With mountains, skiing, and good weather it's no surprise that people are moving to the Rocky Mountain States in droves. However, with a rising population comes an increasing demand for more water. And, right now, water is a dwindling resource.

While the situation in the West is not yet at the scale of that in the arid countries of Israel and Palestine, where there have been 21 armed disputes over the Jordan River, there are increasing disputes in the region over water resources. And some of these are requiring federal intervention to resolve.

Last week the U.S. Supreme Court appointed a special master to investigate allegations by Montana that Wyoming is withholding more water than it is entitled to. This latest intervention follows a line of bickering and disagreement between the neighbor states over water rights that have centered on the Tongue and Powder rivers. Montana argues that these are being drained by Wyoming’s excessive water use.

The Tongue and Powder rivers flow through northern Wyoming and southern Montana before draining into the Yellowstone River. And Montana argues that the 1950 Yellowstone River Compact, which allocates each state a share of the water and its tributaries, is being violated by the water usage practices of Wyoming. The state says that the leaching of river water is harming the Montana consumers and farmers who rely it.

In 2004 and 2006 Montana attempted to negotiate with Wyoming to increase the water flows downstream. In 2007, however, when these negotiations proved unsuccessful, Montana sued Wyoming, alleging that the state’s agriculture and energy industries were using too much water and violating the interstate agreement.

But in April 2008 Wyoming’s attorney general, Bruce Salzberg, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit. Salzberg argued that the suit was “fundamentally flawed” as it discussed the use of water from the river basins as well as the rivers themselves. His argument was that the compact solely covers the use of the rivers’ water.

Montana’s argument is that Wyoming is storing water that should be delivered downstream, and is also pumping underground water reserves to irrigate farmland that should feed into the two rivers. Underground water supplies are also pumped extensively as part of the process of coal bed methane production.

However, Wyoming argues that the Yellowstone compact encourages the construction of reservoirs and that depletion of the groundwater is outside the scope of the 1950 agreement. Montana attorney general Mike McGrath argued that Wyoming was giving precedence to its own residents at the expense of downstream farmers in Montana.

This is not the only dispute that is running over water issues between the two states. Each of the states has been trying to gain a greater share of the Bighorn River, another tributary of the Yellowstone to the West. In addition, Montana has drawn up new water quality standards that affect the Tongue and Powder rivers. Wyoming argues the new standards could dampen its energy industry development and this dispute has reached the federal courts as well.

As demand for water increases and water in the arid Western states becomes even scarcer, more of these disputes are likely to crop up. The precise details of laws and regulations are going to be tested, as are the negotiation skills of all the stakeholders. However, just as the early pioneers were known for their rugged individualism, they were also known for their ability to co-operate to "Win the West." And it will be precisely this skill that is needed to prevent the region entering a new "era of water wars."

    Subscribe via RSS