Welcome to the newsletter about all things water in Montana!

MONTANA WATER NEWS will come your way via email every month with fresh news about meetings and water topics that we hope is of interest to you. If you do not want to receive this newsletter, please scroll down and follow the directions to unsubscribe. If you are seeing only text in this email, or if it's not easy to read, please make sure your email program is set to view "HTML" messages, or view the newsletter online in the newsletter archives.

Jeff Tiberi

Q: Jeff, what does the Missouri River mean to Montana?

A: The Missouri is one of the great rivers of the world, connecting people and places and ideas that have shaped North America. It provides an ecological, agricultural, commercial, recreational, and social link to and for many Americans. It draws people together, sometimes to argue but mostly to agree, about how it will be managed. I have been in this job for 14 months. One of the most interesting perspectives I have heard is the idea that the entire world is a garden, and needs to be managed. Even our wilderness areas need someone to look after them. Now “we” are looking at the entirety of the Missouri River to see how it can be managed to best protect that system.

Q: What is Mr. Erp and how far along is it in Montana?

A: Mr. Erp is the Missouri River Ecosystem Restoration Plan. It will be written to direct what needs to be done to protect the ecology of the river. Driven by a focus on endangered species, it will be guided by the Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee and result in an Environmental Impact Statement for the entire Missouri River main stem. The committee has been meeting, but has a long way to go. You may have seen notices in local newspapers asking the public to attend meetings and give input.

Addressing endangered species can be daunting for some farmers and ranchers, but it is becoming a cooperative venture and we are seeing some positive results. Like the river itself, it brings people together from many perspectives. And, in general, Montanans have been visionary in assuring wildlife has a place with us.

Q: What has been the role of MACD and the related Missouri River Conservation Districts Council?

A: The Council has taken the lead in this issue. Its one employee, Vicki Marquis, was selected to be on the Implementation Committee. She represents the districts along the river, but de facto represents all districts and local communities more generally. MACD is trying to give Vicki support wherever we can.

Q: The Corps of Engineers vision for the Missouri signals a major shift in resource management with some pretty lofty goals: restore ecosystem functions, mitigate habitat losses, and recover native fish and wildlife on the Missouri River, while providing for current social and economic values. Does this include helping keep family ranchers and farmers on the land with enough water? If so, how?

A: Your questions bring up an important issue. I left natural resource management and worked in other fields for about 10 years. Since I have returned, I see less confrontation and more cooperation between those representing agriculture and those representing fish & wildlife. The farmers and ranchers are saying to themselves “I agree with a lot of these things that the environmentalists are talking about.” The environmental community is saying “If it were not for these farmers and ranchers many species would not be protected.” Both realize they need each other and need to cooperate to address natural resource issues. I think our biggest problem is making the urbanites aware of natural resources and natural systems. The fact is political power, even in Montana, has shifted to the urban areas. Urban voters can decide where resources go and what the priorities are. We can only make progress if we are united in purpose, and we make a clear case to the urbanites. The Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee is trying to use a cooperative and inclusive approach. The logo the Corps is using – One River, One Vision, reflects a lofty and noble goal, but we need to look there.

Q: What discussion has there been on managing major impoundments differently, such as Fort Peck, and what do you feel needs to be done with them?

A: I often hear comments about the desire to keep Montana’s water in Montana. I also hear suggestions that small impoundments might be the way for this to be addressed. A new state water plan is being developed and I hope this will be considered in that document. The large reservoirs are operated by the federal government, and they look the whole way down to New Orleans when they pull the levers. We have to be constantly at the table with them to make sure they understand the issues in Montana.

Q: Do people feel this plan is important? If so, what will it take for the plan and the people to succeed?

A: People definitely feel this is important. The people I have met on the committee are excited and serious about the potential for doing good things for the river. Anytime we are able to take a systems look at nature we are better off. We are learning new things every day about natural systems. To be successful over time, the plan has to be able to adjust to new understandings. There are win-wins out there, and the plan has to find those sweet spots to succeed.

Editor’s note: Now through December 1, 2009, the public is encouraged to comment on the draft the MRERP. For details go to http://im4.nwo.usace.army.mil/mrrp/f?p=136:11:3808690980874005::NO

I’ve always wondered whether these processes create significant quantities of water. Someone has undoubtedly tackled this at the continental or global scale, but I’m not familiar with the work. Such an all-inclusive water balance would have to account for the destruction of water by processes like plant photosynthesis. A study done a couple of years ago at the Minnesota Water Resources Center sheds light on the water balance at the household level.* The investigators calculated the fluxes of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus through households in the suburbs of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Knowing the carbon flux and the amount of tap water a household consumes, the proportion of new water in its water budget can be estimated. For the Minnesota suburban households this turns out to be 7% - not a big fraction, but not negligible. Almost all of it is derived from the burning of fossil fuel for heat, electricity production or transportation. And so, as we mobilize fossil carbon into the biosphere, we’re also creating considerable amounts of new water. But, as the leader of the Minnesota study commented, we're not going to be able to burn enough coal to produce enough rain to solve our water-supply problems. - Gretchen Rupp, Water Center Director

*Baker, L.A., P. Hartzheim, S. Hobbie, K. Nelson, J. King. 2007. Influence of consumption choices on C, N and P fluxes through households. Urban Ecosystems 10:97-117. This was not a life-cycle analysis – it didn’t take into account the manufacturing of the household goods, or the growing or transport of food. Its purpose was to estimate the potential for pollution reduction through reduced consumption within a household; the potential turned out to be considerable.

For some fascinating reading about this year’s conference, and memories from last year, download the 2009 newsletter at http://awra.org/state/montana/news. You will also be emailed a PDF of our preliminary agenda soon, including scheduled presentations and posters. An outline of the agenda is available at http://water.montana.edu/awra/agenda.htm.

In addition to the great attendees and speakers coming to the conference this year, we also expect to have Dr. Abror Gadaev of the Samarkand State Architectural and Civil Engineering Institute in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. Dr. Gadaev is currently in the U.S. participating in the Fulbright Scholar-in-Residence program. He will present a poster on his work that features investigations on the regeneration of water wells.

Dr. Gadaev is interested in interacting with faculty and private engineers while he is in Montana. If you would like to contact Abror to set up a time to talk, you can email him at agadaev@hotmail.com. His CV is available at http://water.montana.edu/mwnewsletter/attach/CVGadaevA_17_08_09.pdf (149 kb PDF).

The school will go a long way to help new water and wastewater operators pass the certification exam that will be held on Friday, October 9, 2009, from 8 a.m. until noon. Registration for Water School does not automatically register you for the exam, nor do you have to attend the school to take the exam. A separate registration form is required to sign up for the exam. For details go to http://www.deq.state.mt.us/wqinfo/opcert.

Last month the Montana Water newsletter called a new program at the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology an assessment program. We were mistaken. The actual program is the Ground Water Investigation Program. For more information, visit the MBMG website at http://www.mbmg.mtech.edu/gwip/gwip.asp.

The 2009 National AWRA Annual Water Resources Conference will be held November 9-12, 2009, at the Red Lion Hotel in Seattle, Washington. The conference’s 75 sessions and panels are designed to provide a multidisciplinary approach to water resources issues that range from local to international in scope. The preliminary program is available at: http://www.awra.org/meetings/Seattle2009.

2010 Spring Specialty Conference

The 2010 National AWRA Spring Specialty Conference will be March 29-31, 2010, in Orlando, Florida at the Rosen Shingle Creek Resort. The conference will include the current state of knowledge about Geographic Information Systems, as well as up-to-date water resources and software tools. Abstract deadline for the conference is October 9, 2009. For additional information, visit http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010.

Do you have more news?

Take special note of upcoming national and local water meetings on the Events Calendar at MONTANA WATER.