I. Introduction
The Usumacinta River of Guatemala and Mexico is
the largest river in Mesoamerica and among the most significant
shared water resources in the Western Hemisphere. The river basin
drains one of the largest areas of contiguous tropical forest
in the region and is extremely rich in natural and cultural resources.
The river also flows through the most economically and politically
marginalized regions of both Guatemala and Mexico. The ecological
and hydrological integrity of the Usumacinta watershed faces numerous
threats from deforestation, hydroelectric development and mineral
exploitation on both sides of the border.
On July 25 and 26, 1996 a roundtable meeting of
representatives of governmental, non-governmental and academic
institutions from Guatemala, Mexico and the United States convened
in San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas, Mexico to discuss the
management of the Usumacinta River. The roundtable was sponsored
by the Mesoamerican Environmental Law Program as part of its continuing
boundary water series, and ECOSUR, a research institute within
El Colegio de la Frontera Sur in Chiapas. This report provides
background information concerning the ecological, social and legal/institutional
context for river management, discusses some of the key threats
the basin faces, and provides some initial conclusions reached
by roundtable participants for future watershed management. A
more comprehensive report and GIS base map is in preparation.
II. The Usumacinta
A. The River
The Usumacinta is the longest river in Mesoamerica.
With a basin of 106,000 sq km., shared by Guatemala and Mexico,
it is also the region's largest river. The river rises in the
Peten of Guatemala and flows along its common border with the
Mexican state of Chiapas before entering Mexico and flowing to
the sea through Chiapas, Campeche and Tabasco. 42% of Guatemala
is drained by the Usumacinta. The annual average discharge to
the Gulf of Mexico is 105,200 million sq. meters, making it the
6th largest river in Latin America. This quantity represents 30%
of Mexico's freshwater.
B. Ecological significance
The region drained by the Usumacinta is one of
the most biologically diverse in the world, and represents the
northern limits of tropical forest ecosystems in the Western Hemisphere.
The river itself has an especially rich ichthyofauna, with 112
known fish species. The estuarine delta of the Usumacinta is one
of the most important wetlands on Mexico's Gulf coast for migratory
waterfowl, wading birds and crocodiles. The Laguna de TÔrminos,
part of the Usumacinta delta, is the home to Mexico's largest
fishing fleet.
The watershed of the Usumacinta drains what many
believe is the largest remaining contiguous tropical forest north
of the Amazon, often referred to as the Selva Maya, or Maya Forest.
Much of the river originates in the Peten of Guatemala, a vast
comparatively pristine region of lowland tropical forest. The
other major area of tropical forest within the River's watershed
is Mexico's Lacandon Forest, recognized as an important storehouse
of biological diversity. Two internationally recognized RAMSAR
wetlands lie within the Usumacinta watershed -- Laguna del Tigre
National Park in Guatemala and Pantanos de Centla Biosphere Reserve
in Mexico.
C. Cultural significance
The Usumacinta River was a center of ancient Maya
culture, which used the river and it's network of tributaries
for trade and travel. Some estimate the region may have been inhabited
by as many as five million Maya at its peak in 700 A.D. Several
major archaeological sites are located on the banks of the river,
including YaxchilĂn and Planch˘n de las Figuras in Mexico, and
Guatemala's Piedras Negras. Other significant sites in the basin
are Palenque, Bonampak, Altar of Sacrifices and Tikal. There are
literally thousands of smaller sites.
In addition to its archaeological significance
the Usumacinta River basin supports a regional way of life that
is distinct from contemporary societal models. The Lacandones
of Chiapas, a Maya people, provide a contemporary link to the
region's precolombian history. As a reservoir of indigenous knowledge
that has largely been lost by other Mayans, the Lacandons have
much to teach the world about living sustainably in tropical forests.
In Guatemala, Peteneros represent a fiercely independent forest
dwelling society that continues to harvest chicle ("oro blanco")
and other non-timber forest products using methods that also provide
an alternative to the traditional pattern of tropical rainforest
destruction for timber and agriculture.
III. Summary of Threats
A. Dams
The Usumacinta has never been dammed, although
it has great potential for hydropower development. Five feasible
dam sites have been identified on the main stem of the river.
These projects would have the potential to generate between 2
and 3.7 megawatts of electricity, while flooding over 1,315 sq.
km. of land along 525 km. of the Usumacinta River. The potential
impacts of dam projects have been an historic focus of conflict
between between Mexico and Guatemala, which would suffer two thirds
of the flooding. Guerrilla warfare, political tensions, and deteriorating
economies, as well as concern for ecological effects and inundation
of archeological sites, have thus far stymied hydropower development.
Instead, Mexico constructed a major system of dams on the neighboring
Grijalva river system and Guatemala focused on hydropower development
of the Chixoy River, a tributary of the Usumacinta.
Many observors believe that the time has come for
Mexico and Guatemala to revive plans for development of the Usumacinta.
Guatemala is developing plans for hydropower development of several
major tributaries. The effects of tributary hydropower development
on the basin as a whole have not been assessed.
B. Deforestation
The region's rich timber resources, especially
mahogany and red cedar, were a target for exploitation beginning
in the late 1800's, when logs were floated down the Usumacinta
to Tenosique. During the 1980's, a mill was in operation in Chancala,
Chiapas, with the capacity to produce 17 million board feet per
year. Satellite imagery reveals substantial deforestation on Mexico's
side of the border in the area served by this mill. The Guatemala
government is now proposing to subdivide the Peten Forest into
commercial and community concessions for timber extraction.
Much of the region, especially in Mexico, has been
deforested. Over 60% of the 5,000 square mile Lacondon forest
has been cleared since 1970, with 1,500 square miles lost in the
last 10 years. The only significant area of the Lacondon forest
remaining is the 1,278 square mile Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve,
which has recently experienced major incursions by settlers. The
1.3 million hectare Maya Biosphere Reserve in the Peten of Guatemala
represents the region's largest "protected area," yet colonization
and refugee resettlement continue to swell the Peten's once sparse
population and threatens all but the most remote forests of the
Reserve. Forest clearing rates in the strictly protected areas
and multiple use zone of the Reserve were less that 0.5 percent
per year in the early to mid 1990s, but over 2 percent in the
Reserves's southern perimeter buffer zone (comparable to Chiapas).
Forest exploitation does not necessarily result
in deforestation, but in the basin of the Usumacinta, that is
often what happens. Typically, an area will be timbered and then
settled by colonists who plant corn and other subsistence crops.
After a few years of cultivation for corn, the productivity of
the soil is usually depleted and the area is converted to grasslands
for cattle grazing, while additional areas of forest are cleared
for corn. This process, plus the influx of new settlers, leads
to rapid deforestation. Deforestation results in major loss of
biological diversity in the basin. Deforestation also significantly
affects water resources, by accelerating runoff, causing erosion
and sedimentation and transporting nutrients.
C. Roads
Deforestation is often inititated by the construction
of roads, creating easier access for timber extraction and colonists.
Wherever roads have been constructed in the basin, settlement
has followed. Proposals to build major roads linking archeological
sites to facilitate tourism, thus have enormous potential to facilitate
inappropriate patterns of settlement and accelerate loss of the
forests in the watershed. The construction of roads to Bonampak
and YaxchilĂn, or even from Palenque to Tikal, have been criticized
as posing a considerable threat to environmental resources in
the basin.
D. Oil
Oil has been exploited in the area since the 1930's.
The Mexican state of Tabasco has over 7,000 oil wells, three petrochemical
plants and 175 primary processing facilities, which have resulted
in extensive pollution. Oil exploration and development is continuing
in more remote parts of the basin. The Peten of Guatemala is the
focus of much current activity. Laguna del Tigre National Park
in the Usumacinta headwaters is Central America's largest wetland
and an internationally recognized RAMSAR site. The protected wetland
also overlies an oil production field that is under consideration
for international development bank financing for expanded production.
The exploitation of petroleum has the potential
to cause significant direct environmental impact through construction
activities, spills and the discharge of pollutants. This concern
is especially significant around the River's mouth in Tabasco,
which is currently experiencing an oil boom. Some of the greatest
concerns, however, are for the indirect effects of building roads
and bringing workers into forested areas. Change detection data
from satellite imagery between 1993-1995 has graphically demonstrated
the deforestation resulting from the construction of the oil road
in Laguna del Tigre National Park in Guatemala.
E. The Social Context: Poverty, Population Growth,
Political Instability, Land Tenure and Enforcement
The areas drained by the Usumacinta are among
the poorest in Guatemala and Mexico. Until recently, the Peten
was a center for armed conflict between guerrilla and government
troops. Many Guatemalans were driven by the violence to cross
into Mexico, forming refugee settlements. Social and economic
conditions in Chiapas led to the Zapatista uprising in 1994, whose
forces continue to hold part of the Lacandon forest.
To alleviate these social pressures and secure
contested border areas, both governments have encouraged immigration
to frontier parts of the basin. Land tenure, however, is commonly
uncertain or contested, and there is ineffective enforcement against
incursions into parks or other protected areas. Immigration has
often resulted in deforestation of ostensibly protected areas
or other inappropriate lands. As the population increases, and
the resource base is degraded by unsustainable development, the
potential for continued social strife seems likely to rise.
IV. The Legal and Institutional Context
A. A Short History of the Guatemala Mexico Border
In 1823, Guatemala and the other Central American
states declared their independence from Mexico and established
the shortlived Central American Federation. Chiapas, however,
joined Mexico, establishing the basis for the current poltical
geography of the region. The precise location of the remote border
remained uncertain, however, prompting the two nations to agree
to develop a more precise boundary determination. After years
of negotiations, agreement was reached on the common border, which
included the Usumacinta River. This agreement was ratified by
treaty in 1882, in which Guatemala also renounced any further
claims to Chiapas. The river border is represented by the deepest
point in the river along its common boundary.
B. CILA - The International Commission on Limits
and Waters Between Mexico and Guatemala
The International Commission on Limits and Waters
between Mexico and Guatemala was formally established by an exchange
of diplomatic notes between the two countries in 1961. The Commission
has jurisdiction over the border between the two countries and
hence over much of the Usumacinta River basin. The Commission
has authority to advise the governments of the two countries concerning
border issues, to conduct investigations, and to develop works
that have been previously approved by the two governments. The
Commission also has the authority to develop projects concerning
the equitable use of international waters for the benefit of both
countries. The Commission is composed of two sections, corresponding
to each country, and each section is headed by a commissioned
engineer with diplomatic status and technical, legal and administrative
staff as warranted. Decisions taken by the Commission must be
referred to the Secretary of Foreign Relations of each country
for approval by the respective governments.
In 1979, the respective governments agreed to establish
working groups to begin basin development planning. In 1980 a
development planning process was approved that authorized studies
concerning the hydroelectric and agricultural potential of the
international watershed. While many of these engineering and planning
studies were undertaken, no agreement was reached to finance joint
development projects.
In 1990, an agreement was signed by each country
that would provide CILA with treaty status and obligate each country
to provide the resources necessary for the Commission to discharge
its duties. The agreement was apparently ratified by Mexico, but
has not been acted upon by Guatemala. In addition to reaffirming
the Commission's jurisdiction and authority set forth in the prior
exchange of notes, the agreement requires the Commission to provide
technical recommendations that could serve as the basis for a
treaty governing the use, development and conservation of the
international rivers. The agreement also would obligate the commission
to investigate projects to develop the hydroelectric capacity
of the Usumacinta, Suchiate and Chixoy Rivers. It further requires
the Commission to recommend solutions to problems that affect
the quality of the international waters under its jurisdiction,
including the establishment of water quality standards. Finally,
it authorizes the Commission to assist in investigations and studies
related to the improvement of the environment and the conservation
of natural resources and cultural patrimony.
C. The Border Environment Agreement
In 1988 the governments of Guatemala and Mexico
ratified a convention concerning the protection of the border
environment. The agreement obligates the governments to cooperate
in matters related to environmental contamination and the protection
of natural resources. The agreement charges CILA with incorporating
environmental considerations into its planning studies and establishing
a working group to provide recommendations to the respective governments
on this subject. The agreement also requires the parties to evaluate
the effect of activities proposed within the frontier zone consistent
with their own national law.
V. The Law of International Rivers
The Usumacinta is an international river. International
rivers are defined as "those which flow either through, or between,
more states than one." Such shared waters are characterized by
special rules in international law. Most states adhere to theory
of "limited territorial sovereignty" when considering shared basins.
This theory holds that a state may use the waters flowing through
its territory as long as it does not interfere with its reasonable
use by a co-basin state. This theory has emerged as a general
rule of international law and has evolved into the doctrine of
"equitable utilization." Professor Utton has summarized the rules
governing the use of international waters in the following fashion:
- ... a co-basin state can develop and utilize water resources
within its jurisdiction if no appreciable harm is caused to
other co-basin states....
-
-
However, a co-basin state has an obligation
not to use the waters of an international watercourse system
in a way that would cause substantial or appreciable harm
to a co-basin state.
-
If existing uses or a proposed use could or
would cause appreciable harm, then there is an obligation
to notify, consult and settle the question by mutual agreement
through negotiation.
-
If negotiation fails, then the question would
be referred to an appropriate tribunal or other decision maker
to decide, based on the "equities" by balancing the relevant
factors under the principle of equitable utilization or apportionment.
As water resource management has become increasing
multi-faceted the doctrine of equitable utilization has been criticized
for its emphasis on independent development of shared basins based
primarily on allocations of water for consumptive uses. Contemporary
water managers tend to view shared waters from the perspective
of the entire watershed and emphazise comprehensive river basin
planning. As a result, the principle of equitable participation
has recently emerged to modify the doctrine of equitable utilization
and ensure that it contemplates cooperation in integrated water
resource management.
VI. The Roundtable: Background and Results
A. Background
Shared basins are common in the Americas. The
United States and Canada share such major systems as the Great
Lakes and the Columbia River. Mexico and the United States jointly
manage the Colorado River, the Rio Grande and several smaller
rivers. There are 58 shared basins in Latin America. Every country
in Mesoamerica shares a boundary river or other significant water
resource. Like the Usumacinta, these basins are often areas that
have been economically and politically marginalized. Unless there
is effective cooperation in the management of these resources,
ecological degradation will continue, sustainable development
cannot be achieved and international conflict can result. The
development of effective institutions for managing shared water
resources is an urgent priority in the Americas.
The Usumacinta is thus a microcosm for issues that
must be addressed elsewhere in the region. Although Mexico has
devoted considerable resources to the management of rivers along
it's northern border with the United States, the southern border
and the Gulf of Mexico have received much less attention. Similarly,
from the perspective of Guatemala, while there has been some recognition
of its role as manager of part of a larger basin, few resources
have been allocated.
B. Summary of the Roundtable
Recognizing the need to stimulate improved cooperation
in management of the Usuamacinta basin, a group of environmental
and water management experts, officials and academics from Guatemala,
Mexico and the United States convened a roundtable discussion
in San Crist˘bal de las Casas, Chiapas, July 25-26, 1996. The
roundtable was hosted by El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR).
The purpose of the roundtable was to review development
and conservation issues from a basin perspective. To facilitate
the process, the staff of ECOSUR mapped available information
for the basin using a geographic information system (GIS). Participants
were asked to bring relevant documents and make short presentations
regarding the hydrologic, ecological, archeological, cultural
and socio-economic status of the basin. The laws of Guatemala
and Mexico affecting the basin were reviewed. In addition, other
multijurisdictional water management efforts were described.
The degree of knowledge regarding parts of the
basin is impressive. Studies have focused on the estuary, the
Lacondon forest and significant areas in the Peten. What the roundtable
identified as lacking, however, is any integration of those studies,
or a coordinated plan for implementation.
C. Action Plan
The participants in the workshop agreed that the
most pressing immediate need is for a rapid assessment of existing
information in order to identify research gaps and management
priorities. Given the pace of deforestation and other development
in the region, it was felt that action could not be delayed pending
the completion of long-term studies. Accordingly, the roundtable
supported the idea of conducting a "Rapid Watershed Assessment,"
which would be designed to synthesize existing information as
the basis for relatively short-term management recommendations.
The participants agreed to work on completing such an assessment
over the next year, and to meet again either in Guatemala or in
Tabasco, close to the estuary, to consider recommendations for
improving basin management.
D. Potential Legal Framework
The Roundtable participants also agreed that the
legal and institutional framework for basinwide management must
be given further consideration. Guatemala and Mexico have established
an institution with significant authority over the basin, the
Comisi˘n Internacional de Límites y Aguas Entre MÔxico y Guatemala
(CILA). CILA has clear authority to mark the boundary between
the two countries. In addition, it has authority to conduct planning
studies related to managing shared water resources. The 1987 border
agreement also appears to give CILA an environmental mandate.
CILA thus appears to provide an opportunity for the institutional
expression of the principle of equitable participation in the
law of international waters. As such roundtable participants believed
it has the potential to serve as the binational coordinator of
basin management initiatives.
The structure of such binational management should
be further explored, however. A range of institutional models
exist for multijurisdictional basin management. Those factors
that have led to the success or failure of other institutions
should be understood and used as the basis for developing recommendations
for improving management of the Usumacinta.
VII. Conclusions
The Rio Usumacinta roundtable was the third in
a series that the Mesoamerican Environmental Law Program has been
conducting to discuss issues related to the management of shared
water resources in Mesoamerica. Two previous roundtables have
been conducted to discuss issues related to the Rio San Juan,
the boundary water between Nicaragua and Costa Rica. The roundtable
series has been conducted as a contribution to the Organization
of American States' Inter-American Dialogue on Water Management,
convened for the second time in Buenos Aires, Argentina in September.
In both instances, the roundtable discussions have
resulted in several conclusions. First is the urgent need to consider
the management of water and related resources on a basin level
across political boundaries. Second, even in the absence of well
developed institutions for multijurisdictional managment, progress
can be made on the technical level through establishing mechanisms
for the exchange of information and points of view, and building
a foundation of trust. Third, the institutional capacity for multijurisdictional
management should be further developed through financial support,
technical assistance, and diplomacy.
