Water Rights: The Rio Grande River - Essay Example

Information The Rio Grande River: An analysis and historical review of the struggle over water rights Abstract This paper is an analysis and historical review of the struggle of water rights between the Texan and Mexican border in regards to the Rio Grande River. There is clearly a struggle over the interpretation of prior and existing legal principles that have battled to determine the water rights to this historical water source. Texas is challenging its’ water rights case based on the 1944 Mexican Treaty Agreement, the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation, and the Riparian Water Rights. However, Mexico argues that climate change has caused Texas to receive a limited quantity of water. I will examine the historical and current legal principles that have historically and presently shaped the revolving battle over the Rio Grande River. Background Analysis The Rio Grande River is 1885 miles long or approximately 3000 kilometers. It rises in the South West Colorado and the San Juan Mountains and flows south through the middle of Mexico. It courses southwest of the border between Texas and Mexico. It is known for its international source of controlled irrigation. This river has been important for centuries. The Pueblos and Native Americans used the water for irrigation. Presently, there are dams on the Rio Grande River to regulate irrigation, flood control, and water flow. The Rio Grande Valley was developed in the 1920’s for citrus fruit and truck farming. The Valley depends on irrigation from the Rio Grande River. The 1944 Mexican Water Treaty between Mexico and the United States of America required Mexico to provide Texas with an agreed quantity of water. However, Mexico’s drought conditions have forced Mexico’s water agreement with Texas to diminish. In addition, the shifts in the Rio Grande River’s channel have created border disputes between the United States and Mexico. The Rio Grande River was diverted into a concrete channel after a 114 year dispute was settled in 1968 about the location of the El Paso border. The Rio Grande River provides water through three U.S. states and two nations. This river has profound historic, cultural, and environmental significance for many citizens who live on its’ border. Due to the vast construction of the river over the years, it has lost its mark from the location where the Spanish conquerors discovered it. The river has been diverted, dammed, and polluted within the last century. Normally, this river lacks water, allowing many to question the characteristics of a river. Regardless of these issues, there is a constant struggle to somehow restore the Rio Grande River along its banks, forcing many government officials to attempt to plan its’ restoration. The Rio Grande River has faced major litigation based on endangered species, public and private interest, and water rights. This river is controlled by owners who have a special interest in the water rights. However, the public interest has concerns over the endangered species. The major dispute is the Middle Rio Grande, which is a stretch of the river that encompasses Albuquerque, New Mexico. The preservation of this river is important because there are endangered Rio Grande Silvery Minnow. This species has become endangered due to a series of dams and irrigation. In addition, Mexico’s drought conditions have affected water management. Water management and allocation is essential in the Rio Grande River. The water system is very complex. Over the years, there has been a series of laws governing these water rights. This region has experienced a growth in the population in the Texas Lower Rio Grande Valley as well as international trade and economic development. Due to these changes, water right laws have endured a series of ratifications. Mexico has lacked its necessary supply of water deliveries due to years of droughts, affecting its’ treaty compliance. In order to comply, water system improvements are desperately needed. This river provides a main source of water for irrigation for both Texas and Mexico. Mexico’s water supply has diminished, leaving an inability to provide Texas with an efficient source of water and fulfill the duties of the 1944 Mexican Water Treaty. Based on the Riparian Rights, riparian landowners who have land bordering the Rio Grande River have a right to use the water source for beneficial purposes. Based on the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation, the original appropriator has the initial right to the water source, leaving preceding appropriators with access based on availability. However, who has the legal water rights to the Rio Grande River? According to Riparian Rights, the bordering states have the legal right to obtain an agreed quantity of water if available. If there is a reason why the stated amount of water is not supplied, the states will receive a limited quantity based on the amount of available water. However, based on the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation, the first appropriator has full rights to the water supply. Texas law recognizes both water rights, the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation and Riparian Rights. Before Texas became separate from Mexico, it was government by Mexico, creating a conflict due to prior established laws and the 1944 Mexican Water Treaty. Mexico’s historical interest in the Rio Grande River Mexico’s historical interest in the Rio Grande River was established when Mexico was granted its’ independence from Spanish, and before Texas became connected with the United States, it was governed by Mexico after its victory over the Spanish in 1821. Mexico’s main source of water for irrigation and beneficial uses was diverted from the Rio Grande River. Mexico used this river for its’ major source of water supply. Throughout the years, Mexico has experienced severe droughts, which has forced a limited supply of water for both Mexico and Texas. The water law in Mexico is based on the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation. All of the existing water in Mexico is considered public and subject to appropriation based on beneficial uses. The components of legal water rights in Mexico consist of point of diversion, place of use, purpose for use, appropriator, and quantity of water. These components are based on statute requirements; however, the state engineer who is appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate allows flexibility in the interpretation of these basic components. The State Engineer has a wide range of authority over the supervision, appropriation, and distribution of Mexico’s surface and groundwater. The application process for obtaining a permit before 1907 for water right and small scale stock watering, ten acre-feet of less, required landowners to contact their State Engineer. The State Engineer determined if a landowner could appropriate water, change the point of diversion, change the specific location of water wells in declared basins, divert or store water, or change the location or purpose of the water use. The elements that are examined by the State Engineer when considering an applicant for a permit are the existing water not appropriated, the negative affect of appropriating an existing water right, affects of conservation within the state, and the public’s welfare. Before the applicant can change the existing water rights or declare a new appropriation, the application has to be advertised in a local newspaper once a week for three consecutive weeks. Individuals who believe that their water rights may be damaged by granting the application may file a protest within ten days of the last advertisement notice. A protest has two basic components; the application for the water rights will adversely affect the welfare of the public and the conservation of water within the state. A hearing is granted with the State Engineer or an appointed hearing examiner if the dispute is not settled. Any appeals are received by the district court, but the applicant has to determine the burden of proof. If a permit is approved, the individual granted the permit must complete the agreed upon work for purposes of placing the diverted water to its beneficial use. Once completed, a certificate is issued by the State Engineer, describing the water right, point of diversion, location, and purpose for the water use. Once the stated amount of water has been used, the individual must file a proof of application of water to beneficial use. The State Engineer inspects the location and grants a license, describing the extent and condition of use to appropriate water. This process takes a minimum of three months for approval unless the application is complex or protested. A point of diversion for beneficial uses is subject to statutory laws, determining its natural path to the location where the diverted water produces money or sustains human life. Court rulings have determined that all beneficial uses are not subject to these requirements, such as in stream flow and recreational uses. Mexico has established a water right that allows the individual or entity to change the point of diversion, location, and purpose of water uses. This change should not affect the conservation of water and affect the public’s welfare. If this change affects the surface or groundwater, the State Engineer requires the appropriator to file an application for approval. There is not a list of approved beneficial uses. The State Engineer determines if the diversion of water is for a beneficial use. In 1931, Mexico’s groundwater code was enacted. Groundwater procedures require a permit for drilling and appropriating water within declared thirty-three underground water basins. State licensed, well drillers may drill or alter wells in a diameter larger than 2 3/8 inches in declared underground water basins. The water use is regulated by the State Engineer who regulates the underground basins when necessary in an effort to protect prior appropriations, ensure the diverted water is put to a beneficial use, and maintain orderly development of Mexico’s water resources. The State Engineer declares water rights to any accepted entity, such as a corporation, organization, or government agency. The water appropriated for irrigation is connected to the land that it is on and cannot be transferred to another land for beneficial uses, unless the water rights are separated from the connected land. The State Engineer approves an application to separate the land rights from the water rights, since water rights are considered real property and cannot be sold or bought. If the appropriated water is not put to beneficial use in a segment of four consecutive years, these rights can be revoked by the State Engineer who issues a notice of nonuse, and the unused water becomes the property of the public domain. Adjudicated water rights were established in 1907. The process requires the State Engineer to hydrographic surveys of each stream system within the state. After the surveys have been conducted, the collected data is compiled to assist the court in determining the proper amount of water for each recipient. When an adjudication suit is presented in court, the claimant can present relevant evidence of water rights. The courts determine the beneficial use, location of water use, priority, amount, and period of use. The Doctrine of Prior Appropriation Mexico applies prior appropriation in connection with beneficial use to determine the allocation of water. To briefly explain prior appropriation in regards to the Rio Grande River, the initial date a state decides to divert water is the priority date of the legal right to use the water source, considering the geographical location. Beneficial use is the application of water to a lawful purpose. It is useful to the appropriator and a consistent use for the general public. To determine if the named party qualifies under the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation, the appropriator or initial user in time has the legal right to take and use water. This right continues against preceding users for the time the appropriator exercises its beneficial use. If the initial appropriator no longer exercises the beneficial use, preceding users have the right to acquire water. However, since Mexico’s water supply is scarce, previous rights existed more frequently than presently. Under circumstances of limited water availability, the initial appropriator has the right to use the stated amount of water, regardless of the geographical location. The initial user’s right places a limit on preceding users to the extent that the initial user utilizes the water source. Riparian Water Rights Riparian Water Rights apply to riparian landowners whose land borders the Rio Grande River. However, Mexico recognizes the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation. It does not recognize the Riparian Water Rights as oppose to Texas. If Mexico chose to recognize the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation and Riparian Water Rights, the two legal principles would conflict in determining a decision in a court case. As a result, Texas has faced this issue because it recognizes both water rights. Mexican Water Treaty of 1944: Mexico’s rights The 1944 Mexican Water Treaty was created between the United States of America and Mexico, establishing rights to the water use of the Colorado, Tijuana, and Rio Grande River. This treaty was signed on November 14, 1944. It was later ratified on April 18, 1945 and November 1, 1945 by the United States. Mexico later ratified this treaty on October 16, 1945, exchanged in Washington on November 8, 1945, proclaimed by the U.S. president on November 27, 1945, and effective on November 8, 1945. According to Article 8 of this treaty, the two governments are required to take into consideration the common interest of conservation and storage of water in the international reservoirs. The governments are to consider the maximum use of the structures for the sole purpose of the countries’ beneficial use as well as regular and constant use of claimed water. The following water rights are granted to Mexico: (a) All of the waters reaching the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) from the San Juan and Alamo Rivers, including the return flow from the lands irrigated from the latter two rivers. (b) One-half of the flow in the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) below the lowest major international storage dam, so far as said flow is not specifically allotted under this Treaty to either of the two countries. (c) Two-thirds of the flow reaching the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) from the Conchos, San Diego, San Rodrigo, Escondido and Salado Rivers and the Las Vacas Arroyo, subject to the provisions of subparagraph (c) of Paragraph B of this Article. (d) One-half of all other flows not otherwise allotted by this Article occurring in the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo), including the contributions from all the unmeasured tributaries, which are those not named in this Article, between Fort Quitman and the lowest major international storage dam. According to Article 24 of this treaty, when a water dispute arises between the two countries, the International Boundary and Water Commission has the powers and duties to began an investigation and develop a clear plan to alleviate the dispute based on the treaty agreement between the two countries. According to the International Boundary and Water Commission, “Our mission is to provide bi-national solutions to issues that arise during the application of United States - Mexico treaties regarding boundary demarcation, national ownership of waters, sanitation, water quality, and flood control in the border region.” Therefore, the investigations provided by this agency have a specific criterion that includes the location, size, kind, costs and characteristics of the specifications. Under Article 26 of the Transitory Provisions, Mexico is required to cooperate with the United States of America in times of climate droughts. Mexico is authorized to supply the United States with the requested quantity of water by releasing water from El Azucar reservoir on the San Juan River. This supply of water must run through its’ system of canals back into the San Juan River, allowing the United States to divert this water from the Rio Grande River. However, Mexico is required to supply the United States with the water as long as it does not affect the Mexican Irrigation System. Therefore, unless there is an extreme drought or problems with its hydraulic system, Mexico is required to release and make the requested quantities of water available to the United States. According to the treaty, if Mexico experienced a drought and could not supply the stated amount of water to Texas within the five year cycle period, the water would be provided in the next five year cycle period. According to the treaty, within the eight year period from the date of entry into force of the treaty, Mexico shall have the following amounts of water available: “A total of 160,000 acre-feet (197,358,000 cubic meters) and up to 40,000 acre-feet (49,340,000 cubic meters) in any one year; that the water shall be made available as requested at rates not exceeding 750 cubic feet (21.2 cubic meters) per second; that when the rates of flow requested and made available have been more than 500 cubic feet (14.2 cubic meters) per second the period of release shall not extend beyond fifteen consecutive days; and that at least thirty days must elapse between any two periods of release during which rates of flow in excess of 500 cubic feet (14.2 cubic meters) per second have been requested and made available.” In conjunction with the required water flow, Mexico had to release water from the El Azucar reservoir and run it through its canal system and the San Juan River when the United States has a drought once Mexican users are provided with their water supply. Mexico has to continue to provide water that was needed for irrigation during 1943 in the Lower Rio Grande Valley in the United States.  Texas’ historical interest in the Rio Grande River Before Texas became separate from Mexico, it was called Mexican Texas during the periods of 1821 and 1836. Texas became governed by Mexico after Mexico’s victory over Spain in 1821 during the war of independence. During the beginning of Mexican Texas’ existence, it operated similar to Spanish Texas. In 1824, under the Constitution of Mexico, Texas and Coahuila joined, forming the state of Coahuila y Tejas. During the same year, the General Colonization Law was enacted. This law allowed all head of households to claim land in Mexico, regardless of race or immigrant status. The initial empresarial grant or right to settlement was established under the Spanish control. Stephen F. Austin was one of the settlers known as the Old Three Hundred who settled by the Brazos River in the year of 1822. The Mexican government later ratified this grant. Twenty-three empresarios later transported settlers to this state from the United States of America. The majority of Anglo-American settlers owned slaves. Texas could continue to own slaves because it was granted a one-year exemption from Mexico’s 1829 edict, which outlawed slavery. However, in 1830, President Anastasio Bustamante ordered all slaves to be freed. To reverse this law, the Anglo colonists allowed their slaves to become indentured servants for life. In 1830, President Anastasio Bustamante outlawed United States immigrants into Texas. The government formed several new presidios or fortified bases in this region to monitor any immigration or customs practices. A convention was held in 1832 because of angry colonists who demanded that the United States Citizens be granted immigration. In the next year during the convention of 1833, they made a proposal to separate Texas from Mexican rule. Mexico created several proposals to appease colonists. However, many Texan colonists revolted because of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna’s proposal, which would transform Mexico from a federalist state to a centralist state. On June 26, 1832, the initial violent incident occurred during the battle of Velasco. On March 2, 1836, the Texans signed the Texas Declaration of Independence. After the battle of San Jacinto, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna was imprisoned, ending the Texas Revolution on April 21, 1836. Texas began to govern itself. It was known as the Republic of Texas. However, after nine years, Mexico acknowledged Texas’ independence as long as Texas did not join Mexico’s aggressive neighbor, the United States of America. The Doctrine of Prior Appropriation Based on the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation, Texas is the initial appropriator after separating from the Mexican Government. In addition to acknowledging Texas’ independence, Mexico is required to supply Texas with the requested amount of water based on the initial appropriator status of the state. Texas was granted the legal right to obtain water from the Rio Grande River. When the water is limited in the five year cycle period, Mexico is required to supply Texas with a portion of the agreed amount of available water. Within the next five year cycle, Mexico is required to supply Texas with the additional agreed amount of water that was unable to be supplied in the previous five year cycle. Riparian Water Rights Based on Riparian Water Rights, any state that borders the water source has legal rights to divert water. Texas has the legal right to demand its supply of water for irrigation and other beneficial uses from the Rio Grande River because this state borders the river. However, Mexico has an inability to fulfill this water right due to years of droughts and an inefficient water supply for Mexico. Texas’ conflict of recognizing both water rights The legal issue over Texas water rights surfaces from Mexico’s limited amount of water supply, the United States common law, and the legal implementation of this water process. The water rights law is implemented for several reasons: It determines the unit entitled to use the available water source, the quantity of the amount of water, the beneficial use, and the destination and time where the water is used. Texas courts distinguished water into distinct unrelated classes with specific legal rules, which governs ownership and use. The courts recognize underground and surface water as well as atmospheric moisture. Texas law classifies surface water resources as immense. Groundwater law is relatively sparse, and the laws governing atmospheric moisture are undeveloped. Texas recognizes Riparian Law and the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation when determining surface water rights. This method makes determining the legal rights to the Rio Grande River difficult because these two laws are very distinct in nature. The Riparian Law was initiated over 200 years ago when the Spanish settled in San Antonio. This law determines water rights to individuals who own riparian land. The legal principles and practices that the Hispanic culture implemented were continued and unchanged by the Mexico Government after 1821 and by Texas, which became the Republic of Texas until 1840. The Texas Government granted water rights to individuals owning extensive tracts of land. Presently, there is approximately twenty-six million acres or one-seventh of the state that can be traced to water sources. For a number of years, Texas courts along with water agencies and water users assumed that Mexico and the Republic of Texas land grants carried extensive Riparian rights, such as the legal right to extract water for irrigation from streams. In the 1926 landmark case Motl v. Boyd, the Texas Supreme Court agreed to the following principle. “A water course, river, or stream consists of a bed, banks, and a stream of water. The bed of a stream is that portion of its soil which is alternatively covered and left bare as there may be an increase or diminution in the supply of water, and which is adequate to contain it at its average and mean stage during an entire year, without reference to the extra freshets of the winter or spring or the extreme droughts of the summer or autumn. The banks of a stream or river are the water-washed and relatively permanent elevations or acclivities at the outer lines of the river bed which separate the bed from the adjacent upland, whether valley or hill, and served to confine the waters within the bed and preserve the course of the river when they rise to the highest point at which they are still confined to a definite channel. Since the stream is a navigable one, the elevations of land adjacent to its bed, which hold its navigable waters in place, and to which boats might be tied or anchored, and wharves or other instrumentalities of navigation attached, are its banks.” Due to the construction of the International Falcon Reservoir in 1950 on the Rio Grande River, the courts re-examined the interpretation of Mexico’s water law. In the 1961 case of State of Texas v. Valmont Plantations, the courts determined that the water rights for irrigation and additional major uses are not indicated from Mexico’s water law unless the use is expressly mentioned, leaving only a few specific grants or rights for irrigation to be established. Detailed comprehensive riparian rights were connected to all lands granted by the Republic of Mexico and State of Texas. This right was established between 1840 and the Prior Appropriation Acts of 1889 & 1895. This was a time when vast tract of Texas land passed from the federal government to private interest groups. In the year of 1840, the Texas Congress established the common law of England attached with the English Riparian Doctrine, which differed from the Spanish Riparian Doctrine. Subsequent amendments to the original Riparian Doctrine gave riparian landowners the legal right to make reasonable uses of water for the purpose of irrigation and other beneficial uses. Due to the unsuitability of the Riparian Doctrine for the arid and semiarid sections of the State of Texas, the Texas Supreme Court proposed the legislation to implement the Prior Appropriation Doctrine. By the end of the century, the State of Texas enforced the ideas of the Appropriation Doctrine. Since 1895, land acquired from the State of Texas is no longer governed by the Riparian Water Rights. Therefore, individuals are required to appropriate water rights from the State of Texas through governed statutory procedures. The appropriation rights recognize pre-existing Riparian Rights. However, during the periods of 1895 and 1913, landowners could file a sworn statement and map with the county clerk indicating their diversion methods for appropriating water. This result caused inappropriate demands for the supply of water. Most often, landowners needed water for largely irrigated acreages or claims for more water than the stream could supply. After 1913, the appropriating water rights were indicated as certified filings because the State of Texas recognized and recorded around a thousand certified copies of previous water diversions. In 1913, a new modern and strictly administered appropriation procedure statute was enforced. This process forces individuals to apply for a permit at the Texas Water Commission, presently known as the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, to appropriate water from Texas streams. Since August 1975, there have been more than 10,600 water rights claims involving almost fifty-four million acre-feet of water. This amount is slightly higher than Texas’ average annual surface water runoff of forty-nine million acre-feet. There has been much difficulty with the State of Texas and water users’ determination of Mexico and Texas’ Riparian rights and later appropriation rights because both of these rights affected the same body of water. There are accurate long-term records of appropriative water uses because permit holders are required to file annual reports. This record was inconsistent up to 1968 because there were unrecorded water rights claims. Because of this dilemma, it became difficult to coordinate administration and management of Texas surface water resources. Therefore, Arbitration began on the lower Rio Grande River. The 1969 lawsuit involved the State v. Hidalgo County Water Control and Improvement District No. 18. The massive lawsuit consisted of forty-two special water districts, more than twenty-five hundred individuals, and over ninety attorneys. This lawsuit exemplified a futility of a purely judicial determination of water rights for the State of Texas. However, the Water Rights Adjudication Act of 1967 was established to remedy this situation by setting up a complex administrative and judicial adjudication procedure. In 1969, the unrecorded water-rights were required to be filed with the Texas Water Commission. After 1969, there were over 11,600 unrecorded water rights claims. These claims came from riparian landowners who had rights to over seven million acre-feet of riparian water. Between 1963 and 1967, the maximum amount of water diverted from the primary water source determined if a landowner could file a claim. Landowners were granted claims once an administrative determination of these rights was proved. After this process was completed, the claims were filed in the district court for judicial review. After the judicial review was successful, landowners were granted certificates of adjudicated water rights. The areas that were granted these rights were the sparsely populated southwestern stream segments and the northeast river basins. By the 1980s, this adjudication process still endured constitutional challenges because riparian rights and various unrecorded water rights had a maximum quantity of water requirements. In addition, the specific amounts of permit holders were limited, and if the permit holders were inactive, they were automatically cancelled for nonuse. This sparked a need for a more efficient management, administration, and planning in developing a process for obtaining rights to surface water. Mexican Water Treaty of 1944: Texas’ rights Based on the treaty, Texas water rights to the Rio Grande River are as follows: (a) All of the waters reaching the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) from the Pecos and Devils Rivers, Goodenough Spring, and Alamito, Terlingua, San Felipe and Pinto Creeks. (b) One-half of the flow in the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) below the lowest major international storage dam, so far as said flow is not specifically allotted under this Treaty to either of the two countries. (c) One-third of the flow reaching the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) from the Conchos, San Diego, San Rodrigo, Escondido and Salado Rivers and the Las Vacas Arroyo, provided that this third shall not be less, as an average amount in cycles of five consecutive years, than 350,000 acre-feet (431,721,000 cubic meters) annually. The United States shall not acquire any right by the use of the waters of the tributaries named in this subparagraph, in excess of the said 350,000 acre feet (431,721,000 cubic meters) annually, except the right to use one-third of the flow reaching the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo) from said tributaries, although such one-third may be in excess of that amount. (d) One-half of all other flows not otherwise allotted by this Article occurring in the main channel of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo), including the contributions from all the unmeasured tributaries, which are those not named in this Article, between Fort Quitman and the lowest major international storage dam.  Conclusion In order to claim water rights, there must be an appropriation. The main element of an appropriator is the process of diverting water from a particular water source for a beneficial use. To divert means to remove the specified amount of water from its original natural source or by controlling the remaining water in its natural course. The appropriator has the right to remove the specified amount of water from the water source and place it in any location. However, Riparian Rights take the geographical location into consideration, such as the Riparian landowners who own land bordering the river. Based on the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation, the initial appropriator of the water rights owns rights to divert water and remove it to any location from the Rio Grande River as long as it is for a beneficial use. Due to climate conditions, growth in the population, and economic growth, the battle over fulfilling the 1944 Mexican Water Treaty Agreement has proven to be difficult. The lack of distribution of water from the Rio Grande River has contributed to the historical battle over water rights between Mexico and Texas. Throughout the centuries, there have been major developments and controversies over who actually owns rights to the Rio Grande River. The answer to the question, “Who has the legal water rights to the Rio Grande River?”, is based on the legal principles, interpretations, and water laws applied to the dispute. Works Cited Fort, Professor Denise D. “WHO OWNS THE RIO GRANDE? PUBLIC v. PRIVATE INTERESTS IN A WESTERN RIVER.” Jurist Legal Intelligence. 28 Jan. 2003. University of New Mexico School of Law. 03 Dec. 2008. . Kane, Sharyn. “Fort Brown, Texas: A New Frontier.” 04 Dec. 2008. . Moore, J.G., et al. “PROPOSAL FOR AN INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE RIO GRANDE/RIO BRAVO.” First International Symposium on Transboundary Waters Management. 18-22 Nov. 2002. Southwest Texas State University & Texas Parks & Wildlife Department. 05 Dec. 2008. . Stubbs, Megan J., et al. “Evolution of Irrigation Districts and Operating Institutions: Texas, Lower Rio Grande Valley.” Texas Water Resource Institute. Jul. 2003. Texas A&M University. 02 Dec. 2008. . Templer, Otis W. “WATER LAW.” THE HANDBOOK OF TEXAS Online. 11 Jan. 2008. Texas State Historical Association. 04 Dec. 2008. . Templer J.D., Ph.D., Otis W. “WATER RIGHTS ISSUES TEXAS WATER RIGHTS LAW: EAST MEETS WEST.” Texas Tech University. 04 Dec. 2008. . “Texas Water.” TEXAS A&M AgriLIFE. 01 Dec. 2008. . “New Mexico WATER RIGHTS FACTS SHEET.” Western States Water Laws. 15 Aug. 2001. National Science & Technology Center Bureau of Land Management. 01 Dec. 2008. . “The Dispute Over Shared Waters of the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo.” TEXAS CENTER FOR POLICY STUDIES. Jul. 2002. 02 Dec. 2008. . “The Republic of the Rio Grande.” HISTORYNET.COM. Copyright 2008. Weider History Network. 03 Dec. 2008. . “Treaty between the United States of America and Mexico relating to the utilization of the Waters of the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande.” International Water Law Project. Copyright 2008. 03 Dec. 2008. . “Rio Grande.” Encyclopedia.com. The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Ed. Copyright 2008. Columbia University Press. 04 Dec. 2008. . “DROUGHT MAGNIFIES IMPORTANCE OF U.S.-MEXICO WATER DISPUTES.” SourceMex Economic News & Analysis on Mexico. 17 Apr. 2002 ALLBUSINESS A D&B COMPANY. 05 Dec. 2008. . “Region M Regional Water Plan.” 5 Jan. 2006. NRS Consulting Engineers R. J. Brandes Company. 06 Dec. 2008. . “THE MEXICAN WATER TREATY: TREATY SERIES 994 (59 STAT. 1219) Utilization of waters of the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande.” 3 Feb. 1944. 02 Dec. 2008. . “The United States – Mexico Dispute over the Waters of the Lower Rio Grande River.” CRS Report for Congress. 21 Mar. 2005. American Law Division. 04 Dec. 2008. . “The ‘Lectric Law Librarys Lexicon On Riparian Rights, Riparian Proprietors.” The ‘Lectric Law Library. Feb 2005. Ads by Google. 01 Dec. 2008. . “Welcome.” International Boundary & Water Commission United States and Mexico United States Section Est. 1889. 06 Dec. 2008. < http://www.ibwc.state.gov/home.html>. Read More