The smoldering debate over local water rights took the spotlight in well-attended meetings held from Ronan to Arlee last week. Called together by the Flathead Joint Board of Control, the meetings sought to facilitate public dialogue about the main concerns many local irrigators have with the proposed water compact that faltered in the state legislature earlier this year.

The regulatory irrigation board is primarily focused on three points of contention in the proposed water use agreement - ownership of Flathead Indian Irrigation Project (FIIP) water, the quantity of water allotted through the agreement, and the creation of a Unitary Management Board.

John Swenson of Ronan shared his concern that the compact’s proposed unitary management board would lack the accountability of a representative form of government.

“They’re not my representatives. They don’t represent me,” said Swenson.

Swenson also voiced uneasiness over the matter of water ownership.

“I have a right to that project water,” Swenson said. “I’m not going to lay down and relinquish my water right on my piece of property unless they want to compensate me.”

Although attorney Jon Metropoulos reminded attendees that “there have been a lot of assurances that historic uses will be maintained,” some still feel as though the proposed irrigation allowances will leave them high and dry.

For instance, Jerry Laskody, an FJBC board member, believes that exaggerated efficiencies have been used to quantify the farm turnout allowance for irrigators.

“They are using efficiencies that we dream about,” said Laskody. “I am convinced that that model will not stand as determining what our water allocation will be,” he added.

Not all those in attendance were opponents of the compact, as some spoke in defense of the negotiated agreement.

“I’d say half the audience at [the Arlee] meeting were pro-compacters,” said Mary Stranahan of Arlee. Stranahan says that the debate has already pitted “neighbor against neighbor” in an ugly dispute that she fears will only worsen if the expensive route to litigation is taken.

“If we don’t get the compact, it’s long, it’s painful, it’s divisive. It won’t get as good as what we’ve got in the compact.”

Steve Dagger, a Dixon vegetable farmer, echoed those sentiments.

“I think the concerns are overstated,” said Dagger. “My biggest concern is that the Board doesn’t want to take litigation off the table, and I don’t think that’s the way to go.”

After hearing input from irrigators and other citizens at the week’s proceedings, FJBC officials will spend the next couple weeks deciding how to move forward, according to Metropoulos. He expects the Board will then approach the Tribes and the federal government in an attempt to rekindle talks.

“It will be a respectful request to discuss some reasonable concerns,” said Metropoulos.