May 15, 2010

Royal Dutch Shareholders

C/O Shareholder Relations

Royal Dutch Shell plc

Carel van Bylandtlaan 30

2256 HR The Hauge

PO Box 162, 2501 AN

The Netherlands

Greetings:

My name is Chief Don Testawich. I am the elected leader of the Duncan’s First Nation (DFN)
located in north – western Alberta. Our First Nation hosts Royal Dutch Shell’s (Shell) Peace
River Tar Sands In – Situ Project. I have been asked to appeal directly to you by the elders,
youth and community members of the DFN who wish to inform you about the impact of Shell’s
Peace River Tar Sands In – Situ operations and projects on the environment, our people and
rights.

Specifically, we wish to bring your attention to five critical matters. These include:

• The impact that Shell’s Tar Sands operations has had on the regional environment and
our people over the last twenty five years.

• The serious impacts posed by Shell’s newly proposed “Carmon Creek Expansion
Project” on the regional environment and our rights.
 • The need to implement major change in relation to Tar Sands In – Situ operations and
projects to protect the environment and the Boreal forest that First Nations depend on.

• Shell’s poor social corporate responsibility track record in relation to its Peace River Tar
Sands operations, its proposed Carmon Creek Expansion Project and the
constitutionally protected rights of the Duncan’s First Nation.

• The undisclosed risks posed by Shell and the Government of Alberta’s ongoing failure to
protect and address the constitutionally protected rights of the Duncan’s First Nation.

We write to you given that to date, we have utterly failed to have these serious matters
addressed by Shell’s senior management and the Government of Alberta. We appeal directly to
you as Shell’s shareholders and stakeholders to inform you of the deteriorating situation in the
Peace River Tar Sands area of northern Alberta that places our rights and your interests at risk.

Background to the DFN

The Duncan’s First Nation (DFN) are a Cree speaking people who have been present in
northern Alberta and western Canada prior to the time of contact with Europeans. The Cree and
Beaver people established their own “peace” treaty where our Cree ancestors agreed to occupy
the lands to the east of the Peace River, and the Beaver to the west. Shell’s Peace River In –
Situ project borrows its name from the river and the very same treaty.

In 1899, the Dominion Government of Canada entered into a sacred, binding and legally
enforceable treaty with our people. Treaty #8 covers a large area in north western Canada and
sets out the right of our people to continue their way of life, our rights to lands and resources
and to share in the benefits of the land with newcomers. The DFN is an adherent to Treaty #8.
Shell’s Peace River operations falls within this treaty area.

While the treaty allows governments to grant lands to third parties such as Shell, this “taking up”
of lands was to be the exception and not the rule. Enough land of sufficient quantity and quality
must remain to sustain fish and wildlife populations that our way of life and treaty rights are
predicated upon.

The Supreme Court of Canada, Canada’s highest court, has set out the following directives in
relation to the interpretation and protection of First Nation’s Treaty and Aboriginal Rights:

• That the Crown (governments) is obliged to honour its sacred treaty commitments and
obligations made to First Nations.
 • That Treaty and Aboriginal rights continue to exist, are constitutionally protected and that
First Nations needs in relation to resources must be given priority.

• That it is illegal for the Crown or any third party to unjustifiably infringe Treaty and
Aboriginal rights.

• That the Crown (and by extension proponents such as Shell) must meaningfully consult
and accommodate the rights and interests of First Nations. Further, the Crown must
address First Nations’ concerns within a demonstrable plan of action prior to approving
projects and decisions that risk infringing First Nations’ rights.

• That the Honour of the Crown is always at stake in all of its dealings with First Nations
and that the treaty obliges governments to achieve reconciliation with First Nations in
respect to resource development and management.

• That while the Crown bears the duties of consultation, accommodation and
reconciliation, third parties such as Shell also play a significant role in respect to these
requirements.

• That governments must address the direct, indirect, cumulative and consider the past
effects of development when considering new projects that could affect First Nations.

• That First Nations have the ability to intervene and legally challenge government
approvals of major projects such as tar sands projects where their rights, concerns and
interests have not been addressed.

While Canada’s domestic laws are still found to be lacking in regards to the true nature of our
treaties and our rights, they do establish standards and directives that must be met. The rule of
law must be followed and governments and corporations such as Shell are bound to meet the
letter of the law and respect the rights of the Duncan’s First Nation.

In parallel, the Duncan’s people also hold themselves to be a nation - an existing indigenous
people who retained their ancient lands, original title and sacred responsibilities of protecting
and governing these lands via the treaty. Given this they take the view that their free and
informed consent is required where developments, like Shell’s Carmon Creek Expansion Project
are proposed. Such a view is consistent with principles contained within the United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, yet to be supported by the Government of
Canada.

Historical and Ongoing Impacts of Shell’s Operations on the DFN

Shell’s Peace River In – Situ plant is located within DFN’s traditional territory. (Attached: Map of
DFN Traditional Territory and Shell Operations) along the Peace River – the core of DFN’s
traditional territory. The plant was originally constructed in 1979. Shell constructed this large In
Situ complex in and adjoining oil fields on lands that Duncan’s families historically utilized and
attempt to utilize to this day.

Our people hunted caribou, moose, deer, bear, ducks, geese and crane. We trapped many
animals including beaver, muskrat, otter, wolverine, squirrel and marten. We fished for many
species of fish in creeks, rivers and lakes including trout, northern pike, whitefish, walleye and
burbot. We used forest plants for medicines and food. We lived on the land and used the land
year round, following the animals.

Although our way of life has changed due to the impacts of industry, the loss of forested lands
and creation of Indian Reserves (permanent communities), DFN families continue to utilize and
rely on the lands for a variety of sustenance, socio – economic, cultural and spiritual purposes.
Many of our families must still hunt to put food on the table. Given the heavy impact of tar
sands, oil and gas, forestry and other development on the land, our people are required to
utilize the breadth of their traditional territory, travelling greater distances every year..

Due to the sheer amount of development and destruction of habitats and watersheds, there are
few areas of intact boreal forest left within our traditional territory. These intact boreal forest
areas still offer us the best and only available opportunity to utilize our lands for traditional
purposes.

Shell’s Peace River Tar Sands operations heavily impacted one of these areas of critical cultural
importance to our people. We wish to provide a summary of the impacts of Shell’s operations on
our people and their rights:

• The Government of Alberta sold oil sands rights and tenures to Shell to develop without
ever consulting the DFN or ascertaining the impact of such development on the DFN.

• The In Situ operations and adjoining oil fields were built within a critical community use
area and fragmented an important wildlife habitat area that supported our way of life.
 • Neither the Government of Alberta nor Shell involved DFN people as the In Situ
operations and adjoining oil fields were developed or sought to ascertain the effects of
such development and operations on the DFN.

• Since the Shell plant was built thirty years ago, DFN people have found it increasingly
difficult to find wildlife in this area and saw the numbers of moose and caribou drop
substantially – they found it hard to exercise their rights in any meaningful way as the
years passed by.

• The forested habitat of area and wildlife habitat was bisected with seismic lines, wells,
pipelines, processing facilities and roads. The opening up of the area contributed to the
collapse of wildlife populations. The remaining wildlife still present in the area are
weakened and disturbed by the constant noise and activity present in the area.

• The area has been so impacted and fouled, that many elders feel there is no more point
in going to this area – many see the area as lost to them and that they can no longer use
the area to pass on their culture to the next generation.

• The DFN have all but lost their right to hunt in Shell’s In Situ area and adjacent oil fields
the areas due to safety issues – they cannot reasonably or legally hunt given the
infrastructure, above ground pipelines, equipment and personnel constantly present.

Impacts of Shell’s Carmon Creek Expansion Project and Infringement of DFN Rights

Shell is proposing a large expansion of its Peace River In – Situ plant – the “Carmon Creek
Expansion Project”. The project will result in 8 – 10 fold expansion in production (80,000 bbl/d).
Shell has submitted this project to the Government of Alberta for regulatory approval. This major
project will impact an area that has already been heavily impacted by Tar Sands development
and the effects on the regional environment and impacts experienced by the DFN will only
intensify due to Shell’s expanded project and operations.
Unfortunately Shell and the Government of Alberta have already adopted the view that Shell’s
Carmon Creek Expansion Project and Tar Sands In – Situ projects have little to no impact on
the environment or our rights. Shell and Government of Alberta representatives have taken a
cavalier approach and suggest that our people’s concerns are unfounded and our elder’s views
misinformed. While the impacts of In – Situ development may be somewhat less when
compared to surface mining, In – Situ projects and operations still result in significant impacts
on the regional environment, In fact, the combined effect of Tar Sands In – Situ development
may have a far greater and widespread impact on the Boreal forest than that of surface mining
projects. .

Our experience of Shell’s operations over the past thirty years tells a much different story. Our
elders and community members have an intimate knowledge of what the land was like before
Shell Tar Sands operations came to our area, and what it is like now. This traditional knowledge
is gained and based on direct observations over the years by virtue of being on the land through
all seasons of the year. Based on our experience with Shell’s operations, we have seen our
lands and rights suffer “the death of a thousand cuts” as a result of Shell’s Peace River In Situ
operations. Shell’s proposed Carmon Creek Project will make a bad situation, worse.

In summary, the project will result in significant regional environmental impacts and will
irreparably harm and impair the rights of the DFN given the following factors:

• In Situ Tar Sands development is more intense and impactful than conventional oil and
gas development. If a business as usual approach is adopted in northern Alberta, In Situ
Tar Sands development will have a greater and more widespread impact on the Boreal
Forest and First Nations that depend on them.

• There is no terrestrial cumulative impacts framework to guide tar sands development or

regional development with Alberta. EIAs are conducted in the absence of an appropriate
cumulative impacts management framework. Alberta’s much vaunted Land Use
Framework / Land Use Planning process is already failing to address this critical issue
from the outset and address impacts on the treaty rights of First Nations.

• While In Situ projects undergo environmental assessments, projects are simply allowed
to proceed provided they meet standard industry practices – no projects to date have
been substantially modified to address conservation concerns or objectives.
• There are two characteristics of significant concern. Disturbances are distributed widely
through the project area where the ecological effect of In – Situ development extends
beyond the footprint of the project area into adjacent boreal forest. Further, these
disturbances will persist on the landscape for decades.

• Forests adjacent to roads, well sites and pipelines are avoided by a variety of mammals
and birds due to their sensitivity to human disturbance.

• Direct loss and avoidance of habitat results in wildlife population declines and further
declines occur once a threshold is reached where the landscape as a whole becomes
unsuitable.

• Industry’s heavy reliance on reclamation is unfounded and unproven. Some eco-types

cannot be restored such as wetlands.

• Industry and government claim that impacts of In – Situ are temporary in duration – a
development with a 40 year life span will effect several generations of affected wildlife
species, thus there may be no breeding populations left for repopulating the sites even if
reclamation is indeed successful.

• Evidence is mounting that ecological thresholds for many species are already being
exceeded at current levels of industrial development in the boreal forest.

• Impact on ground water and surface water sources from water takings and re-injection.

• Damage to aquatic ecosystems from disruption of natural flow patterns by roads and
facilities.

• Acidification of area land and water.

• Regional contamination of ground and water from waste and drilling fluids.
 • Conversion of wetlands such as fens and bogs to upland landscapes after reclamation.

• Large increase in green house gas emissions with no plan for offsets or sequestration.

These impacts, effects and factors are confirmed by academic and western scientific sources
and summarized by the Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development.

The Ongoing Failure to Address DFN Rights, Concerns and Interests

Since we learned of Shell’s intentions and Peace River In Situ expansion plans, DFN has made
good faith efforts to engage Shell’s representatives and the Government of Alberta with a view
to addressing the grave concerns of our community in relation the project.

To date, neither Shell nor the Government of Alberta have addressed the following relevant and
critical issues raised by our community in relation to Shell’s Carmon Creek Expansion Project:

• The project will impact an important wildlife habitat area and critical wildlife corridor
which provides connectivity for species of critical cultural importance to our people.

• The expansion will make it harder for our people to utilize the land and exercise their
rights in an area already deeply impacted by prior Tar Sands development.

• Contrary to the directives of the Supreme Court of Canada, Shell and the Government of
Alberta have failed to address our reasonable issues and concerns. They have erred in
ignoring these matters in the early strategic planning phase of the project and within the
Terms of Reference that will guide the Environmental Assessment for the project.

• DFN has raised the critical issue of the cumulative effects and impact that will arise out
of the expansion project and Shell’s ongoing operations. However, both Shell and the
Government of Alberta have refused to deal with this fundamental issue, contrary to the
legal directives of the Supreme Court of Canada.

• Shell and Government of Alberta representatives continue to trivialize the issues and
concerns our community brings forward as irrelevant and having no bearing on the
expansion project – our issues will be dealt with in some other process, in the future. If
 the Government of Alberta and Shell’s assertions are true, that the Land Use Framework
(LUF) will address the concerns of DFN – then the Carmon Creek Expansion Project
should be delayed pending the outcome of the LUF.

• The governments of Alberta and Canada are considering legislative and policy change
that would fast track and streamline In – Situ Tar Sands project approvals.

• While Shell and the Government of Alberta maintains that it is meaningfully consulting
the DFN, the reality is that no one is actually doing it. Given this ongoing shirking of
responsibility by Shell and government regulators, DFN has taken pre-emptive legal
action and is intervening in a case before the Supreme Court of Canada this summer.
(Attached – Press Release)

The laws of Canada require that our rights, interests and concerns be addressed within a
meaningful process of consultation, accommodation and reconciliation prior to the approval the
Carmon Creek Project. Neither the government nor Shell, who plays an important role in court
mandated consultations, has met these legal standards.

We regret to inform you that our good faith efforts have not been returned in kind, that our
concerns have not been addressed and that your senior management, responsible for
forwarding this project, appear intent in running roughshod over our rights. The Government of
Alberta continues to take a hands off approach, and allows Shell senior management to
continue to ignore our legitimate concerns and rights. While DFN will appeal to regulators for
their assistance, DFN feels that it must also appeal directly to you as shareholders and
stakeholders of Shell.

DFN Views of Consequences of Tar Sands Development

In this letter we have attempted to enlighten you on the regional and local impacts resulting and
from Shell’s Tar Sands Peace River operations and expansion plans. The DFN, as a hosting
First Nation, has borne a disproportionate balance of the impacts. Other area First Nations have
also felt and had to live with the consequences of your operations such as the Lubicon Nation
and is people.

While the DFN are not opposed to resource development, we believe that it must be sustainable
where the needs of future generations are met. Our people share similar concerns with other
First Nations regarding the sheer scope, impact and implications of unfettered Tar Sands
development. Governments, industry and corporate shareholders must act now to bring about
the required changes to address the local, national and global implications of the Alberta’s Tar
Sands Surface Mining and In – Situ projects and operations.
In our view, until corporations such as Shell and the Government of Alberta deal with the risks
and negative impacts and consequences posed by Tar Sands development on the environment
and First Nations’ rights, new developments such as the Carmon Creek Expansion Project
should be halted.

We would also ask Shell shareholders to hold its senior management to account. In this case,
Shell should be required to adopt the precautionary principle and satisfy its shareholders,
governments and the public that bitumen resources can be brought to market in a safe,
sustainable and just manner. They have failed to do so to date.

The Consequences of Failure to Address DFN Rights and Interests

The DFN has provided constructive notice and evidence to Shell senior management and the
Government of Alberta of its rights and interests within the Carmon Creek Project area and how
these will potentially be impacted by Shell’s operations and expansion plans.

The duty for deep consultation, accommodation and reconciliation has been triggered. Shell
senior management is now bound to fully disclose this information and the potential risks to its
shareholders and stakeholders. DFN asserts that Royal Dutch Shell’s Peace River In – Situ
operations and its proposed Carmon Creek project will impact on the DFN people and infringe
their rights. DFN has attempted to engage in the consultation process in good faith and a
constructive and reasonable manner. However, the Government of Alberta and Shell have both
frustrated the consultation process and have avoided in dealing with the both the procedural
and substantive issues that DFN has raised.

DFN has documented this ongoing pattern of behaviour and sharp dealings that Shell senior
management have engaged in respect to this project. While the Government of Alberta bears
the duty to consult and accommodate, Shell’s role and conduct within the consultation and
accommodation process is an important factor. Shell’s ongoing pattern of behaviour points to a
corporation that is contributing to the frustration of the consultation process.

Given the stance and conduct of the Government of Alberta and Shell, DFN has initiated pre-
emptive legal action and is currently intervening in a case before the Supreme Court of Canada.
The case will be heard on May 21st, 2010 and the outcome of this case will have a direct bearing
on Shell’s Carmon Creek Project and the role of Tar Sands project regulators and project
proponents. (See attached News Release circulated to Canadian and US media outlets)

The ongoing failure to address the concerns of the DFN and failure to meaningfully consult and
accommodate and effect reconciliation poses several possible consequences to Royal Dutch
Shell and its shareholders:
 • DFN intervention with Alberta’s Energy Conservation Resources Board and the holding
of public hearings into the Carmon Creek Project. The DFN has applied for intervener
status and intends to raise both procedural and substantive matters before the Board.

• Should Shell, the Government of Alberta and project regulators fail to address the
concerns of the DFN, there is the potential for DFN to launch court action challenging
the Carmon Creek Expansion Project based on administrative, common law and
constitutional law principles. This could result in significant project delays and stranded
investment.

• Potential breach of duties of where Crown would be found responsible for infringing the
rights of the DFN.

• Potential legal action / class action suit to address damages resulting from the Peace
River Tar Sands operations where Royal Dutch Shell and shareholders could be found
liable.

• Potential for consumer boycott of synthetic bitumen oil produced by Shell and
considerable harm to Shell’s corporate profile.

Closing

The Duncan’s First Nations community thanks you for your time and consideration in this critical
and pressing matter.

There is an expression that we hear with increasing frequency in First Nations communities
within Canada and Alberta’s north these days - “Get the Shell Out”. We can understand how
and why this phrase has come into use given our experience with Shell to date. However, we
believe that there is still time and the opportunity to deal with the issues we have raised through
peaceful and constructive means. Environmental and social change must be truly adopted and
achieved on the land and in our lives, rather just on paper if Shell is to be welcomed as a
corporate citizen within our traditional territory.

The elders, youth and community members of the Duncan’s First Nation ask that you consider
the historical, ongoing and future impact of Royal Dutch Shell’s operations on the environment,
our people and our rights. We appeal to you, not merely as shareholders and beneficiaries of
Shell’s operations, but as fellow members of the human race to understand and take
responsibility for the investment and value decisions that you will make this year and years to
come.

Yours in Peace and Respect,

ORIGINAL SIGNED

Chief Don Testawich

Duncan’s First Nation

CC: Elders and Community Members of Duncan’s First Nation Chief Rick Horseman: Horse Lake First Nation

Chief Benard Ominiyak: Lubicon Nation Chief Alphonse Lameman: Beaver Lake First Nation

Chief Roxanne Marcel: Mikisew Cree First Nation Chief Alan Adam: Athabascan Chipewyan First Nation

Mr. Peter Voser: CEO Royal Dutch plc Premier Ed Stelmach: Government of Alberta

Prime Minister Stephen Harper: Government of Canada SAM Indexes GmbH: Dow Jones Sustainability Index

Indigenous Environmental Network Friends of the Earth

Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development Environmental Defence

Green Peace Sierra Club of Canada

Attachments: Map of DFN Traditional Territory and Shell River Peace River In Situ
 Attachments

View of Existing Shell Peace River Tar Sands Project in DFN Territory
View of Persisting Impacts of In – Situ Development (South of Ft. MacMurray)

Impacts to Boreal Forest from Oil and Gas Development

In Situ Above Ground Pipelines Fragment Forest Landscape
 Shell’s Carmon Creek Expansion Will Increase Production to 80,000 bbl/d and Further Impact and Fragment Important
Wildlife Corridor and a Critical Cultural Use Area of the DFN

In Situ and Heavy Oil Operations Impacting First Nation Use of Land and Treaty Rights

MEDIA NEWS RELEASE

Alberta First Nations Take Legal Stand on Oil Sands
April 9, 2010

Peace River Alberta

Two more Alberta First Nations are seeking the assistance of the Supreme Court of Canada in
defending their Aboriginal and Treaty rights in the face of mounting oil sands development in
Alberta. The Supreme Court of Canada has granted intervenor status to Duncan’s First Nation
(DFN) and Horse Lake First Nation (HLFN), in a case that may have major legal implications for
the development of oil sands, pipelines, oil sands infrastructure projects and other major
projects.

DFN Chief Don Testawich stated, “Our traditional territory is being overrun and cut to pieces by
oil sands, major pipelines, gas fields and major power projects. Companies such as Royal
Dutch Shell, Trans Canada Pipelines and Bruce Power are proposing massive projects that will
fuel unsustainable oil sands growth. Development on this scale will is making our Treaty Rights
meaningless and threatens our traditional way of life”.
Chief Testawich added, “The governments of Alberta and Canada sit back and refuse to
address our concerns. We are intervening before the Supreme Court because it is abundantly
clear that neither the environment nor First Nations can expect to receive a fair hearing within
Alberta, where oil sands revenues are at stake. We need help now and help fast”.

This summer, the Supreme Court will hear conflicting arguments and views of First Nations,
governments and industry in the Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council case.
The case will address the question of whether regulatory boards and tribunals, such as the
National Energy Board (NEB) and Alberta’s Energy Conservation and Resources Board
(ECRB), have a duty to decide whether the Crown adequately consulted and accommodated
First Nations’ concerns before granting approvals for resource development, including concerns
about past infringements of Aboriginal and Treaty rights.

The NEB and ERCB regulate, among other things, development of the oil sands, pipeline
projects and other energy projects that support oil sands developments. The DFN and HLFN
are intervening at the Supreme Court of Canada because of their concerns over the growing
number of oil sands developments and major energy projects that will make oil sands expansion
realizable. The DFN and HLFN want the Court to direct governments and regulators to fully and
effectively address the consultation rights of First Nations in the regulatory processes for the
major oil sands and tar sands infrastructure projects being proposed by Royal Dutch Shell,
Trans Canada Pipelines, Enbridge, Bruce Nuclear Power and other corporations.

The First Nations have opted to take this matter to the courts because of their mounting
frustration over the refusal by the governments and their regulators to act on earlier court
decisions that direct governments to deal with their rights.

Chief Rick Horseman of the HLFN added, “To date, it’s been like watching a game of musical
chairs where everyone is saying they are addressing our concerns, rights and interests but no
one actually gets down to it and does it. We need a referee in Alberta that will deal with First
Nations in a serious and impartial way and blow the whistle when our rights are being trampled”.

DFN and HLFN MEDIA CONTACTS

Mr. Jay Nelson: Woodward and Company (250) – 383 - 2356

Ms. Audrey Horseman: Horse Lake First Nation (780)518-5179

Mr. Matthew General: Duncan’s First Nation (780)597-3777

The Oil Sands: An Interconnected and International Project in Scope Impacting the Rights of First Nations
 DUNCAN’S FIRST NATION MEDIA RELEASE
First Nations and Tar Sands Industry Clash in the Courts and the Hague

May 25, 2010

“We may be a small community, but we carry a big stick”, says Chief Donny Testawich of the
Duncan’s First Nation, one of the many Treaty #8 First Nations located within the tar sands
producing areas of northern Alberta. This week, the small Cree community walked into
Canada’s top court and the Hague Netherlands to take on the Government of Alberta and Royal
Dutch Shell over the impacts of tar sands developments and trampling of their Constitutionally
protected Rights.

The Duncan’s First Nation and the Horse Lake First Nation’s lawyer presented at the Supreme
Court of Canada’s hearing in the matter of the Carrier Sekani and Rio Tinto case – a case that
will determine how Canada’s energy regulators are to deal with the conflict between First
Nations’ rights and major energy projects such as the Tar Sands.

The two First Nations are representative of a growing number of First Nations opting to take on
Alberta, Canada and the tar sands industry in the courts and on the home turf of the world’s
most powerful oil corporations. Testawich adds, “First Nations are tired of Alberta’s “song and
dance about how they responsibly regulate the oil industry and protect the environment and our
rights. The reality is that there are two environmental oil related disasters unfolding in North
America today – the Gulf spill and that caused by Alberta and its “results based”, hands off
approach with the tar sands industry. It is clear to us that the emperor is not wearing any
clothes. We have nothing to lose at this point but to pick up the stick - our constitutionally
protected rights, and take them into Canada’s courts.”

At the same time this week, the Duncan’s took action in Europe. A group of Alberta First Nations
arranged access to Royal Dutch Shell’s AGM in the Hague Netherlands with the assistance of
the Indigenous Environmental Network and Friends of the Earth Europe.

Representatives of the Duncan’s, Beaver Lake, Chipewyan Athabascan, Mikisew and the
Lubicon Nations addressed Shell’s CEO, investment firms and shareholders on the impacts of
the tar sands mining and In – Situ projects on First Nations communities and their rights. Chief
Don Testawich confirms “the constitutionally protected rights and unresolved concerns of First
Nations pose a significant risk to Shell and its investors’ interests that will result in delayed and
halted projects and stranded investment”. The Duncan’s issued a letter to Shell shareholders
briefing them of the impacts and risks associated with the cumulative impact of Shell’s
operations, its proposed Carmon Creek Expansion In Situ Project, and a growing list of major
energy projects that will fuel and make full out Tar Sands expansion realizable.
For Further Information Contact and Media Package Contact: Chief Don Testawich:

DFN (780) 597 – 3777 or Ken Rich: DFN (780) 625 - 4750