Search Articles:

 

Breaking News......... Missoula gives cyclists room to ride on Higgins, Stephens......... Two sentenced for drug trafficking in Arlee, Kalispell......... BREAKING NEWS: City Council members file suit over rezoning ......... UPDATE: Gov. Schweitzer on GM's cancellation of Montana mine contract: "Damn right I'm mad!"......... Local News......... Jury acquits ex-Griz Wilson in second murder trial........Lincoln County sheriff recall petitions approved........Warrants suggest evidence tampering in Seeley Lake hit-and-run........Defendant pleads guilty to embezzling $800,000 from Missoula bank........Pearly white fight - Burtello Salon owner, state board face off over teeth-whitening procedure........BNSF comes clean in Whitefish, but residents skeptical about contamination........

BILLINGS - Wyoming Attorney General Pat Crank is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reject claims his state is depleting two rivers at the expense of downstream Montana farmers, in court papers filed Friday.

A lawsuit filed in January by Montana Attorney General Mike McGrath asserts that Wyoming farmers and coal-bed methane developers consume more than their fair share of water from the Powder and Tongue rivers in violation of a 1950 interstate water compact.

The two rivers flow from northeast Wyoming into southeast Montana before draining into the Yellowstone River. That region has suffered from drought since 2000, heightening tensions over water use.

Heavy snowfall this week was expected to provide short-term relief but not solve the states' fundamental disagreement over the rivers.

In a brief submitted to justices as they weigh whether to accept the case, Crank and his staff wrote that Montana had offered no evidence to prove it has been shortchanged.

''Montana's claims lack sufficient seriousness or dignity to justify this Court's exercise of its original jurisdiction,'' they wrote. ''Had Montana gathered the facts before prematurely filing this suit, it would have discovered that it has no factual or legal basis for its claims.''

In a separate statement, Crank said it could cost the state millions of dollars to defend the case if it proceeds.

The court filings also said several of Montana's claims were not covered by the 1950 agreement.

In particular, Wyoming says water pumped from underground aquifers for irrigation or during coal-bed methane drilling is not covered by the compact. Montana contends such uses should be counted against Wyoming's share of the water.

The 1950 Yellowstone River Compact said disagreements between the states that cannot be settled by an interstate commission would go straight to the Supreme Court. The Yellowstone River Compact Commission declined to act when Montana complained about allocations from the Tongue and Powder rivers in 2004 and again last year.

McGrath said he and his staff were analyzing Wyoming's response and will prepare a reply in the next two weeks.

''We think we made a good case and we're confident the U.S. Supreme court will accept jurisdiction,'' he said. ''They owe us more water in both the Tongue and the Powder.''

North Dakota, another signatory to the Yellowstone Compact, also is named as a defendant in the case. But Montana officials have said they have no gripe with their eastern neighbor and included it in the lawsuit only as a formality.

---

---

Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)

---