A new Compact, without irrigators’ participation
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
Where, oh where, are the irrigators? Not at the negotiating table within the Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission; and yes, Virgina, there is a new rewritten Compact somewhere in the wings. Hello, public. Wake up.
Melissa Hornbein, attorney for the RWRCC forthrightly stated that the irrigators, normally represented by the Flathead Joint Board of Control, now defunct, or individually by the various (three) irrigation districts (two of which have been enjoined [prohibited] from endorsing any Water Use Agreement), do not have a venue, or a representative vehicle by which to protect their interest and disputed water rights. They have been marginally dismissed, if not excluded. Does that seem like a plan come together by the local proponents of the Compact? Or just incidental?
Who would be the interested parties, at the table? The citizens of Montana, representatively via the lawyers at the Compact Commission, of which Ms. Hornbein would be one; via the governor of Montana; via the legislative statute from the Congress of Montana. Like I said, that would be the citizens of Montana.
Then there are the Tribes, stewarded by the Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, represented by a host of lawyers, too many to mention here, both Tribal and Federal, or shall we say, Lawyers Et Al (LEA)? And by the way, citizens of Montana.
And (this would seem to be a repeat of the above) the Federal government represented by the DOI, again too many to mention. All, and all of the above, citizens of the United States.
Who is missing? The Irrigation Project, a Federal project. The irrigators. Why?
The answer: They do not have a venue. Why, yes they do. The Irrigation Project. The DOI has a fiduciary responsibility (financially, operationally, and maintenance wise) to protect the Project. That would seem to be the BIA, in the present obscene arrangement leaves irrigators flatter than a dried up cow pie. As much as the push-back from the over abundance of Tribal support is willing to stipulate, that the Feds are saliently required to represent the interest of the Tribes, seems to be the reason for existence for the whole federal government. That my friends gives them no excuse to leave the irrigators bloody and bruised, who are by the way, citizens of Montana, too, and citizens of the United States, also; just like Tribal folks.
If you disbelieve this federal responsibility, take a look at United States District Court, D. Montana, decided Oct. 16, 1986, where the suggestion is for the BIA to get out of the irrigation business, as their performance at such is disastrous beyond belief. They liked the Bureau of Reclamation, with a much better track record, and they have a couple of nickels, not broke apparently like the BIA. As mandated by statute, the irrigators would like the feds to just go away.
Ms. Hornbein, again forthrightly, begs to differ. I would certainly not want to say that she has fallen into that “federal trap.” She did acknowledge that the workshop in Helena is devoid of irrigators or anything wearing muck boots. When do we see this extra-final rewrite? Ms. Hornbein says hopefully in about two weeks, to avoid the last flighty presentation of the 2013 legislative submittal — the week before Christmas, and then re-written on January 17 of 2013. They are still figuring out “ ... how to write it.” Without the irrigators.
