the Kitimat valley supports its aboriginal neighbors and is deeply concerned about the threat of oil tankers in perilous coastal waters.

The sense of community and warmth in the recreation centre was palpable. The Haisla graciously welcomed the panel to their village and provided a lunchtime feast of wild salmon sandwiches and fry bread to the several hundred attendees. The audience, dotted by blue scarves embroidered with a salmon design, clapped and hooted following each presentation, undeterred by the panels’ request that such appreciation be stopped. 

Cheryl Brown of Douglas Channel Watch spoke about her commitment to participate in the process as a citizen. “It does not bode well for me that the government itself is not respecting the process of its citizens”, she said, referring to recent comment by Prime Minister Harper and Minister Joe Oliver.

We heard repeatedly about the importance of the once prolific but now endangered oolichan runs, the vitality of wild steelhead and salmon stocks throughout the Kitimat watershed, and individuals whose identities and livelihoods are dependent on the integrity of this dynamic place.

Gary Ducommun, of the Métis Nation of BC described the aboriginal worldview in which a people are not outside of the ecosystem but integrally a part of it. It would seem that this is a worldview shared across the northwest. The health and well-being of the natural world is reflected in the health and well-being of the people. 

Consequently, northern residents are standing up and speaking out and in an unlikely twist of fate, Enbridge is helping to build stronger communities.

If you have participated in the hearings thus far, thank you. If you want be involved, hearings continue in Terrace, January 12th, Smithers, January 16th, Burns Lake January 17th and Prince George, January 18th.

 

DAY ONE: KITAMAAT VILLAGE

(January 10, 2012)

Day one of the Enbridge pipeline review hearings was a day to remember. In Kitamaat Village on the banks of the Douglas Channel, where the proposed Enbridge pipeline would supply a proposed crude oil supertanker port, members of the Haisla First Nation and other Northwest BC residents made it clear that the pipeline is not welcome.

 

Click here to watch the video on Youtube

Speaker after speaker met with loud applause from the audience, as Haisla Chiefs told powerful stories about growing up in their territories and how they have relied on trapping and fishing for thousands of years. Visiting First Nations including members of the Heiltsuk, Gitga’at and Kitasoo First Nations attended the hearing to stand alongside the Haisla in opposition to the pipeline.

Haisla chiefs spoke of the demise of the Ooolican fishery, which has been killed off by the impacts of industrial development. But while the river has lost its Oolichan, the Chiefs vowed to protect their wild salmon runs which continue to sustain their community.

Elected Chief Ellis Ross emphasized that the Haisla are not anti-development and that they want jobs, and said they must also protect the natural resources they have left.