DIALOGUE

1. DIALOGUE

2. Energy Health Recreation Water Forestry Environment Transport- ation Agriculture Human Settlements

4. Otero Pecos Doña Ana Las Cruces El Paso El Paso Salt Basin Cd. Juárez Hudspeth Ascensión Juárez P.G. Guerrero Rio Grande Río Bravo Guadalupe Elephant Butte Caballo

5. Jornada del Muerto Tularosa Basin Mesilla Bolson Hueco Bolson Rio Grande Aquifer Conejos Médanos

6. 2,500,000 2,000,000 2,073,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 1944 – Mexican Water Treaty 1954-58 – Drought of Record 1938 – Rio Grande Compact 1906 - Mexican Water Treaty 500,000 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 2000 1900 1980 1990 El Paso County Juárez Municipio Doña Ana County 43,291 Historical Population Growth

7. 5,000,000 3,929,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,518,000 2,000,000 1,082,000 1,000,000 329,000 2000 2040 2020 1980 1920 1940 1960 1900 7,000,000 Projected Population Growth 6,000,000 ? 2,073,000

8. Irrigated Land (in ha) Surface Water Allocation (in Mm3) Population 1,218,817 36,400 ha 333 Mm3 27,900 ha 174,682 255 Mm3 679,622 74 Mm3 12,100 ha Surface Water Allocation Doña Ana County New Mexico El Paso County Texas Juárez Municipio Chihuahua

9. 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1980 1976 1972 1974 1982 1984 1986 1988 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 1978 1990 Per Capita Water Use Trends El Paso 848 606 Per Capita Water Use (liters/person/day) Cd. Juárez 350 1980 2000

10. Midland Odessa 52o 250 km 128o Albuquerque Phoenix Lubbock Tucson Hermosillo Chihuahua

11. New Mexico / Texas Water Commission • City of Las Cruces • Doa Ana County • El Paso Water Utilities • Elephant Butte Irrigation District • El Paso County Water Improvement District No. 1 • New Mexico State University (WRRI) • Texas A&M University (Research Center) • University of Texas at El Paso

12. Impediments to Rationalizing Water Allocation • Fragmentation of jurisdictions & separate regulation of surface and ground waters • Information voids / reticence to share information • Limitations on transferring surface water to M&I use • Continued rapid population growth • Limited financial means to address water / wastewater problems among different jurisdictions

13. Alphabet Soup of Water Management • IBWC / CILA • EPCWID / EBID / 009 • USBR / COE / CNA • EPA / SEMARNAT • BECC / COCEF • TCEQ / OSE • USF&WS / ISC

14. Fundamental Differences in Water Laws Rio Grande Río Bravo Surface Water by by Prior Appropriation (Adjudication in Process) Ground Water by Prior Appropriation Absolute Ownership Doctrine (“Right of Capture”) Surface Water by by Prior Appropriation (Unadjudicated) Surface Water as a Public Resource Ground Water as a Public Resource

15. Perspectives Political Influence Knowledge / Timeframe

16. Binational Water ProgramPrograma Binacional del Agua • UTEP awarded a Ford Foundation Grant - 1992 • Hosted Series of Workshops • Program coupled with an EDA Grant - 1996 • Technical Studies & Community Dialogue • Publication of a “Sustainable Water Use Strategy” – 1998 • One recommendation was the creation of a Binational Water Management District

17. A Model: Paso del NorteAirQuality Task Force • Binational • Government / Business / NGO • Catalyst for shared action • Ultimate Vision:international air quality management district • Led to formation of the Joint Advisory Committee

18. Air versus Water • Air Pollution is a Contaminant • Water is a Resource • Laws regarding Air Pollution are relatively Recent • Water law has a Long History • Air is not Owned • Water rights are fully Allocated • Few institutions govern Air Quality • Numerous Institutions are involved in water resource management

19. Paso del Norte Water Task ForceStrategy for Accommodating Diverse Points-of-view Municipal Water Utilities Irrigation Districts Water Researchers Business Interests Civic Organizations

20. Irrigation District Municipal Water Utility Irrigation District Irrigation District Municipal Water Utility Municipal Water Utility New Mexico Texas Chihuahua Business Leader Water Expert Business Leader Business Leader Water Expert Water Expert Community Leader Community Leader Community Leader Paso del Norte Water Task Force Structure IBWC / CILA Commissioners Support Team (Academicians & NGOs)

21. Paso del Norte Watershed Council • U.S. Army – Fort Bliss Directorate of the Environment • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S. IBWC • Ysleta del Sur Pueblo • New Mexico Department of Agriculture • New Mexico State University (WRRI) • Texas A&M – Extension Service • Universidad Autónoma de Cd. Juárez • University of Texas at El Paso • El Paso Water Utilities • ASCE – Environmental & Water Resources Institute • Chihuahuan Desert Rescue • Environmental Defense • Keystone Heritage Park • League of Women Voters • Rio Grande Restoration • Southwest Environmental Center • World Wildlife Fund

22. Far West Texas Water Planning Group • Counties (3) • Municipalities (3) • Water Districts (2) • Water Utilities (1) • Ground Water Conservation Districts (2) • Agriculture (1) • Industry (1) • Environmental (1) • Economic Development (1) • Travel & Tourism (1) • Building / Real Estate (1) • Small Business • Electric Generating Utilities (1) • Public (2) • Other (2) • Non-Voting Members (14)

23. Alphabet Soup of Water Organizations • Aqua 21 • Far West Texas Water Planning Group • Lower Rio Grande Water Users Association • New Mexico / Texas Water Commission • Paso del Norte Water Task Force • Paso del Norte Watershed Council • Border 2012 – NM/TX/CHIH Water Task Force • CHIWAWA • Rio Grande / Rio Bravo Basin Coalition • Forgotten River Advisory Committee

24. SUSTAINABILITY: Meeting the needs of today without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.  from the Brundtland Report, Our Common Future World Commission on Environment & Development

25. 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 440 480 520 560 600 640 680 720 760 Sustainable Population Parameters 10 Surface Water 740 Mm3 Natural Recharge 30 Mm3 8 No Agriculture, 50% Recycling No Agriculture, No Recycling 50% Agriculture, No Recycling 6 Population (in millions) 4 2 0 320 Per Capita Water Use (liters per person per day)

26. Friends of the Earth - Middle East • Affiliated with Friends of the Earth International • Acts as an ‘umbrella’ for several Mid-East environmental groups • Membership includes Israelis, Palestinians & Jordanians FoEME

27. Turkey Syria West Bank Lebanon Gaza Strip Iraq Israel Jordan Egypt Saudi Arabia

28. = =

31. Committee on Sustainable Water Supplies for the Middle East Water Use Management Criteria: 1. Impact on Available Water Supply 2. Technically Feasible 3. Environmental Impact 4. Economically Feasible 5. Implications for Intergenerational Equity

32. Demand Management Agriculture Industry Pricing Urban Criterion 1. Impact on Available Water Supply 0 0 0 0 2. Technically Feasible + + + + 3. Environmental Impact 0 +/- +/0 +/- 4. Economically Feasible + +/- +/- +/- 5. Implications for + +/0 + + Intergenerational Equity

33. Augmenting Supplies Water Harvesting Watershed Management Ground Water Overdraft Criterion 1. Impact on Available Water Supply +/- + + 2. Technically Feasible + +/- + 3. Environmental Impact +/- +/- - 4. Economically Feasible +/- +/- + 5. Implications for + ? - Intergenerational Equity

34. Reclamation, Marginal Water, & Desalination Brackish Water Desalination Seawater Desalination Marginal Quality Water Wastewater Reclamation Criterion 1. Impact on Available Water Supply + + + + 2. Technically Feasible + + + + 3. Environmental Impact + +/- + - 4. Economically Feasible +/- +/- + - 5. Implications for + +/0 + ? Intergenerational Equity

35. Self-actualization Status Needs Social Needs Security Needs Survival Needs Maslow’s Hierarchy of NeedsApplied to the Individual

36. Diversity of Opportunity Quality-of-life Community Prominence Current Focus in the Middle East Community Linkages Community Stability Community Economy Maslow’s Hierarchy of NeedsApplied to the Community Environmental Enhancement Environmental Protection

37. Scenarios for Cooperative Planning • Individual actions based on parochial interests • Guarded dialogue and limited cooperation • Forthright information-sharing & willingness to engage in projects of mutual benefit

38. Collaborative Planning Principles • There is no magical leadership structure – just people & relationships. • Collaboration is messy & frustrating … but indispensable! • No one is excluded; no one is excused.

39. Commerce Nature Recreation Social Equity Industry Public Health Tribal Concerns Water Institutions Quality of Life Neighborhoods Emerging Technologies Conflicting Interests Agricultural Water Needs Municipal Water Needs

40. Collaboration Principle #4:As the Table Gets Larger … … It Gets Rounder.

41. Collaborative Planning Principles • There is no magical leadership structure – just people and relationships. • Collaboration is messy and frustrating … but indispensable! • No one is excluded; no one is excused. • As the table gets larger, it gets rounder. • As the process continues, the agenda gets tougher. • It’s never over.

42. Tools for Possible Solutions • Conservation • Technology • Financial Capability • Region-based Cooperation • Water Markets • Growth Management

43. Not to know what happened before one was born is to live always as a child.   – Cicero