For the second time in two years, the House of Commons has united to demand that North Dakota not send potentially contaminated water north from Devils Lake into the Lake Winnipeg system.
However, the water is already flowing north. Despite a 2005 Canada-
U.S. agreement that it would not happen until a filter was installed, North Dakota authorities let the water start to flow June 11 as a way to relieve flood pressure around Devils Lake.
The promised filter has not been installed.
“The North Dakota government turned on the tap at the Devils Lake outlet and water at that point began flowing through Devils Lake to the Sheyenne River, north to the Red River system and on its way to Lake Winnipeg,” Winnipeg New Democrat MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis told the Commons during an emergency late night debate June 14.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
“We are talking about a vast Canadian ecosystem that is under threat.”
It was her motion that triggered the debate and in the end, she joined with Selkirk-Interlake Conservative MP James Bezan to call for an immediate halt to the water flow.
According to their motion, the federal government should work with the Americans “to ensure the principles of the August 2005 joint statement to halt the diversion of water from Devils Lake until adequate environmental and health protection measures, including construction of (an) advanced filter, are respected.”
However, the North Dakota government has said it can wait no longer and is not prepared to spend the money for the filter.
The Canadian and Manitoba governments and environmentalists are concerned that unfiltered water from Devils Lake could introduce parasites, high levels of sulfate and other contaminants not now found in the Lake Winnipeg system. It could undermine the fishing and tourism industries on the lake.
Several MPs said they sympathize with the North Dakota government’s flooding issues, but dumping its problem into Canada’s water system in violation of an earlier agreement is not the answer.
