<br />
<br />'"
<br />
<br />.
<br />..-N.
<br />;,i?r~..
<br />
<br />:"~:;""
<br />
<br />.',"
<br />
<br />. :.,;;~,.:.
<br />','\";' ,
<br />
<br />
<br />, .'
<br />
<br />,"'!
<br />
<br />"',,
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />j
<br />
<br />. "".,"
<br />
<br />~.. ;
<br />
<br />14
<br />
<br />MEXICAN WATER TREATY
<br />
<br />IJ?c/i"' Orive Alba, chairman of the National IrrigllJ,ion Commission;
<br />testIfied: . .
<br />With respect to the possibility that the waters of the Colorado River which
<br />are delivered to us'may be of poor quality, because they contain dissolved salts,
<br />we are able to. affirm, based on reasons of legal and teohnical nature, that fortu-
<br />nately such a danger does not exist. In the official report to the Senate that the
<br />National Irrigation Commission is terminating, this theme will be considered
<br />more fully, in order to do away with any doubt that may be had in this respect,
<br />It is not within the purpose and the time set for this report to do it as fully as is
<br />necessary, but we may point out at least the following reasons:
<br />(a) The negotiations of the treaty on the part of the American delegation arid
<br />later its approval by the American Senate were made by taking as a fundamental
<br />basis the official document called the Santa Fe agreement, which with the. apProval
<br />of the American Federal Government distributed, since 1922, the main stream o.f
<br />the Colorado. River among the, American States of the upper and lower baa;ins,
<br />and specified that the waters assigned to Mexico should be taken from'the excess
<br />which the average virgin volume of the river (22,000,000;000. cubiQ me~rs)
<br />(17,835,000 acre-feet) had over the volume distributed among the American
<br />States of the upper and lower basins (20,000,000,000 cubic meters) (16,213j600
<br />acre-feet). Our assi!1nment of 1,850,000,000 cubIC meters (1,500,000 acre-reet)
<br />is included, then, Within the 2,000,000,000 cubic m~ters (1,621,000 acre-feet)
<br />of the difference. The virgin waters of the Colorado River are of gOO<l quality.
<br />Besides this, even a superficial study o.f the treaty shows, from the introduotion
<br />to the transitory articles with .which it terminates, t!1at it is inspiredwitb.the
<br />fact that "it is to the interests of both countries to take advantage of these waters
<br />in other uses and 'consumptions *. * * in order to obtain its most ~o:tnple.te
<br />and satisfactory utilization." This is a paragraph transcribed from the pref~ce.
<br />In article 27 of. the transitory articles It Is clearly stated that the use to which
<br />these waters are to be put .is that of irrigation. Therefore, ~n this treatYJ,,9'8,in anti
<br />other oj its kind, it is understood that the water must. be 'of good quality. lUexico :hos
<br />the right to ka've the water that i8 a8signed to it from tke Colorado Rivet' proceed entir.elJl
<br />from the virgin. volume of the current, but know~ng .that (his is physically irnpossible
<br />to obtain for any use of water downstream on any river fully utilized, as is the' Coloradc
<br />. If,ive1, our country had .no objection' to receiving these waterq tl;-e same as _ the other
<br />American users of the lower portion of the Colorado River, as long as they were of good
<br />quality for irrigation. . [Emphasis supplied.]
<br />One of the critics of the treaty in Mexico, Lic. Esguive] Obregon
<br />president of the Academy of Jurisprudence and lJegls]ation, offered
<br />seven reservations: Reservation No. 5 read as follows: .
<br />The UnIted States undertake that the waters delivered to Mexico from the
<br />Colorado Riv~r shall satisfy, as to chemical composition, the iIidispenaabl~-require-
<br />ments for agricultural use, so that the lands whi~h receive them may" 'use them
<br />(Excelsior. 'August 9, 1945). .
<br />Rep]yi~g to this demand for a reservation, lng. Orive Alba said:
<br />That was 'covered in the treaty when it spoke of waters for irrigation. No on6
<br />would be able to sign a treaty to give or receiv~ waters of bad quality because ,both
<br />parties would suffer damage therefrom (Excelsior, August to, 1945). .
<br />Lic. Ernesto Enriquez, the eminent international lawyer, said,
<br />with respect to this rese~vatio!lon quality of water, that he wanted it
<br />noted that the treaty saId plam]y that they must be waters usefu] for
<br />agriculture (El Nacional, August 11, 1945).
<br />The reservation was never voted upon,
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />(2) CONFLICTING INTERPRETATIONS AS TO THE OPERATION OF THE
<br />"EXTRAORDINARY DROUGlIT", CLAUSE
<br />
<br />/i
<br />
<br />The Oolorado River drought clause.-The testimony of the negotiators
<br />here and in Mexico likewise demonstrated that. there was no real meet-
<br />ing of the niinds with respect to the" extraordinary drought" clause
<br />on the Colorado. This clause (art. 10) reads: .
<br />
<br />~; .
<br />
<br />
<br />-C"','-,'.,"
<br />. .'
<br />
|