Excerpted from owrb v. texas irr, 1974

The earliest water law, the 1949 Ground Water Law, envisioned a system of conservation in which only the safe annual yield of a basin as measured by its average annual recharge would be permitted to be withdrawn. Accordingly, the 1949 Act recognized the concept of a "critical ground water area"

In 1957, House Joint Resolution No. 502 was passed declaring and adopting a statement of basic principles of a proposed water policy for the state.  In part, the resolution stated a "Priority of Water Uses:"

1. Sustaining life (domestic use)
2. Maintaining health
3. Providing food and fiber
4. Increasing wealth
5. Augmenting recreation

The Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled in 1980 that S.J.R. 502 was intended by the Legislature to be utilized only as a guide in the consideration of future legislation and not as an expression of substantive law or rules possessing the full force of law. It ruled that additional implementing policies would be required.

In 1972, our Legislature revised Oklahoma's statutory system for regulating the use of ground water.

Under the 1972 revisions, the Legislature adopted a policy of utilization of water as opposed to the prior use conservation policy. The declaration of policy of the 1972 Ground Water Act, 82 O.S. 1981, expressly provides:

"It is hereby declared to be the public policy of this state, in the interest of the agricultural stability, domestic, municipal, industrial, and other beneficial uses, general economy, health and welfare of the state and its citizens, to utilize the ground water resources of the state, and for that purpose to provide reasonable regulations for the allocation for reasonable use based on hydrologic surveys of fresh ground water basins to determine a restriction on the production based upon the acres overlying the ground water basin or subbasin. The provisions of this act shall not apply to the taking, using or disposal of salt water associated with the exploration, production or recovery of oil and gas or the taking, using or disposal of water trapped in producing mines."

As reflected in this policy, use regulation and management is contemplated as the means of restricting production of water. The 1972 Act thus contains no provisions for the designation of a "critical ground water area." Rather, apportionment for reasonable use is the standard.

Pursuant to this standard, beyond prior existing water rights, the right to withdraw ground water for non-domestic use is apportioned based on the maximum annual yield of the basin. The maximum annual yield is measured on a minimum basin life of 20 years, and the amount of land overlying the basin or subbasin.

Consequently, whereas under the 1949 Act a permit for the extraction of water could not be issued if the Water Resources Board found that such use would result in depletion above the average annual rate of recharge; under the 1972 Act a regular permit to use water allocates to the applicant for beneficial use a proportionate share of the maximum annual yield of the basin. Since the proportionate share of the maximum annual yield of the basin equals the percentage of land owned or leased by the applicant (as compared to the total acreage of the basin), the use or nonuse by one landowner neither decreases nor increases the proportionate share of another. Moreover, in addition to not recognizing "critical ground water areas", the 1972 Act neither recognizes nor mentions preferences between beneficial uses. The concept of conflicting beneficial uses in a critical ground water area has no application in the current ground water law.