Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Georgetown Lake Release topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Granite County Commission approves temporary higher releases from Georgetown Lake to help irrigators

5501288 · July 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Faced with drought and competing irrigation claims, the commission approved a one-week increase in outflow from Georgetown Lake to 40 cubic feet per second, with a required payback window later in the irrigation season.

Granite County commissioners voted July 29 to temporarily increase outflows from Georgetown Lake to 40 cubic feet per second for seven days to help irrigators downstream, then require irrigators to restore the volume during the late irrigation season.

The move came after more than two hours of public comment from irrigators, homeowners and state agencies about drought conditions and downstream impacts. Commissioner comment and a motion approved by the board said the increase would be followed by a scheduled payback period near the end of the irrigation season.

Why it matters: Lower- and Upper-Valley irrigators told the commission they were facing imminent shortfalls that could force livestock sales and reduce hay production. Several speakers said limited creek inflows and reservoir storage meant a short-term release from Georgetown was the most practicable way to keep downstream ditches charged until harvest.

The commission unanimously approved a motion to raise releases to 40 cubic feet per second for seven days, with the payback to occur in the last week(s) of the irrigation season so the water would be returned before October 15. The motion was seconded and passed on an “aye” vote; no roll-call of individual commissioners was recorded in the audio transcript.

Who asked for what: Frank Prince of McAllen Ranch and other irrigators said the Lower Valley would “run out of water on the August 8” without extra inflow, adding that East Fork storage and creek carrying capacity limited their options. Brian Clark, president of the Georgetown Lake Homeowners Association, and other lake residents asked the commission to watch lake elevations and noted legal and operational constraints tied to the FERC license and the project’s operating requirements. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks staff and other state officials spoke by phone and said they would work with the county if a short-term modification was authorized.

Legal and operational constraints: Speakers referenced the FERC operating license and the project’s operating regulation (cited in testimony as “Article 402” and related temporary-modification language). Homeowners and attorneys in the meeting pointed to sections of the operating order that limit outflows in summer months unless temporary modification is authorized; they also said FERC has an established complaint process. County officials said they had sent notice to the agencies and that the county has used temporary modifications in past years.

Discussion vs. decision: Commissioners emphasized the drought emergency and their willingness to approve a measured, temporary increase. They also urged irrigators and agencies to coordinate on the timing and payback. Commission discussion said the board expects the payback to be calculated by staff and that irrigators would need to confirm how the water would be accounted for in flow gauges.

Next steps and follow-up: County staff said they will calculate payback volumes and timing and communicate with irrigators and agencies. Commissioners and several irrigators recommended convening an irrigators’ meeting and additional county outreach to try to build consensus before similar actions in future seasons.

Outcome: Motion to increase outflow to 40 CFS for seven days, with the payback to occur in the late irrigation season — approved (motion seconded; vote recorded as “aye”).