The enterprise. [volume] (Harlem, Mont.) 1899-1926, 1912-01-04

Grande and Milk River, questions of
inte' national water rights necessita-
ted the intervention of the State De-
partment to negotiate, and acts of
congress to confirm treaties with our
eighbors OH the south and north.
The Milk River project in Montana
involved probl ms which were not
only difficult but unique. The sources
of water supply were streams rising
in this country, but both flowing in
to Canada, and through a region con-
tanning vast amount of valuable
land easily irrigated. One of these
rivers, the st. Mary. flows across our
borders and none of it's waters re.
turns to the United States. The
other, Milk River, after leaving this
county, flows for nearly 100 miles
OH the Canadian side of the line and
then returns to join the Missouri in
northern Montana.
The engineering plans call for the
construction of a dam in St. Mary
river for storage OF the flood waters,
and diversion canal excavated
through the divide into Milk River.
1t is proposed to utilize the latter
stream as a carrying channel for 200
miles, and to divert the combined
flow upon the lower Milk River
valley in Montana. Obviously, it
was necessary to negotiate with
Canada for an equitable division of
the water, as otherwise there could
be be no assurance the Canadian irri-
gators would not use upon their own
lands all the flow of both streams.
These negotiations, begun in 1904,
were not finally concluded until May
13, 1910, when treaty was finally
ratified between the nations. This
treaty provided for an equal division
of the waters of Milk River, supple.
mented by the storage supply from
st. Mary river. and the chief obstacle
to the actual construction of the
large engineering structures was re-
moved.
While the diplomats were engaged
upon the treaty the engineers of the
service made All exhaustive examina-
tion of the country about the head
waters of the Marias and st. Mary
rivers. Hundreds of miles of country
were mapped and studied in the hope
OF locating feasible canal wholly
within our borders, but no practicable
scheme for present development was
worked out. Since that time, how
ever, the Reclamation Service has
diligently sought to have adjusted
the numerous and complicated prob.
lens of prior appropriations of the
many smallirrjgation systems in the
lower valley, and in reaching an ad-
justment with the private land
owners as to the subdivision of the
large ranches. Until the vested
water rights on the streams are de-
termined and adjndicated. it was not
advisable to proceed with storage
construction, as there is no other way
in which the government can ascar-
tain how much, if any of the water,
if stored in st. Mary reservoir, will
be assured to the lands embraced in
its project. This adjustment is being
affected, and the necessary signing
up of the private lands which must
pay their proportionate share of the
cost of the project is proceeding
rapidly. Reassuring reports have
been received from the people of the
valley that signatures for 62 per cent.
of the land have been secured, and
that the balance will be obtained i'll
January. '''
This project has been cited fire.
quently as an example of the "red-
tape" of the government authorities
when engaged in any large work Of
construction. The fact is completely
lost sight of that during all the years
the treaty was pending II was neces-
sary in order to maintain and protect
our rights in these streams to con-
tinue Investigations and studies, and
to keep construction work I'M pro-
gress in small way. Wherever it
was practicable portions of the en-
gineering work were begun. To hold
our rights to st. Mary storage, work
was begun on the big diversion canal
and on the Milk river the Dodson dam
and main south side canal We're uni
dertaken, and a small acreage
actually irrigated last year.
Tins project, with ends several
hundred miles apart, evolved an i'm
mense amount of elaborate and costly
surveys, part Of which were in q
region nearly fifty miles from rail