|
<br />
<br />river upstream as one ecological whole, overcoming the
<br />obstacles presented by an international boundary. The
<br />delta is part of a regional ecosystem that includes the
<br />remaining wetland and riparian ecosystems described
<br />in this report, as well as the Salton Sea (see beloW), and
<br />the New and Alamo rivers, and connecting wildlife
<br />corridors in the United States and Mexico. Any
<br />management plan for the delta and lower Colorado
<br />River ecosystem must take into account the effects on
<br />components of the larger ecosystem as well.
<br />
<br />The growing interest in preserving delta ecosystems on
<br />both sides of the border may offer a window of oppor-
<br />tunity. In the past few years, representatives of
<br />universities, government agencies, and environmental
<br />groups have met in cities along the border (Mexicali,
<br />San Luis Rio Colorado, EI Paso, Tucson, and Yuma) to
<br />discuss preservation of the delta. New opportunities for
<br />funding, research collaboration, and even international
<br />agreements, stemming from bi- and trinational environ-
<br />mental organizations have been established in the wake
<br />of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
<br />
<br />The opportunity to design and implement preservation
<br />strategies for the delta is also enhanced by the current
<br />status of water development and use in the Colorado
<br />River basin. At present, mainstem reservoirs are full.
<br />The era of building dams on the Colorado is over, and
<br />there will be little, if any, additional storage on the river.
<br />Upper basin states (Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico,
<br />and Utah) do not presently use their full entitlement of
<br />Colorado River water, and, with the exception of Colo-
<br />rado, it is not likely that they will in the next several
<br />decades. Existing storage capacity, combined with un-
<br />used entitlements in the upper basin (some or all of
<br />which may be freed up with the implementation of con-
<br />servation measures such as California's 4.4 plan [see
<br />below]) mean that water will continue to flow in the
<br />river and into the delta.41 In other words, the time may
<br />be right. In this climate of opportunity and interest, there
<br />may be sufficient political will to secure the delta's fu-
<br />ture.
<br />
<br />AGENTS OF CHANGE
<br />
<br />
<br />The list of numerous agencies with some jurisdictional
<br />authority over the delta, Colorado River water, and bor-
<br />der-related environmental issues, is daunting.
<br />Successful, long-term preservation of the Colorado River
<br />delta will require cooperation between Mexico and the
<br />United States, among states and resource agencies,
<br />tribes, and the active involvement of nongovernmental
<br />organizations, communities, and citizens. While an ex-
<br />act course for institutional action is impossible to chart,
<br />this section offers brief descriptions of the myriad au-
<br />thorities that could be a part of the solution. In addition,
<br />it details several long-standing resource management
<br />issues that may offer these institutions (and others) stra-
<br />tegic opportunities for improving management of the
<br />delta.
<br />
<br />International Boundary and Water Commission
<br />
<br />The only institution with binational authority over
<br />surface water resources in the border region is the
<br />International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC),
<br />known as Comision Internacional de Limites y Aguas
<br />(CILA) in Mexico. Created in 1889,42 the IBWC is charged
<br />with applying provisions of various boundary and
<br />water treaties. The scope of its work includes boundary
<br />maintenance, reclamation projects, allocation of
<br />transboundary water resources, construction and main-
<br />tenance of sewage and sanitation works, and the
<br />resolution of treaty and water quality disputes (Meyers,
<br />1967). Today, the IBWC's mission is to "provide envi-
<br />ronmentally sensitive, timely, and fiscally responsible
<br />boundary and water services along the United States
<br />and Mexico border in an atmosphere of binational co-
<br />operation and in a manner responsive to public
<br />concerns" (Valdes-Casillas et aI., 1998a). In practice, the
<br />IBWC has limited its focus to problems of water supply
<br />and quality along the border, leaving issues of environ-
<br />mental protection to the jurisdiction of other Mexican
<br />and U.S. agencies.
<br />
<br />41 A severe, sustained drought would change these circumstances, but its eventuality should not constrain action at this time.
<br />42 The International Boundary Commission was formed in 1889, and renamed the IBWC following the United States-Mexican Water Treaty of 1944
<br />(Mumme, 1996).
<br />
<br />34
<br />
|