Advertisement

Ambio

pp 1–11 | Cite as

The transboundariness approach and prioritization of transboundary aquifers between Mexico and Texas

  • Rosario Sanchez
  • Laura Rodriguez
  • Cecilia Tortajada
Research Article
  • 92 Downloads

Abstract

“Transboundariness” refers to a new approach that identifies and prioritizes transboundary aquifers using socio-economic and political criteria, improving their characterization by using other variables in addition to their mere physical boundaries. This approach is applied to the hydrogeological units/aquifers shared by Mexico and Texas, with the following results. First, the rankings agree with the current level of attention to transboundary aquifers in the region by both countries, providing a quantifiable system that could be tested in other transboundary aquifers. Second, this approach provides a holistic and integrative perspective for transboundary aquifer assessment and prioritization. Third, this prioritization exercise expands the criteria currently used into a more integrative regime of groundwater links to the community as a whole. Finally, the results reflect not only how the transboundary aquifers are being used (or neglected) but also the socio-political context of the populations that depend on these resources for current and future development.

Keywords

Mexico Prioritization Texas Transboundariness Transboundary aquifers 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) for financial support under the Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Program (TAAP). The authors recognize and acknowledge the collaboration of TAAP members from the University of Arizona and the University of New Mexico. The authors wish to thank Amy Troung for her collaboration in the collection of data for this research. The public data can be obtained through the referenced websites, and/or from Dr. Rosario Sanchez (rosario@tamu.edu).

References

  1. Alley, W.M. 2013. Five-Year Interim Report of the United States–Mexico Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Program: 2007–2012. 2331-1258, U.S. Geological Survey.Google Scholar
  2. Anaya, R. 2001. An overview of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system, central-west Texas. In Aquifers of West Texas, vol. 356, 100–119. Texas Water Development Board Report.Google Scholar
  3. Beach, J.A., L. Symank, Y. Huang, J.B. Ashworth, T. Davidson, E.W. Collins, B.J. Hibbs, B.K. Darling, et al. 2008. Groundwater availability model for the West Texas Bolsons (Red Light Draw, Green River Valley, and Eagle Flat) Aquifer in Texas.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, R., and A.N. Sayre. 1962. Geology and ground-water resources of Kinney County. Texas: Texas Water Commission.Google Scholar
  5. Boghici, R. 2002. Transboundary aquifers of the Del Rio/Ciudad Acuña—Laredo/Nuevo Laredo Region, Texas Water Development Board.Google Scholar
  6. Carrillo, J., and C. Schatan. 2005. The Environment and “Maquila” in Mexico; an unavoidable problem, 83. Jorge Carrillo Viveros (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  7. City of Carrizo Springs. 2014. Annual Drinking Water Quality Report City of Carrizo Springs.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, H. 2016. Regional Geology and Hydrogeology, Part III, Attachment III-E, Appendix III-E.1, Pescadito Environmental Resource Center.Google Scholar
  9. CONAGUA. 2006. The Water Quality in Rio Bravo Watershed (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  10. CONAGUA. 2015a. Results of the Technical Studies of National Groundwaters of Serriania del Burro Aquifer, 0526, Coahuila state., Technical Subdivision, CONAGUA, Mexico, DF (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  11. CONAGUA. 2015b. Update, Annual Average Availability in La Amistad Dam Aquifer (0522), Coahuila State, Technical Subdivision, CONAGUA, Mexico, DF (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  12. CONAGUA. 2015c. Update, Annual Average Water Availability in Valle de Juarez Aquifer (0833), Chihuahua State, Technical Subdivision, CONAGUA, Mexico, DF (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  13. Darling, B.K., and B.J. Hibbs. 2001. The aquifers of Red Light Draw, Green River Valley, and Eagle Flat. In Aquifers of West Texas, ed. R.E. Mace, W.F. Mullican III, and E.S. Angle, vol. 356, 226–240. Texas Water Development Board Report, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  14. Davidson, S., and R. Mace. 2006. Aquifers of the Gulf Coast of Texas: An overview. Aquifers of the Gulf Coast of Texas, 1–22. Austin: Texas Water Development Board.Google Scholar
  15. DOF. 2011. Results of the National Groundwater Technical Studies of Allende-Piedras Negras Aquifer, 0501, Coahuila state. Official Journal of the Federation, Mexico, DF (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  16. DOF. 2015. Results of the National Groundwater Technical Studies of Santa Fe del Pino Aquifer, 0515, Coahuila state. Official Journal of the Federation, Mexico, DF (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  17. Eagle Pass Water Works System. 2015. Consumer Confidence Report for Calendar Year 2015. Eagle Pass Water Works System.Google Scholar
  18. Gates, J., J. Nicot, B. Scanlon, and R. Reedy. 2011. Arsenic enrichment in unconfined sections of the southern Gulf Coast aquifer system, Texas. Applied Geochemistry 26: 421–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. George, P., R. Mace, and R. Petrossian. 2011. Aquifers of Texas, Texas Water Development Board, Austin.Google Scholar
  20. Hildenbrand, Z.L., D.D. Carlton Jr., J.M. Meik, J.T. Taylor, B.E. Fontenot, J.L. Walton, D. Henderson, J.B. Thacker, et al. 2017. A reconnaissance analysis of groundwater quality in the Eagle Ford shale region reveals two distinct bromide/chloride populations. Science of the Total Environment 575: 672–680.Google Scholar
  21. International Boundary & Water Commission (IBWC). 1973. Minute No. 242—Permanent and definitive solution to the international problem of the salinity of the Colorado River. Natural Resources Journal 15: 2.Google Scholar
  22. International Boundary & Water Commission (IBWC) 2014. About the Rio Grande. United States and Mexico, United States Section.Google Scholar
  23. International Groundwater Resources Assessment Centre IGRAC. 2015. Transboundary Aquifers of the World, UNESCO-IHP (UNESCO International Hydrological Programme). Delft: IGRAC.Google Scholar
  24. Khedun, C.K., A.K. Mishra, J.D. Bolten, H.K. Beaudoing, R.A. Kaiser, J.R. Giardino, and V.P. Singh. 2012. Understanding changes in water availability in the Rio Grande/Río Bravo del Norte basin under the influence of large-scale circulation indices using the Noah land surface model. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres 117: D05104.Google Scholar
  25. Lambert, R.B., and C.A. Hartmann. 1999. Quality of ground water in Webb County, Texas, 1997–1998. 2327-6932. U.S. Geological Survey.Google Scholar
  26. Land, L.F., J.B. Moring, P.C. Van Metre, D.C. Reutter, B.J. Mahler, A.A. Shipp, and R.L. Ulery. 1992. Water quality in the Trinity River Basin. Texas.Google Scholar
  27. Larson, C.E.P.D., M.D. Flora, and J. Reber. 2001. Amistad National Recreation Area, Texas Water Scoping Report, United States Department of the Interior. National Park Service.Google Scholar
  28. Monge-Naranjo, A. 2013. Major US trading partners before and after the great recession. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Economic Synopses No. 27.Google Scholar
  29. NADB. 2017. Summary of project implementation activities, March 31, 2017, North American Development Bank.Google Scholar
  30. Preston, R. 2006. The Yegua-Jackson aquifer. In Aquifers of the Gulf Coast of Texas: Texas Water Development Board Report, 365, ed. R.E. Mace, S.C. Davidson, E.S. Angle, and W.F. Mullican III, 304.Google Scholar
  31. Purchase, C., D. Larson, M. Flora, and J. Reber. 2001. Amistad National Recreation Area, Texas. Water Resources Scoping Report. United States Department of the Interior. National Park Service.Google Scholar
  32. REPDA. 2015. Groundwater Use. Mexico (in Spanish): Water Rights Public Records.Google Scholar
  33. Sanchez, R., and G. Eckstein. 2017. Aquifers shared between Mexico and the United States: Management perspectives and their transboundary nature. Groundwater 55: 495–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sánchez, F.G., R.P. Solís, E.G. Partida, and A. Camprubí. 2007. Estratigrafía del Noreste de México y su relación con los yacimientos estratoligados de fluorita, barita, celestina y Zn-Pb. Boletín de la Sociedad Geológica Mexicana 59: 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sanchez, R., V. Lopez, and G. Eckstein. 2016. Identifying and characterizing transboundary aquifers along the Mexico–US border: An initial assessment. Journal of Hydrology 535: 101–119.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.01.070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sanchez, R., L. Rodriguez, and C. Tortajada. 2018. Transboundary aquifers between Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon and Tamaulipas, Mexico and Texas, USA: Identification and categorization. Journal of Hydrology, Regional Studies, Special Edition on Transboundary Aquifers.Google Scholar
  37. SEMARNAT. 2002. Presentation of the “New environmental policy in Mexico: Sustainable development”, held by environmental vice-minister Francisco Szekely, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Mexico City (in Spanish).Google Scholar
  38. Senate Reports. 2006. Public Law 109-448-December 22, 2006. United States–Mexico Transboundary Aquifer Assessment Act.Google Scholar
  39. Sheng, Z., R.E. Mace, and M.P. Fahy. 2001. The Hueco Bolson: An aquifer at the crossroads. In Aquifers of West Texas, ed. R.E. Mace, W.F. Mullican III, and E.S. Angle, 66–75. Texas Water Development Board Report. Austin, TX: Texas Water Development Board.Google Scholar
  40. Strömberg, P. 2002. The Mexican maquila industry and the environment: An overview of the issues, 12. Mexico DF: United Nations Publications.Google Scholar
  41. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 2017. Binational population data in sister cities along the Rio Grande.Google Scholar
  42. TWDB. 2016. Far West Texas Water Plan. Region E: 452.Google Scholar
  43. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. 2017. Reclamation Managing Water in the West.Google Scholar
  44. Van Schoik, R. 2014. The U.S.-Mexico Border economy in transition. Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.Google Scholar
  45. Wilson, C., and E. Lee. 2014. The U.S.–Mexico Border economy in transition. Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Texas Water Resources InstituteTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Water Management and Hydrological Sciences ProgramTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  3. 3.Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public PolicyNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations