nuclear-news

Crow Butte uranium mine’s license renewal protested
The Chadron Record By GEORGE LEDBETTER, Record Editor Monday, October 13, 2008 Opponents of the Crow Butte Resources uranium mine near Crawford used a two-day hearing in Chadron last week to try and convince a panel of Nuclear Regulatory Commission judges that the mine’s operation poses a danger to area water supplies, and may be causing significant health effects on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation The 13 individuals and groups seeking to have operations of the In Situ Leach (ISL) mine suspended face a significant hurdle, however, as they first must convince the panel that they have the right to take part in the license renewal proceedings……………………….The mine is owned by Cameco Corp., a Canadian-owned company that is the world’s largest uranium producer, and ships its yellowcake to Canada for use in nuclear electric generation plants…………………………Opponents of the license renewal include several of the same people and groups who are seeking to block the mine’s expansion. Among those are the Western Nebraska Resources Council, the Oglala Sioux Tribe of South Dakota, Owe Aku/Bring Back the Way, a Lakota Indian cultural group, Tom Cook of Chadron, Debra White Plume of Pine Ridge, S.D., and other individuals from South Dakota and Nebraska.

The Oglala Sioux Treaty Council, a group separate from the tribal government, is also seeking to intervene in the license renewal.
Opposition to the mine is based in large part on the allegation that the water used in mining, which is drawn from the shallow Chadron formation, could contaminate deeper underground aquifers that provide water for the reservation, 30 some miles northwest of the mine. Further threats are posed by surface water drainage into the White River, which flows from the Crawford area to the reservation, they contend.

Criminalizing Indigenous Rights in CanadaDavid Parker The Dominion September 8th, 2008.HALIFAX – In September of 2007, the United Nations adopted the non-binding Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Four high profile countries notably voted against the declaration – namely Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand.[1] All four countries are states that were established by white settlers on indigenous lands, and all four are currently in disputes with indigenous peoples over land and sovereignty.The Canadian state, built on the theft and occupation of indigenous lands, continues to benefit from its unjustly acquired assets…………………………Recent cases of indigenous protest in Ontario have been in opposition to government authorized resource extraction on native lands. Despite legitimate demands for sovereignty and decision-making power over their traditional lands, native protesters have been incarcerated:

Damning report on Aboriginal scheme
Sydney Morning Herald Stephanie Peatling and Joel Gibson
October 14, 2008

THE radical intervention into remote indigenous communities in the Northern Territory has “fractured” the relationship between governments and indigenous people and led to an even greater sense of betrayal and misery among many people, an independent panel has found.

The board commissioned by the Federal Government to review the intervention after 12 months found it had not led to anyone being arrested for child sexual abuse – the grounds on which the previous government justified the intervention………………………….The board called for the intervention’s exemption from the Racial Discrimination Act to be removed and supported the reinstatement of the permit system for entry to lands…………………………………..

Pat Turner, of the Combined Aboriginal Organisations of the Northern Territory, said she hoped the Government would take the report seriously and amend its approach.

She applauded its recommendations to compensate Aboriginal landowners on just terms for compulsory leases over their land and for its call for the intervention to be subject to the Racial Discrimination Act.

But Ms Turner, who has called the intervention a Trojan horse designed to seize Aboriginal land,