#TrackingTransMountain: A database of how Indigenous communities are affected by Kinder Morgan's pipeline proposal - APTN NewsAPTN News

#TrackingTransMountain: A database of how Indigenous communities are affected by Kinder Morgan’s pipeline proposal



Editor’s Note: The Discourse, APTN News and HuffPost Canada launch #TrackingTransMountain, a database that digs into what’s really happening with Indigenous consultation for the controversial project.

Trevor Jang, Lauren Kaljur, Emma Paling, Lucy Scholey, Amber Bernard, Brenna Owen, Kendra Perrin, Caitlin Havlak and Jon von Ofenheim

If Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion project proceeds, the land, resources, and rights of more than 130 Indigenous communities and groups from Alberta’s oilsands to British Columbia’s coast could be affected.

Because of this, the Canadian government and Kinder Morgan have a legal obligation to meaningfully consult with them.

The pipeline company points to the 43 communities that have signed some form of agreement to show Indigenous support for the project.

But anti-pipeline activists say there hasn’t been meaningful consultation. At the same time, six First Nations are arguing consultation was inadequate in court and a single judge ruling in their favour could put the project back to square one.

So, what’s the truth?

Reporters across Canada are documenting a range of Indigenous voices that express support, concern and everything in between. These stories sometimes conflict, adding noise to a confusing but important part of the Trans Mountain story and leaving room for industry, anti-pipeline activists, and others to make competing claims to support their position.

#TrackingTransMountain aims to present a more clear picture of the state of consultation across all of the communities affected. Building from the hundreds of pages of official documents, existing reporting and interviews with leaders and community members themselves, The Discourse, Aboriginal Peoples Television Network (APTN) and HuffPost Canada hope to offer information to help inform discussions about what’s happening.

In a single interactive place, you can explore each Indigenous community along the pipeline and water tanker route to uncover details that you may have had trouble tracking down before.

We’re contacting every Indigenous community identified in Kinder Morgan’s most recent report on Indigenous engagement to the National Energy Board.

The database aims to include as many perspectives as possible, but not every community has gotten back to us yet.

In the meantime, we’re filling it in with official documents from the consultation process. We know there are still holes to fill and perspectives missing. If you have information that you want to add, fill in this survey. We’ll continue to add information and report on it as it comes in.

What’s next?

Texas-based Kinder Morgan has given the Canadian government until May 31 to bring certainty to the $7.4-billion project, but the question of Indigenous jurisdiction and consultation is not going anywhere.

Neither are future decisions affecting the rights of hundreds of Indigenous communities. No single story can fully capture what’s really at stake. But we believe reporters can improve coverage of these complex issues by collaborating with each other and the public.

Follow #TrackingTransMountain on Facebook and Twitter to get the latest updates and stories from our collaborative reporting efforts.

This story was produced as part of #TrackingTransMountain, a collaborative reporting project from The Discourse, APTN News, and HuffPost Canada that aims to deepen the reporting on Indigenous communities affected by Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain expansion project.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

One Response to “#TrackingTransMountain: A database of how Indigenous communities are affected by Kinder Morgan’s pipeline proposal”

  1. blujaycan@yahoo.com'
    peter May 26, 2018 at 2:06 pm #

    as much as i agree with the opposition, there is a factor to consider. the agreements were signed or is there a fine print disclosed that no one read? it is just like the dispute between RN, JT,JH, and luckily there is no involvement of DT or DF. (lol?) seriously, this process only proves how politicians function in our democratic society. it is disturbing on both sides, one is the agreement aspect of this construction between communities, and the other the political clout behind and around it. any opposition that disregards these agreements is not likely to succeed. and furthermore, any arguments in the media not disclosing details of the agreements are misleading. and, of course, any land acquisition without scrutiny is also up for discussion, but perhaps not in this article. yet, this is where we stand in discussion that should have happened before construction, or else we are wasting time on rights and democracy. the fine print is the dilemma. now we need to change! another dilemma!