Valley Journal
Valley Journal

This Week’s e-Edition

Current Events

Latest Headlines

What's New?

Send us your news items.

NOTE: All submissions are subject to our Submission Guidelines.

Announcement Forms

Use these forms to send us announcements.

Birth Announcement
Obituary

Have water needs been quantified?

Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local. You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.



Subscribe now to stay in the know!

Already a subscriber? Login now

Editor,

The Hellgate Treaty of 1855, Article III, guaranteed the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes the exclusive right of taking fish, together with the privilege of hunting, gathering roots and berries, etc., within the external boundaries of their reservation (as they were accustomed); and also the right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed places, in common with citizens of the Territory. It seems to me that it assumes no control over Mother Nature, which the tribes had contended with since time immemorial — like droughts and reduced stream flows following the spring thaw/melt. Dams that were subsequently built, to reduce or prevent severe flooding during spring thaws and provide power in the form of electrons for toasters and TVs, increased the ability of taking fish from the lakes they created – to make up for the drought periods in the natural streams when fish disappear (along with the water) during the long winter months.

The Winters v. U.S. case of 1908 gave birth to the “reserved water rights” for Indian reservations, ensuring that natural water flow feeding a reservation would not be impeded or denied said reservation by those outside it. It did not state, nor was it intended to provide for, more water than Mother Nature chose to deliver to the land; it was an act to prevent the diversion of water before it entered the reservation. 

So, now we find ourselves fighting over the right to life with those who would pervert and deny it here on this reservation. The Winters Rights states that the “water needs” of a reservation must be “quantified” and sets conditions for such quantification. The Flathead Reservation was ordered by the Montana Supreme Court in 1973 to quantify their needs, and again in 1995 and 2002 and 2004 ad naseum, to no avail. On Dec. 19, 2002, Clayton Matt, tribal spokesman, stated, “We’re going to go quantify our water and bring the numbers to you,” during one of the gazillion water compact meetings held over the past 10-plus years on this reservation. So, where are the tribal quantification numbers? If they exist, they have yet to be made public.

Michael Gale

Ronan

Sponsored by: