North
Dakota State University -- NDSU Agriculture
Communication7 Morrill Hall, Fargo ND, 58105-5655, Tel: 701-231-7881, Fax: 701-231-7044
agcomm@ndsuext.nodak.edu
|
North
Dakota State University -- NDSU Agriculture
Communication 7 Morrill Hall, Fargo ND, 58105-5655, Tel: 701-231-7881, Fax: 701-231-7044 agcomm@ndsuext.nodak.edu |
|
|
Plains Folk: Science and PolicyTom Isern, Professor of History
The transforming power of the Pick-Sloan plan on the northern plains is a hard thing to assess. There are all the people, Indian and white, who suffered inundation of their lands and lives. There are the economic benefits, and the economic failures, and there are the massive environmental consequences–again, good and bad. One certainty is that the promised benefits of irrigation for the agriculture and economy of the region have evaporated like a scatter of raindrops on a summer highway. Organized opposition, mainly local, killed the Oahe irrigation project in South Dakota. The Garrison Diversion in North Dakota is on long-term hold, such that if it ever breathes life again it will be to supply urban and industrial needs, not to irrigate farms. What stopped the Garrison project, more than anything else, was the government of Canada. The project envisioned diversion of waters from the drainage of the Missouri River to that of the Red, via the Sheyenne. Downstream interests in Manitoba opposed this. That was the situation which led this year to publication of the book "Science and Policy: Interbasin Water Transfer of Aquatic Biota" by the Institute for Regional Studies, North Dakota State University. All right, that’s a pretty arcane title. This is not exactly romance reading. It is, however, an important record of science and history in our region. Congress first made appropriation for the Garrison Diversion in 1965. As construction of canals and reservoirs commenced, opposition came first from environmental groups and then from Manitobans. They said that harmful organisms, plant and animal, might be carried from the Missouri watershed into the Red, where they were not present, wreaking havoc on fisheries and who knows what. The Canadian government called for a halt to Garrison construction; work ceased the next year. In 1986, trying to break the stalemate, Congress mandated scientific studies to be carried out by both American and Canadian scientists. About 20 studies were completed in the years 1987-96. Science and Policy is the publication of record detailing the studies. The details are interesting–well, many of them are. Some species alleged to have been threats, for instance, were found to be already present in the Red River drainage. Some of the most fascinating work shows all the other ways species can be introduced from one drainage to another–bait buckets, for instance. The studies are convincing along three lines.
Forewords by former North Dakota Governor William L. Guy and former Manitoba official Robert N. Clarkson are particularly intriguing. Guy attributes Canadian opposition to the trouble-making of downstream Missouri River interests who feared that irrigation upriver would interfere with navigation below. Clarkson says–and I don’t think my paraphrase is unfair–it doesn’t matter what the science says, Manitoba will never consent to Garrison. Jay Leitch, editor of Science and Policy, waxes philosophical about the limits of science in political decision-making. I think there is a more basic point to take from this episode, which is this: Canada and the United States are good neighbors, mostly, but if you expect any premier of Manitoba to do a favor for the U.S., then dream on. The currents of anti-Americanism in Canadian life are not always visible, but they run deep. ### Source: Tom Isern, (701) 799-2941, tom@plainsfolk.com
|
