Oklahoma vs. Texas: Water rights edition

[badger]

Background article here (http://newsok.com/u.s.-supreme-court-to-hear-oklahoma-texas-water-dispute/article/3791866) (via NewsOK.com)

There's a four-state water rights dealio involving the Red River. States are Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas. Three of these states agree that water within the state boundaries of Oklahoma belong to Oklahoma.

Guess which state disagrees. :mack: Hook em

The fight is now in the Supreme Court. Thoughts?

[BermudaSooner]

From what I read this morning, seems like it hinges on whether it is implied that you CAN'T go across border to get your water, or whether the lack of wording expressly saying that you can't go across border therefore gives you rights to. Sounds like Texas has a difficult case to win.

[Curly Bill]

I live in Texas and I'm willing to say if we have to go without water down here, we still don't have any rights to water from Oklahoma.

[badger]

Sounds like Texas has a difficult case to win.

They're try though, because north Texas expanded far beyond its local resources could handle, from the sound of it, especially during a drought.

If they need water that badly, perhaps they should get it from the Gulf of Mexico, since they aren't as landlocked as us

[okie52]

J C watts made a bad political mistake when he tried to represent Texas in this argument.

I believe tribal rights will also be involved...that will make it very difficult for TX.

[yermom]

They're try though, because north Texas expanded far beyond its local resources could handle, from the sound of it, especially during a drought.

If they need water that badly, perhaps they should get it from the Gulf of Mexico, since they aren't as landlocked as us

i don't think the gulf helps too much...

[radio]

Pray to god they dont **** ya'll like they did us here in New Mexico.

[badger]

i don't think the gulf helps too much...
It amazes me that coastal states haven't found a way to use saltwater yet with how much there is of it, compared with fresh water.

De-salt the water some how and use it. If you're worried about how much you've been polluting it over the years, clean it up a bit first.


Pray to god they dont **** ya'll like they did us here in New Mexico.

They effed New Mexico? Do share!

[KantoSooner]

It's all a matter of cost, Badger. It costs money to desalinate sea water and then you have to figure out how to dispose of the brine without creating a super salty chunk of either land or ocean. Even places like Singapore that are relatively rich have gone the route of purifying sewage rather than desalination. It's cheaper. And, I might add, something I'd like to see Texas forced into. It would be one more reason to laugh. Not with them, but at them.

[Fraggle145]

The water they want comes from the Kiamichi drainage. If you have ever been there this is some of the cleanest water you'll find.

If Oklahoma loses on this one it will suck mightily for OK's water resources and future development.

I happen to know probably just enough about this to make an *** out of myself since I have been following the story for some time (the past 6 yrs). The problem is that the Red River (especially in the western tributaries) including its largest impoundment Lake Texoma is all salty. too salty to be used for agriculture or drinking. They should desalinate that first. They want the Kiamichi water because they wont have to treat it. Just as an aside - beyond just being clean water this site maintains most of the native freshwater mussel beds in Oklahoma.

This is what the river has looked like the past 2 summers not much water to spare it would seem...

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/p480x480/563140_576608945690945_831753412_n.jpg

[cleller]

Just keep up those Dust Bowl jokes you Texas brush poppers.

If you've ever been to the beautiful Beaver Bends/ Broken Bow area, its a little depressing. 75% of the cars are from Texas.

[Fraggle145]

More background info: http://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/tarrant-regional-water-district-v-herrmann/

[Fraggle145]

I hope that this happens is Texas wins:
Texas might have to show that it can't currently get its share of the excess water within its boundaries

Because they can. It will just be cheaper to take ours. **** them.

[badger]

Because they can. It will just be cheaper to take ours. **** them.

I thought that was their main argument, that none of the water was within their state boundaries?

[KantoSooner]

Hey Fraggle, are those mussels edible? Steam 'em with japanese sake, butter, garlic and herbs. Soak up the juice with crusty french bread.
Repeat as needed for happiness to ensue.

[badger]

I just don't see the Supreme Court siding with Texas on this one, because state borders have to mean something. If the state is sharing a river via a border that's one thing, but in this case, the river is within Oklahoma's state boundaries.

I can see why so many states support Oklahoma on this. water is becoming a very valuable resource. when new mex gov richardson suggested having a "water sharing" program because the Great Lakes states (like Wisconsin) were "awash" in water, you can imagine how infuriated that made that area, as it isn't just a drinking and lawn watering source, but also a tourism and natural beautification source (fishing, anyone?). During a previous suggestion by someone else during a political debate that Great Lake water be shared with more parched, less wet states, a Michigan leader counter-suggested that their national guard would stand at their state border to prevent it, because, after all, they think they're damn special because you can see their state outline from space or some sh!t.

Another key in Oklahoma's favor (take THAT, states that previously sent tribes on the Trail of Tears!) is tribal water rights. I don't recall another presidential regime that focused so much on tribal rights as the Obama administration (to his credit), inviting them to the White House on multiple occasions. It isn't just the state's water, it's the tribe's water too (as those endless TV ads during OU sporting events remind us) and the tribes DGAS if Fort Worth residents can't fill their backyard swimming pools, green up their plushie lawns or have a perfectly manicured green on hole 18 at the country club.

Even if the Supreme Court rules in Oklahoma's favor, though, the water fight is far from over. It's time for states to look for new solutions to this growing problem... you know, ones that don't include "pray for rain," and "sue Oklahoma."

[radio]

[They effed New Mexico? Do share![/QUOTE]

The Pecos River Compact and The Rio Grande Compact. http://uttoncenter.unm.edu/pdfs/tx%20nm%20paskus%20final-3-4-13.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/27/us/new-mexico-farmers-push-to-be-made-a-priority-in-drought.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Fexas has won cases that make NM send X amount of water each year. Which was based on wet years. In recent years the drought has made the Canadian, Pecos and Rio Grande and their Resivoirs puddles.

It has gotten so bad that the State Engineer has bought up ground water rights and put in pumps and pipes to flow the water into the river. To satisfy the delivery requirements.

This is retarded. I have been down on the river at a time when no water was coming down from Sumner. One of those wells was pumping in the river. The water only made it about three miles before it was dry.

It boils down to two things good lawyers and deep pockets.

I wont get into the issues of riparian vs. prior appropriation.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Can we just pee in it first THEN send it to Texas?

[badger]

Fexas has won cases that make NM send X amount of water each year. Which was based on wet years. In recent years the drought has made the Canadian, Pecos and Rio Grande and their Resivoirs puddles.

What a mess. Makes me less confident that Oklahoma is a shoo-in to win this suit.

However, Okla does still have past judgements at lower courts, tribal support, support from the other two in the compact (they probably realize Texas will come after them next if successful against Okla) and tribal support. Did New Mex have any of those?

[KantoSooner]

Badger, the greatest 'Indian' president of all time? Wait for it. I love this.

Richard Milhous Nixon. Hands down. Personally worked to pass the enabling legislation and reforming the BIA that has facilitated Tribal Sovereignty which is the foundation of tribal rights vs. the states and the rock on which tribal management of their own affairs has been based.
Before Nixon, policies toward Indians essentially ran with metronomic tedium between extermination (directly or through 'removal') and assimilation.

Since that time, we've had the glad handed condescension of Jimmy Carter, the misguided congenial racism of Ronnie Reagan, The blank stares of La Familia Bush and the complete indifference of Billy Clinton. Compared to them, yes, Obama is at least engaged and mildly positive.

[badger]

I'm 1/32, registered, and all that jazz. I love tribal rights much like I love my tribe... even if I despise the tribal politics part of it.

UPDATE on the court stuff: Some fun quotes:


"This clause, the one that you rely on, is kind of sketchy, isn't it? Doesn't say how they're going to get it, if they're going to pay for it. There's a lot to be filled in," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said to Charles Rothfeld, the lawyer representing the Texas district.


Justice Samuel Alito called Texas' aggressive language "very striking. I mean, it sounds like they are going to send in the National Guard or the Texas Rangers."

LOL at this follow-up quote:

Rothfeld sought to assure Alito on that point. "Oklahoma's brief suggests that the Texas Rangers are going to descend on Tulsa and seize the water. That is not what is contemplated," Rothfeld said.

HELP! THEY'RE GOING TO SEND THIS GUY TO TULSA!
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a380/thujone/WS5.jpg
(credit the shaggy dick drawer for that image)

On a more serious note:

The Obama administration is backing the Texas district at the Supreme Court, saying Oklahoma may not categorically prohibit Texas water users from obtaining water in Oklahoma. But the administration takes no position on whether the Texans ultimately should get the water they are seeking in this case.

I take back the nice things I said earlier about Obama. **** OSAMA HUSSEIN BARRY SORETORO :mad:

[KantoSooner]

I could be very wrong, but any attorney who'd make the first argument, that no Oklahoma water could ever be sold sold for transportation to Texas would have to be painfully stupid.
I don't see the administration of supporting Texas if they take no position regarding whether Texas should get that particular water. I mean, that's the point of the suit, no?

[okie52]

I wouldn't have a problem with OK selling "excess" water to Texas...that would just make sense. But it shouldn't be bound to deliver X amount of water to TX regardless of the status of OKs water supply.

[radio]

However, Okla does still have past judgements at lower courts, tribal support, support from the other two in the compact (they probably realize Texas will come after them next if successful against Okla) and tribal support. Did New Mex have any of those?

I dont think so on the judgements. But not sure.

The Pueblo Indians are not really affected because they settled in the hills around the headwaters and have first rights.