Whitefish water rights could serve double current population

Whitefish has received updated water rights allowances for its municipal water system that would allow it to serve roughly double the current population of the city.

Whitefish gets its drinking water from Whitefish Lake and from Second and Third creeks in Haskill Basin. The state recently approved water rights permits for the city for use up to 3,182 acre feet per year, or the amount needed to serve a population of 14,024 and commercial properties.

“We have water rights for more than double our highest consumption year,” explained City Manager Chuck Stearns. “We can serve an increase in population of more than double what we have.”

The 2010 Census estimates the city’s population at 6,357. The highest year of water consumption in the city was 2007 when 1,600 acre feet per year was used.

“That high year was likely a dry year,” Stearns said. “What really drives our demand is for irrigation in the summer.”

Montana’s 1972 Constitution declared all surface and ground water to be the property of the state. The next year, the Legislature passed the Montana Water Use Act, which required that all water rights existing prior to July 1, 1973, be recorded with the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation.

Any additional use of water or change in place of use or point of diversion since 1973 requires permission from DNRC. The city can’t expand its water flow usage on its current permits beyond the amount of water used prior to 1973.

The act initiated a statewide water-rights adjudication process that continues today. Through the adjudication process, Stearns explained, the state required that all of the water rights for the Whitefish River basin be adjusted to be based upon historic usage.

“For the city, that was based on population at the time to figure the amount being used,” he said. “We were reduced quite a bit. We didn’t have that much usage then.”

The city’s allowed usage amount decreased by about 75 percent, according to Stearns, based on the state’s adjustment. This equals a decrease of about 11,600 acre feet per year.

However, the city in 2013 applied for and was granted additional rights to pump water from Whitefish Lake, which added 1,700 acre feet per year.

No more water rights are available beyond what has already been granted for Haskill Creek, Stearns noted, but if the city proves a need it could apply to draw more water from the lake.

“The lake is considered a big vessel of water,” Stearns said. “It holds a lot of water and we will be able to apply for more water rights out of Whitefish Lake in the future, if we need to.”

The city’s water claim in Haskill Creek, which is for Second and Third creeks specifically, are dated in 1918.

“We have the second most senior water right in Haskill,” Stearns said. “We have very good water rights. Only the Voerman family has a water right dated before the city.”

If there’s a shortage of water, less senior water rights holders would get shut down first before the city, Stearns noted.

A water study in 2009 by Water Right Solutions Inc. recommended that the city amend its claims to more accurately reflect conditions and obtain additional water rights to Whitefish Lake to meet future demands.

The city also holds water rights for First Creek, but use on the creek was abandoned in the 1970s because of contamination. In addition, it holds water rights for golf course irrigation, power generation and well rights for irrigation at the Roy Duff Memorial Armory.

The state continues to work toward a final water rights compact with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. The tribes, the state and federal government have been working for several years to develop a settlement that will quantify the water rights on and off the Flathead Indian Reservation.

Stearns said he has studied the compact and has spoken with state officials on the matter, and believes it won’t likely have an impact on Whitefish.

In the proposed settlement the CSKT would become a co-owner of the state’s instream flow water rights in the off-reservation areas, including the Flathead drainage.

“The water rights owned by the state, and would be co-owned by [CSKT], have never been called to shut down those with less senior water rights to preserve in-stream flows for fish in time of drought,” Stearns said. “It’s not to say it couldn’t happen in the future, but it’s not likely that our water rights will be affected by the compact.”