State Court Ruling Affects Allocation Of Water Rights

Sunday, July 2nd 2006, 2:36 pm

By: News On 6

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) _ Barely noticed when it was issued, an Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals ruling made in March could have far-reaching effects on the state's method of allocating water rights.

The ruling, in a Caddo County case involving a proposed private dam on a stream north of Hinton, declared a 1993 law unconstitutional.

That law _ which replaced one passed three decades earlier that also had been declared unconstitutional _ was written to try and balance the needs and rights of landowners with streams and rivers running through their properties with the public's need for dependable reservoirs of water.

The 1993 law allowed dams to be built, as long as those projects didn't interfere with the continuous flow of enough water downstream to meet the ``domestic use'' needs of downstream landowners, such as for household or farming purposes.

The court ruled that limiting the landowners' rights to ``domestic use'' needs only amounted to taking property for public use without fair compensation. The court said that the water flow should be enough to meet ``reasonable use'' needs, which could include recreational and aesthetic uses.

That ruling poses a threat to large cities like Oklahoma City and Tulsa and large industrial users, who might lose water rights they thought they had, said Dean Couch, an attorney for the Oklahoma Water Resources Board.

The state Supreme Court said last month it will review the decision.

``Our concern is that the municipal water supply would be altered and there wouldn't be enough water available to meet the needs of the three cities,'' said Rebecca Patten, an attorney for the Central Oklahoma Master Conservancy District, which supplies water _ via Lake Thunderbird _ to Norman, Midwest City and Del City.

Attorney Craig Keith, who handles Oklahoma City's water-related legal issues, said that he thinks a lot of cities will weigh in on the debate ``because it the impact it could have on their ability to provide water.''

Patten said the court's ``reasonable use'' standard would cause problems for cities that depend on water from reservoirs, especially during times of drought.