Answers to questions about the CSKT water compact

Letter to the Editor:

I read Judy Matott’s letter to the editor and felt she asked honest questions to an important issue.

We farm a thousand acres on the Flathead Indian Reservation. The compact protects our irrigation water project by ensuring we receive historic levels of irrigation water. As with off-the-reservation water, all domestic, industrial, municipal and stock water is 100 percent protected. Off-reservation there are 14 rights with no new water, simply co-ownership of the water with Fish, Wildlfe & Parks, with no regulatory authority. This is nothing more than a hugely symbolic right.

The other right in the northwest corner of the state is a right lower than the FERC requirement of Libby Dam. This is never an issue unless Libby Dam goes away. This is another hugely symbolic right. Lincoln County is totally protected.

There is no five-member board that controls off-reservation water. Off-reservation water is and continues to be under the same jurisdiction it has always been, the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation. On reservation, there will be a five-member board to handle new water claims and changes of use. Tribal and non-tribal members use the same process. Without this arrangement, we would be like other reservations in the state with dual management and there would be no new water for non-tribal members on the reservation.

I have watched Sen. Vincent tear the compact apart piece by piece for two years. He questioned the constitutionality, he questioned the property rights protections, he questioned the on-reservation water board and he questioned the protections for all water users. No one has studied it harder or worried more if it is the right thing to do than Sen. Vincent.

He recommended changes that were adopted and at the end of the day he made sure CSKT Compact was good for Montana.

— Susan Lake, Ronan