Water resources within the Manitoba portion of the Hudson Bay drainage basin are extremely valuable. More than one million Manitobans live in the basin, with approximately 100,000 relying directly on the Red River, Souris River, and Assiniboine River as sources of drinking water. Lake Winnipeg, the 10th largest freshwater lake in the world, supports a commercial fishery with a direct, landed value estimated to be over $15,000,000 (Canadian) annually to the economies of Manitoba and Canada each year. About 800 commercial fishing licences are issued to fishers on Lake Winnipeg, many of these to First Nations peoples. In many cases, fishing is their major source of income. Sport anglers spend another $10 to $15 million (Canadian) annually in this region. The Red River is the single most important sport fishing destination in Manitoba and accounts for nearly 20 % of the total value of this $80 million (Canadian) industry to Manitoba’s economy. In addition, there is an important bait fish harvest in the Red River and the south basin of Lake Winnipeg that returns about $200,000 (Canadian) annually to licenced fishers.

The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 between Canada and the United States stipulates that: "waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other side." The Treaty established the International Joint Commission to assist governments in finding solutions to water problems and to try to prevent or resolve disputes.

The issue of biota transfer has become a major concern throughout North America, in part due to the major economic and environmental impacts associated with invasive species such as the zebra mussel. This issue is recognized as one of the most formidable environmental challenges facing governments in North America. An Executive Order on Invasive Species was issued by the President of the United States in early 1999, highlighting the serious nature of the issue and providing direction for preventive and coordinated actions. In Canada, many jurisdictions (including Manitoba) have developed either policies or legislation that oppose interbasin transfers because of their potential for severe environmental damage. Both the United States and Canada are working cooperatively in many areas to control invasive species through ballast water programs, sharing of scientific information, regional cooperation to implement the US Aquatic Nuisance Species Act, plus others.

The Missouri (Mississippi) and Hudson Bay drainage basins, the two largest in North America, have been separated for about 10,000 years since the last glaciation. Their aquatic ecosystems have developed separately, with numerous organisms, both plant and animal, existing in one or the other basin but not both. For example, zebra mussels have already invaded the Missouri River system but are not present in the Hudson Bay system. The Devils Lake watershed has been isolated from the Red River/Hudson Bay drainage system for hundreds of years. Non-native fish species have been stocked in the lake in the recent past.

It is Manitoba's position that the new Garrison Diversion concept authorized by the Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000 and construction of the proposed outlet to Devils Lake, would:

• potentially violate the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, resulting in injury to Canada;
• be inconsistent with the recommendations of the International Joint Commission in 1977 on the Garrison Diversion Unit, which identified an enormous threat to water quality and aquatic life in Manitoba;
• be inconsistent with recent initiatives to collectively prevent the spread of harmful, non-native aquatic species to new regions in North America.
  

Garrison - Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000

The Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000 replaced the Garrison Diversion Reformulation Act of 1986, an Act that represented a delicate compromise between US stakeholders and included consideration of previous International Joint Commission work on the potential problems associated with diverting water from the Missouri to the Hudson Bay drainage basin. The Dakota Water Resources Act now makes it easier to move water from the Missouri to the Hudson Bay drainage basin.

The Dakota Water Resources Act:

• assumes that treatment of Missouri River water will make diversion into the Hudson Bay Drainage basin acceptable. There is no scientific consensus on the level of treatment required to prevent biota transfer, nor are there biological standards;
• potentially authorizes the interbasin transfer of large volumes of water to meet in-stream flow needs and to augment ground water aquifers. Moreover, the Act requires that the Garrison Diversion principle supply works be maintained - these are capable of transferring water up to a rate of 2000 cubic feet per second (cfs).
  

Reasons that led to the recommendation of the International Joint Commission are as valid today as they were in 1977 -- the enormous threat recognized by the International Joint Commission has been realized with the introduction of, for example, the zebra mussel to the Great Lakes, Mississippi, Missouri, and other major basins.

Northwest Area Water Supply Project

The Northwest Area Water Supply Project (NAWS) is a proposal to transfer pre-treated Missouri River water by pipeline to Minot. The Missouri River water will then receive further treatment and be distributed to a number of communities in the Hudson Bay basin in western North Dakota.

The NAWS project was authorized by the Garrison Reformulation Act of 1986 and again by the Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation prepared an Environmental Assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of the NAWS project. In early June 2001, the U.S. State Department formally handed over to Canada the NAWS Final Environmental Assessment (EA) and the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

In mid-August, 2001, Canada and Manitoba filed an administrative appeal with the Bureau objecting to its conclusion that impacts were either insignificant or could be mitigated. The basis of the appeal was that under NEPA, a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should have been prepared rather than the cursory Environmental Assessment (EA). It was Canada’s and Manitoba’s opinion based upon legal requirements and precedents, normal procedure, and significance of impacts that the more comprehensive EIS should have been undertaken.

The appeal presented legal arguments, identified normal procedural matters that were not followed, and identified errors of omission and judgement that were made that under-represented the risk to Manitoba waters during the lifetime of the project.

During the appeal, Canada and Manitoba raised significant issues with respect to NAWS project design, the level of pre-treatment, leakage from the pipeline, the probability of line failure, and the degree to which the project increased the risk of biota transfer. For these reasons, Canada and Manitoba requested that the FONSI be withdrawn and that a more detailed EIS be prepared in accordance with NEPA.

Failure of the NAWS project, with subsequent release of invasive species into the Hudson Bay drainage basin, has enormous consequences for Canada.

As a result of this appeal, the Bureau issued a revised FONSI in early September, 2001 that addressed several process issues. However, the Bureau rejected the majority of Canada’s and Manitoba’s appeal and did not address any of the scientific arguments made during the appeal. Manitoba continues to take the position that a full EIS will reveal significant risks to Canadian waters and that no project should proceed without a full EIS that conclusively demonstrates compliance with the Boundary Waters treaty.

Red River Valley Water Supply Study

The Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000 calls for a study of long-term water needs for eastern North Dakota including identification of alternatives to meet those needs. The Act requires that at least one of the alternatives include the interbasin transfer of water from the Missouri River. The Bureau, in partnership with the North Dakota State Water Commission and the Garrison Diversion Conservancy District, has launched the Red River Valley Water Supply Study.

Although Manitoba and Canada are informally participating on the Study’s Technical Team, there are significant concerns regarding the objectivity and comprehensiveness of the proposed study since the two strongest proponents of Garrison diversion project comprise two of the three agencies on the Study Management Team. It is also feared that the inadequate water treatment identified for the NAWS project will be used as a precedent for the movement of potentially much larger volumes of water from the Missouri River to eastern North Dakota.

Devils Lake Outlet

Devils Lake has no natural outlet. Thus, water levels rise and fall with changes in precipitation and the rate of evaporation. Devils Lake, while nominally in the Red River of the North basin, has not discharged water to the Red for about 1,800 years. It is estimated from the archeological record that Devils Lake may have overflowed to the Red River basin about four times in the last 10,000 years or so and that it has been dry about four or five times. This isolation may well have resulted in different biota in Devils Lake in comparison with the Red River and Lake Winnipeg.

While Manitobans feel deep compassion and sympathy for the affected residents in the Devils Lake basin - we know only too well the terrible impacts caused by flooding - the proposed outlet will not relieve the flooding should the current wet cycle persist.

Manitoba has several major concerns with a proposed emergency outlet. The first is that water quality will deteriorate in the Red River due to the high level of total dissolved solids, sulphates and the high salt content of Devils Lake water. Recent water quality modelling done by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers indicates that operation of an outlet from the western region of Devils Lake could cause the International Joint Commission objectives established for water at the international border for total dissolved solids to be exceeded between 20 % to 33 % of the time. This represents a substantial degradation of present water quality in the Manitoba portion of the Red River.

It is not always possible to identify or to predict the consequences of the transfer of unknown biota from Devils Lake to the Red River. While much is known of the large fish species, little is understood about microscopic organisms in either system, such as fish pathogens, viruses, etc.

Of critical concern to Manitoba is the link between the Garrison diversion and the stabilization of water levels in Devils Lake. It is well known that water level stabilization in Devils Lake was one of the original goals of Garrison. Recent public statements by local government officials in the Devils Lake basin, state politicians and other government officials, as well as the North Dakota Congressional Delegation clearly indicate that this remains the long-term goal. While gaining an outlet to Devils Lake is the immediate goal, once water levels recede naturally following the end of the present wet cycle -- as they have historically -- the goal will then be to create an inlet to divert water from the Missouri River. It is important to note that less than 10 years ago, North Dakota was examining proposals to construct an inlet to Devils Lake from the Missouri River because of concerns with low water levels.

There are other, internal solutions available to North Dakota. With or without an outlet, additional flood protection works should be constructed and upper basin storage needs to be pursued with much greater vigour.

The potential for imminent overflow of Devils Lake to the Red River basin is minimal. Considerable time is available for serious and thoughtful examination of all potential options and there is sufficient time to undertake a full and complete environmental assessment of all options.

At the present time, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is undertaking an EIS under NEPA for a federally-sponsored outlet project. It is expected that the EIS will be completed by the fall of 2002 and will form a portion of a report submitted to Congress. Because the EIS is being undertaken in accordance with NEPA, some protection is provided to Manitoba and Canada.

However, North Dakota has indicated its intention to construct a temporary outlet in a manner that would preclude the need for federal funds, federal permits, or an EIS under NEPA. North Dakota has indicated that a temporary outlet would be constructed should additional delays occur with the federally-sponsored outlet project. This unilateral North Dakota outlet project raises considerable concerns since it is being designed in such a way that an EIS would be avoided.

Conclusions

As foreseen by the International Joint Commission in 1977, the invasion of non-native species is having impacts of catastrophic proportions. The most recent estimates of damage by the zebra mussel alone in the Great Lakes region and adjoining waters in the northeast United States is $3 billion (US) each year.

The permanent, large-scale diversion of waters between the Missouri River and Hudson Bay basins represents an unacceptable risk of irreversibly damaging the aquatic resources of Manitoba. It is a risk that can never be reduced to zero, and a risk that has enormous consequences for Manitoba given the value of our water resources, including those of Lake Winnipeg.

The construction of an outlet to Devils Lake, while providing little relief to the present flooding situation, will not only pose similar, potential catastrophic risks to the water resources of Manitoba, but also produce the first link in North Dakota's long-term plan to stabilize water levels with both an outlet and an inlet.