In these instances, the United States attempted to extract water from Canada.

Running Dry: A Sneak Peek into the Water Wrangles Between the United States and Canada

For over a century, the United States has shown a keen interest in tapping into Canada's precious water resources. Let's delve into the timeline of these attempts, ranging from modest endeavors to multi-billion dollar projects, designed to divert Canada's coveted "blue gold" south of the 49th parallel.

In the early 1900s, disputes over water use along the border became evident. For instance, a group of Montana settlers dug canals to divert the waters of the St. Mary and Milk rivers for their own benefit, sparking complaints from Alberta farmers who built competing canals to irrigate their lands. This conflict underscored the need for cooperation rather than confrontation when it comes to managing water resources.

The "Chicago Diversion" in the early 1900s was another bone of contention. This hydraulic project aimed to divert the waters of Lake Michigan to serve Chicago's needs, ultimately leading to a decrease of approximately 15 cm in the Great Lakes' levels.

Recognizing the importance of sharing water resources, the United States and Canada signed the Boundary Waters Treaty in 1909. This treaty established guidelines for managing shared water resources, and it remains the cornerstone of cooperation between the two neighboring countries today.

From Dreams to Reality: Grandiose Projects

GRAND Canal (1959): Proposed by Newfoundland engineer Thomas Kierans, this project aimed to create a massive freshwater lake between James Bay and Hudson Bay by building a dam. The lake would have replenished the Great Lakes and watered the arid regions of the American Southwest. While the project garnered interest in the 1980s, it never moved forward due to its astronomical environmental and financial costs.
NAWAPA (1964-1974): The North American Water and Power Alliance (NAWAPA) was a colossal project that proposed to provide water to the entire North American continent through a complex network of canals, dams, and reservoirs. This ambitious project would have diverted "excess" waters from the Yukon, Alaska, and the Northwest Territories to the arid regions of North America. Estimated to cost $300 billion USD and requiring approximately 40 years of construction, the project collapsed due to its astronomical costs and environmental impact.

A Modern-Day Dilemma: NAFTA and the Commodification of Water

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which came into effect in 1994, contained a loophole that some interpreted as allowing the commodification of water. Taking advantage of this loophole, companies could potentially challenge in court laws that they perceived as harmful to their businesses.

In response, the Canadian government elected to adopt an environmental approach, enacting a law that prohibits water from being removed from transboundary watersheds, rather than an outright ban on water exports. This legislation is non-discriminatory and does not violate NAFTA.

The Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, negotiated during Donald Trump's term, effectively closed this loophole. However, concerns remain that the White House may reopen it during upcoming negotiations of the Agreement.

The Future of Water Relations Between the United States and Canada

In the current turbulent political climate, water could potentially become a bargaining chip in negotiations between the United States and Canada. The Liberal government's Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, Tim Hodgson, hails from a corporate background, raising concerns among environmentalists.

However, the government has not yet made its stance clear regarding the potential use of water as a bargaining chip to appease Washington. As the situation evolves, it will be crucial for both countries to maintain the collaborative spirit established by past treaties and commissions to ensure fair and sustainable management of transboundary water resources.

[1] Enrichment Data: The Bering Sea Dispute serves as an example of how the United States and Canada have tackled disputes regarding shared resources. The issue was ultimately resolved through international arbitration.

[3] Enrichment Data: The International Joint Commission (IJC) overseen by the 1909 treaty is responsible for managing and resolving disputes related to shared water resources, including fishing rights, water diversion, and pollution in shared waterways like the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway.

[4] Enrichment Data: Collaborative efforts to manage transboundary waters include the International Poplar River and Big Muddy Creek Task Force and other initiatives focused on preserving these vital waterways while ensuring their sustainable use.

[5] Enrichment Data: The inclusion of the 1944 U.S.-Mexico Water Treaty in the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) reflects a broader effort to integrate water management into trade agreements. This approach reflects a growing awareness of the critical importance of water resources in cross-border trade and cooperation.

In the context of growing concerns over the commodification of water, the proposed reopening of NAFTA's loophole by the White House could jeopardize the environmental-science-based approach adopted by the Canadian government, potentially leading to disputes over shared water resources akin to those witnessed in the historical Bering Sea Dispute.
As the future of water relations between the United States and Canada remains uncertain, emphasizing general-news about the International Joint Commission's role in managing and resolving disputes related to shared water resources, such as those in the Poplar River and Big Muddy Creek, could help maintain the established spirit of cooperation and sustainability in the face of political uncertainties.