226 



FORESTRY AND IRRIGATION 



May 



The writer believes that this prob- number of tests, the reliability of ger- 



lera offers attractive opportunities for mination from seed, 



further study to determine the exact It is hoped that some one may have 



process of sprouting from the root sys- opportunity and inclination to com- 



tem, and to fix more surely, by a greater plete the study. 



THE MILK RIVER PROJECT. 



LATEST NEWS CONCERNING A DESIRABLE BUT EX- 

 TREMELY DIFFICULT PIECE OF RECLAMATION WORK. 



ITIZENS of Montana residing in 

 the valley of Milk River are 

 gravely concerned over the proposed ex- 

 tensive diversion of the waters of that 

 stream in Canada, and are importuning 

 the government to intervene in order 

 that their prior rights to the water may 

 be protected. The government itself is 

 concerned in this matter, as it has con- 

 structed an irrigation system at Fort 

 Belknap, which is a prior appropria- 

 tion to that of the Canadians. 



Citizens in the lower Milk Valley 

 fear that the Canadians' works will ex- 

 haust the normal flow of the river, leav- 

 ing them without water during the low 

 stages of the stream. Unfortunately 

 for the Montanans, the government's 

 work of constructing an extensive irri- 

 gation system combining large storage 

 reservoirs in St. Mary L,akes with many 

 miles of canals has been delayed, ow- 

 ing to the unfavorable physical features 

 which were encountered by the engi- 

 neers and to other obstacles in the 

 shape of prior rights and difficulties in 

 securing right of way. 



The government project is divided 

 into two sections the storage of flood 

 waters in the mountain catchment area 

 of St. Mary River and the utilization of 

 the water on the irrigable lands of the 

 lower Milk River Valley. The engi- 

 neering surveys in the St. Mary Basin 

 are practically completed, but the best 

 method of bringing this water to the 

 lower lands has not yet been found. 

 The simple plan of permitting the 

 stored waters to flow down the stream 

 through Canada in the natural channel 

 has been abandoned, owing to the in- 

 ternational complications, and the alter- 

 nate plan of utilizing Cutbank Creek 



and Marias River is receiving careful 

 consideration. 



The survey of the Marias River has 

 not been completed, and it is not possi- 

 ble at this time to state whether a diver- 

 sion is feasible or not. While the engi- 

 neers consider it a difficult proposition, 

 belief is strong that a way out will be 

 found before the close of the coming 

 field season. The question now being 

 considered is whether it will be wise to 

 start construction work in the lower 

 valley, depending only on Milk River 

 for a supply, and before it is found feas- 

 ible to bring the waters stored in St. 

 Mary Lakes to this area. 



While the engineers do not view with 

 equanimity the diversion of the waters 

 of Milk River by the Canadians, they 

 are not becoming unnecessarily alarmed 

 thereat. So far as can be ascertained 

 from the somewhat imperfect maps of 

 the region, the drainage area of Milk 

 River above the point of diversion of 

 the Canadian ditch is approximately 

 1,050 square miles. This catchment 

 area is not mountainous, but, on the 

 contrary, consists of undulating or roll- 

 ing gravel hills, from which the run-off 

 is not notably great. In comparison 

 with this the drainage area of Milk 

 River above Malta, Montana, contrib- 

 utory wholly to the flow of the stream 

 in the United States, is 14,044 square 

 miles. In other words, the drainage 

 area controlled by the Canadians is only 

 7^ percent of the total drainage area 

 above Malta. Assuming that there is a 

 larger available run-off in the upper part 

 of the basin, this at most can not be con- 

 sidered as affecting seriously the utili- 

 zation of the water at points near Malta. 



It is recognized that any diversion 



