Ive been struggling while crafting this weeks column.

I know that no matter how precise I am with my wording, there may be some who will believe after reading this that Im doing a 180 on something I expressed on this page just a little over a month ago.

In a column I typed out shortly after the Womens March was held in downtown Vermillion, I wrote: Freedom of expression is one of the cherished things that distinguishes the United States from the rest of the world. We shouldnt be surprised when happenings in our nation or our community compel people to make their voices heard. Even when we dont agree with the message.

Recent happenings in Pierre, and further north in North Dakota, are requiring a bit of clarity be added to that statement. Ive always been a big believer that the most effective forms of expression are somewhat controlled, non-violent activities, with no looting, no property damage, nothing like that.

I know there are some that will disagree with my assessment. After Michael Brown was shot by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, that community erupted with outrage, compassion and street protests. The response from many corners of the news media included condemnations of bad elements" among the protesters who resorted to property destruction as their demonstration of resistance.

Count me among those who will never understand how wanton property destruction, or looting, or rioting can be justified to make a point. And yes, I realize the Boston Tea Party could be labeled as an early example of protest combined with property loss, but somehow the act of throwing a few crates of tea into a harbor seems pretty mild when compared to watching, for example, rioters slash and burn a business youve spent years building, or having a mob pull you from your truck and smash your head with concrete, as we all remember watching during the Rodney King riots.

Those riots stemmed from the acquittal of four white Los Angeles Police Department officers in the beating of King in 1991. They lasted over five days in the spring of 1992, and left more than 50 people dead and more than 2,000 injured.

I know it sounds like Im saying that "good" protesters march, carry signs and make their voices heard, but anyone who smashes, burns or vandalizes contaminates the otherwise defensible show of democratic expression. I also know that someone may just as easily point out that property destruction as a tactic of resistance has a long history and is frequently effective.

Theres another type of protest-related property damage that we need to talk about: the unintentional damage that can have far-reaching, detrimental effects.

This is what I fear has just occurred at Standing Rock in North Dakota. The nearly year-long Standing Rock protest, which gained steam in the final months of 2016, as thousands of protesters traveled to the site from across the country, achieved its ends for a brief time when the Army Corps of Engineers denied Energy Transfer Products (ETP) a permit to build a portion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The Standing Rock Sioux allegedly feared the pipeline had the potential to contaminate the Missouri River, the source of the tribe's drinking water. Now they fear a new problem. The garbage left behind by the activists.

Standing Rock protestors, who gathered by the thousands to voice their concerns about an oil pipeline they claimed would contaminate the Missouri River, have left a garbage wasteland behind, which, if not cleaned up in time, will contaminate the Cannonball River and Lake Oahe.

Thousands of protesters moved in and out of the Dakota Access site over the past few months. According to numerous news reports, theyve left behind an estimated 200-plus large truckloads of garbage, an enormous amount of human waste, and dozens of abandoned cars, buses, trucks and other vehicles that had either broken down or run out of gas.

According to recent piece in the Washington Times, the Standing Rock Sioux, private sanitation companies and other volunteers involved in the cleanup estimate that it could take weeks to clear all the abandoned tents, camping gear, supplies and trash now littering the camp.

The looming winter thaw threatens to make the area even more of ecological mess. Without proper remediation, debris, trash, and untreated waste will wash into the Cannonball River and Lake Oahe, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said in a statement.

Standing Rock protestors may have been successful in drawing public attention to their cause, but they were not able to stop the pipeline. Earlier this month, Energy Transfer Partners announced that Dakota Access, LLC (Dakota Access) has received an easement from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to construct the pipeline across land owned by the Army Corps on both sides of Lake Oahe in North Dakota.

The release of this easement by the Army Corps follows a directive from President Donald Trump to the Department of the Army and the Army Corps to take all necessary and appropriate steps that would permit construction and operation of the Dakota Access pipeline, including easements to cross federal lands.

With this action, Dakota Access now has received all federal authorizations necessary to proceed expeditiously to complete construction of the pipeline. A federal judge was scheduled to hear arguments this week about whether to stop the final bit of construction on the pipeline.

The Standing Rock protest also gained the attention of lawmakers in Pierre. Gov. Dennis Daugaard won approval from state senators last week for sweeping additional powers to respond to public protests such as North Dakota has faced over an oil pipeline. The concern is that TransCanada will face protests in South Dakota when the company builds the Keystone XL oil pipeline through the states western half from Montana to Nebraska.

The legislation, SB 176, now goes to the House of Representatives. If it becomes law, it would allow South Dakotas governor to declare public safety zones where entry and exit would be controlled and trespassers would face one year in jail for the first offense and one year in prison for the second and subsequent offenses.

The proposal also would make standing outside a stopped vehicle on a highway an act of crime if it happened in an off-limits area.

Whether or not you agreed with the message that activists at Standing Rock were trying to send, their actions have had substantial consequences. They have caused millions of dollars in property damage, they have threatened the environment of the Missouri River waterway which flows our way, and they are potentially changing the rules to be followed in should similar types of protests ever be planned in South Dakota.

Maybe part of the problem is assuming protest can always be a neat, tidy thing. It clearly cannot, and it clearly, at times, can be messy.

All I can do is once again repeat a snippet from my earlier column: Want to accomplish something? Reach out to those you disagree with. Talk with them. The worst thing we can do is simply dismiss people who think differently as being racist, sexist, privileged, out of touch, ignorant, and so on. Change comes from building relationships, not with people you agree with, but with those whose views are different.

Our best hope is that Standing Rock, despite its unintended consequences, will spark this kind of conversation. Hopefully, the discussions will continue. Hopefully, they will be fruitful, and they wont be destructive.

See the original post:

Between the Lines: Freedom And Its Messy Consequences - Vermillion Plain Talk