Six Michigan tribes will no longer participate in the scoping and consultation process with the Army Corps of Engineers related to a pipeline construction project through the Straits of Mackinac. Tribes said that the Army Corps of Engineers has for years merely placated tribes while undercutting relevant expertise and treaty obligations. 

A recent move by the Corps, the federal agency tasked with green-lighting and constructing large-scale development projects, to speed through an environmental impact statement (EIS) process prompted the tribes to bow out of the consultation. The agency’s full-speed-ahead approach comes just over 100 days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring a national “energy emergency” as one his first acts upon returning to office. 

Citing an “active threat to the American people” from high energy prices and competition from international markets, the president’s executive order calls for agencies to “expedite the completion of all authorized and appropriated infrastructure.” 

“It is clear that the Tribes continued participation would be futile, especially because the process is likely to be cut short under the Executive Order declaring an Energy Emergency,” Native American Rights Fund senior staff attorney David L. Gover told Prism in an email. “To avoid lending credibility to a questionable permitting process, the Tribal Nations elected to withdraw and to conserve their limited resources.”

The Army Corps of Engineers did not respond to Prism’s request for comment.

The Line 5 repair project through the Straits of Mackinac, or the Straits, is one such project impacted by the executive order. A set of dual pipelines currently runs along the bed of the Straits, a body of water connecting Lake Michigan and Lake Huron, carrying crude oil and natural gas from Superior, Wisconsin, to Sarnia, Ontario. But opponents said the pipeline has been operating for over 70 years even though it was built to last 50 years. As a result, the pipeline’s protective coating is corroded in some areas, while in other areas, the pipeline is simply floating just above the bed of the waterway, making it susceptible to anchor strikes from passing boats. 

The degraded pipeline infrastructure and imminent threat of a spill are justification for what Enbridge, the pipeline operator, sees as a solution: a 21-foot-wide tunnel dug below the bed of the Straits that would house a single 30-inch diameter pipeline. Replacing two pipelines with one, and placing that one in an underground tunnel, offers a level of protection against a spill, Enbridge argues. 

But Ojibwe Tribes of Michigan disagree. Tribes, legal groups, and environmental organizations cite Enbridge’s record of spills, lackluster monitoring, and negligence for tribal sovereignty as just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to potential threats of the pipeline. They also mention that the tunnel project has never been tested anywhere in the world, and as such, could bring potential unforeseen negative impacts. 

The Great Lakes are the largest body of surface freshwater on the continent, with currents as powerful and fast-moving as those of Niagara Falls. Because of this, a spill in the Straits would be catastrophic.

But these concerns, despite being raised consistently since 2018 when the project was first greenlit by Michigan’s outgoing Republican Gov. Rick Snyder, have not been given the proper consideration by the Army Corps of Engineers, tribes said. The permitting and environmental review process has been less about gathering information and soliciting expert testimony than facilitating unequivocal support for Line 5 under the guise of environmental review processes, they said. 

“The Corps’ key decisions relating to its jurisdiction, scope of analysis, and project purpose were designed merely to advance the applicant’s goal to continue the flow of oil through the Straits,” read a March 21 letter sent to the Corps from leaders of the Bay Mills Indian Community, the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi, and the Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi. 

“Tribal Nations are no longer willing to expend their time and resources as Cooperating Agencies just so their participation may be used by the Corps to lend credibility to a flawed EIS process and document,” the letter continued. 

Tribal leaders also point to the Corps’ lack of concern for its own policies and principles that direct the federal arm to engage with tribes as cooperating agencies with experience and knowledge in a range of areas, from cultural resource preservation to environmental stewardship. 

“Tribal Nations are sovereign governments with experience and expertise across all aspects of their peoples’ experience in a place,” the letter read. “That the Corps insisted on a more myopic view of the Tribal Nations’ expertise at the start of the EIS process was a harbinger of the way it continued to quarter off the Tribal Nations’ comments and expertise throughout the Consulting Agency relationship.”

Esteban Chiriboga, an environmental specialist with the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, told Prism that the federal government maintains a trust responsibility to tribes that has been affirmed through a Biden administration memorandum to consult meaningfully with tribal nations when projects could harm waterways and other habitats. 

He added that a treaty signed in 1836 between Ojibwe tribes and the U.S. government also guarantees the right to hunt, fish, and gather in ceded territories. These territories include the Straits of Mackinac. If an oil spill were to occur in these sacred and culturally significant waters, it would prevent Ojibwe peoples from practicing these treaty rights.

“Treaties are central to tribal identity,” Chiriboga said. “When tribes signed the treaties, their major motivation was to preserve their way of life.” Treaties confer the “ability to continue to live as they choose to live,” he said.

Natalie Cook, an organizer with the Sierra Club, said that there’s still a lot that can be done at the state level to challenge Enbridge’s permits. “The state process that is left is more important than ever,” Cook said. “It is really on Michigan’s governor and her [Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy] department to do a thorough, thoughtful, and critical review of the project that’s in front of them that Enbridge is proposing.”

Editorial Team:
Sahar Fatima, Lead Editor
Carolyn Copeland, Top Editor
Stephanie Harris, Copy Editor