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

Who’s in charge?

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,

It seems that I’m once again confused concerning the process of this Flathead Indian Reservation Reserved Water Rights Compact.  Maybe Mr. Ducheneaux could educate us all once more. If the tribe (the CSKT) is claiming its federally reserved water right to fulfill the purpose of this federal reservation (as defined by the Winters Doctrine of 1908), why is anyone talking to the tribe? The CSKT, as clearly stated in the Hellgate Treaty of 1855, is a dependent of the United States Government (refer to Article 8 of said treaty).  Shouldn’t everyone be talking, or negotiating, with the parent (the federal government of the United States) and not the dependent? Oh, I’m certain the “dependent” will have input and requests, and that’s all fine and well, but we’re talking about “federally” reserved water fights for a “federal reserve” — not “tribal” water rights for a “tribal” reserve.

Why isn’t the Department of the Interior or the Bureau of Indian Affairs taking a more responsible and dominant seat at the table? Why are they lurking in the background? They created this mess, along with an absent U.S. Congress. Why aren’t they front and center? Why are we even listening to the state water compact commission, who are more than willing to “negotiate” with a dependent, rather than the adult in charge, and have publicly stated they do not represent us, the citizens of Montana?

Seems to me we need to put the shoe on the other foot, about now, if there is any intention whatsoever of moving this compact to a fair and equitably negotiated solution. Otherwise, we will be litigating for the next 50 years or so. Who’s running this house, the adults or the dependents?

Just asking, because it seems to me the proper process would be a negotiation between the responsible parties, as defined by the federal and state constitutions, the Winters Doctrine and the treaty itself; not the illusion and Broadway stage play that’s been presented to date.

Remember: “sovereign” only means capable of self-governing and does not infer landmass or water or air; it’s a concept, not a physical entity.

Michael Gale

Ronan

Sponsored by: