The Hardin tribune-herald. [volume] (Hardin, Mont.) 1925-1973, 1937-10-29
YELLOWSTONE RIVER
DRAINAGE HEARING
Continued from Page One)

Horn dam, still no offer had, up
to the present time, been made
to the Indian for the lands that
would be taken from them for
storage purposes. Mr.. Yellowtail
further stated that he would not
oppose the construction of the
Yankee Jim canyon dam. Con-
gresham O'Connor closed the
meeting by agreeing that the In
dian had not been fairly treated
by the government. but said that
if the government decided that
the dam should be built the land
of the Indians probably should be
made subject to use for that
purpose the same as the property
of any other citizen and COM
pensation made for them on the
same basis.
In 1881, at the earlier war de
partment'S hearing regarding the
Yellowstone watershed, the con-
struction of the Big Horn dam was
urged from the standpoint of silt
and flood control on account of
the damage it does to the Mis-
souri, and Mississippi valleys. Tues
day, dams we're urged in the yell
lowstone watershed from the stand
point of the need of the control
and storage of the flood water for
irrigation purposes within the area.
Big Horn county people are glad
to see this viewpoint recognized,
because future irrigation of these
valleys will depend on the storage
of the flood waters, if the valleys
are to continue to be irrigated.
Wyoming has presented figures
showing that the Big Horn river
has an annual run-off of 3.642 900
acre-feet of water, of which the
state of Wyoming now puts to use
Cos 900 acre-feet. or about one
sixth of the total run-off. It
states that it has use for an adj
ditional 1,1O3 900 acre-feet needed
to supply 100000 acres of land:
that it now has $4,000 acre-feet
of storage developed on the Big
Horn and potential storage for an
additional 1,132,O00 acre-feet, leav-
ing only a storage capacity of
$1,000 acre-feet over its potential
needs. !
No storage can or would be coll
sidered feasible up to its full ca
pacity. In fact it is doubtful if
storage could be used up to three
fourths its actual capacity. Add to
this condition the fact that the
use does not decrease. but that
the capacity of storage on account
of sitting in, does, we cannot in
Big Horn county, therefore, de-
pend on wyoming for any storage
of water for use in the Big Horn
or lower Yellowstone valleys. Even
though storage could be found in
Wyoming, the evaporation of water
coming from such a distance
would be so great that double that
actually needed on the land would
have to be stored in order that the
land could be properly irrigated.
Further objection to storage pro-
vlded at a great distance from the
place of use is that if a use can
be made of the water above, the
chances of the people below get
ting their full share of water is
greatly reduced.
Wyoming further shows that
there will be a balance of water
for use below. or to be stored, of
1,934,OOO acre-feet and that it has
no way in which to control or
store this water. This is no doubt
true, but the very large part of
this last mentioned water will be
high flood water Of which no use
can be made in the mountain area
except through storage. In other
words there will be coming down
the Big Horn, after the full de-
of the use of waters in
wyoming, the water which is be-
.ond the control of the state OF
wyoming. This condition leaves
the Big Horn valley in a condition
that prevents us from expecting
and being able to rely on a con- ;
normal flow of the Big
Horn.
That Wyoming claims the first
light To the head HaterS of the