A cliff on the side of Rio Conchos in Mexico.
At the La Boquilla Dam on the Conchos River conflict erupted. The dam was being used to transfer water to a wealthy foreign nation until protesters turned off the valves and shut down the flow. Federal forces soon arrived to secure the dam and restore the water transfer. As the National Guard attempted to retake the dam from the protesters, they shot and killed a woman and wounded her husband.
This didn’t happen on another continent, or decades ago. In fact, it was in Mexico, in 2020. Who was the water recipient? The United States.
The 1944 Treaty: U.S.-Mexico Water Diplomacy
Signed by the U.S. and Mexico, the Mexican Water Treaty of 1944 focuses on the utilization of waters of the Colorado,Tijuana and Rio Bravo Rivers, which cross the U.S.-Mexico border. This treaty established an International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) which is charged with resolving water disputes between the US and Mexico.
The Treaty requires the U.S. to send Mexico 1.5 million acre feet of water from the Colorado River and Mexico is required to send the U.S. 350,000 acre feet of water from the Rio Grande River in five year cycles. One acre foot of water will last a family of five one year (although most of the water is used for agriculture). Mexico’s water deliveries are due annually by October 24. Mexico sends water stored in dam reservoirs, mostly in Chihuahua, to pay their water debts.
A map of the U.S.-Mexico border detailing the shared river and its main tributaries.
Regional Impacts of Climate Change on Water Levels
As the Treaty was being negotiated in the 1940s, these rivers were in a period of water abundance. The engineers and diplomats who negotiated the treaty, could not anticipate the current 23 year-long drought the region is experiencing.
Researchers cite low rainfall and water mismanagement as the two causes of one of Northern Mexico’s worst droughts. Northern Mexico and Southwest U.S. have both seen an average of over 2 degrees celsius of warming compared to historical averages 1900, which is a greater increase than other regions globally. Higher temperatures drive more evaporation, which dries out soil and worsens the drought. As temperatures continue to rise, the drought will only intensify.
For the first fifty years of the treaty, Mexico reliably delivered its water debt on the Rio Grande. But in 1994 the drought conditions forced Mexico to roll over their water debt from one five-year cycle to the next. But when the drought continues beyond the ten-year debt due date.
Agricultural Sector’s Concerns and Responses
Mexico draws 54 percent of the water needed to meet its debt from Chihuahua, home to the Rio Bravo and Rio Conchos, a Rio Grande tributary.
But the water going to the U.S. would have been highly beneficial to Chihuahua’s agricultural sector had Mexico been able to keep it. Chihuahua is known for growing cotton, walnuts, apples, and corn for export. Production is valued at around US$2.9 billion as of 2019, ranking fourth in highest agricultural production value and volume when compared to other Mexican states.
Texan farmers are also highly concerned about these water deliveries because their crops rely on the water too.
Conflicts Stemming from this Treaty
In 2020, the Chihuahua government sent water to Texas, despite protests from farmers and the local communities. That February, at the behest of the Mexican President, federal forces occupied the La Boquilla dam.
Activists responded by burning government buildings, destroying vehicles, blocking a major railroad, and even taking several politicians hostage.
In July, military police and members of the National Guard fired tear gas at protesters, who had come to protest the release of water at another dam. Following this clash, the state government agreed to stop water debt repayments pending negotiations between the state and community.
A few weeks later, protesters gained control of the La Boquilla Dam and a woman was killed in the conflict. In response, farmers at La Boquilla dam armed themselves with rocks, sticks, and homemade shields. They then assaulted the hundreds of soldiers tasked with protecting the dam, gaining control of the dam briefly.
Can future negotiations solve the problem?
The treaty will be up for renegotiation in 2023. Now, a key question is how the treaty might change as a result of these conflicts. While there are many aspects to reconsider, it is most essential to put the needs of the communities near the rivers and their tributaries first. The renegotiated treaty should invest in community input to reduce the risk of government decisions and community opinions clashing. The original treaty negotiators were not the people most impacted. Prompting conversations between the community and government will reduce the risk of future conflict by helping the government understand community level needs.
The treaty negotiators should also consult with scientists to understand how climate change will impact the river and the communities’ water needs. To set up the treaty for a successful future sharing water and mitigating conflict, it should reflect the current outlooks on water, and make room for unexpected changes. Combining community input and science will enable the renegotiated treaty to better consider human needs overtime and maximize benefits.