Water-bottling plant puts risk on neighbors

In my opinion, if the Montana Artesian Water Company is allowed to commence operations, many wells on the inter-connected shallow, intermediate and deep aquifers will eventually go dry. Because this will occur gradually over years and decades, it may be difficult to see the company’s impending pumping of the deep aquifer as a critical and pressing issue. The issue, however, is brought into jarring and painful focus by examining the potential drilling cost of $5,100 to $6,800 per new well and the cumulative drilling costs to the Flathead Valley in the tens of millions of dollars.

When the Montana Artesian Water Company is at full production 24 hours a day and seven days per week, it will pump water from the aquifer faster than it can be replenished. As documented in the water permit application, a hydrologist for the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation estimated drawdowns of 20.5 feet and “in excess of” 1 foot over five years based on a modeling solution for wells a quarter of a mile and seven miles from the bottling plant. Using those figures, one might think wells 3 1/2 miles away from Montana Artesian Water Company would be drawn down “in excess of” 10 feet every five years. That may be so, but modeling calculations are more complex than that; so that extrapolation should be taken as a convenient “more or less” estimate.

The accuracy of DNRC’s drawdown model is certainly debatable. The drawdown may actually be greater over a shorter time span because studies have indicated the shallow aquifers to the east of MAWC are hydraulically connected to the deep aquifer and are important to its recharge. Using a somewhat different model, the Creston Fish Hatchery — about 3 miles from the proposed plant — estimates its two deep wells will drop 20 feet in one year.

No one can predict when any given well will go dry. It depends on well depth, the depth of the pump, water pressure, distance from the plant, the contour of the aquifer, the time of year, etc. It is worth noting there has been a long-term decline in the water level throughout the aquifer. This was reported by hydrologist John LaFave in February 2001. He stated it “is not serious at this time. It warrants continual monitoring.” That, of course, was 16 years and more than 540 new wells ago.

Lew Weaver, the current owner of the Montana Artesian Water Company, may initially intend to operate the bottling plant below maximum capacity with minimum impact on the aquifer and the water wells of the Flathead Valley, but consider that if the DNRC grants the water rights provided for in the application, those rights are granted forever, regardless of the impact over the years and decades to Flathead Valley well owners. Those water rights may be sold or passed on to the original owner’s estate and heirs. Large multinational companies are known to offer tens of millions of dollars for such water rights and the property to which they exist. Can anyone reasonably be expected to turn down an offer for land and water rights that far surpasses any they would receive for farmland? Even if Mr. Weaver holds out against reaping the greatest possible profit, his land and water rights will eventually pass to his estate or heirs. Keep in mind that an estate has a fiduciary duty to maximize the value of the estate. If the farm is to pass through to Mr. Weaver’s heirs, they may wish to operate the Montana Artesian Water Company at full capacity or to sell the land and water rights to Coca Cola, Pepsi, Nestle or any of the other large bottlers.

Imagine you are a well owner who has been enjoying running water for three or five or 10 years after MAWC started operating at full capacity when suddenly the water stops flowing. You call drilling companies and are told they generally cannot deepen an existing well but must drill a new well to reach water. The cost is a minimum of $34 per foot, and because the water table is steadily dropping, it would be prudent to drill down 150 to 200 feet or more, depending on the depth of the dry well, for a total cost of $5,100 to $6,800. You are also told hundreds of other wells have gone dry around the same time as yours, and you will have to wait months for your new well to be drilled.

Now you are without running water for bathing and cleaning for a considerable period. To continue living in your home you buy an above ground cistern. Then you pay for water to be delivered. If it is winter you purchase a stock tank heater. If you are fortunate you can run a hose into the house; otherwise you will be toting 40-pound buckets of water daily. You will, however, have the satisfaction of replicating the “good old days” when your ancestors bathed by heating water on the range or wood-burning stove and then lugging it to the tub. And while you are lounging in your tub, you can picture property values falling faster than the water table.

Here is the kicker: the Montana Artesian Water Company’s Aquifer Test Report of Aug. 10, 2015 states there are 8,240 wells drilled into the shallow, intermediate and deep aquifers, of which only 2,089 have been registered with the DNRC. In other words, should their wells go dry, 6,151 well owners (or 75 percent) would have no water rights and no legal standing versus the Montana Artesian Water Company — even though these well owners are no less affected by the lack of clean, clear water for drinking and washing.

As the years and decades pass by, 100 new wells must be drilled, eventually 500 new wells are drilled, and before long 1,000 new wells have been drilled. The collective cost for 1,000 new wells to the well owners on the aquifer at a rate of $5,100 to $6,800 per well is $5,100,000 to $6,800,000! (Those are conservative estimates because as wells go dry, the law of supply and demand will increase the drilling rate due to the many wells affected versus the limited number of well drillers available — not to mention inflation.) Keep in mind 1,000 dry wells is 12 percent of the total wells currently on the aquifer. The collective cost of 3,000 new wells, or 36 percent, over the years? $15,300,000 to $20,400,000. The collective cost of 5,000 new wells, or 61 percent, over the decades? $35,700,000 to $47,600,000. It is doubtful very many residential wells were drilled any deeper than necessary in the day, so only the deepest wells will be spared going dry over time.

Please understand that the DNRC does not consider dry wells and the expense of drilling new wells to be an adverse effect, according to their definition of adverse. As long as water is available, regardless of the cost, there is no “legal” adverse effect to well owners!

The DNRC’s Prelimin-ary Determination to Grant Permit contains the following language: “The Applicant has the ability to regulate the volume of water diverted during times of water shortage so that the water rights of prior applicants may be satisfied. During times of water shortage, they will initially reduce production 50 percent. If the reduction in production is not enough, the Applicant has the ability to cease diversion altogether until water becomes available.”

This language puts the regulation of the bottling plant’s water diversion solely in the hands of ... Mr. Weaver! Does anyone seriously believe he will curtail or cease pumping under any circumstances? After all the money he has (and will) put into constructing and permitting the bottling plant, arranging for shipping and paying for shelf space in retail outlets, will he voluntarily reduce his bottling income and the potential sales value of the land, water rights and bottling plant by limiting production? Moreover, the language of this clause provides no specific criteria as to what a “water shortage” constitutes, nor does it define what is meant by “until water becomes available.” In the world of laws and courts, lawyers can have a field day with the countless interpretations of these terms.

On the other hand, if Mr. Weaver or his heirs sell the water rights to a major player in the water-bottling industry before wells start going dry, the purchasing corporation will need to maintain production to offset the tens of millions of dollars they will have paid for the land and water rights. Besides, whoever owns the Montana Artesian Water Company will always argue that “water shortages” are due to causes other than the bottling plant; and it will be up to registered well owners to spend even more money to hire attorneys, hydrologists and other experts to prove otherwise.

Those well owners who have not registered their wells with DNRC should do so now, so they may have legal standing when any other water-rights issues arise in the future. In the meantime, it is in all well owners’ best interests to stand together by supporting — financially and otherwise — Water for Flathead’s Future, which is fighting for everyone’s water rights.

Brant is a resident of Bigfork.