1

Lake Chapala and its watershed:

Summary of Experiences and Lessons Learned

Alejandro Juárez Aguilar Director General, Corazón de la Tierra, A.C.

Guadalajara, México. direccion@corazondelatierra.org.mx

Introduction Chapala is the largest natural lake in Mexico and the third one in Latin America. In its watershed dwell more than 15 million people and take place an important part of agricultural and industrial activities in Mexico. Altogether, the two largest cities in the country are users of this basin (Mexico City and Guadalajara Metropolitan Area) which has generated a strong pressure on forest resources and the available water in the basin. Fishing and tourist activities are performed in Lake Chapala, even if have been badly affected during stages of storage depletion, one of the most serious of which occurred in 1999-2002, when the lake was reduced to 14.4% of its full capacity. In addition to changes in volume, greatest damages to the lake result from eutrophication, siltation, pollution from industrial sources and the presence of exotic fish species. The main sources of organic matter entering into the lake are from run-off of agrochemicals, municipal sewage, waste from hog farms and waste from the tequila industry. Aquatic biodiversity has been severely affected by this combination of conditions, having lost 26% of native species in the period from1960 to 2000. Going against a context in which normally have prevailed sectoral and short-term visions, in the last five years a number of initiatives have been generated, looking for a sustainable management of the lake and its watershed. These projects come from academia, government and civil society organizations, taking currently a joint search process to integrate the different approaches. The new initiatives focus on both managing the water body and the basin of which it forms part, although this latter area is hampered by the number and diversity of stakeholders. There is a long historical record of conflicts over the use of water. Since 2008, a bonding process focused on strengthening the working of the sub-basins it’s ongoing, using Integrated Lake Basin Management (ILBM) as a guide. In such process 53 institutions have been involved, distributed in 7 out of 19 sub-basins. Description of the lake and its watershed Chapala is the largest natural lake in Mexico, with a maximum storage capacity of 7.897 km³ and an area of 1112 km². The lake is located in western Mexico, having its origin in tectonic movements that occurred between 6.7 and 7 million years, making it one of the world's oldest lakes. Lerma-Chapala basin, which feeds the water body, has an area of 53591.3 km², being composed mainly by

2

extrusive-volcanic rocks. The area is characterized by the diversity of ecosystems related to changes in altitude and climate as well as the extent of topographic forms (mountains, plains, canyons and valleys), which in turn has generated a rich biodiversity and environmental services (both of regulation and service), quite essential for a population of more than 15 million people living in the basin and 10 million external users. Five states compose the basin, being these Estado de Mexico, Queretaro, Guanajuato, Michoacan and Jalisco. Both Jalisco and Michoacan share the lake territory. Lake Chapala was declared a Ramsar Site (Wetland of International Importance) on February 2, 2009. The conservation of this ecosystem has a prominent weight in terms of biodiversity types (alpha, beta and gamma: species, populations and ecosystems), not only in the water body itself but also in the surrounding forests, given the effect of climate regulation generated by evaporation, which is indispensable for the maintenance of areas of tropical deciduous forest and pine-oak forest in a radius of 50 kilometers. The water body is permanent, with upward fluctuations during the rainy season and low during the dry season. Although volume has reached beyond its storage capacity (in 1926 reached 122.36% with 9.663 km³, generating severe flooding) has also suffered sharp declines in their level (in 1955 was reduced to 12.08% of its maximum volume, while during 2002 fell to 14.4% of it). In general conditions the average depth is 7.7 meters.

Parameter Value Total surface area 1,112 km².

Maximum historical water level 9.663.1 km³ Minimum historical water level 953.98 km³

Lenght along major axis 77.00 km Maximum width 22.50 km Maximum depth 26 m

Mean depth 7.7 m

Inflows and outflows (annual average)

Quantity

Rain over lake 852.4 Lerma River Contribution 1418.9 Duero River Contribution 227

Groundwater Not quantified

Evaporation 1122.1 Extraction for the Guadalajara

metropolitan area 153.6

Out on the Rio Santiago 28.9 Total discharge 1304.6

Lake Chapala currently has 18 native fish species, several of which are endemic, among them the charal (Chirostoma arge) and whitefish (C. sphyraena), both considered endangered. Other endemic species are blackmouthed whitefish (C. consocium), bigmouth whitefish (C. promelas) and

3

Chapala catfish (Ictalurus dugesii), all also threatened by damage to their habitat and overfishing. The lake is one of the most important centers of origin, evolution and biogeography of the fishes in Mexico. The Goodeidae family (pintillas and tiros) it’s also endemic, with nine species in the lake. In total 15 species have commercial value, highlighting the family Cyprinidae (carp), with four species; Ictaluridae (catfish), with three species, Atherinidae, with seven species (charales and whitefish), and finally the family Cichlidae (tilapia, introduced) with one species. The body of water and surrounding vegetation serve as refuge and feeding area for birds. After disappearing of many bogs and wetlands systems from Mexico’s central highlands, Chapala has become one of the few alternatives for a vast region of western Mexico. Migratory routes into the lake are part of the central and Pacific routes that come from Alaska, Canada and the United States. In total, between resident and migratory birds there are scientific reports of 100 species and 250 species more from birdwatchers. Globally it is estimated that the lake area can be reached a population of approximately 50,000 waterfowl during winter. To our knowledge, Lake Chapala has the richest phytoplankton species in Mexico and the largest number of species per genus. In total, there are reported 226 species of phytoplankton, grouped in 92 genera and 44 families. Noted for its abundance are those belonging to the divisions Chlorophyta, Chromophyta, Cyanophyta, Dinophyta and Euglenophyta. Problems in the lake and its watershed The Lerma-Chapala basin altogether with Lake Chapala itself have undergone through various changes resulting from the use of land, one of the most important was building of Ballesteros Dike (completed in 1908), which drained 50,000 hectares east of the lake, which functioned as a bog. This work reduced the water surface but increased its volume, from a maximum storage 5.8 km³ to the current 7.897 km³. With greater intensity since the mid-twentieth century numerous dams have been built, both for irrigation purposes and for urban supply. The natural flow of the tributaries is lacking in long stretches during the dry season due to fluid retention generated by these systems, counting in the basin with 552 structures capable of holding more than 1 km³ each, being the main use the same agricultural irrigation, which mostly shows low efficiency, reporting up to 80% of waste by use of techniques such as open distribution channels, and even entarquinamiento. This last technique consists to flood agricultural land to kill pests and weeds, at same time that getting the ground wet. That requires high volumes of water of which a large portion is lost by evaporation. The balance of surface water in the Lerma-Chapala in average conditions indicates a deficit of 677 km³ per year, which is remedied through over-exploitation of underground aquifers, a condition that threatens to trigger a major crisis in the medium term derived from the depletion of them. A serious problem of Lake Chapala, which affects all components of aquatic and riparian ecosystems that compose it, is derived from pollution. Contaminants enter through main tributaries, the runoff from small streams in

4

the basin and direct discharges of wastewater treatment plants. Pollution comes from point sources (urban and industrial sewage, also from livestock production) and non-point sources (fertilizers and pesticides from agricultural areas). Nitrogen and phosphorus loads in Lake Chapala are high, so it has the necessary conditions for algi blooms abundance of aquatic weeds. However, this production does not occur to the extent that one would expect because there are abiotic factors that prevent full implementation of photosynthesis process. The most important of these is the concentration of solids in the lake. The erosive processes along the catchment area (caused by deforestation and inappropriate agricultural practices) have drawn a large amount of soil that is kept constantly in suspension, due to strong winds blowing on the lake and the characteristics of the particles constituting sediment. Estimates on the volume of solids deposited in the lake varies widely, with more sustained calculation stating that between 1930 and 1977 entered an average of 1.81 km³ per year, although there is not updated data. This is caused primarily on existing rapid deforestation throughout the basin, being reported the loss of 1 million hectares of natural vegetation in the period 1980-2000, partially derived from farming practices that leave the soil bare and promote their drag from wind and rain, both on flat land and hillside areas. Slope-agriculture activities (locally known as ecuaro or coamil), have the particularity to be fertile for a short period before losing their productive capacity, which favors its abandonment to look for new areas, that are deforested to be used in that way. Additionally, run-off serves as mechanism to transport pollutants such as heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and organochlorine pesticides. A very visible effect derived from the abundance of nutrients in the water is the abundance of water hyacinth, which forms extensive moving patches (as result of wind action). In 1993 the water hyacinth coverage reached 135 km² (13% of the surface of the lake). According to data from the State Water Commission of Jalisco, between 2007-2008 some patches of water lilies came to be as large as 7000 hectares each. From 2008 was established as main method of control the use of glyphosate, which was strongly criticized by the scientific and NGO sectors though accepted by the general population because of its rapid effects. Coincidentally algal blooms have been reported, from species as Microsystis aeruginosa, Microsystis flos-aquae and Anabaena flos-aquae. The overabundance of algae is consistent with reduction of water hyacinth population, which suggest that it leaves an open niche for the use of nutrients. Other pollutants reported for Lake Chapala are heavy metals like arsenic, copper, chromium, mercury and zinc, with higher concentrations at the delta of Lerma river entering the lake. Assessments of heavy metals in water hyacinth and cattail in Lake Chapala have reported concentrations up to 178 mg. of cyanide, 6 mg. of chromium and 4 mg. of lead per dry kilogram in water hyacinth and 552 mg. of cyanide and 15 mg. of mercury per dry kilogram in cattail. The source of these pollutants it’s the industrial corridor in El Bajio (Central Mexico), highlighting fur production in Leon, Guanajuato, that generates arsenic discharges into the Rio Turbio (a Lerma river tributary), as well as the petrochemical plant in Salamanca, which generates a wide variety of substances as a result of their processes, which reach the lake through Lerma

5

stream. There are also chemicals derived from industrial discharges from the upper basin (Toluca and Queretaro) and the industrial corridor from Ocotlan, adjacent to the lake. Management of the lake and its watershed The management of the Lerma-Chapala basin has been usually made with partial approaches, without a comprehensive view that considers the body of water and its basin as dynamic ecosystems that are part of a complex and interrelated unit. Since 1991 there is a surface water distribution agreement, approved by the governments of states and representatives of water users, all integrated within the framework of consultation represented by the Council of Lerma-Chapala Basin, an organ derived from the National Water Commission (CONAGUA). In this agreement, the lake is the reference item to define policy of volume distribution. In the medium and long terms this aims to ensure at least equivalent entries to the evaporation rate. Although the structure and functioning of the Basin Council have evolved over time, the prevailing approach is that water is a resource to be shared, in order to ensure productive activities and reduce levels of conflict among users. The Basin Council base its actions on the allocation of concessions for exploitation without linking it to management, proper planning, conservation of forest areas for water recharge, control of pollutants from non-point sources and sustainable management of biodiversity, to name a few topics. Fishing in the Lake Chapala has been an important source of resources for centuries, but declined sharply after 1980 by the fluctuations of volume, unorganized fishing and water pollution, reporting continued reductions in the size of the specimens captured. The fishery is conducted in a semi-traditional way, by large numbers of people either individually or grouped in cooperatives. Among the most identifiable fishes are caught whitefish and charales (8 to 12 centimeters), used commonly as snack. Despite its ecological importance and endemic condition there is a wide spread lack of interest from government agencies, fishermen's organizations and the general public about the knowledge, conservation and sustainable use of these species. Of the 28 native fish species reported in the 1960 currently only are found 18. If same trend continues there are estimations about all native species disappearing by 2020. Catch volumes for decades maintained a constant number of fishers, located mainly in the Chapala-Jocotepec area, Mezcala and Cojumatlán. The fishing on the lake reported an average annual catch of 5176.9 tons in the period 1990-2001, which amounts to about 30% of the total catch for the state of Jalisco. Truth it’s that there were a gradual reduction in volume until reaching a sharp plunge in the period 2001-2002, when the lake was reduced to only 14.4% of its volume. Overall the fishing industry has been the weakest one compared to other productive sectors: real estate, tourism services, agriculture and industry, having little weight in decision-making about development priorities in the region. The activities that generate the greatest revenue to the region surrounding the lake are tourism and agriculture. The first benefits directly or indirectly about 80,000 people, mostly in urban areas, while rural and nature tourism are poorly

6

developed. Tourism has been little planned, generating strong development pressures that have affected the adjacent forest areas. As part of this process it’s important to mention the establishing of about 12,000 American and Canadian citizen in a semi-permanent basis, who purchased real estate and remain in the north shore of the lake between November and March, being known locally as "winter birds”. The area devoted to agricultural activities it’s 127869 ha. in the shoreline municipalities, of this being 36.77% irrigated and 63.27% dependant on rain. Soils of the region are considered among the richest in Mexico, particularly those located east of the lake in what was formerly called the "Cienega of Chapala”, land desiccated in 1908 . Considering the total territory of the Lerma-Chapala basin, agriculture occupies a total of 23200 km² equivalent to 43% of the total basin territory. In this area, which includes irrigation and temporary, there is production of grains (mainly wheat and maize) as well as vegetables, fruit and forage plants. According to data from the Public Registry of Water Rights, the total extraction volume of surface water in the Lerma-Chapala is 2036 km³/year through 4046 surface water concessions. The most important consumptive use it’s agriculture (79.74%), followed by public urban use (12.48%), aquaculture (2.7%) and industrial (2.3%). The most widespread public perception is that the lake problems are directly related to its volume. Since the period 2003-2010 has been abundant rain seasons, with a volume fluctuating between 50 and 75% of its maximum capacity. Expressions of interest in the health of the water body and voices of both institutional and individual complaints declined greatly in this period, even between instances of environmental sector. The general idea is that having enough water, "the lake is good." Arguably, the liquid covers the problems that lie beneath the surface: sedimentation, pollution from point and non-point sources, biodiversity loss, eutrophication, etc. The actions of municipal governments in relation to the lake shore have focused mainly to the use of it for tourism purposes, either by the beauty of its landscapes or any of its elements (such as waterfowl, including migratory although even this approach is emerging). The tourism industry maintains a certain level of conflict with the fishery due to lax regulation on how to make the fishery, having frequent complaints from service providers by the widespread prevalence of networks in space navigation. The weight of fisheries in development decisions was further reduced in 2010 due to presentation of a study reporting concentrations of mercury in lake fish tissue, which significantly reduced its consumption. Public reaction in this case focused into abandon the consumption of fishery products, without focusing on solving the entry of pollutants. Also in 2010 ocurred the creation of the Intermunicipal Association for Sustainable Development of Lake Chapala (AIPROMADES), an initiative that seeks to link municipal governments of Jalisco and Michoacan to the overall decision-making and the process of reaching financial sources from both state and federal order. While AIPROMADES proposals are interesting, in this instance it is too early to assess their impact.

7

In February 2009, Lake Chapala obtained Ramsar status, which triggered preparation of its corresponding Conservation and Management Programme (structured between 2009 and 2010) under the coordination of the National Commission of Protected Natural Areas (CONANP). It is envisaged that final document will be presented in early 2011, which represent an important advance for the management of the water body, which structure specific Action Lines organized in several components: Protection, Management, Restoration, Research, and CEPA (Communication, Education and Public Awareness). Main “Impact Stories”

1) Irrigated agriculture is an activity of high water demand, which has shown little adaptability to low availability scenarios. A successful experience in this context was made by the Special Working Group on Comprehensive Agricultural Planning (GTEPAI) for the period 2002-2003 (one of the most critical cycles of the past 20 years). This group, now dissolved, was linked to the Council of Lerma-Chapala Basin and prompted the replacement of wheat and similar crops (which require up to three irrigations) for growing barley, safflower and chickpea, which require less water volume. Through a series of alliances to ensure the promotion among farmers, availability of crop warehouses and definition of previous agreements with buyers, they managed to convert 55,000 hectares of high water demand crops in other of low demand, thereby achieving savings of 68 million cubic meters of water and a gross income of 45 million dollars from the sale of the grains. While the availability of surface water increased in the period 2003-2010 it is clear that the Lerma-Chapala has a strong water deficit, which produces a constant decrease of groundwater. The GTEPAI work experience is a viable alternative that would help greatly to reduce water requirements for agriculture without creating a negative economic impact on it.

2) In 2002 began the Sustainable Development Program of the Sierra

Candiro-Canales (a forest area of 11760 ha, located northeast of the lake), which continues to nowadays. This program focuses on increasing the organization capabilities of peasant groups that use the area's woods in order to achieve conservation and improvement of forest coverage, given the fact that most of local ecological degradation has been done directly by these rural groups. Work with them it’s done through participatory assessments, training courses, training for productive groups, environmental education and development projects. Through improving community practices and technical knowledge better practices of forest management, control of water pollution and quality of life have been implemented. At this point there have been more than 90 applied projects including reforestation, soil conservation, organic farming and installation of eco-techniques (dry toilet systems, rainwater collection, saving stoves, etc.). The process of organizational strengthening has been implemented on two levels, the first directly into the 11 participating communities and the second through the articulation of such groups among themselves and with government institutions, universities and

8

civic organizations through the Working Table of Sierra Cóndiro-Canales, a space for meeting, exchange of ideas and experiences that helps to define agreements and solve conflicts. The program uses a multi-level methodological model that, once perfected, will be used to restore other forest areas in the Lerma-Chapala basin. The effort has received several awards in Mexico and abroad. Project coordination it’s done by Corazon de la Tierra (Heart of the Earth, a civil society organization) while in project implementation have took part 23 institutions from federal, state and municipal government agencies; civil society organizations, universities and international institutions.

3) For decades, decisions about the management of the Lerma-Chapala

basin lacked of a basic document that summarizes in an integrated and easy to understand way the large body of scientific information on the area. Institutions of state and federal order handled often contradictory information on population, water usage, problems and even about the boundaries and surface area of the basin. Between 2005 and 2006, the National Ecology Institute (INE) in conjunction with the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM) assumed the task of integrating the book "Atlas of the Lerma-Chapala basin, building a shared vision”, an easy to understand text with a detailed set of maps, which showed clear information provided by 60 researchers on issues of biodiversity, water balance, population dynamics, production activities, water uses, institutional and legal framework for the management, history of conflict, land use change and erosion, among others. Among the highlights of the document is the delimitation of the 19 sub-basins that make up the Lerma-Chapala basin, along with a descriptive picture of them and a list of technical recommendations for each. The first edition sold out quickly, being taken as reference material for many of the federal sector, state water commissions, universities and civil organizations. To facilitate access the full text its’ available for free on the Internet.

4) The vast majority of dams and lakes in the basin is troubled by the

presence of aquatic weeds, most notably water hyacinth (Eicchornia crassipes), which has been tried to control in many ways, including manual and machine harvesting, crushing plants, use of herbicides and biological control using parasitic beetles. In the control of this weed millions of dollars have been invested in the Lerma-Chapala basin (although there is no accurate quantification of the amount) but, to date, there is not an adequate solution, since the plant continues to thrive because of the abundance of dissolved nutrients, coming from both sewage and rain-washed agrochemicals. A peculiar attempt of control was the introduction of manatees in Lake Chapala in the late 1980's, with the idea that they would feed on such aquatic plants. However, this action was carried out without informing the public, generating prompting reports of "monsters" that were killed by fishermen, who haven’t had any prior contact with these animals. This case shows the risks of making decisions without adequate technical support (as manatees never naturally inhabited this body of water) as well as intervention actions without engaging in the process the human groups that use the space.

9

5) Between 2008 and 2010 was implemented the project "Planning for

Integrated Management of Lerma-Chapala Basin" which includes a series of training on ILBM, in order to strengthen institutional capacities and generate working groups in the area. The set of activities included a training workshop in 2008, integration and operation of a monitoring group that carried out a series of projects arising from 2009-2010; holding of two planning workshops (2009 and 2010), the formation of a network of sub-basins (2010) and the development and use of a system of governance indicators to monitor the six components of ILBM: Information, Participation, Institutions, Policies, Technology and Finance. In the set of activities participated 197 people from 53 institutions, including the level of federal, state and municipal institutions; public and private research organizations, civil society and producer groups. At this point the institutions involved in the formation and operation of the network are defining the structure and work plans of the same, which is focusing on training, exchange of experience and fostering of projects in the sub-basins, from which 7 are represented in this initial stage. The project was coordinated by Corazon de la Tierra with involvement of the International Lake Environment Committee Foundation (ILEC) and government groups of the states of Jalisco (2008), Michoacan (2009) and Guanajuato (2010), as well as civil organizations, universities and federal government (INE-National Institute of Ecology).

Key governance issues in the basin

• Since 1991 there is an approved agreement for surface water distribution,

signed by the governments of 5 basin states and representatives of water users, within the framework of consultation and coordination of the Council of Lerma-Chapala Basin, an organ derived from the National Commission of Water (CONAGUA). In the agreement, the lake is a reference to the allocation policy. The instrument has solved to some extent the conflicts over access to water, even in drought conditions there have been strong pressures arising from the clashes between sectors. The Basin Council works primarily as a forum for negotiating water allocations through making agreements between CONAGUA, the governments of states with territory in the basin as well as representatives of major users (agricultural, urban public industrial, aquaculture, livestock, services, power generation). In 2008 were added representatives from academia and organized society. The structure of the Basin Council has evolved over time, although a background situations that remains is its approach to water resources, basing its action on the allocation of concessions for use, in isolation from the watershed management in issues as management of agricultural, forest and urban areas; public promotion, environmental education and others.

• A major difficulty in this context is the low cost of water in the region,

which receives subsidies (variable but often high) for urban public use. Agricultural irrigation water it’s free of charge, claiming only the use of distribution infrastructure. This means that there are no incentives for

10

proper use of the resource, which has led to overexploitation of underground and surface water.

• In the case of payment for urban use, it remains artificially low due to

political perception (widely shared by various political parties) that increasing the amounts represents a loss of positive public perception, which could be punished at the polls. This contrasts with water availability, of 1820 cubic meters/per person/a year, which according to international standards is considered "Very Low". In addition to this there is a strong limiting factor in terms of verification, since the only entitled to apply warnings and fines over unauthorized water users (a very common practice, made either by building channels without permission or by direct extraction with electric pumps) are CONAGUA inspectors, who are greatly overwhelmed by their small numbers and the huge territory to be covered. In the region, farmers say that "it is easier to get struck by lightning that get a visit from CONAGUA inspectors”.

• From 1950 to nowadays, federal government has tried five times to

establish a "Master Plan" for managing the basin as a whole. However, the attempts developed on each occasion have been technical instruments with varying degrees of quality, but lacking of social support, which has aroused strong social resistance to prevent its implementation. Currently there is a new initiative called "General Strategy for the Environmental Rescue and Sustainability of the Lerma-Chapala Basin" (already structured and ongoing promoting process) whose approach divides the basin into five "sub-regions" corresponding to the territory of each federal state (Estado de Mexico, Queretaro Guanajuato, Michoacan and Jalisco) in the basin.

• Civil society organizations involvement has been varied and with different

levels of development. As a group their activities have gone through several stages: the initial and the longer focused on denouncing contamination problems and environmental risks, approach which shows growth in the historical moments of Lake Chapala’s low level. Among the set of actions in this regard are demonstrations, marches, press conferences and legal claims. In the last decade new civic groups have emerged more focused on public information activities, environmental education and training to government sectors and civil society itself. Also recorded from 2005 there is a slight but promising increase in joint actions of civil organizations, academic and government groups, both in the field of promotion of public initiatives and basic research. Similar situations are reported for Chapala lakeshore and other sub-basins. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the overall participation of CSOs on issues related to governance are still poorly developed, with few civil organizations developing strong projects of medium and long term. Also it’s interesting the joint venture between civil organizations in the basin, represented by the on process ILBM network group. As for the general population, there has been little involvement in the process, being one of the pending issues to be addressed in depth.

11

• Current funding mechanisms for basin management aspects are generally inadequate, issue identified at least since 1980, both federally and by other stakeholder groups. The cost of construction of treatment plants is mainly absorbed by water commissions of the states, taking mixed results in terms of water treatment coverage among the five states. Operation of the plants correspond to municipalities, who face serious difficulties in many cases due to lack of efficient water offices, so it does not generate sufficient resources to accomplish this task. There are special cases worthy of attention, as the operation of the “drinking water and sewerage office” of Leon (Guanajuato), which is virtually self-sustaining from the fee system implemented in late 1980s, with strong social resistance at the beginning, which was solved by showing the improvement of service. Also interesting is the use of alternative treatment systems, such as artificial wetlands conducted in various locations around Lake Patzcuaro, whose operation involves local people, who use the final stage treated water to produce ornamental flowers, which are then sold to generate local income. Another useful example is the "Green Fund" established in the municipality of San Miguel de Allende, which through a series of charges and fines finances projects for restoration of water bodies, reforestation and environmental education, among others. This fund was integrated within a legal framework that ensures its maintenance despite changes in administration, counting also with transparency mechanisms which, although perfectible, have gained it social support.

• With regard to forest management and conservation, the National

Forestry Commission (CONAFOR) is the institution that manages higher levels of resources to finance a wide range of activities such as soil conservation works, tree nurseries, reforestation, forest pest control, among others. Despite solid development in some areas the scheme that uses (addressed directly to owners of forest lands) shows weaknesses such as lack of attention directed to priority areas for groundwater recharge, and the risk of not having resources for sequential stages of forest restoration, for example. Several ministries and commissions of state level have similar functions, with varying degrees of effectiveness.

Key governance challenges There are several processes underway that are expected to have impacts on the management of the Lerma-Chapala basin. Some are relatively recent and others are the result of long work of various institutions and sectors. Among the most interesting are: The Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) is promoting the "General Strategy for the Environment Rescue and Sustainability of the Lerma-Chapala Basin" as the linchpin of the efforts of the five basin states, through definition of specific commitments arising from the document. This is still in the early stages, but it is feasible to perform various actions arising, although the document, like previous efforts of "master plans", is relatively unknown, which could mean difficulties for implementation.

12

No doubt the Council of Lerma-Chapala Basin will continue to play a central role in decisions regarding this area, but to achieve integrated management of the basin is required to create complementary figures that consider the conservation of forest areas, control of non-point pollution sources, effective control of industrial pollution and management of water bodies (both lotic and lentic) with an ecosystem approach. In this sense the strengthening of existing working groups (some emerging and others with proven experience) is an issue that must be understood and harnessed as a strategic element. It is also necessary to increase the efficiency of joint work between government agencies, academia, research institutions and civil society organizations. Combination of efforts it’s also a key issue in the implementation of the Conservation and Management Programmes of declared Ramsar sites in the basin (mostly in preparation), considering that they are applicable only within the bodies of water. Complementing these instruments with management plans or strategies of action for sub-basins were they are located is extremely important. Also it should be promoted research and monitoring of environmental indicators in the basin, fine-tuning existing tools in the government sector (federal and state levels), universities and private research centers. Ensure that information is understood and applied for decision making is essential, as well as structuring mechanisms and environmental education outreach to raise awareness and engage different social sectors in the process. REFERENCES Audubonistas de Chapala. 2010. “Birds of Chapala, Jalisco, Mexico”. http://avesajijic.com/documents/chapalachecklist.pdf Barba C. G., L.M. Güitrón., R.M.A. Macias y S.C. Barrera. 2005. “Aves y Vegetación”. En: Orozco, M.G. y V.J. García. (Compiladores). Diagnóstico Ambiental del Lago de Chapala. ISBN: 970- 27- 0835- 4, Universidad de Guadalajara, México. CEAS, 2006. “Acciones para la Recuperación Ambiental de la Cuenca Lerma-Chapala”. Comisión Estatal de Agua y Saneamiento, Gobierno del Estado de Jalisco/Instituto Mexicano de Tecnología del Agua. CEA. 2008. “Lago de Chapala”. Sitio web de la Comisión Estatal del Agua de Jalisco. www.ceajalisco.gob.mx/chapala.html CONAGUA, 2005. “Registro Público de Derechos de Agua, base de datos digital”. Comisión Nacional del Agua”. México. Cotler, H., M. Mazari y J. de Anda. 2006. “Atlas de la Cuenca Lerma-Chapala, construyendo una visión conjunta”. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Instituto Nacional de Ecología/Universidad Autónoma de México, Instituto de Ecología. 195 pp.

13

Dávalos-Lind, L. 1996. “Phytoplankton and bacterioplanckon stress by sediment-borne pollutants”. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery. Volume 5, Number 2. P. 99-105. de Anda, J., H. Shear, U. Maniak y P.F. Zárate-del Valle, 2004, “Solids Distribution in Lake Chapala, México”. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA), 40:97-109. de Anda y Shear, 2001. “Nutrients and Eutrophication in the Lake Chapala Basin”. En: A.M. Hansen & M. Van Afferden , eds. The Lerma-Chapala Watershed, Evaluation and Management. Kluwin Academia/Plenum Publishers, Nueva York, Estados Unidos. Delgado Granados, H. 1992. “A Review of Tectonics of the Western Trans Mexican Volcanic Belt”. Report of the Monbusho Grant for the Joint Project Japan–Mexico Cooperative Research Subduction volcanism and tectonics of the western Mexican Volcanic Belt. Edited by: K. Aoky. Japan. Pp. 80-103. Ford, E; R.; I.J. Shine., L. Davalos-Lind and O. Lind 2000. “Trace metal concentrations in Chirostoma sp. from Lake Chapala, Mexico: Elevated concentrations of mercury and public health implications” J. Environ Sci. Health Part A35(3): 313-325 GTEPAI, 2003. “Resumen de la Planeación Agrícola Integral”. Reporte Interno del Grupo de Trabajo Especializado en Planeación Agrícola Integral, Comisión de la Cuenca Propia del lago de Chapala, A.C. Jalisco, México. Guzmán, M.; A. Valdez y S. Peniche.2000. “El lago de Chapala, una visión general”. En: Chapala en crisis. Análisis de su problemática en el marco de la gestión pública y la sustentabilidad. A. Valdez, M. Guzmán y S. Peniche. Universidad de Guadalajara. México. 177 pp. Hansen, A.M. & M. Van Afferden, 2001, “Toxic Substances, Sources, Accumulation and Dynamics”, en A.M. Hansen & M. Van Afferden , eds. The Lerma-Chapala Watershed, Evaluation and Management. Kluwin Academia/Plenum Publishers, Nueva York, Estados Unidos. INEGI. 1995. Espacio mapa Guadalajara, hoja F13-12. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática, México. Juárez, A. 2007. “Sistematización y Fortalecimiento del Programa de Desarrollo Comunitario de la Sierra Cóndiro-Canales”. Reporte de proyecto. Corazón de la Tierra, A.C./Instituto Nacional de Desarrollo Social. Guadalajara, México. Juárez, A. y S. Medina. 2002. “Proyecto de Cuencas Interiores, Cuenca Propia del Lago de Chapala”. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Delegación Jalisco. Documento electrónico.

14

Juárez, A.; M.E. Reyes, E. Montaño, R. Velázquez, I. Gálvez. 2002. “Plan Rector de Producción y Conservación de la Microcuenca San Marcos, municipio de Chapala”. Fideicomiso de Riesgo Compartido/Ayuntamiento de Chapala/Corazón de la Tierra, A.C. 68 pp. Moncayo E. R. y H.R. Buelna. 2001. “Fish fauna of Lake Chapala”. En: A.M. Hansen y M. van Afferden (eds.) The Lerma Chapala Watershed: Evaluation and Management. Kluwin Academia/Plenum Publishers, Nueva York, Estados Unidos. Pp. 215-242. Mora N., M. R. y T. Castro. 2005. “Determinación del Fitoplancton del Lago de Chapala en un Ciclo Anual 1996–1997”. En: Orozco, M.; M.G. García y V.J. (Compiladores). “Diagnóstico Ambiental del Lago de Chapala”. Universidad de Guadalajara, México. ISBN: 970- 27- 0835- 4 Rosas, E.; J. Ferrari, M. López y J. Urrutia. 1997. “Stratigraphy and Tectonics of the Guadalajara Region and Triple Junction Area, Western Mexico”. International Ecological Review Vol. 39, pp. 125-140 SEMARNAT. 2002. “Programa para la Recuperación y Sustentabilidad de la Cuenca Lerma-Chapala”. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales-Gobierno de la República. Documento electrónico. SEMARNAT. 2005. “Programa de Control Integral de Maleza Acuatica en el Lago de Chapala”. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. Junio 2005. http://sinat.semarnat.gob.mx/dgiraDocs/documentos/jal/estudios/2005/14JA2005H0003.pdf Shear y de Anda, 2005 SUMA. 2006. “Programa de Conservación y Manejo del Parque La Eucalera del Paso de Hidalgo, municipio de Briseñas de Matamoros”. Secretaría de Urbanismo y Medio Ambiente/Ayuntamiento de Briseñas/Corazón de la Tierra, A.C. 117 páginas

15

ANNEX 1

Figure 1. Location of Lerma-Chapala basin (with sub-basins).

MEXICO

16

Figure 2. Topography and hydrography of the lower part of the Lerma-Chapala

basin.

17

Figure 2. Bathymetry of Lake Chapala

18

Media

0

5

10

15

20

25

ENE FEB MAR ABR MAY JUN JUL AGO SEP OCT NOV DIC

Meses

Tem

pera

tura

Media

Figure 3. Average temperature in the region of Lake Chapala, (period 1934-2009).

0

50

100

150

200

250

Ene Feb Mar Abr May Jun Jul Ago Sep Oct Nov Dic

Precipitación

Figure 4. Rainfall in the Lake Chapala area (mm-average for from 1934 to 2009)