North Dakota governor orders pipeline protesters expelled

Women hold a prayer ceremony on Backwater Bridge during a protest against plans to pass the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, near Cannon Ball, North Dakota,

By Terray Sylvester

CANNON BALL, N.D. (Reuters) – North Dakota’s governor ordered the expulsion of thousands of Native American and environmental activists camped on federal property near an oil pipeline project they are trying to halt, citing hazards posed by harsh weather as a blizzard bore down on the area.

The “emergency evacuation” order from Governor Jack Dalrymple came days after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which manages the site, set a Dec. 5 deadline for the demonstrators to vacate their encampment, about 45 miles (72 km) south of Bismarck, the state capital.

The Army Corps has insisted, however, that it has no plans to forcibly remove protesters, many of them members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. The agency instead urged a “peaceful and orderly transition to a safer location.”

Late Monday, Standing Rock Chairman Dave Archambault II denounced Dalrymple’s order as a “menacing action meant to cause fear,” and accused the Republican governor of trying to “usurp and circumvent federal authority.”

Archambault noted that the evacuation order, which the governor said he issued for the campers’ well-being in the face of dangerous winter weather, came a week after police turned water hoses on protesters in sub-freezing temperatures.

Activists have spent months protesting against plans to route the $3.8 billion Dakota Access Pipeline beneath a lake near the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, saying the project poses a threat to water resources and sacred Native American sites.

The governor did not specify how he intended to enforce his order other than by directing state and local agencies to refuse emergency assistance and other services to anyone who remained at the site. He said the order was effective immediately and would stay in force “until rescinded.”

But Standing Rock Sioux spokeswoman Phyllis Young told a news conference Monday night the tribe would stand its ground.

“We have lived for generations in this setting. That is our camp. We will continue to provide for our people there,” she said. “This is Lakota territory. This is treaty territory, and no one else has jurisdiction there.”

Protest leaders suggested a forced evacuation could prove more dangerous to the activists than staying put.

“We’re in the heart of winter now. To even think of a forced removal is terrifying,” said Dallas Goldtooth, an organizer with Indigenous Environmental Network, who estimated there were about 5,000 people in the camp.

Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier added to the pressure by issuing a video statement urging protesters to avoid subjecting themselves to “life-threatening conditions” by remaining exposed to the elements with little shelter.

The National Weather Service has posted a storm warning for most of western and central North Dakota, forecasting the possibility of heavy snow through Wednesday.

The 1,172-mile (1,885-km) pipeline project is mostly complete except for a segment that is supposed to run under Lake Oahe, a reservoir formed by a dam on the Missouri River.

The Obama administration in September postponed final approval of an Army Corps permit required to allow tunneling beneath the lake, a move intended to give federal officials more time to consult tribal leaders. The delay also led to escalating tension over the project.

The companies say the pipeline would carry Bakken shale oil more cheaply and safely from North Dakota to Illinois en route to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries than it could be shipped by railroad or tanker trucks.

(Additional reporting by Timothy Mclaughlin in Chicago; Writing by Steve Gorman; Editing by Leslie Adler, Robert Birsel)

Authorities say no plans to forcibly remove North Dakota protesters

People march in Oceti Sakowin camp during a protest against plans to pass the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, near Cannon Ball, North Dakota,

(Reuters) – U.S. authorities said on Sunday they had no plans to forcibly remove activists protesting plans to run an oil pipeline beneath a lake near the Standing Rock Sioux reservation in North Dakota, despite telling them to leave by early December.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which manages the federal land where the main camp protesting the Dakota Access pipeline is located, said last week it would close public access to the area north of the Cannonball River on Dec. 5

On Sunday, the agency said in a statement that it had “no plans for forcible removal” of protesters. The statement said anyone who remained would be considered unauthorized and could be subject to various citations. It also said emergency services might not be adequately provided to the area.

“The Army Corps of Engineers is seeking a peaceful and orderly transition to a safer location,” the statement said. “This will reduce the risk of harm to people in the encampments caused (by) the harsh North Dakota winter conditions.”

Women hold a demonstration on Backwater Bridge during a protest against plans to pass the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, near Cannon Ball, North Dakota,

Women hold a demonstration on Backwater Bridge during a protest against plans to pass the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, near Cannon Ball, North Dakota, U.S. November 27, 2016. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

A representative for the agency could not be immediately reached on Sunday to provide further clarification on its plans.

Organizers told a news conference on Saturday at the main protest site where about 5,000 people are camped that they had no intention of moving.

There are smaller camps on land not subject to the planned restrictions, including an area south of the Cannonball River where the Corps said it was establishing a free-speech zone.

Demonstrators have protested for months against the $3.8 billion Dakota Access Pipeline, owned by Energy Transfer Partners LP, saying it poses a threat to water resources and sacred Native American sites.

The companies say the pipeline would carry Bakken shale oil more cheaply and safely from North Dakota to Illinois en route to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries.

The 1,172-mile (1,885-km) project is mostly complete except for the segment planned to run under Lake Oahe, less than half a mile (0.8 km) north of Standing Rock.

The Obama administration in September postponed final approval of a permit required to allow tunneling beneath the lake, a move intended to give federal officials more time to consult with tribal leaders. The delay also led to escalating tensions over the project.

Police stand guard during a prayer ceremony on Backwater Bridge during a protest against plans to pass the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, near Cannon Ball, North Dakota, U.S. November 27, 2016. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

Police stand guard during a prayer ceremony on Backwater Bridge during a protest against plans to pass the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, near Cannon Ball, North Dakota, U.S. November 27, 2016. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

Last weekend, police used water hoses in subfreezing weather in an attempt to disperse about 400 activists near the proposed tunnel excavation site.

(Reporting by Curtis Skinner in San Francisco; Editing by Peter Cooneyand Peter Cooney)

Police fire water cannon at Dakota protesters in freezing weather

Police use a water cannon to put out a fire started by protesters during a protest near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation.

By Chris Michaud and Stephanie Keith

NEW YORK/CANNON BALL, N.D. (Reuters) – Police fired tear gas and water at hundreds of protesters in North Dakota opposed to an oil pipeline in freezing weather late Sunday and early Monday, in the latest violent clash between law enforcement and activists over the $3.7 billion project.

An estimated 400 protesters mounted the Backwater Bridge just north of Cannon Ball, North Dakota, and attempted to force their way past police in what the Morton County Sheriff’s Department initially described as an “ongoing riot.”

A joint statement from several activist groups said protesters were trying to remove the burned vehicles blocking Backwater Bridge in order to restore access to the nearby Standing Rock encampments so emergency services and local traffic can move freely.

Police fired volleys of tear gas at the protesters to prevent them from crossing the bridge. Law enforcement also sprayed protesters with water in sub-freezing temperatures, and fired rubber bullets, injuring some in the crowd.

“It is below freezing right now and the Morton County Sheriff’s Department is using a water cannon on our people – that is an excessive and potentially deadly use of force,” said Dallas Goldtooth, a spokesman for the Indigenous Environmental Network, one of the organizations involved in protests.

A statement from the sheriff’s’ department said one arrest had been made by 8:30 p.m. local time (0230 GMT Monday), about 2-1/2 hours after the incident began 45 miles (30 miles) south of Bismarck, the North Dakota capital. About 100 to 200 protesters remained after midnight.

The protest was latest in a series of demonstrations against the Dakota Access Pipeline that Native American activists and environmentalists say threatens water resources and sacred tribal lands.

Kazlin Red Bear,4, from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe jumps from a hay bale in an encampment near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation.

Kazlin Red Bear,4, from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe jumps from a hay bale in an encampment near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation. REUTERS/Stephanie Keith

The Dakota Access project has drawn steady opposition from activists since the summer, led by the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, whose tribal lands are adjacent to the pipeline.

Supporters of the pipeline, owned by Energy Transfer Partners, said the project offers the most direct route for taking shale oil from North Dakota to Gulf Coast refineries and would be safer than road or rail transportation.

Completion of the pipeline, set to run 1,172 miles (1,185 km) from North Dakota to Illinois, was delayed in September so federal authorities could re-examine permits required by the Army Corps of Engineers. A final decision on the permit has been deferred for more consultation with the tribe.

The latest confrontation began after protesters removed a truck that had been on the bridge since Oct. 27, police said. The North Dakota Department of Transportation closed the Backwater Bridge, which crosses Cantapeta Creek north of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s camp, due to damage from that incident.

The Morton County Sheriff’s Department said officers on the scene of the latest confrontation were “describing protesters’ actions as very aggressive.”

Demonstrators tried to start about a dozen fires as they attempted to outflank and “attack” law enforcement barricades, the sheriff’s statement said. Police said protesters had hurled rocks, striking one officer, and fired burning logs from slingshots.

(Reporting by Chris Michaud in New York and Stephanie Keith in Cannon Ball, North Dakota; Editing by David Gaffen and Marguerita Choy)

Dakota Access pipeline to be completed despite protests, official tells PBS

Protesters gather in front of the Bank of North Dakota in Bismarck during a protest against plans to pass the Dakota Access pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, North Dakota, U.S

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The company behind the controversial Dakota Access crude pipeline will seek to complete the project even if protests against its construction continue, its chief executive told the PBS NewsHour television news program late on Wednesday.

“This is not a peaceful protest,” said Kelcy Warren of Energy Transfer Partners. “If they want to stick around and continue to do what they’re doing, great, but we’re building the pipeline.”

Dakota Access, halted by the federal government in September after protests, has drawn opposition from the Native American Standing Rock Sioux tribe and environmentalists who say it could pollute water supplies and destroy sacred historic tribal sites.

Demonstrators fanned out across North America on Tuesday to demand that the U.S. government either halts or reroutes the pipeline, while Energy Transfer asked a federal court for permission to complete it.

Energy Transfer has said the pipeline would be a more efficient and safer way to transport oil from the Bakken shale of North Dakota to the Midwest and onto the U.S. Gulf Coast.

(Reporting by Ethan Lou in New York; Editing by Bernadette Baum)

U.S. government mulling alternate routes for North Dakota pipeline

A North Dakota law enforcement officers stands next to two armored vehicles just beyond the police barricade on Highway 1806 near a Dakota Access Pipeline construction site.

By Valerie Volcovici

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama has weighed in on the ongoing protests against the construction of an oil pipeline in North Dakota, saying the U.S. government is examining ways to reroute it and address concerns raised by Native American tribes.

Obama’s comments late on Tuesday to online news site Now This were his first to directly address the escalating clashes between local authorities and protesters over Energy Transfer Partners’ $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline project.

“My view is that there is a way for us to accommodate sacred lands of Native Americans. And I think that right now the Army Corps is examining whether there are ways to reroute this pipeline,” Obama said in the video interview.

The U.S. Justice and Interior Departments along with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers halted construction of part of the pipeline in September due to protests by Native American tribes who contend the pipeline would disturb sacred land and pollute waterways supplying nearby homes. The affected area includes land under Lake Oahe, a large and culturally important reservoir on the Missouri River where the line was supposed to cross.

Construction is continuing on sections of the pipeline away from the Missouri River, U.S. refiner Phillips 66 said.

Obama said government agencies will let the situation “play out for several more weeks and determine whether or not this can be resolved in a way that I think is properly attentive to the traditions of First Americans.”

The fight against the pipeline has drawn international attention and growing celebrity support amid confrontations between riot police and protesters.

The 1,172-mile (1,885-km) pipeline, being built by a group of companies led by Energy Transfer Partners, would offer the fastest and most direct route to bring Bakken shale oil from North Dakota to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries.

At a Sept. 27 White House summit for tribal nations, Obama did not directly comment on plans to deal with the pipeline protests but acknowledged the swell of support for the Standing Rock Sioux tribe.

“This moment highlights why it’s so important that we redouble our efforts to make sure that every federal agency truly consults and listens and works with you, sovereign to sovereign,” he said at the event.

(Reporting by Valerie Volcovici; Editing by Will Dunham)

Police arrest 141 in crackdown on North Dakota pipeline protesters

A line of police move towards a roadblock and encampment of Native American and environmental protesters near an oil pipeline construction site, near the town of Cannon Ball, North Dakota, U.S.

By Timothy Mclaughlin

(Reuters) – Police arrested 141 Native Americans and other protesters in North Dakota in a tense standoff that spilled into Friday morning between law enforcement and demonstrators seeking to halt construction of a disputed oil pipeline.

Police in riot gear used pepper spray and armored vehicles in an effort to disperse an estimated 330 protesters and clear a camp on private property in the path of the proposed $3.8 billion Dakota Access Pipeline, according to photos and statements released by the Morton County Sheriff’s Department.

Some protesters responded by throwing rocks, bottles and Molotov cocktails at police, attaching themselves to vehicles and starting fires, police said.

“It was a very active and tense evening as law enforcement worked through the evening to clear protesters,” the department said.

A female protester fired three rounds at the police line before she was arrested, the department said.

In another shooting incident, a man was taken into custody after a man was shot in the hand. That “situation involved a private individual who was run off the road by protesters,” the department said in a Facebook post.

The 1,172-mile (1,885-km) pipeline, being built by a group of companies led by Energy Transfer Partners LP, would offer the fastest and most direct route to bring Bakken shale oil from North Dakota to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries.

Supporters say it would be safer and more cost-effective than transporting the oil by road or rail.

But the pipeline has drawn the ire of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and environmental activists who say it threatens the water supply and sacred tribal sites. They have been protesting for several months, and dozens have been arrested.

A line of police move towards a roadblock and encampment of Native American and environmental protesters near an oil pipeline construction site, near the town of Cannon Ball, North Dakota, U.S.

A line of police move towards a roadblock and encampment of Native American and environmental protesters near an oil pipeline construction site, near the town of Cannon Ball, North Dakota, U.S. October 27, 2016. REUTERS/Rob Wilson

In all, 141 people were arrested on various charges including conspiracy to endanger by fire or explosion, engaging in a riot and maintaining a public nuisance, the sheriff’s department said.

Native American protesters had occupied the site since Monday, saying they were the land’s rightful owners under an 1851 treaty with the U.S. government.

Video posted on social media showed dozens of police and two armored vehicles slowly approaching one group of protesters.

Reuters was unable to confirm the authenticity of the video,  which showed a helicopter overhead as some protesters said police had used bean-bag guns in an effort to chase them out of the camp.

North Dakota Governor Jack Dalrymple said police were successful in clearing the camp.

“Private property is not the place to carry out a peaceful protest,” he said.

Members of the Standing Rock Sioux asked Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Thursday to oppose the pipeline. She has not taken a public position on the issue.

(Reporting by Timothy Mclaughlin in Chicago and Brendan O’Brien in Milwaukee; Additional reporting by Valerie Volcovici in Washington; Editing by Peter Cooney and Nick Macfie)

Tribal service deals dould help Dakota pipeline impasse

Dave Archambault II, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, waits to give his speech against the Energy Transfer Partners' Dakota Access oil pipeline during the Human Rights Council at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland

By Ernest Scheyder

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – The chief executive of North Dakota’s largest oil producer, Whiting Petroleum Corp, says the standoff over the $3.7 billion Dakota Access pipeline could be solved by giving economic opportunities, including supply and delivery contracts, to the Standing Rock Sioux and other Native Americans.

Thousands of protesters from all over the world have joined with the Sioux to oppose the pipeline, which would transport oil within half a mile of tribal land in North Dakota. Federal regulators temporarily blocked construction of the pipeline earlier this month under the Missouri River, mollifying opponents but irking the fossil fuel industry.

The Standing Rock Sioux say the pipeline’s construction would destroy tribal burial sites. They also worry that any future leaks would pollute their water supply.

Jim Volker, Whiting’s CEO, said those concerns would be best addressed through economic opportunities, including contracting with American Indian-owned firms for water hauling and other oilfield service needs across oil-producing regions.

“We as an industry like to see them provide those services,” Volker said in an interview on the sidelines of the Independent Petroleum Association of America’s OGIS conference in San Francisco.

“It does provide a better standard of living for them. It does provide a direct tie to the energy business and makes them and their tribal leaders more inclined to want to have more energy development.”

When fully connected to existing lines, the 1,100-mile (1,770 km) pipeline would be the first to carry crude oil from the Bakken shale directly to the U.S. Gulf. The project is being built by the Dakota Access subsidiary of Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners LP.

Contracts between Native American-owned firms and oil and natural gas producers are not uncommon on reservations. Indeed, the MHA Nation, whose members live on a reservation in western North Dakota where about a third of the state’s crude is pumped, requires oil producers operating on their land to contract with American Indian-owned businesses.

But the requirement cannot apply outside the reservation’s borders and many oil companies, Whiting included, do not have oilfield service and supply contracts with a large number of Indian-owned firms.

Dave Archambault II, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux, said he appreciated the suggestion from Volker, but that his opposition to the pipeline has little to do with economics.

“It’s going to be very difficult for us to allow this line to come through just because some indigenous-owned company may benefit,”  Archambault said in an interview. “If this pipeline goes through, we will be the first to pay the cost.”

Dakota Access first contacted the Sioux about the pipeline in October 2014 and continued reaching out to the tribe through March 2016, according to a report from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Volker, who has worked at Whiting for more than 30 years, said he was sensitive to the tribe’s concerns that construction of the Dakota Access pipeline would disturb ancestral burial sites and other historical areas.

“I wouldn’t want necessarily a pipeline to go through the cemetery where all my relatives are buried,” he said.

But he added that he expects the situation to be resolved by November. “I’m pretty sure there will be a pretty good resolution to this.”

Volker called a move last week by the owners of the Dakota Access pipeline to buy more than 6,000 acres of land adjacent to the line’s route a “pretty good move.” Federal oil pipeline regulators do not have authority over private land and cannot block construction on it.

“It just increases the odds that things get done,” he said.

The Dakota Access pipeline would, if finished, help North Dakota oil producers transport their product to refiners and other customers cheaper and faster.

Volker said he estimates the pipeline would cut the differential for North Dakota oil – that is, the extra cost needed to get the oil to market due to its distance – from about $8.50 per barrel to around $5.50.

Federal regulators are expected to rule soon on whether the pipeline’s construction can proceed, though the Standing Rock Sioux and environmental groups have vowed to oppose it.

(Editing by Matthew Lewis)

Easy resolution unlikely for contentious Dakota pipeline

Protesters demonstrate against the Energy Transfer Partners' Dakota Access oil pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, in Los Angeles, California,

By Catherine Ngai and Ernest Scheyder

NEW YORK/CANNON BALL, NORTH DAKOTA (Reuters) – A potential rerouting of a long-anticipated pipeline at the center of a protest in North Dakota would be a laborious and costly task, possibly delaying a startup by months and provoking further opposition from Native American and environmental groups who were instrumental in halting construction.

The 1,172-mile (1,886 km) Dakota Access pipeline was slated to start up by the end of the year, transporting more than 470,000 barrels per day of crude oil through four states into Illinois before it hooks up to another pipeline down to Texas.

But in a stunning twist last week, the U.S. Justice Department and other federal agencies intervened to delay construction in what industry and labor representatives called an “unprecedented” move.

The halt on the $3.7 billion project was the result of a groundswell of protest from Native American tribes and environmentalists, some of whom now are vowing to continue the fight until the project is permanently suspended.

While there are a few options for rerouting the line, most still cross either culturally important lands to Native Americans or large waterways. The more extensive a reroute, the more likely it is that regulatory obstacles crop up.

“We’re entering unchartered waters if a reroute happens at this stage and I can’t think of another example of a case where this has happened,” said Afolabi Ogunnaike, a senior analyst at consultancy Wood Mackenzie. “Should a reroute take place, there are some major challenges.”

Protesters demonstrate against the Energy Transfer Partners' Dakota Access oil pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, in Los Angeles, California,

Protesters demonstrate against the Energy Transfer Partners’ Dakota Access oil pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, in Los Angeles, California, September 13, 2016. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson

 

North Dakota’s governor, Jack Dalrymple, told Reuters on Friday that he hoped regulators would give the go-ahead for construction to resume shortly. If that does not happen, an alternative solution does not appear to be easy to come by.

Energy Transfer Partners, the company constructing the line, declined to comment. It had said it is committed to completing the project.

The protest is concentrated in Cannon Ball, North Dakota, near Lake Oahe, a large and culturally-important reservoir located on the Missouri River in central southern North Dakota, where the line was supposed to cross.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers now needs to decide whether it correctly followed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other federal laws. If they did not, the permit process may need to be restarted, which could take at least 120 days. It is unclear when the NEPA review will be finished.

The other option — rerouting the pipeline — also presents substantial challenges. The surrounding land where the pipeline could cross has a number of national parks or wetlands, commercial and residential uses, or Native American reservations.

An early proposal involved sending the pipeline from the Bakken shale, where more than a million barrels of oil is produced daily, a bit further north and crossing the Missouri north of the state capital of Bismarck. The current crossing is about 30 miles south of the state capital. http://tmsnrt.rs/2cqkRJ7

“Knowing that the destination of the pipeline is to the east and looking at where the majority of the oil is sourced from, at some point, you have to cross the Missouri River,” said Eric Hansen, director of environmental services at Westwood Professional Services, a surveying and engineering firm that works in North Dakota.

Activists have said they will continue their protest, fearing damage to the water supply in the event of a leak, though there are many pipelines in the United States that carry fuel under waterways.

“No one can live without water. We just want this to stop. We won’t leave until it does,” said Valerie Eagle Shield, a member of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, the Native American tribe whose lands would be directly affected.

Energy Transfer Partners preferred the more southerly route eventually decided upon because it was 11 miles shorter and would have less impact on the land, according to a U.S. Army Corps environmental assessment from July. It also cost $23 million less than the first proposed pipeline route.

The path with fewest obstacles, experts say, is even further north, heading from the small town of Stanley, located in the Bakken, due east, avoiding the Missouri River altogether.

However, that would require substantial changes and new state and federal permits, and would make it difficult to gather oil from the Bakken, which is not an issue for the current pipeline path. The state and federal regulatory review for the current pipeline took more than two years, according to North Dakota officials.

“A permitting process is quite complicated,” Hansen said. “As they come up with alternatives, they’ll have similar issues to face and re-permitting for any reroutes.”

In addition, winter is coming, which will make construction a challenge if the situation is not resolved.

Meanwhile, protesters, emboldened by their success, are prepared to take their opposition into the cold winter months, while locals in a section of the line in Iowa are also stepping up their pressure.

“This is a large issue, and why expedite it when we have to sit down and consider the ways to move forward. Why rush?” said Dave Archambault II, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, in Fort Yates, North Dakota.

(Additional reporting by Valerie Volcovici in Washington; Editing by David Gaffen and Edward Tobin)

Company agrees to halt some North Dakato pipeline work

Heather Mendoza of Arlington, Virginia, holds up a sign as she protests outside the U.S. District Court in Washington, where a hearing was being held to decide whether to halt construction of an oil pipeline in parts of North Dakota where a Native American tribe says it has ancient burial and prayer sites

By Julia Harte

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A Native American tribal chairman said his people were “disappointed” that a company agreed on Tuesday to temporarily halt construction of an oil pipeline only in some but not all parts of North Dakota where the tribe says it has sacred sites.

After violent clashes over the weekend between protesters and security officers near the construction site, the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and a neighboring Native American tribe had asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Sunday for a temporary restraining order against Dakota Access, the company building the pipeline.

U.S. Judge James Boasberg said on Tuesday he had granted in part and denied in part the temporary restraining order, and that he would decide by Friday whether to grant the tribes’ larger challenge to the pipeline, which would require the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to withdraw permits for the project.

A group of firms led by Energy Transfer Partners is building the 1,100-mile (1,770-km) pipeline. The $3.7 billion project would be the first to bring crude oil from Bakken shale, a vast oil formation in North Dakota, directly to refineries in the U.S. Gulf Coast.

Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairman David Archambault II said in a statement the ruling puts the tribe’s “sacred places at further risk of ruin and desecration.”

Dakota Access agreed to halt activity until Friday in an area representing about half the total space requested in the tribes’ temporary restraining order.

It did not include ancient burial and prayer sites recently discovered by a historic preservation officer for the tribe, Jan Hasselman, an attorney for the Standing Rock Sioux, told a news conference on Tuesday.

Hasselman said the tribe would now wait for Boasberg’s decision on Friday and pursue appeals if the judge rules against the tribe.

Dakota Access accused the Standing Rock Sioux during Tuesday’s hearing of inciting the pipeline’s opponents to break the law. The company’s lawyers could not immediately be reached for comment after the ruling.

Saturday’s protests were triggered, the tribes said, when the pipeline company used bulldozers to destroy sacred tribal sites whose locations had been identified in court documents filed on Friday.

Tomas Alejo, who participated in Saturday’s demonstrations, said in an interview that the security officers had formed a “barricade” with guard dogs to prevent protesters from accessing the bulldozers, and that the dogs bit children and tribal elders.

Dakota Access said in its reply to the requested restraining order that the protesters “stampeded” the construction area and attacked the dogs and security officers with makeshift weapons, and that the bulldozers did not destroy important historical sites.

(Reporting by Julia Harte and Mohammad Zargham in Washington; Editing by Frances Kerry and Matthew Lewis)