Troubled water
Mission Valley residents feel left out of water rights debate
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
More than 100 Mission Valley residents filed into the Ronan Community Center last Thursday to discuss concerns, fears, uncertainty and hope for the current water rights debacle.
Terry Backs, one of the event organizers, created an informational 27-minute video discussing the history of the debate and possible ramifications. Backs said the purpose of the meeting was to inform citizens of what’s going on and how to get more involved.
“Our initial goal for the meeting was to give people a brief overview of the issue. We wanted people to understand not only why these negotiations are going on, but what’s on the table,” Backs said.
Water has always been an essential part of life on the reservation, but until recently, it was not a major issue.
In 1855, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes relinquished 23 million acres of land to the United States government in exchange for the 1.3 million acre Flathead Reservation. The land was intended for tribal use only and guaranteed members the right to fish in traditional areas, including several river basins outside the reservation.
In recent years, hydrologists and the government have sought to quantify exactly how much water the tribes use and compare this to past and present years. Efforts to forge an agreement or compact over water rights have been under way for more than 10 years.
This agreement is currently being hashed out by tribal council members, state officials and representatives from the federal government. The concern, and reason for the town hall meeting, is that many residents are being left out of the conversation.
“We believe not enough has been done to inform people off the reservation,” Backs said. “People were concerned that the tribal interests seem to be represented much more so than those of non-tribal descent living on the reservation.”
The legislative council comprised of a three-party negotiation (tribal, state and federal agencies), will approve a commission to oversee water rights and use. The legislature hopes to approve the commission to be enacted before July 1, 2013.
The meeting began with an impassioned opening speech by freshman congressman Derek Skees. Skees said he understood why emotions might run high, but asked that everyone retain their composure during the debate and, “act like the adults we want our children to become.”
Skees believes that letting the population of the tribe dictate what all of Western Montana does with its water is unfair.
“There’s so much federal overreaching, I’m worried that this will just become another example,” Skees said.
He is also concerned that if the water commission is made up of unelected individuals, they cannot be held accountable. “It’s almost looks like they’ve stacked the deck against us. I’m worried that in a three-party negotiation, the feds would back the tribe.”
Concerns from residents are varied and seem to be going unanswered.
Ronan resident John Moon’s greatest concern was the unknown.
“We all know as time goes on, prices on gas and electric will rise. But could people actually be cut off from water?” Moon said.
Retired rancher and enrolled tribal member Alan Sloan said that he could see both sides of the controversy, as water is a necessity for ranchers as well as the tribe. However, he is a bit concerned. He owns a well that was drilled in 1974 and produces 1,100 gallons of water per minute.
“I’m a bit concerned about what the tribe would say regarding that,” Sloan said.
Backs owns land on the reservation and is not a tribal member. She is concerned about what restrictions on water use would do to her property value.
“Beyond that, it appears to me that new water use will be a problem because it will need to go through the unitary management board,” Backs said. “It’s designed to discourage economic growth on the reservation.”
Jerome Stenberg is a rancher in the process of selling his land. He is not concerned regarding the possibility of the valley being cut off from water.
“The Mission Valley would turn into a bleak, dark desert were it not for the irrigation. No one wants the valley, which is a garden spot, to turn back into a desert,” Stenberg said.
“Irrigation built the Mission Valley,” he continued. “I’m not concerned about losing water. It will never happen.”
