Land Defence Alliance stands united against the burial of nuclear waste
The group held a rally in Waverley Park on Tuesday afternoon.
NWO Newswatch, Clint Fleury, Apr 30, 2024
THUNDER BAY – With the decision on where Canada will store its nuclear waste looming, four of the six First Nations representatives from the Land Defence Alliance held a rally in Waverley Park to voice their concerns and dangers of this controversial project.
“We’re concerned about future leaks and accidents and we’re very concerned that if that should happen, it could contaminate the local environment like the animals and also the air and the grounds,” said Grassy Narrows Chief Rudy Turtle in an interview with Dougall Media.
Turtle was the first to take the microphone and send out a profound message of solidarity with his fellow First Nations who are opposed to the burial of used nuclear waste in the Revell Lake area.
Currently, Ignace Township and nearby Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation are each in a “willingness process” to decide whether they will be hosts for a deep geological repository between their communities.
Outside of Ignace and Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation, no other municipality or First Nation communities have a right to vote on their willingness to allow the storage of nuclear waste in Northwestern Ontario.
In southern Ontario, the municipalities of South Bruce and Saugeen Ojibway Nation are also considering being willing hosts to the repository where it is situated near them.
For many, there are too many variables and “what if” questions as the deep geological repository project slowly becomes less like a science fiction concept.
The trouble is that for many First Nation communities, the government’s track record of leaving contaminated industrial sites on treaty land has given way to skepticism. ……………………………………………………………………..
Turtle explained: “It’s coming from down south which is like 28 hours of driving, or whether it’s coming by train, it’s still like over 20 hours and there’s always the possibility of an accident. We’ve seen it happen with other chemicals. We’ve seen it happen with oil transportation.
“So, the potential, the possibility is there of an accident and people should be concerned about that. The towns that are in between during those 20-hour travel times. Those towns should be concerned. Those towns should be worried about the potential of having nuclear waste dumped or accidentally dumped along their communities.”
At the end of the rally, the Land Defence Alliance stood united to say no to the burial of nuclear waste in Northwestern Ontario. https://www.nwonewswatch.com/local-news/land-defence-alliance-stands-united-against-the-burial-of-nuclear-waste-8676906
Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) responds to Land Defence Alliance protest
In response to the recent Land Defence Alliance protest where a coalition of First Nations said “no” to burying nuclear waste in Northwestern Ontario, Vince Ponka, NWMO’s regional communications manager, attempts to dispel concerns surrounding the deep geological repository project.
Clint Fleury, May 2, 2024
THUNDER BAY – At a protest on Tuesday, Grassy Narrows Chief Rudy Turtle shared his strong opposition to the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) proposed deep geological repository where Canada’s used nuclear fuel will potentially be stored.
In an interview with Dougall Media, Chief Turtle said the Land Defence Alliance has reached out to NWMO to speak with them about the project, but NWMO had a scheduling conflict which prevented them from attending a meeting.
“Well, the Land Defence Alliance just finished meeting these past couple of days and we had invited NWMO to come and sit with us but they didn’t show up, and they had a change of schedule or something and we were looking forward to talking to them,” said Chief Turtle.
Turtle stated they would like to set up a future meeting, but there was no date set at this time.
Vince Ponka, regional communications manager with the NWMO, said the organization was aware of the protest, however they were attending the final day of the “willingness process” in Ignace.
Ponka said the NWMO did reach out to Grassy Narrows to schedule a meeting. According to Ponka, the chief and council asked to meet with NWMO’s chief executive officer, Laurie Swami, the next day.
“Unfortunately, she just wasn’t able to make that quick of a turnaround,” said Ponka.
Ignace Township and nearby Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation are two of four potential hosting communities for the DGR. The other two are the municipalities of South Bruce and Saugeen Ojibway Nation.
Once the “willingness process” is complete in all four host communities, NWMO will start the site selection process.
Ponka said NWMO will have a site selected by the end of the year.
In the meantime, Ponka said he would like to meet with the Land Defence Alliance at any point in the future………………………….
The Land Defence Alliance is concerned about limiting the “willingness” vote to residents of Ignace and Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation. However, Ponka did say once the site selection process is finished, NWMO will branch out to the surrounding region to gather input on the next part of the process……………………………………………. https://www.nwonewswatch.com/local-news/nwmo-responds-to-land-defence-alliance-protest-8683263
First Nations leaders voice opposition to nuclear power plants
By Angel Moore, Apr 30, 2024, https://www.aptnnews.ca/national-news/first-nations-leaders-voice-opposition-to-nuclear-power-plants/
Leaders from three First Nations in New Brunswick made the trip to Ottawa to voice their opposition to the expansion of a nuclear power plant in the province.
The federal government, which is pushing the concept of small modular reactors, or SMRs, and the province are proposing to put new nuclear power plants on the Point Lepreau nuclear site.
The plant sits next to the Bay of Fundy and is Atlantic Canada’s only nuclear facility.
“Our people were never consulted or asked about our input or concerns about nuclear so we’re sitting here today talking about nuclear waste and where to put it, where to place it,” said Wolastoq Council Grand Chief Rom Tremblay.
The plant also sits on the traditional territory of the Passamaquoddy nation.
“Every child needs to see what I saw, they need see those fish they need to see those trees they need healthy air and they do not need nuclear contamination for thousands of years,” said Chief Hugh Akagi at the news conference in Ottawa.
The power plant has been operating since 1983 and provides New Brunswick with 40 per cent of its power.
Like other plants, it uses uranium processed in refineries such as the d’uranium de Blind, located in Blind River, Ont., a small community west of Sudbury on the traditional land of the Mississauga First Nation.
Band Councillor Peyton Pitawanakwat said her band council issued a resolution that said, “To declare opposition to any future use of the Blind River refinery site that would see these lands being used as a disposal site for radioactive wastes unfortunately that challenges faced by our first nation are not unique, and the environmental discrimination is happening all across the country.”
Pitawanakwat said the community is consulting with the Canada Nuclear Safety Commission and that their treaty rights are not being upheld.
“There’s a lot of more in-depth discussions that need to be had and we really are at a point where we need to re-set the relationship and ensure that our rights are being upheld,” she said.
New Brunswick Power didn’t respond to a request for an interview. The Canada Nuclear Safety Commission said an interview was not possible.
Indigenous leaders decry lack of consent for nuclear waste on their homelands
OTTAWA, April 30, 2024 — Today, leaders of Indigenous communities in New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario express their strong concern about the lack of Indigenous consent for nuclear waste, uranium mining and refining on their homelands.
Article 29(2) of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) states: “States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of Indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.”
The Government of Canada is promoting an expansion of nuclear energy across the country without the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous Nations affected. Like the existing reactors, new nuclear reactors will leave a toxic legacy for all living things for thousands of years.
Already, dozens of communities have radioactively contaminated sites on their homelands, and they and others must carefully consider the impacts of proposed permanent repositories for nuclear waste on the next seven generations.
Hugh Akagi is Chief of the Peskotomuhkati Nation in Canada, whose homeland is the unwilling host of the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station on the world-renowned Bay of Fundy in New Brunswick. The reactor was built and later refurbished without the Nation’s consent. Now the federal and New Brunswick governments are spending public funds to develop two new nuclear reactors on the Point Lepreau site.
Chief Akagi has written several times to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada, to express concerns about the proposed projects and ask questions about the high-level used nuclear fuel waste in temporary storage at the Point Lepreau site.
“The nuclear fuel chain – mining uranium, chemically processing the ore, fabricating the fuel, fissioning uranium in a reactor creating toxic radioactive waste remaining hazardous for tens of thousands of years – leaves a legacy of injustices disproportionately felt by Indigenous peoples and all our relations,” says Chief Akagi.
In 2021, the Wolastoq Grand Council in New Brunswick published a resolution on nuclear energy and nuclear waste on traditional Wolastoq homeland.
Grand Council Chief Ron Tremblay, says: “Wolastoqewi-Elders define Nuclear in their language as ‘Askomiw Sanaqak,’ which translates as ‘Forever Dangerous.’ That’s why we called for First Nation alternative energy solutions, including renewables and energy efficiency, as well as no more public funding for nuclear and the phasing out of the Point Lepreau reactor.”
The Blind River uranium refinery owned and operated by Cameco is located on lands which since AD 800 have been the site of vibrant Indigenous occupation and life, including as the ancestral lands of the people of Mississauga First Nation (MFN), and MFN’s access to these lands and waters has been barred by virtue of Cameco’s nuclear operations at the site.
Mississauga First Nation has never consented to the lands being used for nuclear activities nor as disposal grounds for radioactive wastes and there continues to be no equitable redress for this loss of access to their ancestral lands located on the Mississauga Delta.
“The existence of nuclear operations on our ancestral lands has contributed to our loss of culture and spiritual traditions and has been detrimental to our health and well-being of our First Nation, said Mississauga First Nation Councillor Peyton Pitawanakwat. “Cameco has materially benefitted and continues to benefit, from the operations at Blind River, which remains the world’s largest uranium refinery. The proposal to now site radioactive wastes on our lands would perpetuate an existing environmental injustice and amount to environmental racism.”
The Kichi Sibi or Ottawa River, which forms the boundary between Ontario and Quebec, is another site of conflict. The Chiefs of Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nations in Quebec last year made public their Indigenous-led assessment of a million-cubic-metre radioactive waste mound to be built at Chalk River Laboratories on the shores of the Kichi Sibi on unceded Algonquin territory. Their assessment covered the project’s impact on their culture, land, water and wildlife. An experimental nuclear reactor is also planned for Chalk River.
“The Kichi Sibi is sacred to our peoples and at the heart of our unceded homeland,” said Chief Lance Haymond, of Kebaowek First Nation. “The Algonquin peoples never consented to the Chalk River site being used for over 75 years for nuclear reactors and research, and now being the site for a permanent radioactive waste dump. Consultation was far too late and inadequate, and we reject the plan.”
In spite of the clear opposition to the project by ten Algonquin First Nations, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission approved the Near Surface Disposal Facility in January 2024. Two First Nations have launched a legal challenge to the decision, as have several citizen groups.
The federal government says that reconciliation is a priority. How UNDRIP will be respected by the Government of Canada – which signed it in 2016 and passed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act in 2021 – remains to be seen.
Speaking with one voice -tribes call for cleanup, remediation and an end to uranium mining and milling
The early uranium they mined was for atomic bombs dropped on other brown people far away. Later, the mined uranium was used to fuel nuclear power plants whose radioactive releases increase leukemia rates in children living nearby and whose waste is targeted at, yes, more Native communities.
By Linda Pentz Gunter, Beyond Nuclear 7 Apr 24
They were there to tell their stories. The contamination of air, land and water. The sicknesses. The displacement. The loss of community, culture and language. The deprivation of fundamental human rights. And they spoke with one voice in their plea for justice, the voice of Indigenous peoples in the United States and their lived experience of uranium mines and mills.
The occasion was a thematic hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) at the Organization of American States. The topic was: United States: Impacts of uranium exploitation on indigenous peoples’ rights.
The speakers came from Navajo, Arapaho, Havasupai, Ute and Oglala Lakota.
And, across the room, they came from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of the Interior.
The Native American speakers made the same plea they have reiterated for decades: effective cleanup and removal of the radioactive waste that has poisoned their communities and people, and will do so again as long new uranium mines are allowed to go forward. And no new mines.
The personal stories they told the listeners — representatives from the US government, the IACHR panel and members of the public in the audience —were those of universal injustice against Indigenous communities, stories that have been told before and, seemingly, have to be told over and over. They are stories that are listened to and not heard, often not responded to and almost never acted upon.
“We used to drink the spring water,” said Anfreny Badback of the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, a member of the White Mesa Concerned Community who oppose operations at the White Mesa uranium mill near Blanding, Utah. “We don’t anymore.”
The mill belongs to Energy Fuels and is the last remaining such facility in the United States. It receives uranium tailings and other radioactive materials for “processing” and dumping. The mill was built right next to the tribal community on top of hundreds of culturally significant sites, a consideration that is routinely ignored.
Teracita Keyanna, a Navajo woman from the Red Water Pond Road Community Association, described how she had to take her family out of their home community because of the health risks to her children due to the continued failure to clean up the radiological contamination from the Church Rock uranium mine and mill. The mill suffered a devastating tailings pond dam break in 1979 that resulted in the biggest accidental release of radioactive waste in US history. As a result of the relocation, Keyanna said, her children are losing touch with their language and culture.
“We are the poorest community in the country but rich in cultural practices” said Tonia Stands, an Oglala Lakota who testified with her small daughter at her side. ……………………………………………………………………….
All of the stories were those of erasure. To be erased does not necessitate a massacre. It can just be decades-long neglect by the US government to make right a terrible wrong. The loss of a safe environment; no access to clean water or healthy food; the neglect of adequate or even any cleanup; the destruction of a culture; the deprivation of tradition and language. All of these constitute a genocide. No one called it that at the hearing. But that is what it is.
From the government spokespeople we heard mainly that they were doing their best; that they had listened; had held consultations; or that it fell outside their jurisdiction.
But, as Christopher Balkhan from the IACHR panel pointed out, there seemed to be some sort of disconnect between the official regulations “and what is actually happening”. He noted the difference between free, prior and informed consent and consultation. Was the former being offered to these communities? “If not, why not?” he asked.
On the government side, tossed bones were presented as lavish gifts. Clifford Villa, Deputy Assistant Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, sought to reassure the communities that cleanup operations in their communities would deliver an abundance of jobs to residents as if somehow the opportunity to clean up a toxic mess not of their making and which had sickened and killed their families for decades should be accepted as some sort of honor.
Similarly, Bryan Newland, assistant secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department of the Interior, praised the uranium mining carried about by tribes as part of a “long-lasting contribution to the national security of the United States.”
But it was nothing of the kind. The early uranium they mined was for atomic bombs dropped on other brown people far away. Later, the mined uranium was used to fuel nuclear power plants whose radioactive releases increase leukemia rates in children living nearby and whose waste is targeted at, yes, more Native communities.
The cleanup requests have “fallen on deaf ears” said Edith Hood, also of the Navajo Red Water Pond Road Community. Many wondered if the same was happening at the IACHR hearing. The collective presentations of both the civil society and government sides were squeezed into 20 minutes apiece, with another 12 minutes for follow-up to questions from the commission.
“I’ve been a leader for 20 years and I have not seen a single response from any state or fed agency to my tribe on our pleas to stop Pinyon mine,” said Carletta Tilousi of the Havasupai Tribal Council at a press conference after the event. She and her tribe are fighting the newly active Pinyon Plain uranium mine at the edge of the Grand Canyon and the headwaters of Havasu Creek, owned by Energy Fuels Resources…………………………………………………….
Eric Jantz, legal director at the New Mexico Environmental Law Center and representing the tribal speakers, summed up their requests in his opening remarks, noting in particular the absence of consent. What they wanted, he said, were three things:
- For the United States to place a moratorium on all new uranium mining and processing on Indigenous lands or near culturally important sites until it has remediated all legacy waste and implemented laws governing uranium development that are consistent with its human rights obligations;
- That the US begin phasing out ongoing uranium mining and processing in Indigenous communities. The only exception to this moratorium would be when an Indigenous nation has given its free, prior and informed consent to develop mineral resources within its jurisdiction. Free, informed and prior consent should especially include the right to say ‘no’.
- Finally, during a moratorium, federal agencies responsible for regulating uranium production and remediation should review and change as necessary their policies, and regulations should be consistent with the United States’ human rights obligations.
………………………………………………………………………………………….. The IACHR can recommend a corrective course to the U.S. government. The big question now is will they?
Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and edits Beyond Nuclear International https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/04/07/speaking-with-one-voice/
Heavy resistance to Canada’s 1st nuclear waste repository, while Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) says it is safe.
Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) reaffirms safety of Canada’s 1st nuclear waste repository but there’s still heavy pushback
Preferred site, in either southern or northwestern Ontario, to be chosen by year’s end
Sarah Law · CBC News Mar 18, 2024
The body tasked with selecting the future storage site for Canada’s nuclear waste has reaffirmed its confidence in the project’s safety, but others remain concerned about the potential risks of burying spent nuclear fuel hundreds of metres below the earth’s surface.
By the end of this year, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is expected to decide on its preferred site for the country’s first deep geological repository for used nuclear fuel.
The potential locations are:
- The Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation-Ignace area, about 250 kilometres northwest of Thunder Bay.
- The Saugeen Ojibway Nation-South Bruce area in southern Ontario, about 130 kilometres northwest of London.
Earlier this month, the NWMO released updated “Confidence in Safety” reports, which say both sites are suitable for the safe, long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel.
However, We the Nuclear Free North and the First Nations Land Defence Alliance, for example, remain concerned about what’s known as the Revell site in northwestern Ontario.
The alliance issued a letter to NWMO president and CEO Laurie Swami on March 5, saying: “Our Nations have not been consulted, we have not given our consent, and we stand together in saying ‘no’ to the proposed nuclear waste storage site near Ignace. We call on you to respect our decision.”
……. “They’re both good sites. We think that both of the sites would be safe,” said Paul Gierszewski, technical subject matter expert with the NWMO and lead author of the “Confidence in Safety” reports.
Brennain Lloyd is project co-ordinator with Northwatch, which is part of We the Nuclear Free North. Members of the organization feel less confident about the project’s safety, she said.
“I think this newest report from the NWMO tries to put the best face possible on a project which is absolutely loaded with risk and uncertainty, and uses a lot of language that’s difficult for the public, for non-technical leaders to work through,” Lloyd said.
“There are no resources available in any part of this process for the public to be able to get technical assistance from independent third-party peer reviewers.
While Gierszewski says the 2023 reports expand on the previous year’s findings, Lloyd questions whether they contain new information or airbrushed statements that “paint a better picture.” …………………………………
Demand for in-person meetings
Chief Rudy Turtle of Grassy Narrows First Nation, 250 kilometres northwest of Ignace, said no one from the NWMO has met with him in person to discuss the proposed nuclear waste site.
Grassy Narrows has a particular interest in which Ontario site is chose, given the First Nation’s experiences dealing with contaminated fish in the 1960s and ’70s. Mercury from a Dryden pulp and paper mill was dumped into the English Wabigoon River, upstream from the First Nation. Research indicates past mercury exposure continues to impact the health of people in the community.
In the case of a nuclear waste repository, Turtle said, “Should there be any leak or if the containment fails, there is the possibility that [toxic chemicals] can leak downriver again.”
Turtle would like to see a series of in-person meetings so people can better understand the safety measures being proposed and the potential risks………………………………………..
Chief Michele Solomon of Fort William First Nation said it is unlikely her community’s position against the site will change.
Band council passed a resolution last September calling for the Ontario government to adopt the proximity principle, which means nuclear waste would be stored at the point of generation and not transported elsewhere.
“Anything that has the potential to get into our waterway that would cause harm to the fish or to the animals or to our people … we take that very seriously,” Solomon said.
………………………………………………. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/nuclear-waste-repository-safety-reports-1.7145240
—
Northwestern Ontario First Nations Chiefs Unite Against Nuclear Waste Proposal
By NNL Digital News Update, March 14, 2024
Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug – Environment – Leaders from five First Nations communities in Northwestern Ontario have voiced a resolute opposition to the prospect of nuclear waste storage within their territories.
In a concerted message to the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO), these chiefs have articulated a clear rejection of any plans to introduce nuclear waste facilities into the region.
A Firm Stand on Environmental Protection
The stance against nuclear waste storage is captured in a letter addressed to Laurie Swami, President and CEO of the NWMO, an industry-funded body tasked with managing Canada’s nuclear waste. The letter outlines grave concerns about the potential for spills or leaks that could irreversibly harm the environment, disrupt the natural way of life, and have lasting impacts on future generations.
Letter to Nuclear Waste Management Organization
Signed by chiefs from Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug, Asubpeeschoseewagong (Grassy Narrows), Wapekeka, Neskantaga, and Onigaming, the letter embodies the collective apprehension of these communities.
These leaders, forming part of the First Nations Land Defence Alliance, are standing firm in their resolve to protect their lands and waters from the risks posed by nuclear waste.
Concerns Over Potential Environmental Impact Chief Donny Morris of Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug highlighted the risks associated with disturbing the Canadian Shield rock to construct an underground storage facility.
Morris emphasized the importance of environmental preservation over financial compensation and stressed the right of all regional First Nations to be involved in the consultation process.
Calls for Consideration of Alternative Sites In a pointed critique of the proposed locations for the nuclear waste repository, Steven Chapman, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug’s lands and environment director, suggested that such facilities should first be considered in areas closer to Canada’s political centers, such as Toronto or Ottawa.
This suggestion underscores a broader call for equity and responsibility in the siting of facilities that pose environmental risks.
The NWMO has narrowed its search to two potential sites, one near Ignace and another in Southern Ontario, with a final decision expected later this year. The chiefs’ letter firmly states their lack of consultation and consent, urging the NWMO to respect their collective decision against the proposed site near Ignace.
Chiefs in the Ottawa region have also rejected the plans to store nuclear waste in their traditional territories.
As these communities stand united in their opposition, the debate over nuclear waste management in Canada continues to raise important questions about environmental stewardship, indigenous rights, and the principles of equitable decision-making in the context of national infrastructure projects.
Text of the Letter Written by Chiefs………………………………… https://www.netnewsledger.com/2024/03/14/northwestern-ontario-first-nations-chiefs-unite-against-nuclear-waste-proposal/
First Nations urge Environment Minister not to green light Chalk River nuclear waste dump.
MARIE WOOLF, OTTAWA, Globe and Mail, 15 Feb 24
Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault was urged by First Nations chiefs Wednesday not to issue a permit to allow a nuclear waste dump on a forested site northwest of Ottawa where a variety of wildlife, including “at risk” wolves, live.
Ten chiefs and members of First Nations in Quebec and Ontario travelled to Parliament to urge the federal government to halt the Chalk River Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF), which the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission approved for construction last month.
First Nations, supported by environmentalists and Bloc Québécois and Green MPs, said the site of the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ planned nuclear waste dump is too near the Ottawa River, which supplies drinking water to the country’s capital. They fear it could be polluted with a radioactive substance running off the site.
Kebaowek First Nation last week filed a Federal Court application for a judicial review of the Jan. 9 decision by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, alleging the government breached its duty to consult Indigenous people.
At a press conference, preceding a rally with First Nations on Parliament Hill, Kebaowek Chief Lance Haymond urged the Prime Minister to intervene and halt the project saying First Nations had not been properly consulted.
Chief Dylan Whiteduck of Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nation told The Globe and Mail that an inadequate assessment of the impact on plants and mammals – including black bears hibernating in dens on the site – was conducted before approval was given.
First Nations spent several months surveying the site and found it rich with wildlife, but he said they were not given long enough, and a more extensive survey is needed.
Mr. Haymond said if Mr. Guilbeault were to issue a permit under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) it would pre-empt an assessment his department is carrying out on upgrading to a threatened species eastern wolves that roam on the site………………………………………………………………
In 2015, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada reassessed the status of the eastern wolf as threatened.
If the wolves are classed as threatened, their habitat would need to be protected, which could put on hold plans to build the waste dump on territory where they roam.
The eastern wolf, also known as the Algonquin wolf, numbers between an estimated 236 and 1,000 adults, and is confined to forests in Central Ontario and Southwestern Quebec. It is currently listed as a species of special concern.
The federal government published the proposed uplisting of the eastern wolf to a threatened species in November last year, carrying out a month-long consultation. It has until August to make a decision.
The proposed order amends Schedule 1 to the Species at Risk Act “to support the survival and recovery of the eastern wolf in Canada by uplisting it from a species of special concern to threatened.”……………………… https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-first-nations-urge-environment-minister-not-to-green-light-chalk-river/
Tribes condemn start of uranium mining at Pinyon Plain Mine south of Grand Canyon
ADRIAN SKABELUND Sun Staff Reporter, Jan 13, 2024,
https://azdailysun.com/news/local/tribes-condemn-start-of-uranium-mining-at-pinyon-plain-mine-south-of-grand-canyon/article_13efb3b0-b16a-11ee-973a-c789810e105e.html
Two northern Arizona tribes this week condemned the start of operations at a uranium mine just south of the Grand Canyon.
The statements came after Denver-based company Energy Fuels Inc. announced last month that operations at its Pinyon Plain Mine had commenced.
“It is with heavy hearts that we must acknowledge that our greatest fear has come true,” a statement from the Havasupai Tribal Council read.
Meanwhile, Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren said in a statement that mining remains opposed “by all neighboring tribes that have forever called Grand Canyon their home.”
The Havasupai Tribe, along with many conservation groups, have long worried that the mine could contaminate area groundwater.
The Pinyon Plain Mine, previously known as the Canyon Mine, sits above the Redwall-Muav aquifer, which acts as a source of water for countless seeps and springs throughout the Grand Canyon, and is the sole source of drinking water for the Havasupai.
The mine also sits near Red Butte, an area with deep cultural importance to the Havasupai.
Energy Fuels has insisted that mining poses no risk to groundwater in the area.
Energy Fuels Vice President of Marketing and Development Curtis Moore said last month that the concerns over contamination were unfounded and designed to scare the public and push an antinuclear political agenda.
But those statements provided little comfort to those opposed to the mine.
“As guardians of the Grand Canyon, we the Havsuw ‘Baaja, the Havasupai Tribe, have opposed uranium mining in and around our reservation and the Grand Canyon since time immemorial. We do this to protect our people, our land, our water, our past, our present and our future,” a statement from the Havasupai Council read. “And yet, despite the historic and current assistance and advocacy from numerous allies, and the countless letters, phone calls and personal pleas, our urgent requests to stop this life-threatening action have been disregarded.”
Nygren on Thursday called on the federal government to protect tribes from the impact of new mining.
“I join our neighboring tribes and the many non-Native organizations to implore the federal government to uphold its promise to protect us,” Nygren wrote. “We are very concerned about the impending transport of radioactive materials from the Pinyon Plain/Canyon uranium mine to White Mesa Mill in Utah.”
The statements came as activists say they have observed uranium ore being stockpiled at the mine site.
Moore previously told the Arizona Daily Sun they didn’t yet know when they would begin to haul ore from the mine to the Utah Mill for processing. He said it was likely to begin within the year, however.
In 2012, the Navajo Nation passed a law banning the transportation of uranium ore within Navajo lands. That law does not impact federal highways that cross tribal lands.
There are two potential routes trucks bringing uranium ore from the mine to the Utah mill could take. One would direct trucks through Flagstaff, while a second would utilize ranching roads to skirt north of the city. Still, both routes pass through the Navajo Nation on U.S. Route 89.
Nygren also said he was disappointed that he and other tribal officials only learned mining operations had commenced through media reports, as opposed to hearing the news from federal partners.
“Despite all of our objections through the years, we learn through the media, rather than from our federal trustee — the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Department of the Interior/Bureau of Land Management — as would correctly expect, that our land and water will again be threatened with contamination,” he said. “Our relatives, the Havasupai, Hualapai and other tribes along the Colorado River, are bracing themselves for renewed anxiety, worry and constant unease about the safety of their resources and homelands.”
There is a long and controversial history of uranium mining within northern Arizona.
Throughout the Cold War era, nearly 30 million tons of uranium ore were extracted and often processed from Navajo Nation lands. Hundreds of those mines, often near Navajo communities, were then abandoned by the companies operating them.
More than 500 contaminated sites remain across the Navajo Nation.
Documentary ‘Downwind’ shows deadly consequences of nuclear testing on tribal lands
OPB, By Lillian Karabaic (OPB) and Winston Szeto (OPB), Jan. 22, 2024
Western Shoshone Principal Man Ian Zabarte, who lost his family members to diseases caused by radiation exposure, says it amounts to racism against Native Americans that the U.S. government detonated more than 900 atomic bombs on his ancestors’ land in secret from 1951 to 1992.
On Jan. 7, the film “Oppenheimer” snagged five Golden Globe awards. It’s a blockbuster directed by Christopher Nolan about the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in 1945.
But flying under the radar is a documentary called “Downwind,” another movie about nuclear weapons.
Mark Shapiro is the co-director of “Downwind,” he lives in Portland.
Ian Zabarte from Las Vegas is the Principal Man of the Western Bands of the Shoshone Nation of Indians, and is featured in the documentary.
They joined OPB’s “Weekend Edition” host, Lillian Karabaic, to discuss “Downwind” and the tragedy that inspired the documentary.
TRANSCRIPT.
Mark Shapiro: So we came across a pretty remarkable story. We found out that during the Cold War and into the nineties, from 1951 to 1992, the United States detonated 928 nuclear weapons at the Nevada Test Site, which is about an hour from Las Vegas. And we found that to be remarkable, and the radiation from all those tests impacted communities downwind.
Lillian Karabaic: You co-produced this documentary with Douglas Brian Miller. The documentary came out last summer around the same time as “Oppenheimer.” Can you tell me how you both came up with the idea to make the film and explore that connection?
Shapiro: Both of our families had cancer in our families and were impacted deeply by cancer. And, we felt like this shouldn’t be breaking news, that people should really know that for 40 years in one location, they tested a hundred nuclear weapons larger than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined in some cases, and then over 800 underground weapons tests that also vent into the communities. And I think the biggest thing that surprised us, too, was this giant swath of land the size of Rhode Island, 1,350 square miles, is deeded Shoshone land. So that was another topic that we thought the government really took part in an unforgivable era, and we wanted to expose that.
Karabaic: Ian, one of the things that Mark just mentioned was that the Nevada Test Site sits right on your ancestors’ land, and the U.S. government launched more than 900 tests there. How could that happen?
Ian Zabarte: Well, the United States entered into treaty relationships with the Western Shoshone, the Western bands of Shoshone Nation of Indians in 1863. And that was a time when America’s need was great. So we all ourselves with the union, with the North, to help prosecute the war against the South, our lands, and our resources continue to make this nation the great land it is. Our lands bind this nation together, not just Shoshone, but all tribes and the treaties we entered into.
So, what happened was the United States came into our country in secret. They developed the US nuclear facilities, and they came to our country to test the bombs that they built, and they did this in secret. They didn’t ask our consent. They didn’t tell us what was happening, and we didn’t know the problem. That secrecy is counter to democracy, and we’re all not just the Shoshone; we’re all downwinders, and we’re all living with the burden of the adverse health effects that are known to be plausible from exposure to radiation, in this case, from radioactive fallout……………………………………………………………………………………………….. more https://www.opb.org/article/2024/01/21/documentary-downwind-nuclear-test-site-nevada-mark-shapiro-shoshone-nation-ian-zabarte/
Kebaowek Nation calls for cancellationof nuclear waste disposal site at Chalk River
Nuclear waste disposal would run counter to Aboriginal rights and environmental protection.
by Alexia Leclerc, Pivot, January 16, 2024
The Kebaowek First Nation denounces the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s decision to grant a license to the private company Canadian Nuclear Laboratories to build a radioactive waste disposal facility at Chalk River, on Algonquin Anishinabeg traditional territory. She believes that the Commission did not respect its duty to consult Aboriginal communities, and is concerned about the consequences for health and the environment.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) has obtained a federal licence to operate a 37-hectare area for, among other things, the permanent near-surface storage of up to 1,000,000 cubic metres of solid low-level radioactive waste.
This area is located on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation communities, who reject the project. The area is close to sacred sites such as Oiseau Rock and Pointe au Baptême, as well as the Kichi Sibi (Ottawa River) and its watershed, and several animal and plant species important to the ecosystem.
The community of Kebaowek strongly denounces this situation and calls on the federal government to stop the project. “The Commission’s decision is unacceptable,” said Lance Haymond, Chief of the First Nation, in a press release issued on January 9. “The Government of Canada must act quickly and affirm the suspension of the project without delay.”
CNL applied to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), a federal administrative tribunal, for an amendment to its current operating licence. The Commission, which issues licences to nuclear companies, is mandated to assess the environmental and human impacts of such a project, while ensuring that obligations to consult Aboriginal peoples are met.
Duty to consult not respected
“We believe that consultation has been inadequate, to say the least, and that our Aboriginal rights are threatened by this proposal,” says Lance Haymond.
The communities of Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi, members of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation, intervened with the Commission in June 2022 to inform it that they had not been adequately consulted. The Commission gave them one year to provide a brief that would allow adequate consultation.
Only these two communities were given additional time for consultation activities, although other communities also requested this time.
The brief filed by Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi states that all the communities of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation have potential title, interest and inherent rights over the entire Kichi Sibi watershed, beyond the limits imposed by the reserve and provincial system.
“How do they understand the duty to consult, when ten out of eleven communities refuse the project?” denounces Justin Roy, Councillor for the Kebaowek First Nation. “It’s not enough to simply inform and listen. What the communities want is to be able to sit at the discussion table, to take part in the decision-making and solution-making process.
He acknowledges that nuclear waste management needs to be addressed, but maintains that the current solution is inadequate.
The Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi brief already asserted that approval of this project would violate the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This states that states must take effective measures to prevent the storage or disposal of hazardous materials on the territories of indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.
When we asked about the criticisms of the consultations, the Commission simply referred us to its report, without comment. The report describes the consultation process and mentions the additional time granted to the two communities.
Threats to health
Kebaowek Chief Lance Haymond states “it is undeniable that the safety and health of people and the environment will be profoundly impacted for generations to come by this project”.
Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, warns of the dangers of storing nuclear substances in the area, despite the Commission’s ruling. “Judging that there will be no significant environmental impacts doesn’t mean that there won’t be any.”
Gordon Edwards points out that even after the active life of this nuclear waste management site is over, radioactive materials from it will still be present in the environment for several thousand years.
The release of radioactive materials into the water of the Ottawa river that flows into the St. Lawrence will be monitored to ensure that the quantity respects Canadian standards, insists the Commission. However, Gordon Edwards warns that no public health or medical data will be collected on the health effects of exposure to people from these substances in the water.
“When we put radioactivity in the water we drink, we expose millions of people. Even if the level of exposure is very low, it exposes a lot of people to these radioactive cancer-causing agents.” He explains that the more people are exposed to radiation, the greater the number of cancers are expected.
“The main reason to keep radioactive materials out of the environment is to keep the number of people exposed to them as minimal as possible,” he sums up.
Impact on endangered species
Despite the Commission’s assessment, the Kebaowek First Nation also remains concerned about the project’s environmental impacts. “The Commission’s final decision is completely unfounded in concluding that the project […] will not have significant environmental effects,” insists Lance Haymond.
Justin Roy points out that several protected species inhabit this environment. For example, he points out that the Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi brief assesses, among other things, that vegetation clearing would have an impact on the black ash, considered an endangered species by the Ontario government. However, there is no mention of the black ash in the Commission’s report.
Construction of the site would also require the destruction of hibernation sites, threatening the black bear population, says Justin Roy.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission affirms that the environmental effects are for the most part insignificant, and that mitigation measures will be put in place to protect endangered species. In response to Pivot’s questions, it states that it will continue to observe the surrounding environment as part of the Independent Environmental Monitoring Program.
Commission decision a ‘gut-punch’, so years-long battle over radioactive waste mound will continue
“You cannot sit there and tell me that over the next 550 years nothing is going to leach out of this mound and get in and make its way into the surrounding environment and waterways.” —Kebaowek First Nation Councillor Justin Roy
By Shari Narine
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
Windspeaker.com 12 Jan 24
Kebaowek First Nation is considering legal action now that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has given the go ahead to Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) to construct a Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) for solid low-level radioactive waste at its Chalk River Laboratories site on traditional unceded Algonquin territory.
“The big thing being discussed right now is pushing for a judicial review of the project. Just based on all of our environmental findings and the impacts that could be shown, we strongly believe we’d have a good case for this,” said Kebaowek First Nation Councillor Justin Roy.
Next steps will be decided once the legal team has fully reviewed the 169-page decision from the commission, which was released Jan. 9, he says.
The commission ruled it was confident that the NSDF project, an engineered containment mound for up to a million tonnes of radioactive and hazardous waste, was “not likely to cause significant adverse effects with respect to Aboriginal peoples.”
The containment mound is to be located 1.1 km from the Ottawa River on a bedrock ridge. The Kichi Sibi (Ottawa River) is sacred to the Algonquin people. The Chalk River site is also close to the sacred Algonquin sites of Oiseau Rock and Baptism Point.
The commission concluded “the design of the NSDF project is robust, supported by a strong safety case, able to meet its required design life, and sufficient to withstand severe weather events, seismic activity, and the effects of climate change.”
Roy calls the decision a “gut punch” but admits he is not surprised.
What does surprise him, however, is that the decision states that CNL adequately undertook a duty to consult with First Nations.
“I find that hard to believe when you have 10 of 11 Algonquin communities in direct opposition to the project. After everything that we’ve done over the last number of years and everything that we presented at last year’s hearing and then even in the hearing this last August, we’re just falling on deaf ears once again,” said Roy.
On June 9, the Algonquins of Pikwakanagan signed a long-term relationship agreement with CNL and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, another nuclear organization. The agreement establishes a working group with representatives from all three parties.
The commission held that the disposal facility was also “not likely to cause significant adverse effects” when it came to fish and fish habitat, aquatic species at risk, migratory birds, or federal lands.
“We have inherent rights to our unceded Algonquin territory and that means we need to protect everything that encompasses that territory, from the environment, the trees, the land, the air, the water and all the living species that make up our Algonquin territory,” said Roy.
Algonquin people are on the ground, he said, hunting, fishing and picking berries and “were able to show that there are going to be plenty of environmental impacts and, especially, species at risk that are going to be affected by this.”……………………………………………………………… https://windspeaker.com/news/windspeaker-news/commission-decision-gut-punch-so-years-long-battle-over-radioactive-waste
Kebaowek First Nation strongly opposes nuclear waste storage facility in Chalk River
Radioactive waste site in Chalk River a go
National Observer, By Natasha Bulowski / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada’s National Observer, 9 Jan 24
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has greenlit a proposed nuclear waste storage facility in Chalk River, Ont., after a years-long battle waged by concerned citizens, environmentalists and First Nations.
On Jan. 9, the commission announced Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ operating licence will be changed to allow construction of a “near-surface disposal facility” to hold up to a million tonnes of radioactive and hazardous waste. Stored in a large mound, the waste would sit about a kilometre from the Ottawa River, a culturally important river for Algonquins, and this proximity to drinking water for millions is one of many factors that raised alarm bells for opponents.
The proposed facility, referred to as the NSDF, “is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects” as long as Canadian Nuclear Laboratories sticks to its proposed mitigation and monitoring measures, the commission said in its decision.
Within hours of the announcement, Kebaowek First Nation put out a press release calling on the federal government to intervene and stop the project. Organizations representing 10 of the 11 Algonquin First Nations have opposed the project, alongside leaders and elders from those nations. Pikwakanagan First Nation, the only Ontario-based Algonquin Nation and closest to Chalk River, signed a long-term relationship agreement with Canadian Nuclear Laboratories on June 9, 2023………………………………………………
Kebaowek First Nation Chief Lance Haymond called the commission’s decision “unacceptable” because it goes against the rights of Indigenous Peoples and environmental protection in a press release issued a few hours after the decision.
“I want to be very clear: the Algonquin Peoples did not consent to the construction of this radioactive waste dump on our unceded territory,” Haymond said. “We believe the consultation was inadequate, to say the least, and that our Indigenous rights are threatened by this proposal.”
Algonquin leaders from Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nations and Algonquins of Barriere Lake have long opposed the NSDF and have urged the commission to heed their concerns about environmental and human health. At the final licensing hearing in August, Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg argued the consultation was inadequate because it began far too late in the decision-making process and did not appear to take their concerns or traditional knowledge seriously………………………………………….
James Walker, a nuclear waste expert and former director of safety engineering and licensing at AECL, disputed the proclamation that all waste will be low-level in a submission to the commission. His calculations, based on the inventory of waste provided by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, show that much of it is intermediate-level radioactive waste and should not be placed in a near-surface facility. There is also no inventory management system to properly verify the waste complies with the acceptance criteria, he wrote. Walker said the project is “non-compliant with International Safety Standards” for these reasons……………………..
Last month, concerned citizen Ole Hendrickson initiated a House of Commons petition (authorized by Pontiac, Que. MP Sophie Chatel) calling for an international review of three radioactive waste projects including the NSDF at Chalk River. At the time of writing, it has almost 2,950 signatures. Petitions require a minimum of 500 signatures to be presented in the House of Commons and receive an official response from the government. https://www.nationalobserver.com/2024/01/09/news/radioactive-waste-site-chalk-river-go#
Bribery to indigenous people – by Canada’s nuclear lobby
Canada’s Nuclear Regulator Funds Indigenous Relations Boost
Mirage News, 12 Dec 23
Today, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) announced that it is awarding nearly $4 million to 19 Indigenous Nations and communities over 2 years through the new Indigenous and Stakeholder Capacity Fund (ISCF) – Indigenous Capacity Support stream. The ISCF serves to increase recipients’ capacity to better engage and participate in the CNSC’s full lifecycle of regulatory processes, programs and initiatives.
Launched in May 2023, the ISCF provides support for staffing and internal resources, Indigenous knowledge and land use studies, IT equipment acquisition, education and training opportunities, technical assistance, and other much-needed resources……………………………….. https://www.miragenews.com/canadas-nuclear-regulator-funds-indigenous-1141295/
The Members of This Reservation Learned They Live with Nuclear Weapons. Can Their Reality Ever Be the Same?
The Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara peoples are learning more about the missiles siloed on their lands, and that knowledge has put the preservation of their culture and heritage in even starker relief.
Scientific American. By Ella Weber on November 24, 2023
“………………Ella Weber: I met Jayli Fimbres at the recently opened MHA Nation Interpretive Center in New Town, North Dakota, the most populous town on the Fort Berthold reservation. While she says she doesn’t know much about nuclear weapons, she’s been dreaming about nuclear war.
Fimbres: I think I’ve, even within those dreams, I had dreams of surviving those things as well. But there was, like, radioactive damage and stuff. And we were, like, mutating, but we, like, learned to get through it.
Weber: You are listening to Scientific American’s podcast series, The Missiles on Our Rez. I’m Ella Weber, a member of the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation, a Princeton student, and a journalist. This is Episode 5: “What Happens Now?”
Weber: This is the last episode of our series. Throughout the first four episodes, we learned about how nuclear missiles arrived on our reservation. We also learned how the Air Force failed to appropriately describe the human and environmental consequences associated with its plans to modernize existing nuclear missile silos.
Those plans included placing new missiles on our land for the next 60 years.
We discussed the risks associated with living with these weapons for the tribe — and what it really meant for our members—including my family—to live in a national nuclear sacrifice zone.
In this final episode, I’m returning to my tribe, the MHA Nation, to share what I found.
Weber: I met with my grandma, Debra Malnourie, to find out when she first learned about the missile silos. She grew up on the reservation and currently resides there.
Debra Malnourie: Then, like I said, I was driving around, and I was like, “What are these places?” And then I don’t even remember who told me that they were missile sites, that missiles [are] down in there, and I was like, “How do you know?” And I knew nothing about it. It wasn’t even in my radar, actually. Probably still isn’t right now.
Weber: Debra didn’t know much about this.
Malnourie: But I always thought if there was a big war, we’d all end up going. And truthfully, I would not want to be one of the ones that didn’t go. Because what [are] you going to do? I don’t know.
Debra Malnourie: Then, like I said, I was driving around, and I was like, “What are these places?” And then I don’t even remember who told me that they were missile sites, that missiles [are] down in there, and I was like, “How do you know?” And I knew nothing about it. It wasn’t even in my radar, actually. Probably still isn’t right now.
Weber: Debra didn’t know much about this.
Malnourie: But I always thought if there was a big war, we’d all end up going. And truthfully, I would not want to be one of the ones that didn’t go. Because what [are] you going to do? I don’t know………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Weber: As we mentioned in the last episode, Edmund would later find out from our Nuclear Princeton research team, and Princeton researcher Sébastien Philippe, that the entire 3,000-page environmental impact statement, or EIS package–first published in June 2022 in draft form–didn’t actually go into a great amount of detail about the ramifications of potential nuclear strikes on the silos and the surrounding community.
……………………….
As I mentioned in Episode 2, the Garrison Dam, constructed in 1947 by the Army Corps of Engineers, was built adjacent to our land — and against our will. There’s a famous picture of chairman George Gillette crying as he signed the agreement in 1948.
When the dam flooded in 1953, countless tribal families were displaced, and our homes were destroyed. It separated our remaining reservation into five areas—another assault on our language and culture.
It turns out there’s actually a link between the historical destruction of our community by the U.S. government and the loss of our language. People such as Jayli Fimbres—who you first heard in the beginning of this episode—are trying to bring our language back………………………………
As I mentioned in Episode 2, the Garrison Dam, constructed in 1947 by the Army Corps of Engineers, was built adjacent to our land — and against our will. There’s a famous picture of chairman George Gillette crying as he signed the agreement in 1948.
When the dam flooded in 1953, countless tribal families were displaced, and our homes were destroyed. It separated our remaining reservation into five areas—another assault on our language and culture.
It turns out there’s actually a link between the historical destruction of our community by the U.S. government and the loss of our language. People such as Jayli Fimbres—who you first heard in the beginning of this episode—are trying to bring our language back…………………………………………………….
Despite the negative effects associated with the nuclear modernization program that the Air Force listed in the environmental impact statement, I found that the impacts are much farther reaching than what is described in the scope of the document.
Baker: What’s the purpose of a nuclear warhead? Depends on who you talk to. “They defend freedom.” No, they’re meant to kill. They’re meant to destroy. That was never in part of our land, intentional land spirit.
Weber: That’s Edmund Baker who says that not only do warheads go against our land spirit—but they also go against the core concepts in our Hidatsa language……………………………………………………………………………..
Weber: Throughout this project, I came to understand how the story of the U.S. government’s land theft and attempts at destroying our culture are directly related to the history of how the missile silos got here. And our community has been fighting to survive for as long as we’ve been around. This is just another test………………………………………………..
Moniz: So, in closing, should something go wrong, should something happen with all these warheads that are on our tribal nation, our children, our future generations, what we’re working to reclaim and reconnect and revitalize will all—could be diminished. It could be diminished.
Thinking about that and thinking about what could go wrong–what could happen–really puts things into perspective, and in closing I would urge…not encourage, but welcome more folks to the work. And let’s keep going and let’s get this out there. People need to know what’s happening. Our people need to know what’s happening.
Baker: For the future, to keep our people, our land, intact, what’s left of it–our unity…to try to give some space to work on our values, and re-remember who we are… it would make it this much easier if you just get these silos out of here. You know, you’d help that way, if you really care about us, federal government……………………………………………………………………………………………..
Weber: Will things continue as they are but with people now being aware of what the missile silos mean for us?
Could the silos be removed from the reservation?
Could communities in North Dakota, Native and not, work together towards a different future—with no missiles in the state?
I don’t know. What makes me hopeful, though, is the new generation of people willing to continue the fight for our tribe, our land, our rights, our culture, and our futures…………………………………………………… more https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/the-members-of-this-reservation-learned-they-live-with-nuclear-weapons-can-their-reality-ever-be-the-same/
1.This Month
Small Nuclear Reactors Education Task Force: https://stop-smrs.weebly.com/bulletins.ht
24 May. The Vow from Hiroshima film is coming on PBS, this month https://www.thevowfromhiroshima.com/
6-7 July A summit and a rally in Washington D.C. https://nonatoyespeace.org/
-
Archives
- May 2024 (156)
- April 2024 (367)
- March 2024 (335)
- February 2024 (345)
- January 2024 (375)
- December 2023 (333)
- November 2023 (342)
- October 2023 (366)
- September 2023 (353)
- August 2023 (356)
- July 2023 (362)
- June 2023 (324)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 