I stopped by this thread, hoping to see something about the Norman water supply issues. I guess I got to the wrong thread. LOL

I stopped by this thread, hoping to see something about the Norman water supply issues. I guess I got to the wrong thread. LOL

No wonder. There are no great solutions. What if the cost to build a pipeline to Hugo Lake is, let's guess, $500 million? Would Norman residents want to raise city sales tax by a penny or two to pay for it? Is Hugo Lake really big enough?

Good question, others think so:
Controversy over water sales

In recent years Hugo Lake has been in the middle of a controversy regarding out-of-state water sales between Texas and Oklahoma. The city of Hugo had sought to sell water to the growing suburbs of Dallas that need new sources of water to pay debts related to the lake. Irving, Texas has entered negotiations with the Hugo to obtain a supply of fresh water by building a pipeline and purchasing excess water from Hugo Lake. In 2002 the Oklahoma state legislature passed a moratorium on water sales outside the state. Hugo sued the state in federal court citing that the state's moratorium is unconstitutional.[5]

That was an article found in Wikipedia.....

As to being big enough? How big does it need to be especially if it is to add to Thunderbird, not replace. Thunderbird is about 5,400 acres, Hugo is 13,200 acres.

Up the stream from Lake Hugo is Lake Sardis as part of the same drainage basin on the Kiamichi River. It is even larger than Hugo:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/USACE_Sardis_Lake_and_Dam.jpg

This singular river basin has large capacity that is already being sought after by Texas and Oklahoma City metro. But there are complications as this article from the New York Times points out....

When the Choctaw did have reservations, their land covered virtually all of southeastern Oklahoma and was watered by the Kiamichi River, whose tributary, Jackfork Creek, was impounded by the Sardis Dam in 1982. The tribes’ goals are to have some ownership and control over the water, to keep as much water as possible in the lake and to enhance southeastern Oklahoma’s recreational industry.

And, assuming the water is valuable, they want to share in the profits from selling or leasing it.

That prospect is unsettling for places that could face water shortages, like Oklahoma City and suburbs like Edmond, whose City Council has already voted to issue $102.5 million in bonds to help bring Sardis Lake water 110 miles north, to the taps of new homes. It is even more unsettling in the Southwest, where irrigated agriculture and industries consume most of the available water.

No wonder. There are no great solutions. What if the cost to build a pipeline to Hugo Lake is, let's guess, $500 million? Would Norman residents want to raise city sales tax by a penny or two to pay for it? Is Hugo Lake really big enough?

I would like to see a very large pipeline built from the lakes in south eastern OK to the central Oklahoma area with the water going to participating municipalities, including Norman.

When a major job expansion occurs all of central Oklahoma sees growth. I believe we need to look at this as a regional project with the cost and benefits shared by many.

I believe that Norman voters would pass a sales tax increase for water expansion (and for commuter rail). Because Norman has so many visitors spending money in Norman I would be in favor of a sales tax increase to cover at least part of the projects cost.

Up the stream from Lake Hugo is Lake Sardis as part of the same drainage basin on the Kiamichi River. It is even larger than Hugo:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/USACE_Sardis_Lake_and_Dam.jpg

This singular river basin has large capacity that is already being sought after by Texas and Oklahoma City metro. But there are complications as this article from the New York Times points out....

When the Choctaw did have reservations, their land covered virtually all of southeastern Oklahoma and was watered by the Kiamichi River, whose tributary, Jackfork Creek, was impounded by the Sardis Dam in 1982. The tribes’ goals are to have some ownership and control over the water, to keep as much water as possible in the lake and to enhance southeastern Oklahoma’s recreational industry.

And, assuming the water is valuable, they want to share in the profits from selling or leasing it.

That prospect is unsettling for places that could face water shortages, like Oklahoma City and suburbs like Edmond, whose City Council has already voted to issue $102.5 million in bonds to help bring Sardis Lake water 110 miles north, to the taps of new homes. It is even more unsettling in the Southwest, where irrigated agriculture and industries consume most of the available water.

Assuming we decided to build a pipeline to SE Oklahoma would we be in for a long court battle with the Choctaw’s over the water?
Hopefully they would be more agreeable to sell to people in their own home state than to out of state cities.

But it would be a wise move on our part to act on this issue ASAP, before an agreement is reached with any of the Texas cities making this source of water no longer available to us!

Went to Lake Thunderbird today (the western side, under the Alameda bridge). I'm still relatively new to the area, but it was shocking to see how low it was. Pretty depressing, actually. Don't mind the huge dead fish... I thought it was worth documenting, lol.

3236
3237
3238
3239
3241
3242

Reminds me of early summer 2006.

Perhaps this may not be as expensive or difficult as we think. The 5' pipe that comes to Lake Draper from Atoka Res. has recently been repaired. That is the reason Draper was empty for more than a year. In SE Ok lakes Atoka, Sardis, & Hugo form a triangle - with Atoka the farthest west in the center. It is only 50 miles from lake Hugo to Atoka, and about the same from Lake Sardis to Atoka. Pipe lines could be built from each of these lakes to Atoka. And from Draper to Thunderbird. In this manner, the drain on any one lake would be less, the cost for construction less. This COMBINED with water useage restrictions (habit changes) creates a greatly decreased demand with a more secure supply. Yes the Indians would charge, but I suspect not much. The Chickasaw are very supportive of growth in a responsible manner - the Choctaw, who knows.

I have lived in the SE US in cities that are seeing their supply lakes dry up in minor (realitive) droughts. Here, city supported refunds on low-flow toilets, shower heads, and retrictions on yard irrigation greatly decreased water consumption. I use to laugh at them because they would grow grasses that would require much more watering (like fescues and ryes) just so they could have year-round green yards. Bermuda grasses grew fine, but all the northern transplants wanted their year-round green. Slowly they are learning. By severly restricting irragation - just enough to keep the bermuda alive through the winter, water consumption was greatly reduced. In the long-run, xeroscaping and using native plants would be best, but there can be lots of saving just by strictly enforcing (expensive fines for repeat violators) irrigation regulations. This is especially true in Oklahoma where 'summer grasses' are used extensively.

The water is there, if you have the foresight to plan, invest, and use it wisely. The days of waste are taking their toll. But the biggest toll is on the minds of the people who expect everything with little or no cost. Low flow toilets work fine (no, you don't have to flush again), low flow shower heads are easy to get use to. Our forefathers in Oklahoma sought out and built lakes because of their experience with the great droughts early in the previous century. It is up to modern Oklahomans to use these new resources wisely, or you to will once again become 'Okies' leaving the land you destroyed.

Reminds me of early summer 2006.

Yeah I remember that summer well. We had terrible drought and fires, and Norman was worried about running out of water. Then came summer 2007 and its record rainfall which carried into 2008 and 2009..

Hopefully we have one of those on the horizon.

We just need one tropical storm to move up from the Gulf and sit for a month again. That will do wonders to fix the problem. We just need to find a way to keep the water though once we have it.