> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.nastycanuck.ca/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Canada’s Water Strategy Needs to Work in a Dry Year
- URL: https://www.nastycanuck.ca/canadas-water-strategy-needs-to-work-in-a-dry-year/
- Published: 2026-10-14T15:42:16.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-14T16:09:45.000Z
- Description: The St. Mary–Milk report puts farm incomes, storage and cross-border commitments on the same page. Canada’s national water strategy needs to deal with all three.
- Author: Nasty Canuck Editorial Desk
- Tags: Explainers, Water Security, Infrastructure, Agriculture, Canada-U.S. Relations

*You can hold a legal share of a river and still struggle to use it. For Canada, water security means making that share dependable while protecting the communities and ecosystems that rely on it.*

On October 13, the International Joint Commission [announced the completion of its five-year St. Mary and Milk Rivers study](https://ijc.org/en/smmr/international-st-mary-and-milk-rivers-study-board-submits-final-report-international-joint). The board submitted its final report on September 30\. The commission will now review the recommendations, with possible further public input before it advises the Canadian and U.S. governments.

This is useful reading while the Canada Water Agency [develops Canada’s first National Water Security Strategy](https://www.canada.ca/en/canada-water-agency/national-water-security-strategy.html). Canadians have [until October 25 to contribute](https://www.canada.ca/en/canada-water-agency/national-water-security-strategy/public-engagement-towards-nwss/nwss-public-engagement-product-p1.html). The Prairie report gives that discussion something concrete to work with: a shared supply, infrastructure that determines who can use it, and Canadian interests that deserve a careful accounting.

## A treaty share still needs a working route

The [1909 Boundary Waters Treaty treats the St. Mary and Milk rivers and their tributaries as one stream for irrigation and power](https://www.ijc.org/en/who/mission/bwt). It provides for equal apportionment between the countries, with prior appropriations and rules allowing different shares from the individual rivers. “Half each” makes a tidy slogan. It leaves out much of the machinery.

Part of that machinery is the U.S. St. Mary Canal, which [diverts water from the St. Mary River into the Milk River system](https://dailymontanan.com/2025/06/26/st-mary-siphon-back-at-work-bringing-water-to-thousands-of-montanans-ahead-of-schedule/). A siphon failure interrupted that route in June 2024; flow was restored in June 2025\. A farmer cannot irrigate with a treaty clause while the delivery system is broken.

The board’s [four principal recommendations](https://ijc.org/en/smmr/international-st-mary-and-milk-rivers-study-board-submits-final-report-international-joint) bring the rules and infrastructure together: rehabilitate the canal, adopt Modified Annual Balancing for water accounting, install control structures on the St. Mary lakes, and develop long-term storage on the Canadian Milk River.

Better accounting can make available flows more useful. Storage gives users a way to keep water for later. For Canadian Milk River users, the [report identifies storage as the constraint on accessing the full entitlement](https://ijc.org/sites/default/files/SMMR%5FFinal%5FReport%5F093026.pdf), comparing on-channel Forks Reservoir with off-channel Miners Coulee storage.

Those are recommendations, not construction approvals. They make a case for examining Canadian storage, with the costs, environmental effects and affected communities included from the start. The concrete will need a budget, too.

## Canada’s side of the ledger needs attention

The report’s economic tables complicate the reassuring language about better water sharing.

For the recommended package **without new Canadian Milk River storage**, it [estimates annual Canadian St. Mary economic losses of C$72 million to C$165 million, alongside roughly C$2 million in Canadian Milk River gains](https://ijc.org/sites/default/files/SMMR%5FFinal%5FReport%5F093026.pdf). These compare modelled scenarios with a baseline that excludes existing deficit-trading arrangements. They are not observed losses or a forecast for next year.

As the United States accesses more of its entitlement, Canadian St. Mary receipts can fall. [Modelled Canadian St. Mary receipts generally remain at or above their entitlement](https://ijc.org/sites/default/files/SMMR%5FFinal%5FReport%5F093026.pdf). We should be precise about that: the report describes an adjustment toward the sharing arrangement, rather than the United States taking Canada’s lawful share.

If implemented, those changes would still leave Canadian water users facing an adjustment. Honour the agreement, certainly. But examine the effects on the farms and communities that have built around the water available to them. Treaty compliance and attention to Canadian livelihoods belong in the same decision.

Adding Forks storage and increased Canadian irrigation demand produces [estimated annual Canadian Milk River benefits of C$19 million to C$33 million](https://ijc.org/sites/default/files/SMMR%5FFinal%5FReport%5F093026.pdf). The report calls its economic treatment simplified and excludes construction, operation and maintenance costs. Those benefits do not establish a net return on the reservoir or erase the St. Mary trade-off.

A promising storage option has to earn its investment case. Canadians should be able to see who gains, who bears the costs and what happens in a dry year before anyone presents the project as a national win.

## The people and the river have to stay in the picture

The study [included Indigenous, public and government advisory groups](https://ijc.org/en/smmr/international-st-mary-and-milk-rivers-study-board-submits-final-report-international-joint). Their participation matters. It does not establish every Nation’s endorsement of every recommendation.

The report itself [distinguishes the IJC process from the Canadian Crown’s duty to consult](https://ijc.org/sites/default/files/SMMR%5FFinal%5FReport%5F093026.pdf). Domestic Indigenous water-rights allocations were outside the study’s scope. Governments cannot treat an advisory-group seat as having answered every question about a proposed project.

The ecological work has limits as well. [Bull trout supplied the study’s aquatic performance indicator; insufficient information and time constrained broader indicators](https://ijc.org/sites/default/files/SMMR%5FFinal%5FReport%5F093026.pdf). That is a reason to carry the remaining work into decisions about flows and storage. The delivery figures need to sit alongside a fuller picture of the river’s health.

## Give the national strategy a job it can do

Ottawa is [seeking input, not consulting on specific legislative or regulatory changes](https://www.canada.ca/en/canada-water-agency/national-water-security-strategy/public-engagement-towards-nwss/nwss-public-engagement-product-p1.html). The proposed strategy is still being developed. It should not be mistaken for an enacted allocation law, a funded infrastructure program or new federal control over every river.

The agency’s [description of shared responsibilities](https://www.canada.ca/en/canada-water-agency/national-water-security-strategy/public-engagement-towards-nwss/nwss-public-engagement-product-p3.html) puts primary responsibility for water within provincial and territorial borders with those governments. Federal roles include international relations, fisheries and pollution prevention. Indigenous governments have their own stewardship roles and responsibilities; municipalities handle delegated work, including many drinking-water and wastewater services.

That division can work, provided the hand-offs work. A national strategy should help governments identify a shared risk, name who has to act and explain how the work will be paid for. Everyone agreeing that water matters is a starting point. It is a poor substitute for an answer when a community needs one.

There is something to build on. The agency [recognizes existing provincial, territorial, Indigenous and municipal strategies, and domestic water boards](https://www.canada.ca/en/canada-water-agency/national-water-security-strategy/public-engagement-towards-nwss/nwss-public-engagement-product-p4.html). Its engagement material also connects [water security with food production, industry, healthy ecosystems and community infrastructure](https://www.canada.ca/en/canada-water-agency/national-water-security-strategy/public-engagement-towards-nwss/nwss-public-engagement-product-p2.html). Reliable supply belongs in those plans as an operating requirement.

## Decide before the shortage

The St. Mary–Milk case suggests a practical job for Canada’s strategy: help make the difficult decisions understandable before water runs short.

For each watershed, Canadians should be able to find out what supply can be relied on in a dry year, which essential needs, rights and ecological requirements must be protected, and who maintains the infrastructure. The full lifetime bill should be visible, along with a way to judge whether the promised service is actually delivered.

Those are tests we should apply to the strategy, not policies Ottawa has already adopted. They leave room for different watersheds to need different answers, while insisting that responsibility stays attached to the decision.

Canadians can submit their views until October 25, 2026\. The agency says it will [review responses and share a summary as strategy development continues](https://www.canada.ca/en/canada-water-agency/national-water-security-strategy/public-engagement-towards-nwss/nwss-public-engagement-product-p4.html). The IJC review is separate; the national engagement deadline is not a deadline on the river recommendations.

Canada can be a dependable neighbour and take its own water security seriously. That means respecting the shared agreement, weighing the Canadian consequences and choosing infrastructure that stands up to scrutiny.

When the next dry year arrives, the people relying on that water should already know the plan.