Water; prohibiting certain uses and actions in certain location. Effective date.
SB1933 creates a new section of Oklahoma law restricting certain water-related activities in defined stretches of the Kiamichi River and Glover River. The bill defines key terms such as “immediate vicinity,” “industrial water,” and “nonlocal,” then makes it unlawful to divert water from those river segments for nonlocal municipal or county use, including sale, profit, power generation, battery or data storage, or nonlocal agricultural purposes. It also prohibits building dams, impoundments, or diversion structures in the covered areas.
The bill further bars local farming, ranching, silviculture, forestry, and other agricultural uses and practices within the specified river locations, while exempting existing practices and structures that were in place before the effective date. The measure would take effect November 1, 2026, and would be codified in Title 82 of the Oklahoma Statutes, which governs waters and water rights.
SB1933 would add a location-specific restriction to Oklahoma water law, limiting both water diversion and land-use activities along designated portions of the Kiamichi and Glover Rivers. It would affect municipalities, counties, utilities, industrial users, agricultural operators, and landowners seeking to develop water infrastructure or use river water for off-site or nonlocal purposes. Existing uses and structures would be grandfathered, but future projects in the covered river corridors would be constrained by the new statutory prohibition.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at protecting specific river systems from diversion and development, which may appeal to conservation or local-water-protection interests. At the same time, the broad restrictions on water diversion and even local agricultural practices suggest it could draw concern from farmers, ranchers, utilities, industrial users, and local governments that rely on river access.
The main points of contention are likely to be the bill’s broad geographic restrictions and the scope of prohibited activities. Opponents may object that it blocks not only large-scale water diversions and infrastructure projects, but also local farming, ranching, forestry, and agricultural practices within the specified river areas. Another likely dispute is the ban on diverting water for nonlocal municipal, county, industrial, power-generation, and data-storage uses, which could be seen as limiting economic development and regional water planning. Supporters would likely emphasize river protection, local control, and preventing outside entities from extracting water from these watersheds.