Mexicali farmers say they are still owed money as part of an international agreement in which they agreed to not use Colorado River water.
By
Farmers in Mexicali are protesting again, arguing they haven’t been paid in full for pulling land out of production to save water for the imperiled Colorado River.
The farmers argue they’ve only been paid half for the amount of land they’ve left out of production. Earlier this month those farmers staged a days-long sit-in at the offices of CONAGUA, Mexico’s federal water agency. They claim they’re still owed millions of dollars, which ultimately come from the U.S. government under international agreements to compensate farmers who agree not to grow crops and save river water.
The agreements work like this: Farmers take thousands of acres out of production, meaning they reduce the demand on the drought-stricken Colorado River. Then, once U.S. officials verify those crops haven’t been sown, the U.S. government pays the Mexican government, which then pays the farmers.
Under those agreements, called Minute 323 signed in 2017 and Minute 330 signed in 2024, the U.S. would pay a total of $96.5 million to Mexico for water conservation. That conservation could come from paying farmers to take land out of production, known as fallowing, or by building canals and other water infrastructure.
U.S. officials say they have paid out about $20 million so far. A report from CILA, Mexico’s binational water agency who is the first recipient in Mexico of the U.S. cash, shows the Mexican government has paid out about the same amount: $18 million went to the farmers of Irrigation District 14 and about $2 million went to infrastructure as of Feb. 6. It’s unclear how the rest of the money might be spent.
The farmers want to know where it will be going.
During the protest earlier this month, a representative for Irrigation District 14 told tijuanapress.com the sit-in would continue “until the money that was promised is paid.”
But after 10 days, farmers ended their occupation of federal offices when CONAGUA officials said they would report back on how the money has been spent so far. CONAGUA receives the U.S. money from CILA and disperses it to farmers. CONAGUA also promised to ask the United States for more money to pay for farms taken out of production.
“We’ve been fighting against secrecy,” said Ana Quirino, who is acting as a spokesperson for the farmers. She said the farmers would re-occupy federal offices on Friday if they didn’t get clarity on how the U.S. payments were being spent.
The farmers also blamed the U.S., alleging the country wasn’t holding up its end of the bargain by not releasing all of the promised funds.
Officials for the International Boundary and Water Commission, CILA’s U.S. counterpart, told Voice of San Diego they haven’t withheld any payments.
There’s a long process to prove Mexico’s actually conserved a given amount of water before the nation is paid by the U.S. That’s the process that’s being followed, said Sally Spener, secretary for the IBWC.
“We have a long history of doing projects on the Colorado River and elsewhere and we have an established practice for how we do that,” said Spener.
This is how the process works: CILA submits a proposed water conservation project to the U.S. The IBWC determines whether the project fits the scope to receive funding. Then Mexico submits invoices and supporting documentation. Once the water conservation project or land fallowing has been validated by the IBWC and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the IBWC then pays out, officials said.
Voice filed a public records request for that documentation, but has not yet received any relevant documents.
The group of protesting farmers has been at odds with the Mexican government over water for years, but tensions are ratcheting up.
In 2024, farmers and the Mexican government couldn’t agree on how much the farmers should be paid per acre of fallowing, according to reporting in the Mexican press. Then, last December, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum passed sweeping changes to the nation’s water law that stripped long-held water rights away from farmers and consolidated control in the hands of the federal government. As a result, farmers blockaded trade routes with semi trucks at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Many of the farmers from Irrigation District 14 don’t actually farm and instead rely on these payments, essentially conserving water for their livelihood. Others sell their water to cities like Tijuana on Baja California’s coast. Tijuana, Ensenada, Rosarito and other coastal cities depend almost entirely on farmers’ Colorado River water. Upset farmers have in the past threatened to spill their water or use it for agriculture again, even if it’s not profitable, to protest the Mexican government.
River in Crisis
The Colorado River supports the major cities of the Southwest and northern Baja California and props up agricultural industries in both nations. But for years the river has been on the brink of collapse due to overuse and climate change. Another warm winter this year imperiled the Rocky Mountain snowpack which feeds the river. Officials at the Bureau of Reclamation say they expect the river will get about half the water it usually gets from snowpack.
The seven U.S. states that rely on the river – Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona and California – missed a February 14 deadline to strike a deal to use less of it. The U.S. federal government has stepped in to try and impose options that force water use reductions.
Mexico has a right to 1.5 million acre feet of water under a treaty struck in 1944. But the country has agreed to shoulder water reductions as part of a binational plan to lessen impacts on the Colorado River. That’s about half what the state of Arizona receives, for example, but that state – according to the rules that govern the river — shoulders water supply cuts much sooner in a drought than Mexico would.
Mexico and the U.S. haven’t begun renegotiating whether and how Mexico will continue to conserve water. Most of the conservation currently comes from Irrigation District 14 farmers who forgo farming crops.
But this fight between the Mexican government and Mexicali farmers make cross-border negotiations a lot more difficult.
“If the (farmers) say we’re not going to play ball and make any more concessions through the U.S., even if the Mexican government wants that, they can make a pretty good stink about it,” said Stephen Mumme, a political science professor at Colorado State University and an expert on Tijuana River policy.
In other words, discontent from Mexicali farmers could disrupt binational cooperation on the Colorado River and imperil it further.
