Volume 5, Number 15, Page 3

CEC Report: San Pedro River Corridor

by Amy T. Mignella, Esq.

The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), a trinational agency established under the environmental side agreement signed by the U.S., Mexico and Canada at the passage of NAFTA, released its draft report of a study on the San Pedro riparian area on June 15, 1998. The CEC had commissioned the study to examine the impact of development on the San Pedro river corridor that spans the U.S.-Mexico border.

The report, entitled “Sustaining and Enhancing Riparian Migratory Bird Habitat on the Upper San Pedro River,” targets the area along the San Pedro river as it flows between southern Arizona and northern Sonora, Mexico. The report concludes that computer models utilized by officials from the state of Arizona “and others” show that groundwater pumping in the region is currently impacting the water flow in the river and adversely affecting animal habitat and vegetation growth there. The report notes that these adverse effects may have been occurring for over 30 years.

The team commissioned to conduct the study has identified only one approach that could sustain adequate water flow in the river and still allow for continued human water withdrawal in the region. The team claims that by relocating the “National Conservation Area” designation southward to the Mexican border and by redistributing pumping locations for the city of Sierra Vista, Arizona and the Fort Huachuca, Arizona army base into a groundwater basin located further from the river, the riparian habitat between Charleston, Arizona and the Arizona/Sonora border could be preserved. According to the report, however, the area of the corridor north from Charleston would be “sacrificed” in this redistribution plan. The report states that the impact on the alternative groundwater source would be mitigated by requiring Fort Huachuca, Arizona to import water from other sources and to purchase water from private water companies.

The CEC team does not consider large-scale water imports into the region to be a viable alternative because of cost and legal considerations. In addition, the report notes that such large-scale imports would potentially serve only to facilitate the present pattern of overconsumption in the area. Reduced consumption was rejected as a potential solution because of its impacts on regional economic growth. Residential water conservation and reductions in agricultural demand were also highlighted as hydrologically effective and economically viable methods of achieving sustainable water use in the region.

This is the CEC’s first report addressing the impact of development on a riparian habitat. The findings will be significant to numerous interest groups because of their potential impact on private development in the region. The report could also provide a framework to be applied elsewhere in the three NAFTA countries, should a similar set of circumstances arise. Although the CEC has no authority to mandate any specific set of restrictions in member countries, its recommendations could be utilized by decision-makers in each government in their attempts to set policies balancing land development with other natural resource uses. Copies of the full report can be obtained from the Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy in Tucson, Arizona.

Amy T. Mignella is a legal researcher on the staff of the National Law Center for Inter-American Free Trade; her specialty is environmental policy.