Litigation expense should be shared
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
Editor,
I am a concerned irrigator and perhaps defendant in the lawsuit filed by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribe in the United States Federal District Court against water users and landowners under the named authority of the “Flathead Indian Irrigation Project.”
I say “perhaps defendant” because I am not a user under the “Flathead Indian Irrigation Project,” but rather an irrigator under the authority of the “Flathead Irrigation Project” as granted and designated under the United States Congressional Act.
Under the most liberal interpretation of the referenced act could it be even suggested that all the land and water within the reservation boundaries belonged to the Tribes in claimed and sought for in their suit?
One can’t help wonder that in order to reinforce the assertions of some of their compensated proponents that we opponents of the compact would be faced with extremely monumental litigation expenses.
I think I can answer the Tribes’ claim of ownership of all land and water by setting forth a hypothetical example:
Let us suppose that the Tribe claims all property rights to all vehicles garaged within the boundaries of the reservation. Let us further suppose that the Tribe claimed ownership based on the fact that all vehicles are located and operated on the reservation.
My question to you fellow irrigators is simply this: Should my rights of ownership be litigated by myself or should I seek the help of all similar owners by joining me in litigation concerning my ownership?
I find no difference in this hypothetical example than that regarding the litigation facing the so-called “Flathead Indian Irrigation Project” irrigation.
In conclusion, I advocate that all litigation expenses regarding ownership of waters and land be shared by all affected citizens along with the State of Montana.
Lloyd Ingraham
Ronan
