My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC12502
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSPC12502
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:16:28 PM
Creation date
7/30/2007 8:51:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8282.400
Description
Colorado River Operations and Accounting - Deliveries to Mexico
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
1/1/3000
Author
Unknown
Title
Ecological Water Flows for the Colorado River Delta Under International and Domestic Law - Draft - Date Unknown
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />00Q357 <br /> <br />DRAFT-Not for distribution <br /> <br />peremptory norm status, may be the notion of "ecological balance" in the context of sustainable <br />d I 168 <br />eve opment. <br /> <br />It is fair to conclude that there are no peremptory norms of international law which would <br />establish a requirement that one nation insure water flow in an international river in order to <br />create ecological flows in a downstream nation. In particular, none of the customary <br />international law principles highlighted above are currently regarded as peremptory norms in <br />international law. <br /> <br />D. Conclusion: An International Legal Mandate Probably Exists Requiring Mexico <br />to Provide Water for Ecological Water Flows for the Colorado Delta <br /> <br />While political judgments can always be made as to the contemporary appropriateness of <br />a past water treaty allocation, there is no international legal mandate (i.e. peremptory norm, <br />treaty or agreement, or customary law) that the upstream state reduce its use of its treaty <br />allocation to meet minimum flow expectations of the downstream state. <br /> <br />Downstream states lack control of the flow of international rivers under <br />international water law... Although the older rule of absolute territorial <br />sovereignty has been rejected in favor of equitable sharing, upstream states do <br />not need to seek the consent of downstream states to make a diversion. In <br />short, there is no natural flow rule in international water law. 169 <br /> <br />The United States thus has no current international legal obligation to provide or time <br />extra Colorado River flows to Mexico for the Colorado River delta. <br /> <br />Mexico, on the other hand, as the nation enclosing and controlling the Colorado River <br />Delta, is in a different position under international law. Its duty to be responsible for the use of <br />its natural resources, including the plant and animal life within its borders, corollary to its <br />sovereignty over them, as recognized by the North American Agreement on Environmental <br />Cooperation, North American Free Trade Agreement and other international environmental <br />agreements and conventions,170 creates a responsibility to do something to better the <br />environment ofthe Colorado River Delta. <br /> <br />This conclusion is buttressed by the U.S. reading of the intent and purpose of the 1944 <br />Water Treaty; namely that the international allocation of water supply is fully addressed by the <br />1944 Water Treaty,17l that Mexico must address all its water needs, including ecological needs, <br />from the water supply it secured in that Treaty, and that the only way to alter that treaty <br />allocation is through treaty amendment. <br /> <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.