The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-04-20
pREGLACIAL DRAINAGE.
To Be Restored by Diversion or the Waters of St. Mary Lakes
 in Montana.

Tho St Mary project is deslghea s aa store flood waters in the St; .a,a Maa and in Teton County, Northern Moh.s'n", canai " conduct these easterN p,s.a of MIX through the ridges at the neao , or T, and p,ver The construction of the oaln anu ti., lanai was recommended to congress ps
 inc Secretary of the Interior nt n,s s+ract report; ard the following IS h h snhiert
 frpm the progress report on the sup!ebS2 n,sde to inc Division of Hydrograpns nf inc Urited Staes Geological survey by Cyrus C. Babb: uoa,,,.5 the
 "These St. Mary Lakes receNy the drainage from the hlgh pean, v, cnuttn- Rocky Mountains, but instead ol eon'ul, n, uing easterly across the plans, as. as uo The rivers further south. the wa. MasetS ts overflow northerly by St. Mary nieett t., the Saskatchewan River ana are are .,h,ch Hudson Bay. The easterly coarse Wnichi Wai annears to be the original or na'nlai ira, direction for the waters 10 pursue, ,ns, nSt been blocked by the glaclal o'Diis n,1 ,'.r.N near the foot of the mountains. ine p' ,,a nosed canal will restore what may pe nanad inc original preglacial drainage and allow the waters from the hochs
 Mountains to continue eastwaru uo"H the slope of the country. ,,i,,,.
 Milk River. heading Tn tne iow' ., ,,,,9 country east of the foot or the noun tsins. has a general northeasteriy uireG- ton. the two principal branches, N No.t. Fork and South Fork, un1ins
 crossing the Canadian line. Ihe strenl, ttne thus formed loWs tdoeD. iJ .o,,tt- = or more. where it bends to the souln- ward and again returns to MonSana' finally emptving into Missouri HlVer' The broad Milk River Valley Tn Montana consists of a generally rolling country, adapted to irrigation. The water supplS from the river is, however, defcient' oW- ing to the lack of high mountain areas at the headwaters. The diversion canal, as planned, will restore the mouhtd'i catchnen area to this stream. l. 'iThe water of the St. Mary River IS not used in the United States put III Canadian territory. seven miles north or the international line. is canal con pleted In 1900. Between the site or tne nroposed dam at the foot of St Mary lake and the head of the Canadian ca nal. considerable number Of large streams discharge into St. Mary River: furnishing an ample supply for the land irrigated in Canada. It is not believed that any international complications can arise concerning water rights, since the water which it is proposed to store ana divert occurs wholly within Montana
 and it would be impossible for the Cana dians to store and utilize this flood wa ter even If needed in tn canal.
 ''I'he length of thl proposed St. Mary canal, from it's head on St. Mary River to the North Fork of MIX River, IS 27A miles, and the cost of construction. Including dam and headgates. and the drop at the North Fork. will be $6S7.0OO. Tho canal has been planned to carry 200 cubic fet per second and the amount of acreage to be reclaimed is estimated at l20 GOO acres of public land, which would have a probable value of $S5 per acre, or A,2oOo0o. and would sustain popnla-
 ton of 20.000 By he storage in the lowre MIX River Valley the area of reclaimed land including the us, of Milk River, can he increased to 3O.h0 acres