Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AndyA

(16,993 posts)
2. The point is, Oklahoma may not always have more water than it needs.
Fri Apr 26, 2013, 10:57 AM
Apr 2013

If an agreement is reached, Oklahoma will be expected to supply water to Texas regardless of how badly it's needed here.

Many cities were on water rationing last summer, due to shortages, and even Tulsa asked residents to voluntarily conserve, as it was approaching maximum pumping capacity. If hot summer weather continues or worsens, there won't be any extra water to spare.

Since Oklahoma can't be assured that it will be able to supply Texas with water in the years to come, I think it makes sense to not make a deal.

I know things are bad in Texas, I spent most of last summer in the DFW area, and it was awful. Not sure what the solution is, but I don't think committing to something that possibly can't be fulfilled even in the short term is the answer. I know a lot of water supplies in parts of the state are dangerously low, and recent rains haven't done enough to raise the levels, which likely means shortages in a few months unless we have a cooler/wetter than normal summer, which isn't in the forecast.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Oklahoma»The Supreme Court Will De...»Reply #2