EDITORIAL: Address Canada’s Pipeline Concerns
By Grand Forks Herald, N.D.
Jan. 17–The pipeline sections are falling into place (on paper, at least). And the proposal to pipe Missouri River water to the Red River Valley during crippling droughts stands a good chance of being built.
But supporters mustn’t forget one important constituency: Canada. Right now, Canada might support the project or it might not, depending on how well project organizers respond to Canadian concerns.
It’s worth responding in a way that puts those concerns to rest. Canada’s reservations about the project are reasonable and worth acting upon.
More important, Canada deserves attention because the country’s active opposition could kill the project. Project supporters should court Canada in this regard because Canada’s backing, in turn, is vital to the project’s success.
“City officials say their goal of bringing Missouri River water to eastern North Dakota appears to be within reach,” The Associated Press reported Monday from Fargo.
“‘All the pieces are in place, and it appears the money is going to be available, too. Now is the time,’ said Bruce Furness, the former mayor of Fargo and the chairman of the Lake Agassiz Water Authority.”
Which is good news, given that a scorching, 1930s-style drought is real possibility — one that Grand Forks and East Grand Forks must plan for. And no, the Red Lake River isn’t enough of an insurance policy: “There are legal restrictions on the amount of water that is discharged from Upper and Lower Red Lake into the Red Lake River under drought conditions,” wrote Dan Boyce, general manager of the East Grand Forks Water and Light Department, in February.
“It is NOT prudent to assume that there always will be sufficient flow of decent quality in the Red Lake River.”
The valley’s Water Supply Project proposal calls for construction of a pipeline from the Missouri River to Lake Ashtabula. The water would be stored in the lake as needed and released into the Sheyenne River in times of drought.
Importantly, Canada and the province of Manitoba haven’t opposed the project outright. Instead, Manitoba has suggested that the pipeline might be acceptable if several conditions are met: First, that authorities explore all other alternatives first; second, that the water in the pipeline be filtered to a fare-thee-well; and third, that these and other issues get settled to the satisfaction of the International Joint Commission.
Pipeline supporters should agree to these conditions. The “last resort” standard likely already has been met. Calling for a high-powered filter is a reasonable request. As a 2005 U.S. Geological Survey report found, the risk of transferring harmful biota between the Missouri and Red river basins is real but drops dramatically as filtration systems improve.
And the International Joint Commission has been a fair and impartial broker of cross-boundary water issues for a century. If that’s the price of securing Manitoba and Canada’s agreement, project supporters should pay it.
True, Canada’s opposition didn’t kill the Devils Lake Outlet. But it did kill the Garrison Diversion’s first incarnation as an irrigation project. The current plan is a version of Garrision — a much-changed version, to be sure, but one that still would shunt water between two entirely separate and distinct watersheds.
Congress will be skeptical enough as it is. If Canada could be enlisted as a backer rather than a basher of the project, that would be a very good thing.
Tom Dennis for the Herald
—–
To see more of the Grand Forks Herald, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.grandforks.com.
Copyright (c) 2007, Grand Forks Herald, N.D.
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Business News.
For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.