and technological considerations have kept most of these conversion facilities, 

 identified in the North Central Power Study as necessary for 1980, on the 

 drawing board or in the courtroom. There is now no chance of their being 

 completed by that date or even soon after, which will delay and diminish the 

 economic benefits some basin residents had expected as a result of coal 

 development. On the other hand, contracts have been signed for the mining 

 of large amounts of Montana coal, and applications have been approved not 

 only for new and expanded coal mines but also for Colstrip Units 3 and 4, 

 twin 700-mw, coal -fired, electric generating plants. 



In 1975, over 22 million tons of coal were mined in the state, up from 

 14 million in 1974, 11 million in 1973, and 1 million in 1969. By 1980, even 

 if no new contracts are entered, Montana's annual coal production will exceed 

 40 million tons. Coal reserves, estimated at over 50 billion economically 

 strippable tons (Montana Energy Advisory Council 1976), pose no serious con- 

 straint to the levels of development projected by this study, which range 

 from 186.7 to 462.8 million tons stripped in the basin annually by the year 

 2000. Strip mining itself involves little use of water. How important the 

 energy industry becomes as a water user in the basin will depend on: 1) how 

 much of the coal mined in Montana is exported, and by what means, and 2) by 

 what process and to what end product the remainder is converted within the 

 state. If conversion follows the patterns projected in this study, the energy 

 industry will use from 48,350 to 326,740 af of water annually by the year 2000. 



A third consumptive use of water, municipal use, is also bound to 

 increase as the basin population increases in response to increased employment 

 opportunities in agriculture and the energy industry. 



Can the Yellowstone River satisfy all of these demands for her water? 

 Perhaps in the mainstem. But the tributary basins, especially the Bighorn, 

 Tongue, and Powder, have much smaller flows, and it is in those basins that 

 much of the increased agricultural and industrial water demand is expected. 



Some impacts could occur even in the mainstem. What would happen to 

 water quality after massive depletions? How would a change in water quality 

 affect existing and future agricultural , industrial , and municipal users? 

 What would happen to fish, furbearers, and migratory waterfowl that are 

 dependent on a certain level of instream flow? Would the river be as 

 attractive a place for recreation after dewatering? 



One of the first manifestations of Montana's growing concern for water 

 in the Yellowstone Basin and elsewhere in the state was the passage of 

 significant legislation. The Water Use Act of 1973, which, among other 

 things, mandates the adjudication of all existing water rights and makes 

 possible the reservation of water for future beneficial use, was followed 

 by the Water Moratorium Act of 1974, which delayed action on major 

 applications for Yellowstone Basin water for three years. The moratorium, 

 by any standard a bold action, was prompted by a steadily increasing rush of 

 applications and filings for water (mostly for industrial use) which, in two 

 tributary basins to the Yellowstone, exceeded supply. The DNRC's intention 

 during the moratorium was to study the basin's water and related land 

 resources, as well as existing and future need for the basin's water, so that 



