Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gst" data-source="post: 105919" data-attributes="member: 373">Tim here is what I meant by "original" intent of what was behind the building of the Garrison dam from the link I shared. Only later was wildlife and recreation included. My point in sharing that  link was to show that many times the reasons why the taking of private lands are justified changes after they are "taken". What kind of push back would there have been if "recreation" was listed as the purpose behind the taking of private lands? Yet now recreation is a primary point in what people want these "taken" lands managed for. "On December 22, 1944, Congress authorized the Flood Control Act, later named the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program. The primary purpose was for flood control, navigation, irrigation and hydropower, which would be facilitated by the construction of six main stem dams on the Missouri River at Fort Peck, Garrison, Oahe, Big Bend, Fort Randall and Gavins Point.North Dakota was promised over a million acres of irrigation as compensation for the 300,000 acres of prime farmland lost to the permanent flood created as a result of the dams and the lost economic benefit that farmland generated. The state was originally to receive this irrigation from water diverted from Fort Peck Dam in eastern Montana. Initially known as the “Missouri-Souris Project,” it included 1,275,000 acres."- - - Updated - - -So it seems that the representatives in our state legislature did listen to those that shared their views?And now the Federal level representatives are not when lame duck politicians try to pass something?  That seems to support the thought that state management of public lands would be more responsive to we the people .</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA