Trump’s thinking about a ‘very large tap’ in Canada, part of the water crisis, researchers say

The division of water between Canada and the United States has long been a disputed question.

2005, former Prime Minister Alberta Peter Lougheed warned Division of Canadian water supply With the United States, suggesting that the most important resource of Albert was water, not oil and gas.

“We should communicate very quickly with the United States how solid we are,” Lougheed said.

Lougheed’s concern did not appear in the vacuum. He came in the context of a long history of the proposal for the division of water, some more radical than others.

Take the North American Water and Energy Federation (Nawapa), a massive, abandoned engineering megaproject that aimed to “replace” the continent, diverting water from Rijeka on Alaska via Canada to the United States in the northern Montani via Rocky Mountain.

These suggestions come and go, even if Some researchers You see Nawapa as some of the “zombies” of the project, always re -appearing, never dead. The actual history of the water division between the US and Canada was much less dramatic-rowing and bureaucratic, managed through institutions, committees and contracts.

So when Donald Trump, as a Republican presidential candidate, made comments In September 2024. There is a “very large faucet” that could be turned on so that water from Canada could help with American water shortages, the ears of Canadian hydologists appeared.

“There is a little inflammatory nature in it,” said prof. Tricia Stadnyk, Canadian research president of hydrological modeling with Schulich School of the University of Calgary.

“However, I think there is a demonstrated history that he is … Maybe the right word is” interested “through the water of Canada.”

For water experts, there is concern that climate change and switching of US policies can put pressure on long -standing cross -border water.

And centuries -old infrastructure does not help in things.

Take, for example, failed siphons in Montana, where water is diverted from the St. Mary through the northern Montana and through the southern Albete, supplying basic water to some Canadian agricultural operators and the Albert community near the border. Repair on these siphons is now facing an American federal pause of financing according to the executive order.

John Pomeroy, a university scientist at Saskatchewan Water, said he was very concerned about where this question goes for three reasons.

First, the water management regiments in North America do not meet the requirements they need for sustainable water supply and management of ecosystems and people, he said.

“Secondly, fast climate change, which bring greater extremes of droughts and floods and loss of snow and glaciers in high mountains, changes the basic calculation on which we base water management,” Pomeroy said.

“Third, the idea of ​​a conflict, that one country can take the water resources of another country and reound it to its means. …

“Let’s overthrow a century of cooperation to solve these problems. When these three are gathering, you can then see ingredients for a continental disaster.”

Inclusion of taps

This question has always been a political, economic and environmental challenge, said Peter Gleick, a climate scientist and co -founder of the Pacific Institute, a California research organization focusing on water.

“The new administration has set several challenges related to the US-Canade Relations, tariffs, all kinds of challenges that are a bit bizarre,” Gleick said.

“As far as I know, Water has not yet got into a conversation on the American side … but who knows what strange ideas he could get out of Washington now that he’s back to power.”

Trump has a “strange fascination” with water, in Gleck’s opinion, which goes beyond huge taps and valves, including his long fascination with California’s water policy.

In the midst of recent fires in Los Angeles, Trump blamed the California government Gavin News for escalating Blazes, speaking to USMAX from Newsmax, from Newsmax that during his first administration he “requested” the governor accepted “water coming from the north water.”

“From a trip to Canada, and you know, north. It goes down through Los Angeles … huge quantities come out of the mountains, from Setina,” Trump said in January. “Even without it, even during the summer, it’s a natural flow of water. They would have so much water that they wouldn’t know what to do with it. You would never regret it.”

The idea that water can be diverted from Canada to Los Angeles is technically very expensive and that it would be very difficult for an engineer, Pomeroy said. There are also big questions with invasive species and habitats on the way.

“I think you see these wild speculations with Trump, but they reflect the wider gratitude that they are now … lacking waters in many regions, including southwest, and approaches the water crisis in the southern big plains,” Pomeroy said.

“At the same time, climate changes continue to heat Canada faster than the rest of the world. And our summers become a dryer, and this will impose serious water control limits, only to manage their own water resources.”

The involvement of “very large tap” is not so simple. And some, including Gleick, do not see that water is put on a table in trade negotiations.

For years, there have been tensions that have been fluttering because of water, but joint agreements have long ensured that both countries have been fairly managing water and avoiding problems, he said.

To be sure, these commissions cut their jobs.

Wild card? To get Trump in his head that he really wants Canadian water, Gleick said.

“Then, it becomes a political question. And then the question is how is it managed?” he said.

Cross -border cooperation

Alberta currently has a case study in cross -border water relations.

Last summer, two centuries-old siphon located east of Glacier National Park near Rafal Canada-US. These siphons were a critical component of the Milk River project, which leads water from the St. Mary via North Montana and through the southern Alberta.

This diversion follows its history to 1909. The water border contract Between Canada and the United States and under it, they will now have to send water to Canada.

Given the natural flow of the milk river, the city of Milk River, Alta., Located near the United States border, was forced to ban all the irrelevant use of water. At that time, the mayor of the small community called “a dry city – literally”.

Remedial works on these siphons are ongoing, although he recently hit the blockade of the road because of “releasing American energy” Executive command issued Trump administration.

Jennifer Patrick, Head of the Milk River Committee Committee, said the repairs still last thanks to the loan of the Montana State, but the federal money is frozen due to the executive command.

Patrick said she believed that a break was part of a wide assessment of US government consumption in several infrastructure projects. Other regional water projects, which provide drinking water with rural areas, were also caught in examination.

“Our financing has been caught in this, but we are pretty sure that the interior department will take him through the review process and look at how we spend money,” Patrick said. “It’s a good project.”

Infrastructure is important to farmers on both sides of the border, and the Albert government says she was in close contact with the City of Milk River, Water Co-Oops and agricultural operators to help them in any possible way.

During a recent interview with Finance Minister Albert Nate Horner on Calgary EyeopenerHorner discussed the possibilities of investment and strategic advantages that could be taken away by a new Crown corporation that would oversee the heritage fund, Alberta’s Rainy Day.

“I try to think about the things that are important to us we go forward in the coming decades,” Horner said.

“I’m thinking about … water challenges in the country south of us, our capabilities with fresh water, freshwater infrastructure, such things.”

His office later explained that water infrastructure is not an active investment policy. However, the newly established corporation, the length of the Arm’s Gewsy Heritage Fund Corporation, could consider directing investment in the field of water infrastructure if he chooses it, said a spokesman.

However, the repair will be carefully observed by the Canadians whose life means rely on it. And this is emblematic for some Canadian researchers of water on the importance of being aware that the aging of infrastructure and moving climate pressures could put pressure on long -standing contracts.

“None of these contracts are really immune from reopening and discussing in these very dynamic times, where water supplies are changing due to floods and droughts, and also that the infrastructure that has been put into management of many diversions or the extinction of aging old,” said, “he said Stadnyk, Canadian research chairman of hydrological modeling.

With the climatic changes that make Canada warmer and drier, water management becomes even harder. Pomeroy, a scientist at Saskatchewan Water, said the glaciers reduce and grow water requirements, Canada must take on a stronger role in monitoring and managing water, especially since the pressure on the American approach does not disappear – no matter who is in power.

“It will be a huge challenge to go forward … We have to stick to the water firmly, that Canadian water remains in Canada,” he said.