May 13, 2008 - 04:05:48 CDT
For what? That's the question the Burleigh County Water Resource Board kept coming back to as it held a brainstorming session regarding the diversion of Missouri River water to Apple Creek via the McClusky Canal.The water board held the session following its regular meeting Monday. The five board members, their attorney and engineering consultant were joined by Burleigh County rancher Buck Maher and Milt Lindvig, a former State Water Commission employee in charge of groundwater resources.
There were other questions too, like: How much? Who will pay? Who will benefit? But when it came down to it, the big question remained: What will be the uses?
The consensus among the board members was the project will benefit Burleigh County, but it may not directly benefit the landowners whose property Apple Creek winds through. It was those landowners who put an end to a similar issue back in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
Mike Gunsch, the board's engineering consultant, listed benefits, including water to refresh lakes along Apple Creek, enhancement of fish and wildlife opportunities, environmental purposes, agriculture, livestock watering, water for the McDowell Dam Recreation Area and potential irrigation.
"But this isn't about McDowell," Gunsch said. "McDowell is just one component."
Nearly 20 years ago, it was the Garrison Diversion Conservancy District looking for uses of Missouri River water. But landowners along Apple Creek didn't want a big ditch separating their land or providing the public opportunity to access their private property because federal money was being used, according to Gunsch, who was a consultant for the conservancy district.
Board member Terry Fleck, who was tasked with researching the issue and had called for the brainstorming session, feels it is important that uses for Missouri water be found.
"We can sit and watch the water go by for another 55 years, and in reality that's all we'll get to do, because it will no longer be ours," Fleck said.
Fleck reminded everyone that the reason the water board is considering the issue is due to comments made by Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and Burleigh County commissioner Jerry Woodcox. Both men indicated there may be federal funding available for an appropriate project.
"We're at a point in history where we have to quit being bashful about asking. The federal government built a dam (Garrison Dam) and lake, and left it here. For 50 years, no one has taken ownership, and we've always acted like it is somebody else's," Fleck said. "It's incumbent upon us to ask for this. There is a desire to take ownership and take control of our water."
Burleigh County commissioner Doug Schonert said he agreed with Fleck, calling the Missouri a great resource and saying if Burleigh didn't make use of it somehow, at some point and time, someone else will, and Burleigh won't have any say in the water.
Maher asked what is it exactly that the water board wants - to put water in McDowell or to enhance wildlife? He pointed out the county has a hard time now taking care of its roads; if the water board were to pursue this issue, there are a lot of roads along Apple Creek that will need to be raised and maintained.
"Look at what's happened with the McClusky Canal. It costs a lot of money to maintain and what good is it?" Maher asked. "This is the same type of thing."
Water board member Ken Royse estimated a project of this nature might cost $20 million to $25 million.
"These types of projects are amazingly expensive," Royse said. "We'd have to have a local sponsor with really deep pockets. There are any number of issues we'll have to contend with, and in my mind, this is not a federally authorized project."
But Gunsch had been talking with representatives of the Garrison Diversion Conservancy District and there was some thought that through the Dakota Water Resource Act, money could be made available for this type of project.
"Through mitigation enhancement, this is a supported use," Gunsch said. "We could do this with Garrison money. But using Garrison money has strings attached."
Maher said that should the water board continue to pursue diversion, it had better meet with the landowners along Apple Creek. The discussions should include specific uses and how the property owners will benefit.
"I don't know of any funding agency that would get behind a project like this unless it had universal support," Gunsch said. "The first step would be to have buy-in by all stakeholders. If there's any controversy, the answer will be no."
The discussion ended on that note, with no indication if the water board will consider to pursue to issue. But enthusiasm seemed to have waned in light of the discussion.
(Reach reporter Gordon Weixel at 250-8255 or gordon.weixel@;bismarcktribune.com.)
Good Luck wrote on May 13, 2008 12:27 PM:
Tim from Bismarck wrote on May 13, 2008 10:40 AM:
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.