A Survey of Public Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Water in Lubbock

Prepared by Hamed Shirmohammadi

Abstract

Almost no information exists regarding public perceptions and attitudes toward water in Lubbock. This study fills in this gap by providing information about attitudes of people in Lubbock from survey data. From these data, women in Lubbock were found to express greater concerns for the local environmental issues than men. However, men and women were equally concerned about global environmental issues. Those who were more knowledgeable about Lubbock water supply were found to be more likely to support restrictions both for farmers and for the city than those who were not knowledgeable. Texans were found to be more likely to support water restrictions both for the city and for farmers than non-Texans. In fact, the majority of Texans supported water restrictions. We also found that students and non-students were equally worried about Lubbock’s ability to get water in the future.

Introduction                      

This survey establishes a baseline assessment of the attitudes of people in Lubbock toward the city’s water issues. According to some reports Lubbock is among nine cities that are running out of water. A report by U.S. Drought Monitor shows that, among these nine cities, Lubbock has had the worst level of drought since the beginning of 2011 CITATION Sau13 \l 1033   (Sauter & Hess, 2013). By 2014 either new water sources or aggressive water conservation is needed in order to maintain water supply during the summer and by 2025 the existing water supply sources will not be capable of supplying the water demand even if harsh conservation policies are adopted (City of Lubbock, 2013). Currently Lubbock has three water supply sources: Alan Henry Lake, Roberts County well field and Bailey County well field. The well fields are used to pump water up from the Ogallala Aquifer. Lake Alan Henry will run dry in ten years CITATION Ree12 \l 1033  (Reed, 2012) and some studies show that the part of Ogallala which is located in Texas could be depleted in 50 years CITATION Cho13 \l 1033  (Chow, 2013). Lubbock’s municipal authorities, denying these estimations, claim that the city has plans to supply water for the next 100 years.

Lubbock is located in a historically dry area and the prolonged drought has worsened an already dire situation.  Long years of overuse by ranchers, cotton farmers, and fast-growing thirsty cities have depleted water sources. The oil industry's outsize demands on water for fracking have increased the depletion rates. And climate change is exacerbating the situation. The record breaking heat waves in recent years have been further drying out the soil and speeding the desiccation of water sources CITATION Gol13 \l 1033  (Goldenberg, 2013).

While there are multiple factors contributing to the current water crisis, it seems that at least in little cities near oil fields people tend to blame the situation on the oil industry ignoring the complexity of the situation CITATION Gol13 \l 1033  (Goldenberg, 2013). Since there was no study on Lubbock residents’ perception toward the water crisis we did not know how people in Lubbock felt about the situation. We decided to fill this gap by conducting a study on Lubbock residents’ views on the water crisis. We identified the following questions to guide the survey: First, do people think there is a water crisis? Second, if they think there is or will be a water shortage, what do they think has caused the shortage? Third, what measures do they think should be taken to preserve the diminishing water sources? We planned to compare the attitudes of men and women, Texan, non-Texan Americans and international students, and students and non-students toward the water crisis. Our hypotheses about the results of these comparisons were based on the following studies on people’s perceptions on environmental issues:

First, studies that have examined the differences in attitudes of men and women toward environmental issues suggest that women are significantly more concerned about local environmental issues than men. Women have also been found to be more concerned about non-local environmental issues. However the magnitude of difference is not significant (Mohai, 1992).

Second, education and environmental concerns are tightly related. A study on “environmental attitudes and behaviors of American youth” shows that students who know “a lot” about the environment are considerably more likely to be worried about environment than students who have a very limited knowledge about environment, by a 67% to 31% margin (National Environmental Education And Training Foundation, 1994).

Third, according to a study of people’s perception on water conservation, drought is a significant factor that increases people’s receptivity to water conservation (Sochacka, et al. 2013).

In the light of the information provided by above studies the following hypotheses were developed to be examined: First, women are significantly more likely to be concerned with local environmental issues than men. Local environmental issues are those issues that can pose a potential direct threat to the Lubbock community, such as drought, fresh water supply and the effects of fracking. Second, global environmental problems, such as rising sea levels and global warming, concern women and men almost equally. Third, those who are aware of the existence of the severe drought in west Texas and are knowledgeable about Lubbock water are more likely to support water restrictions. Fourth, Texans, unlike non-Texans, tend to oppose drastic conservation policies even if they are necessary. Fifth, the tie between education and environmental concerns suggests that students should have higher environmental awareness than non-students. Sixth, although students have higher environmental awareness, they are less emotionally concerned with the long term consequences of water crisis in Lubbock than residents are. 

Methodology

To examine the above hypotheses we designed a survey. The survey was comprised of 12 questions. The first question asked respondents about their general environmental concerns. Respondents were given nine environmental issues and allowed to choose as many issues as seemed important to them. The next five questions were designed to determine the knowledge level of respondents with regard to fracking and Lubbock’s water sources. Four questions asked them about their views on water restrictions and conservation. One question asked them to identify groups that overused water. The options were farmers, oil drillers and people who water their lawns. They could check as many options as they wanted. The last question asked whether they were worried or confident about Lubbock’s ability to get water in the future.

All four teachers and thirteen students in ESL 5301 participated in data collection. Each interviewer was supposed to survey at least 5 Americans. Another restriction was that at least half of the respondents had to be women. With this restrictions in place a total of 150 individuals were surveyed. There was no restriction in terms of job, ethnicity or age of the respondents. Also there was no restriction on where interviewer could go.

Our method had three major limitations: First, with no restriction on were the interviewers could go, most of them went to their own department buildings and interviewed their fellow students. Therefore, the vast majority of respondents were Texas Tech students. This means that the sample population of this survey cannot be taken to be fully representative of the city’s population. Second, we did not use any method to check if their descriptions of their knowledge level were accurate. Therefore, if they said they were knowledgeable about the issues in question we took them at their words. Third, we did not define “Texan” or “non-Texan” in any exact sense. Therefore, it was up to the respondents how to describe themselves. This applied to those respondents who were born in Texas but raised somewhere else and those who were born somewhere else but raised in Texas. Without an exact definition of “Texan” and “non-Texan” the results of the comparison between Texans and non-Texans should not be accepted without reservation.   

Results

A total of 150 individuals were surveyed. There were equal numbers of male and female respondents (75 male and 75 female) (Appendix II, Chart 1). 73% of respondents were students. 50% of respondents were from Texas, 24% non-Texan Americans and 26% were internationals (Appendix II, Chart 2). This means that the sample population had enough diversity so as to enable us to examine our hypotheses.

We thought women would be significantly more likely to be concerned with local environmental issues than men. Local environmental issues are those issues that can pose a probable direct threat to the Lubbock community. Among nine issues on the survey, four can be identified as local issues:  drought, the effects of fracking, increasing storms and fresh water supply. In fact, almost equal numbers of men and women were concerned with fresh water supply. 47 (63%) male and 46 (61%) female respondents cited Fresh water supply as one of their environmental concerns. Women, however, were more worried about other local issues than were men. 37% of women were concerned about increasing storms and tornadoes, compared to 28% of men. Similarly women were more worried about drought (63%) and fracking (33%) than were men (55% and 27%, respectively) (Appendix II, Chart 3).

We thought that global environmental problems, such as rising sea levels and global warming, would concern women and men almost equally. In fact, our hypothesis turned out to be true. Five out of nine issues on the survey can be considered as global issues including rising sea levels, global warming, increasing flooding, water pollution and air pollution. 27% of women and 25% of men cited rising sea levels as one of the most important issues. Global warming, also, concerned men and woman equally (55% and 53%, respectively). 25% of women and 24% of men were worried about increasing flooding. 69% of women cited water pollution as one of the most important issues, compared to 68% of men. Air pollution was rather different: 71% of men cited it as a concern, compared to 65% of women. Overall, however, the data supported our hypothesis that women and men would be equally concerned about global environmental issues (Appendix II, Chart 3).

Among the nine environmental issues, air pollution was the most important for men. 53 men (71%) cited air pollution as the most important issue (compared with 49 women (65%)). For women, the most important issue was water pollution. 52 women (69%) checked it as most important issue, compared to 51 men (68%)). Overall, water pollution was the first and air pollution was the second most important issue. 69% of respondents cited water pollution and 68% cited air pollution as the most important issue. (Appendix II, Chart 4)

 Our third hypothesis was that those who were knowledgeable about Lubbock water would be more likely to support water restrictions. In fact, our hypothesis was true. Those who were more knowledgeable about Lubbock water were more likely to support water restrictions for the city of Lubbock. 68% of those who described themselves as very knowledgeable about where Lubbock gets its water supply said they believed in water restrictions for Lubbock, compared to 66% of those who were somehow knowledgeable and only 35% of those who were not very knowledgeable. This was in accord with our hypothesis. However, we found another correlation that somehow undermined the correlation between being knowledgeable and being pro-restrictions. The correlation in question was between being knowledgeable and being opposed to restrictions. Those who were more knowledgeable about Lubbock water were more likely to be opposed to restrictions. 32% of those who describe themselves as very knowledgeable were opposed to water restriction for Lubbock, compared to 12% of those who were somewhat knowledgeable and only 8% of those who were not very knowledgeable.

 What was even more confusing was that those who not only were knowledgeable about where Lubbock gets its water, but also knew where it is getting its water now and  knew about Lake Meredith were more likely to be opposed to water restrictions for the city of Lubbock. 37% of these respondents were opposed to water restrictions.

We thought Texans were more likely to be opposed to conservation policies than non-Texas. In fact, Texans were found to be more likely to support water restrictions than non-Texans. 71% of Texans said they believed in water restriction for the city of Lubbock, compared to 44% of non-Texans. 12% of Texans were opposed to water restrictions for Lubbock, compared to 19% of non-Texans.

Texans also were more likely to support water restrictions for farmers than non-Texans (Americans and internationals). 40% of Texans said they believed in water restrictions for farmers, compared to 32% of non-Texans. Texans, however, were more likely to be opposed to water restrictions for farmers than were non-Texans. 35% of Texans were opposed to water restrictions for farmers, compared to 29% of non-Texans. However, the majority of Texans supported water restrictions for farmers (40% vs. 35%) and for the city (71% vs. 12%) (Appendix II, Chart 5).

Texan non-students were more likely to support water restrictions for the city of Lubbock than Texan students. 81% of Texan non-students supported restrictions for the city, compared to 67% of Texan students.  Also, Texan non-students were more likely to support water restrictions for farmers than Texan students. 47% of Texan non-students supported water restrictions for farmers, compared to 37% of Texan students.

We believed students would be less emotionally concerned with the long term consequences of water crisis in Lubbock than residents. In fact, there was not any significant difference between students and non-students in regard with how they felt about Lubbock’s ability to get water in the future.  61% of students were worried about Lubbock’s ability to get water in the future, compared with 59% of non-students.

Overall, 60% of respondents said they were worried about Lubbock’s ability to get water in the future.

Discussion

Our results show that women were more concerned with local environmental issues than men; while men and women were equally concerned about global issues. However, one issue about these results needs to be pointed out. The questionnaire asked respondents to check the most important environmental issues, not the issues that most worried them. In order to examine our hypotheses we interpreted the most important issues as the most worrisome ones. But the interpretation might be found questionable. One might find some issue very important without being worried about it. However, it does not seem implausible to assume that if one thinks some issue is one of the most important issues, then he is likely to care about that issue. This argument does not brush the worries about the interpretation aside. Those worries are legitimate and the above results should not be accepted without some reasonable reservations about the interpretation on which they rely.

One of the interesting results was that the most important environmental issue for the respondents was a global issue that has no bearings on Lubbock’s environmental issues. As reported earlier, 69% of respondents cited water pollution as the most important environmental issue. This is not an urgent issue in Lubbock. What is urgent is fresh water supply. But the issue of fresh water supply was not even the second most important issue. The second most important issue was air pollution (68%). Fresh water supply was only the third most important issue (62%).The fact that the two most important environmental issues were global issues which were not directly connected with Lubbock’s most important issue needs an explanation. One explanation for this fact is that the majority of our respondents were students (73%). Most students do not come from Lubbock and will leave the city after graduation. So, it is not surprising that they were more concerned with global issues instead of Lubbock water.

The fact that those who were knowledgeable about Lubbock water were more likely to support water restrictions was expected. The correlation between being knowledgeable and being pro-restrictions was established by other studies (Sochacka, N.W., et al., 2013). However, we found another correlation that seemed baffling. Those who were more knowledgeable were more likely to be opposed to water restrictions for the city of Lubbock. This baffling correlation might be the result of a limitation of our method. As stated in the method section, we did not check if the respondents were really knowledgeable. We took them at their words. Some of those who described themselves as very knowledgeable might have been mistaken about their knowledge level. Our method, therefore, did not eliminate the possibility that some respondents who were not knowledgeable about Lubbock water described themselves as very knowledgeable. These respondents might have been those who were opposed to restrictions for Lubbock water. 

Another explanation for the correlation in question is that someone who is knowledgeable about the source of Lubbock water might be ignorant about the current water crisis in west Texas. We did not ask respondents if they were knowledgeable about water issues in the area. Rather we asked if they were knowledgeable about where Lubbock gets its water supply. Therefore, the correlation might be a result of the fact that some of the people who were knowledgeable about where Lubbock gets its water supply were not knowledgeable about the water issues in the area. These respondents might have been those who were opposed to water restrictions for Lubbock.

We found that Texans were more likely to support water restrictions for farmers and the city than non-Texans. Texans, however, were more likely to oppose water restrictions for farmers (35%, compared to 25% of non-Texans). Overall, the majority of Texans supported the water restrictions for farmers (40% vs. 35%) and for the city (71% vs. 12%). As the figures show, the percentage of Texans who supported water restrictions for the city of Lubbock was bigger than the percentage of Texans who supported the water restrictions for farmers by a margin of 71% to 40%.

We did not expect any of these results. However, we found an even more surprising one: Texan non-students were more likely to support water restrictions for farmers and for the city than Texan students. One explanation for this fact is that typically, Texan non-students have been in Lubbock for a longer time than students and they will live here for a longer time. Therefore, Texan non-students are more likely to be emotionally concerned with Lubbock water issue than students are. This means that their serious concerns about Lubbock’s ability to get water in the future might outweigh their traditional attitudes toward water as the property of the landowner. Another explanation might be that they have never had such traditional attitudes toward water. We, however, do not have enough data to reject either of these explanations.

We found that students were more likely to be worried about Lubbock water than non-students. Although the difference between students and non-students was not significant in this case (61% vs. 59%), it might seem that our hypothesis about students being less emotionally concerned with water crisis in Lubbock was false. However we do not think that these data can falsify our hypothesis. Our findings show that students and non-students were almost equally worried about Lubbock’s ability to get water in the future. Our hypothesis, on the other hand, was about students and the residents of Lubbock, not students and non-students. We did not ask respondents if they were from Lubbock. Therefore we do not have enough data to confirm or falsify our hypothesis.

To avoid problems like those discussed above, future research on this subject, should take into consideration the following points:

To make sure that the sample population is representative of Lubbock’s residents, there should be limitations on where each interviewer can go to get the respondents. Different interviewers should go to different places in the city.

The questionnaire should collect more information about respondents. This means the questions that are meant to identify the respondents should be more fine-grained. For example, to examine the hypothesis that students and residents have different feelings toward the water crisis, we need to know if the respondent is a permanent resident of Lubbock, how long they have been in Lubbock and things like these.

In order to find meaningful correlations between the level of environmental awareness and other factors, for example the attitude toward water conservation, the level of awareness needs to be determined by objective criteria rather than relying on respondents’ assessments of their knowledge level.

Bibliography

City of Lubbock. (2013). Strategic Water Supply Plan for the City of Lubbock. My Lubbock. Retrieved September 18, 2013, from: http://www.mylubbock.us/docs/default-source/water-department-file-library/2013-strategic-water-supply-plan.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Chow, D. (2013, August 26). Huge aquifer that runs through 8 states quickly being tapped out. LiveScience. Retrieved September 14, 2013, from: http://www.nbcnews.com/science/huge-aquifer-runs-through-8-states-quickly-being-tapped-out-8C11009320

Goldenberg, S. (2013, August 11). A Texan tragedy: ample oil, no water. The Guardian. Retrieved September 10, 2013, from: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/11/texas-tragedy-ample-oil-no-water

Mohai, P. (1992). Men, women, and the environment: An examination of the gender gap in environmental concern and activism. Society & Natural Resources, Vol. 5, Iss. 1, pp. 1-19.

National Environmental Education and Training Foundation. (1994). Environmental Attitudes And Behaviors of American Youth. Retrieved November 20, 2013 From: http://eelink.net/ROPER/TOC.html

Reed, A. (2012, February 9). Lubbock water crisis, how did we get here? KCBD Retrieved September 20, 2013, from: http://www.kcbd.com/story/16903788/lubbocks-water-crisis-how-did-we-get-here

Sauter, M. B., & Hess, A. E. (2013, August 1). Nine cities running out of water. 24/7 Wall Street. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from: http:/247wallst.com/Special-report/2013/08/01/nine-cities-running-out-of-water

Sochacka, N.W., et al. (2013). Public perceptions of water availability and receptivity to water conservation in Georgia. Proceedings of the 2013 Georgia Water Resources Conference. Retrieved November 30, 2013, from: http://www.gwri.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/files/docs/2013/1.6.2_Sochacka.pdf

Appendix I http://lubbockwaterstudy.blogspot.com/2013/12/survey.html

Note to students

This is a review of what is necessary to finish this course. This post will be deleted after the course is finished, on midnight Monday Dec. 9. So pay close attention.

1. Remember that it is YOUR job to make sure your assignments are represented in the assignment posts; they will be, if they were handed in on time, but if you never handed them in, they won't be. Hand them in! Midnight is the deadline. To check, click on the little tag below that says "assignments"...all of them will come up. As of this writing I have checked your e-mail and I believe I have put everything here. You check though, just to be sure. Is this as you want it?
2. Your Research Proposal is supposed to be uploaded here. As of this writing, three are not. Put them here! It's a requirement.
3. Your Final Paper, similarly, should be put here, by midnight Monday Dec. 9. Put it in the best form you can. Put everything here, including abstract (remember, we already have charts here). Do not put a title page or vast empty spaces which result from posting pages like that of the abstract, with lots of white space on them. We don't need that online.
4. Many people are having trouble putting references online, especially those that are "hanging indent" in the paper form. I also am having trouble with this. Maybe Blogger doesn't support "hanging indent." But if I can't do it, I can't expect you to do it. Put them in block form, or don't worry about it. I will not mark off on bad-looking references. Link them if you can, though, OK?
5. There is no final exam for this course. Rather, I and at least one assistant will be in the classroom at the appointed time (7:30 am MON) to remind you of what you still need and give you any help in making what you have better, before you upload it. You do not have to show up if you are satisfied with what you have here. Grading starts quickly after that, though. There can be no extensions beyond midnight on Monday. Make what you put up there the best you can do.
6. The best reports are linked to charts and surveys. In your uploaded word file, include the survey which Ms. Mangano has sent you, and any charts you need from the charts she sent you. Online, link to the survey (which is now here http://lubbockwaterstudy.blogspot.com/2013/12/survey.html) and find the appropriate charts to link to deeper in the post. You can do it!

 Then have a good break; you certainly deserve it! -Tom L.

Argument paragraph #2: Lubbock water crisis

Par. 2

 My first approach is to contact the people who are water experts and discuss how long current water sources are going last, collect some demographic information such as population growth, current water industrial and residential demand and demand increased rate, peak time duration and etc. Moreover, collect some climate data over the past years such as rainfall data, temperature, etc. Other than it is highly recommended to consider people's perceptions because water crisis is controversial problem and more relative to community. After that, rigorous statistical model is created to predict parameters which relates to the problem for the future. As statistical analysis, if the population continues to grow, shortages of fresh water will occur more often and desalination of sea water is good permanent solution for this problem. Because of current technological processes must be done on a large scale to be useful to large populations, and also the current processes are high initial cost, energy-intensive, high cost for maintenance and involve large-scale facilities. In my opinion making illegal for fracking is not a good for economy. Fracking uses more water and besides providing dirty water which should be removed harmful thing to people because of it can contaminate with ground water.  (SG)

Par. 2

                  In Texas, groundwater is possessed by landowners; this is Texas tradition and law. Landowners have the right to pump water as much as they want from their well. Moreover, all regulations for utilizing the groundwater are very beneficial to the landowner, thus it may cause Lubbock water crisis.

                  If we got a significant amount of money to research or improve the water crisis, I will definitely use funding to improve Texas regulations and install water meter. I think that water fee should be paid as much as consumer used. Many residents pay the water fee as much as they use, but landowners do not pay water fee just because they have their well. The different rate of water fee should be charged because some parts of water fee include water supply services. For that purpose, the water meter should be installed for charging the water fee to landowners. (MK)

Argument paragraph # 2

If we get a significant amount of money to research or improve the water crisis, we should spend it to do research about finding long-term solutions for this problem. At this time, spending money for research is more important than spending for a physical solution, because Lubbock has enough water for several years (Young, 2013) and water will be a critical issue if we couldn’t find better solutions in the long-term. Various research and experiments can be conducted to investigate different solutions such as new ground water resources, how to protect existing ground water resources, new alternatives to water for fracking, different ways of recycling waste water, possible ways to collect and conserve rain water before evaporating, suitable plants to drought areas that help to protect water cycle, etc. Because of the fruitful outcome of these researches and its effects on finding better solutions for the Lubbock water crisis, spending money to research would be a valuable investment. On the other hand, if we spend water for a physical solution, it would be only a short-term solution, which is not the most essential solution right now.   

Considering these facts, spending money to research is a smarter decision than spending money for a physical solution. (CD)

Reference

Young, A.D. (2013, August, 16). City disputes 24/7 Wall Street claims that Lubbock is running out of water. Retrieved on November 16, 2013 from http://lubbockonline.com/local-news/2013-08-16/city-disputes-247-wall-street-claims-lubbock-running-out-water#.UoWbINznZdg

Par. 2

If we get a significant amount of money to improve the water crisis, we should invest it to desalinate seawater. There is around ninety seven percent of water on earth contained within the oceans (Cain, 2010). If we can efficiently desalinate this seawater, we will be about to solve the water crisis over the world permanently. Thus, we don't need to live an uncomfortable life to save water if we can desalinate water more efficiently. The water price would be very cheap. Therefore, we can water our lawn as much as we want and we can use as much water as we want to wash our cars; we can enjoy our lives without worrying about water waste. This is because every drop of water you wasted would either go into the ocean where we can desalinate it back or go into the aquifer where we can use it as well. As a result, desalination would be the most efficient way to solve the water crisis in the future. (CL)

How should we spent money on the water crisis?

Today the water crisis has become one of the significant global problems. There are some ways which help countries to solve the water problem like conservation, desalination or learning how to purify the dirty water, learning how to recycle water in an efficient way to save more, and learning how to replenish the aquifer better, and so on. But, the most important factor to solve the water problem is having enough money. I am of the opinion that if the government has enough money to solve the water crisis, it should spend the money to learn how to purify water. Indeed, there is enough water in the world, but the problem is people cannot use the entire amount of water, due to the fact the water is impure and dirty, and it is not appropriate to drink or for healthy use. Therefore, if we have enough money, it is really beneficial to spend it to purify the dirty water. Purifying water is much more important for the remote areas, because in those areas there are so many people who are dying annually due to the use of unclean water. But people in those areas do not have any other choice. They do not have enough money to purify water, and they need water to be alive. Thus, if we allocate the money to purify water we can save many people from death.  (SH)

Par. 2

The Lone Star state of Texas is famous throughout the world for its oil resources, but it is time that the state started focusing its resources on another precious liquid - water. The recent droughts in the state have not only shown how critical the problem of water is, but also has shown us how unprepared the state is to deal with the problem. Conservation, reclamation and reuse of water should be the focus of the state resources. These measures would not only play a critical role in helping the state deal with the problem of water shortage, but also would help the state continue on its growth path. Conservation of water can be enforced in multiple methods; increasing the cost of utilities, water use restrictions are just a few of the methods that the state should enforce to better meet its need of water. Reclamation and reuse would require bringing the cities utilities up to date with current technologies. Though these measures of conservation, reclamation and reuse of water are expensive, they are practically proven methods of water management. (RS)

How should we spend on water problem?

First of all, in terms of priority drinking water should be provided for the residents. In order to do that, a water purification center in a large scale suitable for the city demands should be built. Then, it comes to demands of farmers and industries that may require building dam on rivers, or making channel and pipelines to distribute water from its source. Finally, it comes to regulation of how to use water that requires both time and human resources to establish rules and perform them in a best fashion. [N.K.]

Argument Paragraph 2

 

      If Lubbock got a significant amount of money, the most important thing would be to invest in more infrastructure, such as buying some drilling machine to explore the water underground or buying some desalination machine to make water clean. The reason I suggest that is because only finding water support is a good solution for a long time, and we also have to keep saving water. Even though there are a lot of problems out there waiting for us to solve, providing dirty water for frackers or making fracking illegal is not a long-term solution. For instance, the water resource is like a salary. If you don’t have any income, no matter how thrifty you are, the bank balance will still go down. Therefore, as long as we have a stable water supply, the following questions will be trivial issues and be solved easily. Besides, in reality, promoting public projects will be smooth if we have a significant amount of money. Sometimes, the reason that governments could not implement the right thing is because of money. However, it is time that we have our support now and make water crisis right. (SYH)

Where to invest money to attack the water crisis

                  To resolve situations or problems many times it takes a great deal of work, time, and even money. Also if you really want to solve problems you should attack them from the bottom. Therefore if we want to attack the crisis of water I support the idea that we have to educate and make conscience in the people; this is where I would invest for two reasons. The first one is, if you have to educate people it is easier that they understand what the problem really is, and then you can teach them how to use water efficiently. The second is for the simple reason that an educated person has more criteria than one who’s not.

                  On the other hand we have the industry; well, for them, just implement restrictions and ensure compliance.

                  How can we prepare and make conscience in the people? Well, It could be making programs in three different regions. The first in the elementary schools for kids; second is in parks and public places for adolescents and adults, and the third and the most powerful I guess is putting commercials on television. (JAPCH)

Argument paragraph: What could our community do on water problems?

Problems related to water resources have become increasingly urgent, thus requiring both physical solutions and theoretical research to respond our community's needs. There are many methods to protect water resources falling into two categories, water conservation and recycling of vital water resources. Solutions related to water conservation could be policies, strategies, and activities to manage fresh water as a sustainable resource to protect the water environment and to meet the current and future demand. Recycling of vital water resources encompasses solutions to treat wastewater for usage in sustainable landscaping irrigation and recharge groundwater aquifers. Practical solutions that our community can do on water problems should base on those two categories. Enhancing people's perception towards water problems should be considered a long-term solution. Perception can lead to saving water actions in everyday activities such as brushing teeth, bathing, and so on. As such, everyone in our community can participate in both particular and general strategies to help protecting and saving water resources which should lead to a more sustainable usage in the future. (DP)

Argument paragraph #2

If we have a significant amount of money, I think we should use it to study how to make dirty water recycled. We can build an effective water recycling system, and then we can let frackers and the oil industry use dirty water which had been cleaned. Second, we can build some large reservoirs to prevent water shortages and drought. Although Lubbock has found a new water source, the Lubbock’s water supply had an impact caused by Lake Meredith which dried up in 2012. So we need to take some measures to protect our water sources; for example, we can limit farmers pumping from the lake. We can also talk to farmers to install more technical irrigation system, and we can hire some scientists to study of these and invent more efficient irrigation machines for us. Rainwater is also an important source of Lubbock’s water supply, so we can make some artificial rainfall when we have a good chance.(QK)

Argumentative Paragraph No. 2

Underground water systems have formed during thousands years. For human beings, however, it takes a few decades to totally deplete water sources. In west Texas underground water system has reached a point that no normal amount of precipitation can replenish it (Goldenberg, 2013). If the current trends continue in the future, the water system will reach the no-return point where it is impossible to revive it. Therefore, keeping the water system from drying out should be the focus of budget planning and public investment. Since the only way to revive the water system is to increase the level of precipitation, I suggest that Texas invest on cloud seeding and weather modification technologies. Effective usage of these technologies will significantly increase the amount of precipitation. Significant increase in precipitation will replenish underground water resources and alleviate or totally solve the water crisis. (HS) 

Reference:

Goldenberg, S. (2013, Aug. 11). A Texan tragedy: ample oil, no water. The Guardian. Retrieved on Aug. 28, 2013 from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/11/texas-tragedy-ample-oil-no-water

Arg. Paragraph rewrite

1. As we all know, water is a scarce resource in Texas, and such resources are decreasing every year, and the water should belong to all citizens who live here. But according to the Texas law, the landowners can draw as much water from their own land as they want, so I think the law should be improved. In my opinion, the law should provide a limit on the amount that the farmers are allowed to pump, if the aquifer is endangered under their farms. This is because first of all, I think the water in the underground belongs to all of us who live in Texas, and the water those landowners draw out, may come from somewhere else or just flow through. Secondly, overpumping the underground water  may cause a dry-up situation, and many areas where use of the water from underground will be influenced. Finally, not only in order to protect water resources in Texas, but also for our children who have water to drink in the future, we should improve the law, and this is just what I think. (QK)

2.  Based on a report by the Lubbock Water Department, the city water currently comes from three sources, two groundwater well fields in Robert County and a well field in Bailey County. The third source is Lake Allen Henry. [1] As a matter of fact, in 2011, the third source was Lake Meredith, but in 2012 Lake Meredith dried and put the city on stage 2 restriction of usage limiting mainly lawn water and carwash. [2] The city, after completion of Lake Allen Henry project, went back to stage 1 restriction as of August 20th 2012. [1] (N.K.)

References:

Lubbock water department, http://www.mylubbock.us/departmental-websites/departments/water-department/home

Abby Reed (2012), Lubbock water crisis, how did we get to here?, KCDB website, http://www.kcbd.com/story/16903788/lubbocks-water-crisis-how-did-we-get-here

3.  I believe that water is one of the biggest problems facing society today, not only in Lubbock but in general, but focusing only in this region, we have two major industries mostly occupied in the water supply, which are the oil industry and agriculture. How does this affect us? It is simple; farmers take more water than they need, without any rules that limit, because in Texas you can take all the water you find in your land; on the other hand, we have the oil industry that generates millions of dollars and with that justifies the damage it generates to groundwater aquifers. So I think that you should implement some governing rules on water overuse, for example, using treated water, the same industry or farmers reusing their water. (JAPC)

4. The water crisis may have several issues which need attention. The water crisis includes water shortage, water pollution etc. When there is not enough drinking water, water crisis is felt. Coping with water scarcity requires serious solutions. I believe one of the most important factors leading to a water problem in West Texas is drought. I rest on the belief that at the beginning, we have to recognize what the water problems are, and how we can prevent such problems. I think first we should do some research regarding this issue, and then we should find some ways to resolve the problems. I believe if  the government increases the amount of funds regarding water problem research, it will help scientists to explore what the exact problem is, and help experts to bring up proper solutions about water problems. I think there are some methods we should do to prevent water crisis, such as ways to cope with drought and shortage crisis, identifying water resources available, public awareness and public participation in water planning and management, careful attention to the management of water, adjusting the water pressure in the distribution network, and controlling uses of high consumption. The other way is to make some policies to reduce water problems. For example, with population growth, natural resources of water are running out. Thus, sometimes due to water shortages, the governments could enact some rules to restrict the amount of water usage, so that it can adjust its consumption. According to Sauter and Hess the low rain fall engenders severe drought in west Texas in the United States, and if it continues west Texas cities face lots of problems such as crop losses, low reservoir levels, and water shortage emergencies. In this case, I think the government could provide some advertisement to inform people about the severity of the water problem and encourage them to reduce the amount of water which they use. Overall, I think the government and people both together can give hands to each other and try to find the way to solve the water problems.  (SH)

Reference:

Sauter, M.B.,and Hess, A.E.M. (2013, August 1). Nine cities running out of Water. 24/7 Wall Street. From http:/247wallst.com/Special-report/2013/08/01/nine-cities-running-out-of-water

5. It is Texas tradition (and law) that you can draw as much water from your own well as you want, even at the expense of the aquifer that everyone shares. I do not agree with this tradition totally, but I do partially. I feel farmers and landowners should be limited for some level and these levels should vary depending on the type of farming. Reasons for my statement can be organized as follows.  For a strong society and for the balanced environment, both humans and animals must survive. Water and foods are the most essential things for animals to survive. In that case we need water not only for drinking and day to day life, but also for farming. This situation is true for Lubbock too. Therefore farmers should be able to use water as much as they want for farming. On the other hand, when we read several articles about water in Lubbock, such as Dillon (2013), Reed (2012), and Fleming (2012), we have to consider all actions that are necessary to save water. And ground water belongs to everybody, not only to the landowner where the well is located. On that point of view, farmers, such as cotton farmers, should be generous and they should limit their water usage to save water for the future. Concerning these facts, my idea is that there should be a reasonable limit per period for farmers for their water usage and these limits should be different depending on the type of farming.  (CD)

Reference

Dillon, K. (2013, September, 1). The Ogallala Aquifer, an important water resource, is in trouble.   Retrieved on September, 5, 2013 from http://www.kansascity.com/2013/09/01/4452173/the-ogallala-aquifer-an-important.html

6. I believe that government must control the water resource by its own. Water is like every kind of resource. If we don’t protect it, it will lose it sooner than we imagine. Taking petroleum for example, this is common knowledge that we are going to run out of oil in the following decades or even sooner. Hence, water is in the same condition. Nothing is infinite. Moreover, we have too much population now, and the resources on earth are getting scarce. Therefore, we should prevent the disaster earlier. Then, not only do we have to limit the usage, but also we are supposed to use it in a sustainable way. To sum up, I disagree with the policy in Texas. It is ridiculous because if people can use the water as much as they want, no one will stop to think their behavior is proper or not. In my opinion, those resources should be normed and be considered profoundly. (SYH)

7. According to Texas tradition and law, Texas groundwater is possessed by landowners. Landowners have the right to pump water from their well. Moreover, all regulations for utilizing the groundwater are very beneficial to the landowner. Nowadays the aquifer has become dry in Texas. It is an issue that farmers and landowners should have limitations for using the groundwater. I also agree that some regulations need to be adjusted; however, in my opinion, if there are limitations to use water for cultivation, the amount of cultivation could be reduced and then farmers could be damaged for their income. In addition, there is already the regulation to prevent over using the groundwater. Instead of limitations, if changing the law or adjusting the rule, the aquifer in Texas could be conserved without any damage to farmers and landowners. (MK)

Reference

Ronald A. Kaiser (2005, July). Who Owns the Water?. Texas Parks and Wildlife magazines. Retrived on Sep. 19, 2013 from http://texaswater.tamu.edu/water-law

8. Texas water can be divided into groundwater and surface water (Kaiser). Texas surface water belongs to the state of Texas. On the other hand, Texas groundwater belongs to the landowner; the landowner can draw whatever water is available, regardless of the consequences of pumping on neighboring wells (Texas water law). This law seems not rational today especially when Texas is facing a water crisis. Fresh water is limited sources of our planet and human beings share the water on earth. If some people run out of their local water then they will have to go to some other places for water; if there are too many people run out of their water sources and go to other places for water, this will eventually lead to a war fighting for water. Therefore, we have to use the water wisely before the water crisis is still under control. Thus the Texas groundwater right is not appropriate for wisely water using. It is not reasonable that the landowner can draw as much water as they can under their ground. All of the  ground water reservoirs are connected with each other. If the landowner draws all of the water underneath the land, water from neighboring lands, even from other states, will flow to the land and fill it. Thus the landowner might technically steal ground water from other states, which is against other states' laws. It would be more rational if there is a limit for the landowners based on the sizes of their lands. In summary, water source belongs to human beings and we should all share and use it wisely. (C.L.)

Kaiser, R.  A Primer on Texas Water Law, http://waterquality.okstate.edu/oldsite/events/waterforum/rkaiser1.pdf

[2] Texas water law, http://texaswater.tamu.edu/water-law

9. Clear water nowadays has been regarded as one of natural resources that could be depleted by human usage. Many organizations in the world call for a preservation of clear water resources for a sustainable world. According to Fleming (2012), a climate change and other different factors such as a cycle of hotter temperatures, more people, water-sapping cotton farming, and a devastating 2011 drought lead to a situation of scarce water. Therefore, although Texas tradition (and law) allows people to draw as much water from their own well as they want, it should have a policy on how much water business organizations use, especially farmers and landowners; or the government should impose a policy on farmers or landowners who benefit from using more water than other people. The reason for this idea is to protect a sustainable development in Texas where water is always a crucial issue for human life. In addition, the aquifer is not a finite water resource that can never be used up. In that sense, people should set up requirements for business usage and advise users to have an appropriate behavior to preserve clear water. (D.P.)

References

Fleming, P. (2012). Portrait of a Drought: Finding Water Where It Ain’t. Climate Progress.

Retrieved from http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/19/1052091/portrait-of-a-drought-finding-water-where-it-aint/

10. Texas groundwater belongs to the landowner. Groundwater is governed by the rule of capture, which means landowners the right to capture unlimited amount of groundwater by tapping into the underlying aquifer beneath their property. On the other hand, surface water belongs to the state of Texas. It can be used by a landowner only with the state's permission. Because of this rule, farmers and landowners use ground water until wells are drying out. This practice appears to have been problems for neighboring landowners, when they are withdrawing limited amounts of water or they cannot pump enough to significant amount. (SG)

11.Long years of overuse followed by three years of drought has depleted water sources in west Texas and left hundreds of communities struggling with water crisis. Millions of people are living under some form of water rationing across the south-west (Goldenberg, 2013). Three entities are responsible for the overuse of water sources: ranchers, cotton farmers and fast growing cities (Fleming, 2012). I think there should be water restriction for all of them. Cities have already been experiencing various forms of restrictions. But Texas laws treat the ground waters as the property of landowners. This prevents applying water restrictions on farmers. However, the situation is so dire that a change in these laws seems to be necessary. Now, water system has reached a point that no normal amount of precipitation can recharge it (Goldenberg, 2013). Draught and climate change has made the revival of the water system even more difficult. If this situation continues, sooner or later, the water system will be past the point of regeneration where no amount of precipitation can revive the system. To prevent this real catastrophe all those who use water, including farmers, should be subjected to restrictions. (HS) 

References

Fleming, P. (2012). Portrait of a Drought: Finding Water Where It Ain’t. Climate Progress. Retrieved from http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/19/1052091/portrait-of-a-drought-finding-water-where-it-aint/

Goldenberg, S. (2013, Aug. 11). A Texan tragedy: ample oil, no water. The Guardian. Retrieved on Aug. 28, 2013 from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/11/texas-tragedy-ample-oil-no-water

Experience paragraphs (survey)

1. I asked a few of my classmates and friends to help me finish the survey, and they were all pleased to help me. Firstly, I did the survey in my class when the class was over; I gave it to classmates who were sitting next to me, and asked them to help me. One of them asked me why I was doing this survey; I told them that this was my homework, and I was interested in the Lubbock water situation. And then some of them didn’t know what fracking was, I just told them that I have no idea either. They completed the surveys quickly and turned them back to me. Secondly, when I came back home, I asked some of my neighbors to help me. Most of them are Chinese, so I just told them this is my homework, and then they quickly finished it. (QK)

2. The objective of this exercise for the ESL 5301 class required the students to hand out and collect surveys which were designed to understand the people's knowledge and attitude about Lubbock’s water supply. Before going out and asking participants to fill out the survey, I made sure that I understood the questions and came up with scenarios which would require me to provide more clarity to the participants. Collecting the survey involved me introducing the topic to the students and the staff in the department of civil engineering. Most participants were mostly students or staff of the department of Civil Engineering at Texas Tech and they volunteered readily to be a part of this survey. Lubbock and its water supplies was not a hard or new topic to most of the people who volunteered to be a part of this survey. But there were a few instances during the process of survey collection that did catch me off guard; in the sentences below I would describe a few of these instances. One of the participants, who had agreed to be a part of the survey, was quick to go through the survey; once this participant had finished the survey the participant was interested to find out what my opinion of the subject was. There was also this other participant who went through most of the survey and then asked if he could be excused from the survey. He went on to explain how the last couple of questions were contentious questions, hence did not want to be a part of the survey. (RS)

3. The survey has 12 questions, not including other three classification options from the start. The survey respondents showed their knowledge and concerns about issues related to water in Lubbock by answering yes-no questions. Of 10 subjects approached, one refused to conduct the survey. The surveys were collected primarily on Texas Tech University campus from October 10th, 2013 to October 17th, 2013. One survey was collected off campus when the collector went to a barber shop. Participants were 8 students and 1 non-student. The first participant was willing to fill out the survey but he expressed annoyance later. Four female students in the library were excited to fill out the surveys. They were very nice and happy to help the surveyor. The only non-student respondent was a worker at Texas Tech University. He was approached in the university library when he was having a quick lunch. Two international participants were the collector and his classmate. The collector's classmate did not know about "fracking" and he suggested that the survey collector explain its meaning before answering the question. The survey collector explained the purpose and content of the survey pretty clearly, so all the participants understood and did not ask anything else. (DP)

4. I've distributed the surveys in my department, Chemical Engineering, and asked some of the staff, faculty and students to fill it out. Nobody asked me anything about fracking or land-watering. They just asked why I was doing it and I responded it's for a course. About students before asking them to fill it out, I asked first if they were from Texas or not, and if they said yes, then I gave them the survey. [N.K]

5. The study is about the water crisis and what the people think about water in Lubbock. The population in this study included male and female, student and non-student, Texas and non-Texas residents from Texas Tech University. Questionnaires were conducted to gather data for this research. Participants in this study were chosen through non-random sampling. First, I introduced myself to the participants and asked them whether they wanted to participate in a study about water in Lubbock or not. Second, I explained a little about the goal in this study and told them to ask any question they wanted during the time they answered the questions. Most of the Texas residents looked really eager to fill out the questionnaire and appreciated my doing this research and they told me they were really worried about the water crisis in Lubbock and two of them told me their neighbors and relatives had moved from Texas because of the water problem. The Texas residents did not ask any question about fracking and it seemed that they knew everything about it. But, non-residents asked me to explain fracking and most of them did not know about the water crisis in Lubbock or they did not consider this issue. Overall, all of the participants looked friendly and nice and no one rejected filling out the questionnaires. (SH)

6. I selected the people who were in the Student Union Building and the Civil Engineering Building. Overall they gave me a good response when they filled out my survey. I was very interested about one person who was talking more how Lake Meredith dried out and why it has not been refilled again. According to his voice Lake Meredith was mainly fed by the Canadian River and collected water by rainfall runoff from surrounding areas. Ute Lake is a big reservoir in New Mexico upstream of the Canadian River before Lake Meredith. When Lake Meredith's water level was going down, Ute Lake maintained its water level without releasing water to the Canadian River. In another case, catchment areas of Lake Meredith, there are small lakes. They collected runoff water and because of the shallow depth of water level water evaporates very rapidly. Therefore Lake Meredith is never going to fill out again. (SG)

7. In order to collect data for the survey, my first step was separating 8 surveys into different categories. I separated them into 4 males and 4 females. Among each category, I wanted two students and two non-students. Among students, USA and non-USA people were required. Then I tried to find people who were suited for each category. I focused on people only from the Department of Mathematics and Statistics. After I selected a person for my survey, I gave a brief description about the survey, such as requirement of the survey, and why I selected that person for this. While they were filling the survey, few of them said that they needed to pick all issues for the first question, but they picked only a few, and one said for the eleventh question, she did not need to pick the option “people who water their lawns” because she is also doing the same. (CD)

8. The first place I went for the survey was the bus station near my apartment because there always are a lot of students available while waiting for a bus. They were all very supportive and filled it out immediately except one girl suspected and asked why I did those surveys near the apartment instead of campus. I guess she was worried that I had a scam with some other purposes. After I pointed out where my apartment was and explained the convenience of the bus station to do the survey, she was convinced and filled a survey out for me. However, I couldn't get chances to have a conversations with those students because the buses come very frequently and almost right after they finished the surveys they needed to catch the buses. In order to compare the opinions from students and non-students, I also collected a few surveys from staff in the department of Mechanical Engineering because I am from there and I can easily distinguish non-students there. One of the technicians in the machine shop in ME is very supportive and asked if he could hand it to me later because he needed to finish some work when I went to him. Thus, I collected it later that afternoon from him. Furthermore, the graduate advisor in ME is very aware of the water crisis in Lubbock and she told me that not only did she turn off the water while brushing teeth herself but also persuaded her sons and husband to turn it off. But because of her lack of engineering knowledge, she didn't know what fracking was or the impact of it on water and environment. Therefore, I briefly introduced fracking to her and we even searched online about it. Moreover, she was surprised when I told her that the farmers can draw as much ground water as they want. She complained about the Texas water rights and acclaimed that we should limit the amount of water farmers can draw from their land in Texas. (CL)

9. When I collected surveys, most participants joyfully took part in this survey. I tried to collect various types and ages of people as much as I could. In 8 surveys, I wanted to have 2 students and 2 non-students in a 4 male group and a female group including at least 5 Americans. Since I usually collected surveys in the civil engineering building, it was hard to find female students in my department. So, I visited the office of the Department of Civil Engineering, the library and my apartment leasing office to find female participants. When participants were doing this survey, they typically asked me where I used this survey. In addition, they did not ask me any questions in the surveys. Since many participants were graduate students, they expected that surveys were going to be used in some part of a journal. So, I explained this would be used in a report in the writing class. (MK)

10. To collect my surveys I just went around the school in my other classes with my other classmates and professors. Something unusual that I noticed was, two guys, one from Japan and one from China, know everything about the water problem in Lubbock, even when they study MBA and aren't US citizens. This made me surprised, because I also gave the surveys to Texas residents and they didn't know anything about this problem; they even appeared disinterested (But this is just the people that I asked). Also one of my friends from Venezuela didn’t know too much about the water supply in Lubbock and after she did the survey, she started to ask me about the water, and she seemed worried. That was weird. In general I saw more interest in the people who were not from the US than in those who are US citizens. (JAPC)

11. When I got the survey, I thought that to find 5 Americans would be more difficult than to find international students. As soon as I got 8 survey question sheets, I brought them home and gave one of the sheets to my roommate. I am living in dormitory; my roommate is from El Paso. Although he is a freshman, he knows a lot about Lubbock water. Then, I brought four surveys to find my international friends from Taiwan. When I gave the surveys to them, they complained about me and said is this the way that you treated your friends. They just made fun of me. Even though they complained about me, they still finished my survey, and we had a great discussion of fracking, water sources, and climate change. At that time, I had finished five surveys. The only thing I had to do was find 4 more Americans, so I was waiting in the aisle. Whenever the students went out of the restroom, I begged them to take a look at my survey. If they were willing to do my survey, I would appreciate it. It didn’t take a long time because there were a lot of students going to the restroom. The most popular question from Americans was which class are you taking, and I said “Advanced writing”. Most of them gave me a confused face, but I thought it was pretty fun. Comparing American and international people, Americans know more about Lubbock water. Some of them even studied water supply at Lubbock high school, but this kind of knowledgeable people are just a few.(SYH)

12. All the surveys were filled out by people in my department except for one which was done by the old lady who works in the office of the complex where I live. Therefore I used people who I knew and were available to me. I did not need to talk people into doing it or give them treats, I just asked them "would you mind filling out a survey for me?" and then added, "it is about Lubbock water and takes only two minutes to be filled out". The last sentence was redundant though, by the time I finished the first sentence they were nodding their head as a sign of willingness to do the survey. Despite their initial (pretense of?) willingness, they did not seem much curious about the survey. Even one of them did not bother to flip the paper and fill in the other side! Only three people asked me questions about how they were supposed to answer the survey and two of them asked the same question: they were born in Texas but had spent most of their lives in other places, so they did not know how to describe themselves, Texan or non-Texan? (HS)

Argument Paragraphs

1. As we all know, water is a scarce resource in Texas, and such resources are decreasing every year, and the water should belong to all citizens who are living here. But according to the Texas law, the landowners can draw as much water from their own land as they want, so I think the law should be improved. In my opinion, the law should provide a limit on the amount that the farmers are allowed to pump, if the aquifer is endangered under their farms. Because first of all, I think the water in the underground belongs to all of us who are living in Texas, and the water those landowners draw out, may come from somewhere else or just flow through. Secondly, overpumping the underground water may cause a dried up situation, and many areas which use the water from underground will be influenced. Finally, not only in order to protect water resources in Texas, but also for our children have water to drink in the future, we should improve the law, and this is just what I think. (QK)

2. Based on a report by the Lubbock Water Department, the city water currently comes from three sources, two groundwater well fields in Roberts County and a well field in Bailey County. The third source is Lake Allen Henry. As a matter of fact, in 2011, the third source was Lake Meredith, but in 2012 Lake Meredith dried and put the city on stage 2 restriction of usage limiting mainly lawn water and carwash (Reed, 2012). The city, after completion of Lake Allen Henry project, went back to stage 1 restriction as of August 20th 2012 (Lubbock Water Department). (N.K.)

References:
Lubbock Water Department, http://www.mylubbock.us/departmental-websites/departments/water-department/home
Reed, A. (2012), Lubbock water crisi, how did we get to here?, KCDB website, http://www.kcbd.com/story/16903788/lubbocks-water-crisis-how-did-we-get-here

3. I believe that water is one of the biggest problems facing society today, not only in Lubbock but in general, but focusing only in this region, we have two major industries mostly occupied in the water supply, which are the oil industry and agriculture. How does that affect us? It is simple: farmers take more water than they need, without any rules that limit, because in Texas you can take all the water you find in your land; on the other hand, we have the oil industry that generates millions of dollars and with that justifies the damage it generates on groundwater aquifers. So I think that you should implement some governing rules for water overuse; for example, using treated water, when the same industry or farmers reuse their water. (JAPC)

4. The water crisis may have several issues which need attention. The water crisis includes water shortage, water pollution etc. When there is not enough drinking water, the water crisis is felt. Coping with water scarcity requires serious solutions. I believe one of the most important factors leading the water problem in West Texas is drought. I rest on the belief that at the beginning, we have to recognize what the water problems are, and how we can prevent such problems. I think first we should do some research regarding this issue, and then we should find some ways to resolve the problems. I believe if the government increases the amount of funds regarding water problem research, it will help scientists to explore what the exact problem is, and help experts to bring up proper solution about water problems. I think there are some methods we should use to prevent the water crisis, such as ways to cope with drought and shortage crisis, identify water resources available, public awareness and public participation in water planning and management, careful attention to the management of water, adjusting the water pressure in the distribution network, and controlling uses of high consumption. The other way is to make some policies to reduce water problems. For example, with population growth, natural resources of water are running out. Thus, sometimes due to water shortages, the governments could enact some rules to restrict the amount of water usage, so that it can adjust its consumption. According to Sauter and Hess the low rain fall engenders severe drought in West Texas in the United States, and if it continues West Texas cities face lots of problems such as crop losses, low reservoir levels, and water shortage emergencies. In this case, I think the government could provide some advertisement to inform people about the severity of the water problem and encourage them to reduce the amount of water which they use. Overall, I think the government and people both together can give hands to each other and try to find the way to solve the water problems. (SH)

Reference:
Sauter, M.B.,and Hess, A.E.M. (2013, August 1). Nine cities running out of Water.24/7 Wall Street. From http:/247wallst.com/Special-report/2013/08/01/nine-cities-running-out-of-water

5. It is Texas tradition (and law) that you can draw as much water from your own well as you want, even at the expense of the aquifer that everyone shares. I do not agree with this tradition totally, but I do partially. I feel farmers and landowners should be limited for some level and these levels should vary depending on the type of farming. Reasons for my statement can be organized as follows. For a strong society and for the balanced environment, both humans and animals must survive. Water and foods are the most essential things for animals to survive. In that case we need water not only for drinking and day-to-day life, but also for farming. This situation is true for Lubbock too. Therefore farmers should be able to use water as much as they want for farming. On the other hand, when we read several articles about water in Lubbock, such as Dillon (2013), Reed (2012), Fleming (2012), we have to consider all actions that are necessary to save water. And ground water belongs to everybody not only to the landowner where the well is located. On that point of view, farmers, such as cotton farmers should be generous and they should limit their water usage to save water for the future. Concerning these facts, my idea is that there should be a reasonable limit per period for farmers for their water usage and these limits should be different depending on the type of farming. (CD)

Reference
Dillon, K. (2013, September 1). The Ogallala Aquifer, an important water resource, is in trouble. Retrieved on September, 5, 2013 from http://www.kansascity.com/2013/09/01/4452173/the-ogallala-aquifer-an-important.html

6. I believe that government must control the water resource by its own. Water is like every kind of resource. If we don't protect it, we will lose it sooner than our imagination. Taking petroleum for example, this is common knowledge that we are going to run out of oil in the following decades or even sooner. Hence, water is in the same condition. Nothing is infinite. Moreover, we have too much population now, and the resources on earth are getting scarce. Therefore, we should prevent the disaster earlier. Then, not only do we have to limit the usage, but also we are supposed to use it in a sustainable way. To sum up, I disagree with the policy in Texas. It is ridiculous because if people can use the water as much as they want, no one will stop to think whether their behavior is proper or not. In my opinion, those resources should be normed and be considered profoundly.(SYH)

7. According to Texas tradition and law, Texas groundwater is possessed by landowners. Landowners have the right to pump water from their well. Moreover, all regulations for utilizing the groundwater are very beneficial to the landowner. Nowadays the aquifer is becoming dry in Texas. It is an issue whether farmers and landowners should have limitations for using the groundwater. I also agree that some regulations need to be adjusted; however, in my opinion, if there are limitations to use water for cultivation, the amount of cultivation could be reduced and then farmers could be damaged for their income. In addition, there is already the regulation to prevent overusing the groundwater. Instead of limitations, if there is changing the law or adjusting the rule, the aquifer in Texas could be conserved without any damage to farmers and landowners. (MK)

Reference
Kaiser, R.A. (2005, July). Who Owns the Water?. Texas Parks and Wildlife magazines. Retrived on Sep. 19, 2013 from http://texaswater.tamu.edu/water-law

8. Texas water can be divided into groundwater and surface water (Kaiser). Texas surface water belongs to the state of Texas. On the other hand, Texas groundwater belongs to the landowner; the landowner can draw whatever water is available, regardless of the consequences of pumping on neighboring wells (Texas Water Law). This law seems not rational today especially when Texas is facing a water crisis. Fresh water is a limited resource of our planet and human beings share the water on earth. If some people run out of their local water then they will have to go to some other places for water; if there are too many people who run out of their water sources and go to other places for water, this will eventually lead to a war fighting for water. Therefore, we have to use the water wisely before the water crisis is still under control. Thus the Texas groundwater right is not appropriate for wise water use. It is not reasonable that the landowner can draw as much water as they can under their ground. The ground water sources are connected with each other. If the landowner draws all of the water underneath the land, water from neighboring lands, even from other states, will flow to the land and fill it. Thus the landowner might technically steal ground water from other states, which is against other states' laws. It would be more rational if there is a limit for the landowners based on the sizes of their lands. In summary, the water source belongs to human beings and we should all share and use it wisely. (C.L.)

Kaiser, R. A Primer on Texas Water Law, http://waterquality.okstate.edu/oldsite/events/waterforum/rkaiser1.pdf
Texas water law, http://texaswater.tamu.edu/water-law

9. Clear water nowadays has been regarded as one of natural resources that could be depleted by human usage. Many organizations in the world call for a preservation of clear water resources for a sustainable world. According to Fleming (2012), climate change and other different factors such as a cycle of hotter temperatures, more people, water-sapping cotton farming, and a devastating 2011 drought led to a situation of scarce water. Therefore, although Texas tradition (and law) allows people to draw as much water from their own well as they want, it should have a policy on how much water business organizations use, especially farmers and landowners; or the government should impose a policy on farmers or landowners who benefit from using more water than other people. The reason for this idea is to protect a sustainable development in Texas where water is always a crucial issue for human life. In addition, the aquifer is not a finite water resource that can never be used up. In that sense, people should set up requirements for business usage and advise users to have appropriate behavior to preserve clear water. (D.P.)

References
Fleming, P. (2012). Portrait of a Drought: Finding Water Where It Ain’t. Climate Progress. Retrieved from http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/19/1052091/portrait-of-a-drought-finding-water-where-it-aint/

10. Texas groundwater belongs to the landowner. Groundwater is governed by the rule of capture, which means landowners the right to capture unlimited amount of groundwater by tapping into the underlying aquifer beneath their property. On the other hand, surface water belongs to the state of Texas. It can be used by a landowner only with the state's permission. Because of this rule, farmers and landowners use ground water until wells are drying out. This practice appears to have caused problems for neighboring landowners, when they are withdrawing limited amounts of water or they could not pump enough or a significant amount. (SG)

11. Decades of overuse followed by three years of drought has depleted water sources in west Texas and left hundreds of communities struggling with water crisis. Millions of people are living under some form of water rationing across the south-west (Goldenberg, 2013). Three entities are responsible for the overuse of water sources: ranchers, cotton farmers and fast growing cities (Fleming, 2012). I think there should be water restriction for all of them. Cities have already been experiencing various forms of restrictions. But Texas laws treat the ground waters as the property of landowners. This prevents applying water restrictions on farmers. However, the situation is so dire that a change in these laws seems to be necessary. Now, water system has reached a point that no normal amount of precipitation can recharge it (Goldenberg, 2013). Draught and climate change has made the revival of the water system even more difficult. If this situation continues, sooner or later, the water system will be past the point of regeneration where no amount of precipitation can revive the system. To prevent this real catastrophe all those who use water, including farmers, should be subjected to restrictions. (HS) 

References

Fleming, P. (2012). Portrait of a Drought: Finding Water Where It Ain’t. Climate Progress. Retrieved from http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/10/19/1052091/portrait-of-a-drought-finding-water-where-it-aint/

Goldenberg, S. (2013, Aug. 11). A Texan tragedy: ample oil, no water. The Guardian. Retrieved on Aug. 28, 2013 from http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/11/texas-tragedy-ample-oil-no-water