PRO
The Clean Water Act as it is called is an amalgamation of prior acts that were extensively overhauled and amended in 1972. Then President Nixon’s attempted veto of the Act was overridden by an overwhelming bipartisan majority. It was time. Scenes of the Cuyahoga River on fire, the stench of the Delaware River, and the condition of the Potomac (where doctors recommended tetanus shots for anyone coming into contact with the river), prompted a national response.
Fast forward a generation. The Cuyahoga now boasts over sixty species of fish and is safe for “primary contact,” the Delaware hosts fishing and boating, and fish and wildlife have rebounded on the Potomac with the appearance of dolphins in its lower reaches.
Bipartisan action and common sense prevailed. Today, we see cuts to Clean Water but I have confidence clean water and clean air are positives for most people.
CONS
Last week, I talked about the Columbia River and the current administration’s unprovoked fight with Canada demonstrated how politics and politicians can really muck up effective water planning. Well, the current political climate isn’t the only time smart water usage and common sense were replaced by political dogma.
Take the Red River, that originates in the arid Texas panhandle, serves as the boundary between Oklahoma and Texas, and then flows through Arkansas and Louisiana to the Mississippi River. Its name is derived from the geology it flows through picking up a heavy load of sodium chloride (salt). By the time it reached the Oklahoma/Texas border, its usefulness as a source of freshwater is compromised.
In contrast, the rivers in southeast Oklahoma contribute vast quantities of clean freshwater diluting much of the salt load by the time the river enters Arkansas and Louisiana. No harm no foul, unless you’re Texas, whose border lies entirely within this impaired section of the river known as Reach II of the Red River Compact, an agreement between the four states that share the river. In Reach II, five subbasins are defined, each with different rights to access and use water. Two of the five subbasins are entirely within Texas and two are in Oklahoma (and a small area of Arkansas. Between them is the mainstem area known as Subbasin 5, in which Oklahoma and Texas have equal rights to.
Curiously, Oklahoma has abundant water in the Southeast corner of the state with annual precipitation double to triple of what Texas and western Oklahoma receives. On average 32 million acre feet of water flow unused out of Oklahoma a year. For perspective, the Colorado River that supplies the seven western states including the cities of Denver, Phoenix, Vegas, Los Angeles, San Diego, and the country of Mexico averages 13 million acre feet, or about a third of what flows unused out of Oklahoma. Unless someone thinks Oklahoma will somehow gain a dozen cities the size of Los Angeles, the state would never use that amount. And, would Oklahoman’s want all those city people?
Enter North Texas, Dallas Fort Worth. A dozen years ago, they wished to tap Texas’ portion of the Red River just before the freshwater rivers in Oklahoma dump into the impaired Red River, after and below all uses in Oklahoma. And to boot, they would pay Oklahoma (and the local tribes) handsomely for that right. Seems like a no-brainer, right?
Wrong. Enter politics and football. Oklahoman politicians confided that they knew it made perfect sense to sell an unused asset to defray massive state budget shortfalls, but they could not be seen to “give away Oklahoma water to Texans” else they would not be re-elected. Why the reluctance? Two reasons repeatedly resounded: 1) “we need the water for the future”; and 2) “they take our quarterbacks and best players and now want our water.”
You can’t save water of that magnitude for future years. There’s that pesky concept of gravity. The water is going to flow out of state. And, as for football, well that at least has a little logic. Just a little.
More than a dozen years later, water and those unused dollars continue to flow wasted to the Gulf of Mexico, or America, or whatever it’s called beyond the twelve-mile limit.
Again, wise water management is best left to the professionals, not politicians.
In fairness, please forgive my slant. I was counsel for the Texas interests on this project and case from its inception through the U.S. Supreme Court.