1. obviously you don't know water law. Maclay has first priority to all Carlton Creek water. under Montana law, he may drain it dry for his land's needs. the only question is whether his land "needs" the water. if the forest service should approve his proposed development, and the water rights are contested, Maclay's lawyer can argue that "need" is implied from the approval -- and then it has to work its way through the 5-8 year cycle of water court litigation, which means that all the damage is done from day 1, basically. maybe you ought to learn a bit more about the subject before opening your piehole?
2. excuse me, what does this have to do with the issue? my answer above plays out the scenario to its conclusion. your point #2 affects nothing.
3. wrong, charlie. you obviously don't study the local climate change, do you? have you ranched here? depended on water from the sky? or maybe you'd like to follow historic rainfall and snowpack figures? no matter how you do it, you're redfaced with error here. good night, charlie.
4. again irrelevant, but apparently you think it's critical to your illogic.
what is "profitable" is nonsense. many things are profitable. the question is, what is it that you want?
darned right I moved here from elsewhere, and would like to see it protected. if you want to live in a city, why don't you move to one? there are plenty of 'em in the USA. there's only one Montana, though. have you ever even thought about that? or is your personal monetary wealth the entire raison d'etre
, and to hell with saving something that, once ruined, cannot be restored?
there is no such thing as "responsible development" -- if you want city amenities, move to a city. don't ruin the rest of America for those of us who DO NOT want cities. GOT IT?
Originally Posted by bcripe
These are the same arguments that had been made in every case of development. It sounds more like your a city transplant trying to save us poor country folks way of life. How long have you lived in Montana? My family has been here since 1865. Fact is farming (actually ranching) is not profitable in Montana. Factory farms in California and Texas are MUCH more efficient at producing product. We can never compete. So what would I rather do? Move to a city where I can make a living? Thats what happens to most peoples children in these parts. Or embrace responsible development for the good of us all? Ill embrace responsible development.
1. Carlton Creek will never be drained for a development. That type of thing is not allowed at all anywhere.
2. what were the pasturelands watered with before the Carlton Creek Irrigation Company built the dam in 1889.
3. This part of Montana gets plenty of rain so that the soil will not be arid.
4. What grazed on the dirt before irrigation? Oh yea, thousands of Buffalo and Elk!
But the simple fact is that this will not change with or without the development. A resort is a much better use of the land than the numerous mines that communities all over Montana are fighting for to bring jobs (money) in.