No Compact, less water
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
2 of 3 free articles.
Editor,
The Flathead Joint Board of Control is spending a lot of irrigator money to defeat the Water Compact. And yet, the FJBC has yet to explain in a public forum or document in black and white why it believes that Water Court litigation will produce at least as much irrigation water with at least as much security as provided for in the Compact.
At a recent FJBC meeting I asked what commissioners were expecting. The answer: we can’t forecast how the Water Court will decide.
But there are many reasons to believe that Water Court litigation will produce significantly less water with less security than the Compact. For example, I doubt that the Water Court will approve all of the Tribes water claims, but based on a number of fishery studies conducted in recent years, I believe the Court would at least accept the minimum enforceable instream flows included in the Compact.
The MEFs are significantly above the current minimum instream flows but under the Compact the Tribes are legally obligated to phase in the MEFs only as Compact money improves project water management.
The current minimum instream flows were implemented in the 1980s and many irrigators have told me that there was a noticeable reduction of irrigation water, especially during years with lower snow pack. Without the Compact provisions designed to protect historical irrigation flows, any increase in instream flows granted by the Water Court will mean less water for farmers and ranchers.
Dick Erb
Moiese
