For more than three decades, the State of Missouri has engaged in a water war with North Dakota. During that time, Missouri’s Congressional delegation, our Governor and our Attorney General – regardless of party – have worked together to protect our water.
Missouri has always been vigilant about protecting the water in the Missouri River. As a young assistant attorney general 30 years ago, I witnessed the state, through legislation and litigation, vigorously oppose North Dakota projects diverting water away from the Missouri River. It was a hard fought battle then, and it remains one now.
Congress recently approved a measure that would provide $50 million dollars to North Dakota to complete a project that will move water out of the Missouri River basin. This means federal tax dollars will divert Missouri River water away from the lower Missouri River basin to the Red River basin, which flows into Canada.
Reductions in the amount of water available downstream will harm Missouri agriculture, utilities, public water supplies, power plants, navigation and the greater inland waterway system. Lower releases for downstream uses can also result in increased water temperature, diminished water quality and impacts to Missouri fish and wildlife.
More than a year ago, Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe flagged this $50 million project, known as the Eastern North Dakota Alternate Water Supply Project. In September 2025, Kehoe sent a letter to North Dakota Senator John Hoeven, clearly communicating Missouri’s ongoing adamant opposition to any diversions of water out of the Missouri River basin.
We’ve seen what has happened out West where rivers have been diverted, depleted and diminished. The North Dakota diversions are the first, but they almost certainly won’t be the last.
Missouri and its Congressional delegation have a long history of opposing North Dakota’s water diversion projects because the projects reduce water available for us as a downstream state and set a dangerous precedent. We must ensure this attractive target is not exploited by interests outside the basin.
Missouri’s opposition to the overall North Dakota project is a practical necessity to defend the interests of Missourians. The massive federal reservoirs on the Missouri River store the largest volume of water of any river system in the country. In times of drought, the federal government reduces downstream releases based on the amount of water stored in upstream reservoirs. Because of the current drought, the Corps of Engineers is releasing less water from the reservoirs in the winter, and Missouri power plants have had difficulty withdrawing cooling water from the river. This seriously threatens the reliability of Missouri’s electric grid.
The water stored in the Missouri River system has already been substantially depleted due to existing in-basin uses. The ENDAWS project will only increase the frequency and magnitude of these drought restrictions, reducing flow support to the lower Missouri River. If projects like the North Dakota diversions are allowed to move forward unchecked, other projects will follow, and the Missouri River will end up like the Colorado.
Nearly 25 years ago, U.S. Senator Kit Bond addressed the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, saying that disputes regarding management of the Missouri River are complex, but the political problem is quite simple. Eight states want the river managed to support their needs with little regard to how this impacts the other states in the river basin.
Missouri must oppose any federal funding or other actions that divert water from the Missouri River, and work with members from Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska to seek protections resulting in a fair balance between the upper and lower basin. We want to prevent future diversion projects that may be on a larger scale than what North Dakota is currently building with federal support.
Missouri has a strong Congressional delegation, and we thank Congressman Sam Graves for the leadership he provides at a national level as Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. He, Senator Kit Bond and Senator Roy Blunt protected Missouri’s interests by championing Missouri River issues for decades.
But our delegation can’t do it alone. We need Congressional champions in other lower-basin states to join Missouri in protecting the interests of downstream states.
Director of the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. His legal career has spanned three decades, including serving as a former state senator and assistant attorney general.
