Water compact is better alternative to litigation
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
By now you’ve heard about the debate and concerns regarding the long-anticipated state-tribal water compact in the Mission Valley. If successful, the compact will end decades of uncertainty and establish how water rights are managed for all residents in the Flathead Valley.
The compact would also bring much needed improvement to the Flathead Indian Irrigation Project, which suffers from decades of insufficient maintenance and rehabilitation. At present, the United States has identified $80 million of deferred maintenance, which means the irrigators either could not or would not pay adequate operation and maintenance fees to maintain the system over time. An agreement would help remedy the problems.
Some irrigators have claimed in the letters sections that the agreement would negatively change agriculture in the Mission Valley. That’s just not true. Some irrigators attacked the empirical, detailed science used to create the agreement. What is true is the agreement was built upon scientific findings that were corroborated by the state, the United States and by an independent study paid for the State of Montana. While some object to the farm turnout water amount of 1.4 acre-feet per acre, these attacks are grounded in fear, not fact. Irrigators are arguing to keep water they believe they need. Instead of evaluating the science that determined the water they’ll need, they refer to old reports that support their opinions, but no one has submitted any data to the negotiation teams to refute the current studies that are specific to the Flathead Indian Reservation. The negotiation teams encourage the submission of any scientific data that opponents would like considered.
A recent letter to the editor made a statement that explains why the existing duty system cannot continue. “Most of the irrigators start irrigating when soil moisture gets low and then stop when the water goes off in September, never questioning or measuring the amount of water they use.”
That’s part of the problem. That’s like being a user of a city water system and announcing how you turn on your tap and never bother to turn off the water or pay attention to how much water flushes through your system. That practice needs to change, or the system will eventually fail for everyone.
Here’s a fact: A compact is not required. Adjudication of water rights through Montana law is required, and a compact is a timely and cost-effective alternative to extensive, expensive and divisive litigation.
Please evaluate the contents of the proposal. Be cautious of claims that seem designed to elicit fear and distrust. Voice your concerns at the public meetings. You will receive clear and honest answers. What’s being proposed is the best solution for all parties.
Here are some thoughts to consider:
• No compact means we all must litigate for our water rights. The tribes possess the most senior water rights, a clear legal advantage, which will be deployed as needed in court.
• As part of the compact, if successful, the state of Montana and the United States Congress will authorize significant rehabilitation and maintenance investment into the irrigation project to provide more efficient delivery to irrigators. Without a compact, the system will continue as unfixed and potentially fail in the future while everyone’s jammed up in court.
• Recently, a Mission Valley farmer compared his water needs to grow melons with the water needs of a melon farm in a California desert. You can see how that conclusion may be tainted when compared to water needs of a Mission Valley melon farmer.
• At the Polson water hearing Nov. 28, an irrigator shared the log numbers from his system that were very close to the 1.4 acre-feet levels. This wasn’t an endorsement of the compact, but an acknowledgement that the science matched his reality and there was room to discuss the proposed compact.
If the community will focus on the independent and solid proposal on the table and avoid lobbing emotionally and factually inaccurate statements that ignore the science-based proposal derived from facts specific to the Flathead Indian Reservation and accumulated through 30 years of scientific study, the entire community will be better served.
To repeat a message by some members of the Mission Valley business community, the compact brings stability for everyone. Stability is good for business. Our community has learned that fighting each other leads to failure. Working together to answer tough questions builds the best community for us all.
