Local San Miguel officials and civic leaders returned from the week-long World Water Forum held in Mexico City to report on what they learned and inform sanmiguelenses about our water issues here.

The March 25 forum was attended by about 35 residents who were presented with reassuring information about the quality of water in the city, warnings of problems in the campo and advice such as to drink and cook with purified water and to refrain from swallowing when brushing teeth to avoid taking in the fluorides that might be present. 

But there was no attention to the larger, long-term problem of a vanishing aquifer amid burgeoning development and wasteful agricultural irrigation. Although Mexico has an Integrated Water Resource Management Plan on the national level, it has not been implemented and "it is difficult to scale it to local needs and is complicated because of our particular watershed and regional objectives," said Mark Hill of the Ecosystems Sciences Foundation (ESF). "We are in this by ourselves. There is no grand fund for San Miguel de Allende. Therefore, it is very important that we share what resources we do have and work together," Hill concluded. 

Much of the discussion focused on regional cooperative efforts using existing resources. This came in the form of a report of a water testing study that had been carried out by the Ecosystem Sciences Foundation with the cooperation of the city government, SAPASMA and the University of San Luis Potosí, which hosted a conference on water quality in that state. Conducted over a five-month period, the study tested water from wells, ponds and other sources throughout the San Miguel municipality. No dangerous levels of arsenic were found in our water supply (although unsafe levels were found in eight communities in mountainous areas). Also, no coliform bacteria were detected in San Miguel's water, although they are present in some other communities. Similarly, no E. coli was found. 

That was the good news. However, 65 percent of the wells tested had no purification system. Of the sites that did have purification systems, 21 percent were not functioning, according to David Varner of ESF. Further, 19 percent of the water is distributed in barrels or buckets rather than through pipes, making it vulnerable to contamination. 

The greatest concern seemed to be with the high fluoride levels found in eight communities. Twenty of 101 samples tested had fluoride levels above the safe level of l.5 mg/L. Children are most at risk where there is this high level of fluoride in the drinking water. Professor Deogracias of the University of San Luis Potosí pointed out that in the United States a fluoride level of .6 mg/L is considered the maximum safe level, whereas in Mexico the standard is 1.5 mg/L. In some of the tested samples the concentration of fluoride exceeded 4.0 mg/L.

Derek Risso, also of ESF, pointed to the need for popular education about the dangers some communities are exposed to. Because these are related to drawing water from ever deeper levels in the aquifer, he recommended greater use of rainwater harvesting techniques. However, he emphasized that the watershed issue is the main problem needing urgent attention, and he noted that water is running off lands, causing erosion and rapidly depleting the aquifers.

The information gleaned from this water testing study is of obvious value to residents of San Miguel. Don Anderson pointed out that this is the first time such testing has been done in 36 years. Frequent follow-up testing is called for.

The people of San Miguel will also be happy to learn that, according to Roberto Ruiz Ramírez, director of SAPASMA, 95 percent of all sewage from the city is now being treated, rather than ending up as dumped sewage in the lake. He also informed us that Congress has passed a law requiring golf courses to use only recycled water rather than potable water. The law goes into effect in August. 

In spite of that, it was evident to the panel members who had just returned from the World Water Forum that Mexico gives less attention to its water problems than does Africa. There was agreement that this country was giving insufficient attention at the national level to its water problems and that, consequently, San Miguel de Allende and the region are mostly on their own in resolving the problem. 

Perhaps that is why, as informative as the panel was, many in the audience were disappointed with the lack of discussion regarding such other critical issues as growth and development in our municipality and region. They wondered whether there will be construction limits and whether they are needed. If our water supply is in danger now, what will our future look like if growth is unchecked? Could it be true that "profit is more important than life"? What about the vast agribusiness projects in the state? Should they really be producing for export rather than for self-sufficiency at home? Or is it only the small farmers growing broccoli who are causing problems? Further, is it enough to know that recycled water, rather than potable water, is going to the golf club? Shouldn't we be asking how the decision is made regarding who gets recycled water? More important, what is the policy regarding the distribution of all water? 

Then there is the question of privatization of water, a hot issue at the World Water Forum. Are there other ways to make it available to people, ways that make it accessible to everyone irrespective of ability to pay? As water becomes scarcer, its value and price can be expected to increase. Will profit come before people? Or will a more just solution be found? One speaker claimed that "people in the rural areas prefer to spend their money on beer and sodas. They have to have their consciousness raised." 

Consciousness raising is a good idea, but it is needed among city folks as well. Robin Luxmoore of the Audubon Society pointed out that Mexico's lack of interest in the water issue "is aggravated by the fact that very few people venture out of their city environments and go to the campo to see how serious the problem really is." It is the poor, indigenous communities in the campo that worry most about the environment. Their survival depends on it. "Their needs are in great contrast to those who occupy our attention here in the city," said the Director of Environment and Ecology, Gerardo Arteaga. He concluded by saying, "In order to make improvements in the lives of these people, it is necessary to promote their involvement in any proposed programs. It is especially important to include the women because their lives and role are closely tied to water." 

We went away with the feeling that it is up to city folks and rural people to join together to find just solutions to the water problem. Hopefully, more public conferences like this one will be held to enlighten us and involve us in finding solutions that benefit everyone.





Water supply under the microscope; how clean is San Miguel's water?

Owing to concerns about the levels of contamination in the city's underground water supply, a water quality analysis was begun five months ago. The study was sponsored by the Ecosystem Sciences Foundation, a nonprofit US-based organization, the local departments of ecology and urban development, and SAPASMA. The results were presented at the city's Fourth International Water Forum held March 24. The study found that the quality of San Miguel's underground water supply is acceptable.

To conduct the analysis, water samples were collected within the city and in rural communities. Some samples were gathered directly from water wells, and others from sources near areas of high water consumption, such as schools. In rural communities, sources of water range from wells, ponds and springs to puddles in a few cases. In total, 101 water samples were gathered, of which 75 percent came from wells, 23 percent from springs and 2 percent from puddles.

Tests were conducted at a specially constructed site in the Manuel Clouthier Park (behind the city courts, Juzgado) and were made possible by equipment donated by the Audubon Society. The water samples were tested for the presence of bacteria, arsenic, fluorine and chlorine, as well as for purity, alkalinity and pH.

In San Miguel, 38 percent of the city's water is stored in closed cement containers, 27 percent in closed plastic containers, 19 percent in open containers and 16 percent in other types of storage. Seventy-seven percent of the city's water is supplied via plastic tubing, 4 percent via piping and 19 percent via hand-carried buckets. The latter method yields the highest incidence of water contamination.

Results of specific tests

Bacteria detection

After a 24-hour observation, no deleterious bacterial colonies developed in the water samples. E. coli was not detected in any samples. A campaign is being organized to prevent this bacterium from entering the water supply. Coliform bacteria were not detected in the urban water supply but were found in some samples from rural areas, which could pose a risk for infants.

Arsenic detection

The five-step test for the presence of arsenic indicated no arsenic in the water supply.


Fluorine detection

Excessive fluorine can damage the teeth. The water tested from some rural communities contained a moderate level of fluorine. At the concentrations detected, fluorine does not represent a high risk for 93 percent of these communities and it represents a medium-high risk for the remaining 7 percent. 


Hardness

"Hardness" is a measure of chemical concentrations in water, mainly compounds of calcium and magnesium. Tests indicated that the water in San Miguel is hard.

World Water Forum 2006
By Robin Luxmoore

The world looked at Mexico this week, and Mexico did a fantastic job putting together this huge event: World Water Forum 2006. It was both an inspiration and a disappointment. Many of the panelists confirmed the low priority governments are giving to the earth's water crisis. Most of the prepared statements by politicians said nothing; they were instead full of legalese and skillfully evaded the questions from the floor. The member from CNA (Comisión Nacional del Agua), which is the Mexican government department that manages the water resources, indicated Mexican aquifers are sustainable and rattled on about how well the water crisis is being handled here.

This was not a conference dominated by the United States, and most impressive were the Asian and African countries. They were more direct, more scientific and less political. They gave well-spoken evidence of the plight of their countries and were not ashamed at showing pictures of poverty, but what especially impressed me were their methods of treating these problems. We are behind many other countries in our efforts in Mexico. A panelist from Tanzania related how some villages are purifying their water using the sun. All that is needed are plastic bottles and a black background and the water will be purified after one to eight hours, depending on the intensity of the sun. "We no longer suffer from stomach illness because the water is clean and safe." They used to boil their water and that meant burning firewood, with the usual consequences. The resistance is cultural beliefs. People believe the water will be contaminated from the sun or that an enemy will put something bad in the water. They have to be educ
ated. With thousands of plastic bottles littering the countryside around here, what an opportunity we have.

Another impression was the similarity of our problems to those in other parts of the world. Representatives from Africa, Egypt and Saudi Arabia spoke of constraints, red tape and uncoordinated programs. The many countries that border the Nile have problems through lack of understanding, no partnership with one another and institutional red tape.

Since 2002 some 80 representatives from all over the area are now involved in research and training, but that is hardly enough. The Tanzanian representatives said there are 500 conflicts that need to be resolved, but no forum to deal with them, and that they need to decentralize. One session was devoted to fluoride and arsenic poisoning in the water from natural causes, a known problem to the north of us. Yet very recent results show we have these problems in our own area now. In Bangladesh, arsenic affects the rice crop and public health. Mexico, we were told, has serious health problems from lead poisoning.

Another session dealt with rainwater catchment and spoke of a possible 20 percent drop in rainwater the world over due to climate change, which means less water coming into aquifers. In Michoacán, they estimated one square meter of catchment would serve one person for one year, and the gravity feed would save the municipality power. Individual water catchment would also save the cities money because municipal pipes could then be smaller.

One picture showed a woman carrying water and sticks for firewood. The panelist said this sums up the plight of many nations, including, of course, Mexico. 

The woman had to cut the trees, and that increased erosion, which reduced the available water supply. A delegate from Costa Rica said that for 250 years women and children had walked three hours each day for water and survived. Now that water is not protected. One person said the Comisión Nacional del Agua (CNA) had spent a vast amount of money for water enhancement, but there was not enough training and they gave up.

European nations seemed to give honest assessments of their problems. They were assessed as being far ahead of North America in their approach to many problems. However, access to sustainable water is decreasing in eastern Europe, especially in rural areas. Revenue is only 60 percent of cost. In Georgia, only 30 percent pay their water bills. Mexico said they had no statistics, but at the 1998 International Water Forum in León a spokesman said it cost more to send out the bills in Mexico City than was collected in fees.

A panelist from Bolivia said the human race was not advancing in spite of all our technology. Peru said 10,000 children in the world die each day from polluted water, and in their country only 20 to 25 percent of water systems work. Seven million have no access to water, and sanitation is a political promise but not a priority. Sewage treatment was a major topic, and the right-to-water advocates say the two topics are inseparable. Many sessions were held on sewage treatment, and great strides have been made in African countries toward dry latrines. Before and after pictures were shown. 

One showed a small town mayor's latrine, which was a hole in the ground that he and his family reached by walking across a piece of land. Dry latrines were installed, but the land between was sold and he had no more access. African nations and many others are looking for long-term sustainability, not expensive solutions.

There is nitrate poisoning in Rumania from fertilizer. Farms, we were told, are a big threat to fresh water. They are consuming more water as the population increases and people turn to a Western diet. If we don't take adequate measures now, such as ending subsidies on pesticides and fertilizers, we will have greater problems in the future.

Many said water should be based on a scale, like electricity. Each household would be allowed a basic amount, after which the rate would increase exponentially. We cannot go back to the old system of running waste water to fields for irrigation because of the detergents and other chemicals now used in the households.

Many stories were told not of people born into poverty but whose livelihoods have been taken from them by the building of dams and the corporate theft of water.

We were told that 31 countries face severe water problems, yet North Americans use 500,000 liters of water per person per year, which includes washing cars, filling swimming pools and so on. We actually need only 10,000 liters to live healthily. In some areas in India, people pay 25 percent of their income for water. Instead of living off fresh water income, we were told, we are spending the capital. But the waste could be cut by 50% with better irrigation, such as a drip system, which is 95 percent effective. A quarter of the world's irrigated land is irrigated by groundwater, and only 1 percent is irrigated by drip.

The last session I attended was held in the largest lecture hall and attended by a full audience. The security was the greatest. Having already passed through two checks, we had another for just this session. The topic concerned the corporate theft of water and was chaired by the Canadian Maude Barlow who wrote the book Blue Gold, which is causing a sensation around the world. There were nine panelists. The representative from India gave a captivating account of how his city was in the process of kicking out a large corporation, which had contracted to supply water on a long-term basis, because promises of lower rates and better distribution had been violated. The applause was great. But greater still was the reception given to a Mexican campesino, who was not dressed like all the others in a suit but wore clean work clothes and a sombrero. He told us how a corporation was withdrawing water to bottle and sell, thus depriving his family and others of water they had used for generations. He got a standing ovati
on. Worldwide, the bottled water industry is now worth about US $100 billion a year.

Logistically, the forum was a great success. Two-and-a-half-hour sessions were held each day in 13 auditoriums, and all sessions started on time. Each day a banquet was set out for the many participants, and each table was arranged in a manner in keeping with the best hotels. The large hall served 4,500 people at one sitting.

British-born Robin Luxmoore is a former mining engineer and a longtime resident of San Miguel.

Mexican Oil: National sovereignty, change and the legacy of history
By John Barham

During the long dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz, material progress was the order of the day. The nation's infrastructure was developed with the construction of roads and railroads. Accompanying this was the exploitation of both Mexico's ample natural resources and its labor force. All this was done at the great cost of granting concessions to foreign interests. Those Mexican nationalists who dared speak out against these developments were silenced by the Díaz regime's hard-fisted policy of repression, better known as pan o palo, or bread or the stick.

The ascendancy of Venustiano Carranza was marked by the Jefe Máximo's desire to bestow upon Mexico a constitution that would safeguard the nation's patrimony. With regard to land rights, Article 27 of the Constitution of 1917 was specific in declaring that the state was the custodian of the land for its people. In this capacity, the state also had custody of all subsoil properties, including minerals and oil.

Of immediate concern to foreign entities with considerable investments in mining and oil was the question of retroaction. In other words, would Article 27 be applied to property concessions that had been granted prior to 1917?

Hoping to postpone an ultimate confrontation with powerful outside interests and to gain recognition by the government of the United States, Alvaro Obregón's presidency saw concessions made to American corporate interests, and the Mexican Supreme Court established precedents that worked against the principle of retroactivity. In the Bucareli Agreements of 1923, the Obregón government further promised not to invoke Article 27 retroactively with regard to American oil interests.

During the presidency of Plutarco Elías Calles, Mexico ignored the Bucareli Agreements. American diplomats, in turn, issued pronouncements equating Mexico with Bolshevism, and relations between the two countries steadily worsened. In 1925, the US Secretary of State, Frank Kellogg, stated that his government would "only continue to support the government of Mexico while it protects American lives and interests and fulfills its international compromises and obligations."

By 1927, Mexico had withdrawn the permits of those foreign oil companies not in conformity with new regulations issued by the Calles regime. Later in the same year, American plans for the invasion of Mexico came to light through documents stolen from the American embassy in Mexico City. This sorry state of affairs was saved only by the savvy diplomacy of the new American ambassador, Dwight Morrow, father-in-law of Charles Lindberg. However, it would take another decade before the Constitution of 1917 was validated in terms of Mexico's ownership of its land.

A 1937 clash between oil workers and companies over wages led to President Lázaro Cárdenas taking action that finally resulted in the fulfillment of Article 27. After protracted wrangling on both sides, Cárdenas, in 1938, announced that the Mexican nation was assuming ownership of its own oil resources and that Mexico, although expropriating the properties of foreign oil companies, would compensate them for their losses.

Despite boycotts and embargoes against its oil, Mexico would stay the course, and the foundation was laid for the nation's largest public enterprise, the state-owned oil company best known today through its acronym of PEMEX. By 1941, the United States was involved in World War II, and the need for Mexican oil meant that embargoes and boycotts were no longer appropriate. Mexico's nationhood had been affirmed. Henceforth, no serious Mexican politician could speak of disassociating the nation from its oil.

With the 1970's discovery of significant off-shore oil deposits, Mexico would emerge as a major player in international oil markets. And now, in the first decade of the 21st century, Mexico is the world's fifth-largest oil producer and the third-largest supplier of oil to the United States. Indicative of the importance of its role in national finance is that 67% of PEMEX revenues go to the government in the form of taxes, and 33% of the revenues making up the national budget are derived from oil sales.

Recently, speculation has abounded concerning PEMEX and its future role as a government corporation. In March, news of the production decline in Cantarell, Mexico's largest oil field and the second-largest in the world, was followed by President Vicente Fox's revelation that a new field with the potential to produce 10 billion barrels had been discovered 60 miles off the coast of Veracruz. 

In order to tap this new resource and to maintain its overall level of production, PEMEX would need to invest 20 billion dollars annually over the next 20 years-no easy matter, considering how the federal government has traditionally treated PEMEX as a cash cow. Offering his view on how to accomplish the task of maintenance and development, energy minister Fernando Canales Clariond has come out in favor of joint ventures with international companies, and President Fox has argued for a form of privatization for PEMEX. From the perspective of globally oriented free-traders, an oil company treated like a government bureau is operating with a severe handicap in competing with hard-charging international oil companies.

Luis Ramírez Corzo, CEO of PEMEX, has noted that international oil companies would insist on being partners in any such ventures and would not agree to function as hired hands. At the same time, he has acknowledged that there is the widespread feeling in Mexico that if the energy sector is opened to foreign partners, Mexican sovereignty would be a serious issue.

PAN presidential candidate Felipe Calderón, himself a former energy minister, has called for a private-sector presence in energy affairs and has proclaimed that as president he would take steps to establish a more globally oriented and competitive free-market economy in Mexico. This would seem to place the PAN candidate at loggerheads with his PRD opponent, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who has consistently questioned the benefits of globalization and free-market economics for Mexico.

Among the many crucial issues to be debated during election 2006, perhaps none has the potential to be more inflammatory than how Mexico should capitalize on its rich natural resources. Ultimately, Mexicans will cast their votes to determine whether their country will allow PEMEX to continue on the course that history has plotted for it for the last 70 years or whether the pressures of 21st-century economics will compel new solutions that offer the possibility of better returns on key national investments. 



John Barham, who has been visiting San Miguel de Allende since 1987, has spent his career in higher education, during which he has been an associate professor of history, dean and provost in colleges and universities in Alabama, Texas, New York and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He is presently superintendent of the University of Missouri Forest and is eagerly anticipating an imminent retirement in San Miguel.