BISMARCK, N.D.—The goal of some oil and gas opposition groups is zero growth, zero consumption and getting the country off fossil fuels as soon as possible. That was the message a group of oil and gas industry panelists had for the audience at The Bakken Conference and Expo in mid-July.

The panelists were not just concerned about local groups, but about national movements that engineered the prolonged struggle over the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) in the heart of the Bakken.

The panel, which explored the aftermath of DAPL and the lessons learned, cited not just the on-camera melodrama and messaging from protesters but what oil and gas industry stakeholders need to do to ensure completion of nearly every project.

And that means looking well beyond the immediate surroundings, they said, because social media must be taken into account and opposition messaging often aims to tie oil and gas to the hot-button issue of climate change. It’s a method DAPL protestors used effectively.

“We became intimately aware of the strategy and tactics that have been developed by extreme anti-energy groups and how they are evolving over time,” Michael Zehr, president of federal affairs and adviser for Consumer Energy Alliance, said during the panel.

“Pipelines are everywhere and they’re safe with 99.999% reliability and many have been there for a long time. But they involve fossil fuels, and that’s why they’re being targeted by anti-development groups and they try to tie them to climate change.”

Zehr argued that anti-development campaigns are “mixing the climate change and anti-fossil fuel messages with bad or false science to try to stop hydraulic fracturing. They’re also aiming at the transport process for fuels.”

Related Video: In a separate panel discussion at DUG East, three panelists discuss how to the industry can better win over hearts and minds of the public and political leaders.

Well-Backed Opposition

The days of protesters blanketing communities with flyers and organizing marches are past. Zehr noted that smaller, local opposition groups are funded by large donors such as Greenpeace, the National Resources Defense Council and Oceana. He said each organization provides hundreds of millions of dollars in funding.

He also described the language often used as “very personal.”

“Something is right or wrong. They aren’t engineering discussions with data, they are moral discussions,” he said.

And he lamented about what he said are cyber-bullying tactics used by opposition leaders. He pointed to a particular Internet meme of a pipeline company CEO with his name and his photo and the title “I turn attack dogs on peaceful protestors” along with the CEO’s home address.

“This is a direct threat and something we’ve never seen before,” Zehr said. “How far would they go?”

Not So Peaceful, Anymore

Craig Stevens of Grow America’s Infrastructure, a coalition of businesses, trade associations and labor group with a shared vested interest in infrastructure development, presented a timeline of DAPL protest activities including equipment being set on fire in Iowa in August, along with several millions of dollars of equipment being vandalized along the way. Also in August, an initial group of about 30 Native Americans from The Standing Rock Sioux tribe in North Dakota grew to about 100, but most of the new members were non-local, non-tribe outside protesters, he said.

The protest stopped construction on Aug. 10.

“Several project workers at the site became concerned for their safety and they didn’t want to go back out to the site,” Stevens said.

In September, a clash occurred between police and protestors with protestors stampeding into the construction area with horses, dogs and vehicles.

The final closing of a protester camp in February resulted in 21 million pounds of trash that had to be removed at a cost of $1 million.

Pro-Active Outreach Needed

Following all of the legal rules and normal outreach isn’t enough, Zehr said, maintaining that projects like DAPL show that the industry still needs to be more pro-active in engaging with the public. He said steps must be taken to ensure that the whole message is delivered to as many people in the community as possible—especially land owners, local elected officials and different local groups.

“The community groups of landowners, elected officials and local groups really have the influence and you need to build trust with them with open, honest and continuing dialogue,” he said.

The Consumer Energy Alliance has identified the need to create a baseline level of understanding and engagement in regions where pipeline companies are operating. A program, “Pipelines For America” was developed to educate families, households and small businesses about the link between pipelines and the energy they use. The program also addresses deliberate misinformation, especially around siting and construction.

“The goal is to aggressively start an energy pro-infrastructure dialogue, get a consensus for balanced and rational permitting processes and respond when pipeline benefits are put at risk.”

Both Stevens and Zehr agreed that:

  • The opposition will not rest;
  • Companies need to engage with members of the opposition at a senior level from the beginning of a project;
  • The rhetorical engagement needs to be sustained—it cannot be a one-time event, nor will a statement or a press release from the CEO’s office suffice;
  • Projects are not isolated, they can impact each other; and
  • Citizens of the local communities must be given every chance to understand the benefits of pipelines and how they fit into the overall community including jobs, potential energy shortfalls, and how the shortfalls would have more of an effect on families, seniors and the 43 million Americans who are living below the poverty line.

Tribal Law and Outreach

In the case of American Indian tribes in North Dakota, Troy Eid of Greenberg Traurig spoke about involving and negotiating for rights with tribal leaders and negotiators.

“The tribal issues experienced during DAPL planning and construction are going to continue. I’ve been doing right-of-way negotiations for companies and tribally-owned companies including projects in the San Juan Basin and the Ruby pipeline, which included negotiating with 43 Indian tribes and no crossing of tribal lands,” Eid said.

“Federal law does not care if you cross tribal lands. For the purposes of what we’re seeing and what we will see in the future, this is different than thinking about tribes as stakeholders— don’t ever do that and that’s part of where the problem comes from.”

PODCAST: Political Sidetrack: Dakota Access Pipeline: Lesson Learned

Hear more from Troy Eid as he discusses the possible lasting effects of the standoff over DAPL and explains tribal law.

Eid referred to the U.S. Constitution regarding American Indian law.

“The U.S. Constitution recognized three sovereigns—federal, state and tribal rights—and a tribe has rights to self-government and pre-date the Constitution.

“As long as there are federally recognized tribes in this country, they are governments that have rights—they don’t have to act like stakeholders. They are legal, political entities.”

In addition, the tribal rights are “inherent” and will continue forever or unless divested by Congress—state laws do not apply to tribes unless congressionally authorized.

Eid said that in 2005, Congress looked at changing those rights to an eminent domain authority and it was “resoundingly turned down.” They will be able to, on their own lands, “consent in an absolute fashion.”

“In the post-DAPL environment, when we get out our maps, we have to think differently— where did a tribe use to be, where do they have current cultural affinities and affiliations and let’s get out to them early and find out what they really want,” Eid said.

“And with some projects, I’ve found that there can’t be any negotiations. But on a case-by-case basis, you can often work with them to come up with enforceable agreements.”

Larry Prado can be reached a lprado@hartenergy.com.

Comments