# US <-> Mexico Water Treaties



## Gatos (Aug 16, 2016)

Considering all the back and forth regarding the 'Wall' and who is going to pay for it - can anyone explain to me why the US has a water treaty with Mexico. It apparently deals with waters from the Colorado, Rio Grande and other rivers. I can see the importance of the waters to both parties - I just can't see why there would need to be a treaty. Wouldn't you just take what you can get. I'm sorry - I'm just a little skeptical that the US would enter into an agreement out of benevolence. The little research I did on the topic indicated that Mexico stores a good portion of its share of water in Lake Meade (hmm). I also read that there is an urgent push (on the part of the US) to re-ratify the treaty before inauguration day. 

Can anyone shed more light ?


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

Gatos said:


> Considering all the back and forth regarding the 'Wall' and who is going to pay for it - can anyone explain to me why the US has a water treaty with Mexico. It apparently deals with waters from the Colorado, Rio Grande and other rivers. I can see the importance of the waters to both parties - I just can't see why there would need to be a treaty. Wouldn't you just take what you can get. I'm sorry - I'm just a little skeptical that the US would enter into an agreement out of benevolence. The little research I did on the topic indicated that Mexico stores a good portion of its share of water in Lake Meade (hmm). I also read that there is an urgent push (on the part of the US) to re-ratify the treaty before inauguration day.
> 
> Can anyone shed more light ?


I don't know the history of the water agreement between the US and Mexico for the Colorado and other rivers. But there is always an agreement required when multiple parties share a river. Otherwise the people upstream would take all the water. LA would die of thirst without agreements for water from somewhere else. I don't know what the US got in exchange for promising Mexico some of the Colorado River water, but I doubt that the US gave it away for nothing. Or maybe it was done out of guilt for ripping off half of the Mexican territory.


----------



## Gatos (Aug 16, 2016)

TundraGreen said:


> I don't know the history of the water agreement between the US and Mexico for the Colorado and other rivers. But there is always an agreement required when multiple parties share a river. Otherwise the people upstream would take all the water. LA would die of thirst without agreements for water from somewhere else. I don't know what the US got in exchange for promising Mexico some of the Colorado River water, but I doubt that the US gave it away for nothing. Or maybe it was done out of guilt for ripping off half of the Mexican territory.


But that is kind of my point. If the US didn't have some sort of 'exposure' there would be no agreement with Mexico. Is it biologically important that all rivers flow back to the sea ?

In addition - I can't find the reference at the moment - but apparently there was another 'treaty' where Mexico 'granted' territory to the US - and that might be under 're-consideration'. (I know - good luck with that).


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

I understand that Mexico sells electricity to the USA from Baja.
Lets face it folks, we are interdependent. It is a globalized world. We depend upon each other in many ways.
Here is a challenge: Remove everything you are wearing or that is in your house which was not produced in the USA. You you probably be standing naked, with little furniture, and your refrigerator will be half empty. Actually, most of your appliances will also have vanished and, if the VIN on your car does not start with “1“, it will have vanished too.
Take inventory, looking at all labels, etc. You may be shocked.


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

If your home is very recent, the lumber was probably Canadian, the sheetrock probably Chinese, the appliances probably Mexican, etc., etc. Now, check your closet. And that computer...........?


----------



## perropedorro (Mar 19, 2016)

Gatos said:


> But that is kind of my point. If the US didn't have some sort of 'exposure' there would be no agreement with Mexico. Is it biologically important that all rivers flow back to the sea ?
> 
> In addition - I can't find the reference at the moment - but apparently there was another 'treaty' where Mexico 'granted' territory to the US - and that might be under 're-consideration'. (I know - good luck with that).


Would that be the Gadsden Purchase, that portion of Arizona south of the Gila, and a bit of NM? Wasn't part of the Guadalupe Treaty. As far as the mighty Colorado River, there's not much left by the time it gets to Yuma and then into Mexico. For a long time, barely a drop reached the Mar de Cortés until last year when a recent treaty conserved a small portion of the river's volume for an outflow. Very informative article from NatGeo that explains quite a bit and references even more.


----------



## Gatos (Aug 16, 2016)

perropedorro said:


> Would that be the Gadsden Purchase, that portion of Arizona south of the Gila, and a bit of NM? Wasn't part of the Guadalupe Treaty. As far as the mighty Colorado River, there's not much left by the time it gets to Yuma and then into Mexico. For a long time, barely a drop reached the Mar de Cortés until last year when a recent treaty conserved a small portion of the river's volume for an outflow. Very informative article from NatGeo that explains quite a bit and references even more.


I actually read a very similar article - if not the same one - earlier today. I am still not clear whether the US or Mexico has the upper hand.

If the US - we heard a lot of talk about taxing remittances to pay for the wall - BUT - I'm sure he has a ton of advisers a lot sharper than I - what if he is going to tax the water to Mexico's agricultural region ?


----------

