environmental_evaluation_and_development_problems_of_the_mexican_coastal_zone

8/7/2019 Environmental_evaluation_and_development_problems_of_the_Mexican_Coastal_Zone

1/16

Ocean & Coastal Management 48 (2005) 161176

Environmental evaluation and development

problems of the Mexican Coastal Zone

L. Ortiz-Lozanoa, A. Granados-Barbab,

V. Sols-Weiss

a,

, M.A. Garca-Salgado

c

aLaboratorio de Ecolog a Costera, Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnolog a (ICMyL) UNAM. Apdo.

Postal 70-305, Mexico, D.F., 04510 MexicobCentro de Ecolog a y Pesquer as, Universidad Veracruzana. Av. Hidalgo # 617, Col. R o Jamapa,

Boca del R o Veracruz, Mexico, CP. 94290, MexicocParque Nacional Cancun-Punta Nizuc-Isla Mujeres, Blvd. Kukulcan km 4.8 Z.H. Cancun, Quintana Roo,

Mexico. CP. 77500, Mexico

Abstract

The coastal zone is the main source of foreign currency for Mexico so that federal policies

are adjusting to try to improve its conditions. To that end, a large and comprehensive study

was financed by the government to assess the state of knowledge of the water quality of coastal

waters and the environmental status of the whole coastal area in Mexico. Based on the existing

literature found in the most important research institutions of the country, as well as on field

visits to 42 coastal cities from 1996 to 1998, and complemented with interviews of more than

80 persons (key informants) involved in the different key activities of the sites visited, the

main environmental parameters useful to assess water and environmental quality were

selected. All the sites where data existed and in particular the 42 main coastal cities were then

analyzed according to the different categories of stress to which they are subjected and thedegree of damage observed and reported. As a result, an environmental diagnosis of the

Mexican coastal zone is outlined, divided by type of activity. The oil and related petrochemical

industries as well as the big tourist resorts were identified as the largest contributors to the

degradation of the natural ecosystems in the Mexican Coastal Zone.

r 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman

0964-5691/$ - see front matter r 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2005.03.001

Corresponding author.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (L. Ortiz-Lozano), [email protected] (A. Granados-

Barba), [email protected] (V. Sols-Weiss), [email protected] (M.A. Garca-Salgado).
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoamanhttp://www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman


2/16

1. Introduction

Mexico is a country of large biological cultural and socioeconomic contrasts: with

a population of about 100 million people and a total surface of 1,958,201 km2 (ofwhich 5073 km2 are islands or emerged coral reefs), it is the fifth largest country in

America and the 13th worldwide [1,2]. The country is divided into 32 states of which

17 have coastlines: 11 facing the Pacific Ocean and Gulf of California, five facing the

Gulf of Mexico and one the Caribbean Sea (Fig. 1). The Mexican Coastal Zone

(MCZ) is 11,593 km long, the continental shelf has an approximate surface of

500,000 km2, the estuarine areas cover 16,000 km2 and the coastal lagoons

12,500 km2. The total surface area of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is

2,892,000 km2 [3] (Fig. 1). The MCZ is geomorphologically diversified, with tropical

as well as subtropical and temperate zones. Thus, a large number of different

thriving marine habitats have developed and a large (and often rich) variety of

resources can be found, from sandy and rocky beaches to seagrass beds, mangroves,

coral reefs, estuaries and a large number of coastal lagoons. Tropical habitats

dominate and largely contribute to the high biodiversity (recognized as mega-

diversity worldwide) found in the country. The large offshore oil reserves and the

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Fig. 1. Cities visited for this study: 1. Tijuana, 2. Ensenada, 3. San Felipe, 4. Loreto, 5. San Carlos, 6. La

Paz/Pichilingue, 7. Los Cabos, 8. Puerto Penasco, 9. Baha Kino, 10. Hermosillo, 11. Guaymas, 12. Los

Mochis, 13. Topolobampo, 14. Mazatlan, 15. Puerto Vallarta, 16. Guadalajara, 17. Barra de Navidad/San

Patricio Melaque, 18. Manzanillo, 19. Lazaro Cardenas, 20. Zihuatanejo, 21. Ixtapa, 22. Acapulco, 23.

Puerto Escondido, 24. Puerto Angel, 25. Huatulco, 26. Salina Cruz, 27. Tapachula, 28. Puerto Madero, 29.

Altamira, 30. Tampico, 31. Jalapa, 32. Veracruz, 33. Boca del Ro, 34. Anton Lizardo, 35. Alvarado,

36. Coatzacoalcos, 37. Villahermosa, 38. Ciudad del Carmen, 39. Champoton, 40. Lerma, 41. Campeche,

42. Yucalpeten, 43. Puerto Progreso, 44. Merida, 45. Puerto Juarez, 46. Cancun, 47 Puerto Morelos, 48.

Playa del Carmen, 49. Cozumel, 50. Chetumal. Other coastal cities: 1. Santa Rosala, 2. San Blas, 3.

Tuxpan, 4. Dos Bocas,

L. Ortiz-Lozano et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 48 (2005) 161176162


3/16

rich shrimp and other fishery areas constitute additional elements of interest for the

exploitation of the whole region.

Paradoxically, despite these privileged conditions, Mexico has not yet been able to

organize coherently the research or data gathering necessary for the sustainabledevelopment and correct management of its considerable coastal resources. This

situation has historical roots, since from the Spanish conquest, the main activities

promoted for colonial Mexico by the Spaniards were mining and cattle breeding,

both inland activities; thus human settlements in coastal areas were limited and even

hindered. However, nowadays the opposite is taking place and population growth

rates are definitely much higher in the coastal zone than in landlocked areas [4]. This

migration towards the coastal zones constitutes a worldwide trend [1] (Fig. 2).

The diversity of coastal environments and the rich resources found there, coupled

with its fast growing population, constitute the core of the problem of the MCZ and

make it imperative for Mexico to create a system of specific policies to ensure

sustainable development in harmony with environmental conservation [5,6], a

challenge already recognized officially by the Mexican government in its Environ-

mental strategies for the integrated management of the coastal zone [7].

In this paper, we present the different activities and threats to the environment

characterizing the development of the MCZ as well as the different strategies or

options that could be applied to improve the conditions and sustainable manage-

ment of this crucial region of Mexico. For a summary of the institutional and legal

framework for the Mexican coastal management, refer to Riviera-Arriaga and

Villalobos [4].

ARTICLE IN PRESS

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Pacific

Coast

Atlantic

Coast

Inland Whole

Country

Region

Annualaveragepopulationgrowthrate(%)

1970-1990

1990-1995

Fig. 2. Annual average population growth rate on coastal and inland regions.

L. Ortiz-Lozano et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 48 (2005) 161176 163


4/16


5/16

published on the subject from 1990 to 1997 was compiled. This information was

confronted and complemented for analysis purposes with field visits (19961998) to

the main coastal Mexican cities to compare the in situ conditions with the literature,

as well as to interview 86 selected members of the local administration, researchinstitutes or concerned citizens (such as fishermen). The 42 selected cities (not

counting Mexico City (inland), where the largest amount of information was found)

were chosen for their economic, tourist and/or industrial importance, and the

presence of local educational and research institutes (Fig. 1). The type of coastal

ecosystems present in every State was recorded, as well as their environmental

conditions, the potential or actual damage they are subjected to, be it anthropic or

natural (such as hurricane zones) and the degree of protection that should be

assigned to each one of them. Videotapes and photographs taken during these visits

complement the available information for this evaluation.

In order to produce a general diagnosis of the MCZ, a panel of experts was

convened to evaluate the information gathered (literature research, field visits and

interviews). The main activities related to water quality carried out in the 42 coastal

cities were divided in five groups and their impact to the environment was assessed.

The scale used is from 1 to 5, where 1 corresponded to light impact and 5 to extreme

(Table 1). The same scale was used to hierarchize the leading four direct impact

generators: urban development, garbage presence, habitat destruction and sewage

discharges. From the resulting matrix, a local diagnosis emerged for each city visited

and all of these jointly constitute an environmental general diagnosis for the MCZ.

The description of each of the different activities that can generate moreenvironmental impacts is found below, together with an assessment of where

they do cause the most severe impact, and an evaluation of those impact factors in

the MCZ.

4. Results

4.1. Fisheries and aquaculture

In the last decade, Mexico has increased its catch significantly, now ranking 17thworldwide, with more than one million metric tons/year and an average value of

more than 1000 million dollars (USD)/year in 2001 (this includes scale fish,

crustaceans and mollusks).

Fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico have dramatically increased: demersal fisheries

represent now around 40% of the total catch. Sport fishing already constitutes quite

a sizeable contribution to the fish catch, especially in the Pacific Ocean, but reliable

data are unavailable so that an accurate assessment at this point is not possible.

Another activity directly related to fisheries is the capture of aquarium specimens,

including live rock reef, fishes and other reef dwellers invertebrates like corals,

sponges, echinoderms and mollusks. This poorly documented industry is verylucrative due to the wide variety of species with high demand (and high price) found

in the MCZ. This activity is being actively carried out in Baja California Sur,

ARTICLE IN PRESS



6/16

Table 1

Environmental impacts evaluation in the different coastal cities studied

CITY/IMPACT (in parenthesis:

location of city in Fig. 1)

Fisheries &

Aquaculture

Agricultural Industrial Tourism &

Recreation

Harbors Urban

development

Garba

presen

San Felipe (3) 1 1 0 2 1 1 2

Baha Kino (9) 1 4 0 2 0 1 1

Loreto (4) 1 0 0 3 1 2 1

Anton Lizardo (34) 3 1 0 1 1 1 4

Ixtapa (21) 1 3 0 5 1 1 1

Los Cabos (7) 1 0 1 5 2 3 1 Chetumal (50) 1 4 0 1 1 4 3

B. de Navidad-Melaque (17) 1 2 0 3 1 3 2

Huatulco (25) 1 1 0 5 0 4 2

Puerto Morelos (47) 2 0 0 1 3 2 1

Champoton (39) 3 2 1 1 2 2 2

Puerto de Lerma (40) 2 1 4 0 2 2 2

Playa del Carmen (48) 1 0 1 3 2 2 2

Yucalpeten (42) 3 0 0 2 3 2 2

Zihuatanejo (20) 2 3 1 3 2 2 2

Topolobampo (13) 2 2 3 1 4 2 2

Campeche (41) 2 2 3 2 1 3 3

Ciudad del Carmen (38) 3 2 4 2 3 3 2 Lazaro Cardenas (19) 2 2 4 1 5 3 2

Veracruz (32) 2 0 3 3 5 4 4

Puerto Angel (24) 2 1 0 3 1 3 3

Puerto Vallarta (15) 0 1 1 3 3 3 1

Puerto Progreso (43) 1 0 0 3 5 2 2

Puerto Penasco (8) 3 0 2 3 3 3 1


7/16

Puerto Escondido (23) 3 1 0 3 2 2 3

Salina Cruz (26) 2 1 4 1 3 3 1

Ensenada (2) 2 0 3 3 3 4 2

Puerto de San Carlos (5) 4 4 3 1 3 2 2

La Paz (6) 2 0 3 3 4 4 2

Puerto Madero (28) 4 5 3 1 3 2 3

Manzanillo (18) 4 3 3 3 5 4 3

Tijuana (1) 1 0 3 1 0 4 4

Boca del Ro (33) 3 0 0 4 0 2 3

Cozumel (49) 1 0 1 4 3 3 3

Alvarado (35) 4 4 2 2 2 2 4

Guaymas (11) 4 2 4 2 4 4 3

Mazatlan (14) 4 1 3 5 4 4 2

Cancun (46) 2 0 1 5 1 3 3

Puerto de Altamira (29) 0 1 5 0 5 3 1

Acapulco (22) 3 1 1 5 4 4 2

Coatzacoalcos (36) 2 2 5 2 5 4 5

Tampico-Madero (31) 4 2 5 3 5 5 3 MODE 2 1 3 3 3 2 2

Scale for impacts

0 Not present 2 Moderate 4 Severe

1 Light 3 Intense 5 Extreme


8/16

Revillagigedo Islands (Colima), Sinaloa and the reef areas of Veracruz and the

Mexican Caribbean.

Activities related to capture, processing, conservation and transportation of fish

products are also potential causes of habitat destruction and wastewater dischargesdetrimental to water quality; overfishing in turn can cause the direct loss of the

exploited species [17]. Fisheries are causing moderate impacts in the MCZ in

general. However, the impact can reach severe levels in cities like San Carlos

(Sonora), Alvarado (Veracruz) and Puerto Madero (Chiapas). This is mainly due to

the unloading of fishery by-products in harbors where no management programs

exist for the treatment of organic residues and where engine maintenance for fishery

boats and ships generates direct pollution to the water (such as oil, grease and fuels).

It would thus be advisable to carry out monitoring programs both for water

discharges emanating from local fishing and processing plants, and to monitor the

pathways followed by the organic wastes produced, down to their final destination.

Aquaculture activities are based in man-made infrastructures designed to grow

target species, mainly represented in the MCZ by the highly profitable shrimps. The

total aquaculture production in the MCZ was 196,000 tons in 2001 with a value of

more than 300 million USD; shrimp, and secondarily, oysters were the main

products.

Shrimp farming is potentially dangerous to the MCZ, especially if practised

intensively, because of the important modifications or direct pollution of adjacent

ecosystems caused by the discharge of by-products generally into the closest water

body [18]; in this case, in-depth studies are needed in order to evaluate its effects onthe environment, because the situation is different depending on the region (Pacific

or Atlantic coasts) or other countries. According to our present knowledge, this

activity as a whole is now causing only moderate damage, mainly because it is

seldom practised intensively. Only in Sinaloa State can this activity be considered to

cause a severe impact on the local environment, mainly due to the fact that more

than 70% of the national aquaculture infrastructure is located in that state (in excess

of 20,000 Ha) and thus the surrounding waters, mainly coastal lagoons where most

of the shrimp farms are located, receive large amounts of nutrients [18]. A s a

protective measure, continuous programs for the revision, maintenance and

modernization of the existing infrastructure for the shrimp farms is recommended,including the treatment of the effluents directly discharged into the environment.

4.2. Agriculture activities

All activities regarding planting, growing and harvesting of any crops in contact

with the MCZ are considered here. Accurate evaluation of damage to the CZ is

difficult in this type of study, since impacts evident in the coastal area could be due to

activities carried out far away and transported there. Mexicos agricultural

production is close to 31 million tons/year [18]. The impacts observed included

habitat modifications and destruction due to deviations of rivers and landpreparation for agriculture. Also, leaching of pesticides and other organic

compounds routinely used in agriculture in Mexico impair water quality. In this

ARTICLE IN PRESS



9/16

study, we considered that the impact of this activity in the MCZ is moderate

except where practised intensively as in the areas of Hermosillo-Baha Kino (Sonora)

and Alvarado where severe impacts were detected (Table 1), while in Puerto

Madero they reached extreme status. Surveillance and careful monitoringprograms should be performed, including water analyses and control of the local

crops, as well as their discharged by-products because dangerous compounds have

already been detected in the most affected areas.

4.3. Industrial activities

All activities related to industry in the CZ cause environmental modifications and

damage water quality. The impact these activities are causing in the MCZ were rated

as moderate except around cities like Salina Cruz and Lazaro Cardenas

(Michoacan) and Guaymas (Sonora) where impacts are severe and Coatzacoalcos

(Veracruz), Tampico-Madero and Altamira (Tamaulipas) where they reach

extreme levels; the latter are due to their local industrial parks and to their port0s

management; all with inadequate handling of environmental noxious substances.

Compulsory programs for the treatment of industrial wastewaters should be carried

out and constantly supervised, as this is a severe problem directly affecting water

quality.

4.3.1. Electricity production

Facilities and infrastructure designed for the operation of thermoelectric plants inthe MCZ is considered here, as well as the effects of their operation on the

environment, like cooling processes and waste discharges to sea. All these have

already caused habitat modifications and/or destruction due to the construction of

the plants themselves and their direct discharges to the sea. In this study, we found

that the impact can be qualified as intense locally in all the facilities present in the

MCZ, more importantly in cities like Lerma (Campeche), Guaymas, and Manzanillo

(Colima). Continuous monitoring and careful supervision of discharges to the sea

are recommended since reports already exist of important concentrations of

hexavalent Chromium around the areas of cooling water discharges. Those could

be due to the high temperatures present in the cooling ducts.

4.3.2. Oil-related activities.

The largest oil deposits in Latin America are found in Mexico where oil is the

single most valuable resource of the MCZ and the first source of foreign currency.

Mexican average crude oil production in 2002 was 3177 thousand bbl daily, which

represent more than 3000 million dollars or 40% of the total value of exports for

Mexico. Nowadays, 96% of the oil and gas production comes from coastal states

(73% from offshore extraction). The oil fields are located mainly in the coastal plains

or in the continental shelf of the Gulf of Mexico. The Campeche Sound is, by far, the

most productive area.The Mexican oil industry is expected to continue its profitable expansionbut its

fast growth with little or no consideration for the environment has caused direct or

ARTICLE IN PRESS



10/16

indirect damage to the areas where it is carried out, to the point of being labeled as

incompatible with the existing ecological and social local systems. These activities in

the MCZ (extraction, refining and transportation) are causing habitat destruction or

important modifications mainly due to infrastructure construction and aging ducts.Water quality is also impaired where waste discharges are present or when accidental

spills occur. All this is causing intense impacts in the MCZ reaching severe

levels in the industrial ports of Tampico-Madero, Salina Cruz and Lazaro Cardenas,

and extreme levels in Coatzacoalcos. No locality with oil industry can be

considered to have minimum levels of impact, since these activities are not

compatible with pristine natural environments.

To improve the situation, the Mexican oil company, which by now has already

programmed some restoration projects, should be encouraged to consider policies of

sustainability and care about conservation and preservation of the environment

rather than focus mainly on restoration. Modernization of their equipment and

ducts are needed to avoid pollution at the source or spilling accidents. It would be

appropriate to create and enforce the necessary laws to compel this company to go

beyond its present ecological restoration projects and carry out sustainability-

oriented programs for the preservation and conservation of the local ecological

heritage. Monitoring programs should be permanent in areas subjected to oil

exploitation and related activities, preferably carried out by recognized research

centers or if performed by private laboratories, the results should be available to the

scientific community at large.

4.3.3. Tourism and recreation

This is a fundamental industry for Mexico, since it is the second source of foreign

currency for the country. Mexico has spectacular sites, which already are or can be

used as tourist attractions or resorts. The most important coastal tourist centers in

the Mexican Pacific are (from north to south): Loreto and Cabo San Lucas (Baja

California Sur), Mazatlan and Puerto Vallarta (Jalisco), Manzanillo, Ixtapa-

Zihuatanejo and Acapulco (Guerrero) and Huatulco (Oaxaca) while in the Gulf of

Mexico and Caribbean we can cite: Veracruz (Veracruz), Campeche (Campeche),

Cancun, Cozumel and Tulum (Quintana Roo). In the 1970s, the federal

governments decisive involvement and financial inputs resulted into a considerablethrust for this industry. In 1982, 93% of the federal investment in tourism was

directed towards the CZ: large resorts were built in the states of Baja California,

Quintana Roo and Veracruz. As a result, in 2000, there were already about 91,800

hotel rooms and 16.6 million tourists visiting the MCZ. This represented an

additional (and significant) income of 3000 million USD, which is a considerable

increase knowing that in 1983, the same activity had produced 700 million USD [2].

However, the high potential of tourism, a celebrated industry without chimneys, is

not without potential negative impacts on both the environment and the local

population. That is why it is necessary to understand that its development requires

professional studies, with sustainable development in mind.Mercado-Ceron et al. [19] have concluded that tourism has generated un-

questionable pressure on natural resources, in part because when building resorts,

ARTICLE IN PRESS



11/16


12/16

Our analysis indicated that these activities were causing intense to severe

impacts to the environment in such ports where tourist activities take place

predominantly, like La Paz (Baja California Sur), Acapulco (Guerrero) and

Mazatlan, reaching extreme levels in industrial ports such as Lazaro Cardenas,Manzanillo, Altamira, Tampico-Madero and Coatzacoalcos. To alleviate the

problems caused by this activity, the recommendation would be to carry out a

careful supervision of all port infrastructures as well as constant monitoring of water

quality around ports and adjacent areas. The lack of information and the difficulties

of access to these areas to check the sites generate an uneasy situation, which is why

every effort should be made to rectify it. At present, alarming data have been found,

regarding some water quality parameters like coliforms and heavy metal concentra-

tions in nearby areas, which can be attributed to port activities.

4.3.5. Urban development

In the MCZ there are seven cities with a population between 250,000 and 1 million

inhabitants and a constant increase in its growth rates: Tijuana, Ensenada, Tampico,

Acapulco, Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz and Mazatlan. This makes it necessary to take

adequate precautionary measures, in order to avoid environmental impacts related

to urban growth [2022]. Urban development includes the establishment of human

settlements along the coastline, as well as their effects (direct and indirect) on the

environment. It directly causes habitat destruction, landscape modifications,

domestic water discharges and solid residues among others. In this study, we found

that such settlements were causing moderate to intense impact to the CZreaching severe levels in at least 10 coastal cities (Table 1) and qualified as

extreme in Tampico-Madero. The direct effect that urban development can cause

to the environment is difficult to determine as a separate entity, because it is always

coupled to other activities like tourism, industry, agriculture, fisheries, ports or a

combination of these; however, in all cases, it appears as urgent to at least regulate

and supervise the plants responsible for water treatment in these areas: Our in situ

observations clearly indicated that most wastewater treatment plants do not fulfill

their purpose due to partial malfunctioning or because they do not work at all.

Another problem is that urban planning is almost non-existent. Very few coastal

cities can boast development in harmony with their regional context. Carefulplanning is needed, where the natural advantages of an area can be positively

combined with urban development and socio-cultural tendencies.

4.3.6. Garbage presence

Solid waste abandoned on the shore that can be found along the waterfront

streets, beaches and in coastal waters is considered here. Impacts include aesthetic

aspects and can lead to health hazards. They reflect inadequate maintenance

programs and lack of hygiene in every place they are found. Our observations

indicate that this garbage is causing, in general, moderate impacts in the MCZ,

reaching severe levels in Veracruz, Alvarado, Anton Lizardo and Tijuana. Inorder to correct this situation, education, prevention, maintenance and cleaning

programs are necessary along the coastal areas.

ARTICLE IN PRESS



13/16

4.3.7. Habitat destruction and landscape modification

Besides the effects of the other activities already mentioned above, we analyze here

the changes in coastal landscapes generated by man-made constructions along the

shoreline or adjacent ecosystems, like interconnections of water bodies to buildmarinas, wharfs, docks, break-waters and so on, which result in destruction of

natural coastal areas like mangroves, coastal lagoons, coral reefs and beaches among

others. Those activities are causing moderate impacts to the MCZ in general,

being severe in Ixtapa, Los Cabos, Playa del Carmen (Quintana Roo), Yucalpeten

(Yucatan), Barra de Navidad-Melaque, Boca del Ro and Tampico-Madero. They

were considered extremely severe in Huatulco, Mazatlan, Cancun, Acapulco,

Altamira and Coatzacoalcos. Such activities are closely related to the developing

programs of the local State administrations, which is why there is little that can be

done; however, if sustainable development is incorporated into planning policies, the

impacts should be less severe in all cases. It is important to consider that any

investment done to preserve the environment will always result in lower costs

(economically and others) in the long term, than the depletion of resources in the

short term for maximum but ephemeral gains.

4.3.8. Wastewater discharges

Related to the activities mentioned above, domestic or industrial wastewater

discharged directly into the coastal environment can cause harmful effects on water

quality. One of the most common is severe oxygen deficiencies that can induce the

asphyxiation of the biota of estuaries and coastal areas [23]. This activity is causingsevere impacts in the littorals, of at least 16 coastal cities, reaching extreme

levels in Chetumal and Cancun, Barra de Navidad-Melaque (Jalisco), Veracruz,

Coatzacoalcos, Guaymas, Acapulco, Altamira and Tampico-Madero.

5. Discussion

A common feature, detected practically in every water body included in this

analysis in the MCZ is the presence of fecal and other coliforms . This is an alarm-

ing kind of pollution in large coastal cities and tourist resorts and leads us toconsider directly the causes: lack of treatment of water discharges, inadequate or

inefficient utilization of available water treatment techniques as well as nonexis-

tent or inefficient quality control in the water treatment plants that are in opera-

tion. This factor is directly related to urban development particularly where either

tourism or industrial and port activities are prevalent. In our analysis this factor

was rated as extreme in nine cities, severe in 16 cities and intense in 10 cities

(Table 1).

From the results shown in Table 1 we can deduct that the large oil industrial

compounds as well as the large tourist resorts are the main sources of the

environmental impacts considered severe to extreme in the MCZ. Implicit intheir operations, severe habitat destruction and landscape modifications take place

and damage water quality in adjacent areas.

ARTICLE IN PRESS



14/16


15/16

It is necessary to build new water treatment plants along the Mexican shoreline

and modernize the existing ones. It is urgent to do it in the areas of active urban

development. It would be highly advisable to create an agency charged with the

supervision of the water treatment plants along the coast since severe shortcomingswere detected regarding them.

The creation of a commission charged to determine which institutions or

organizations are able to carry out the necessary studies recommended above would

be very useful. Certification of such institutions or organizations should be based on

the level of their personnel, modernization of their research equipment and reliability

of their results. That commission would determine the standards of such

measurements and the technology to be used.

Strengthening of the existing links between government agencies and research

centers as well as universities should be actively encouraged, because they would

undoubtedly help in the implementation of planning programs for its management

as well as in the organization and financing of the research projects carried out in the

crucial area of Mexico.

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge all collaborations and/or consulting of all persons

that have in one way or another helped in this project, especially: M. Merino,

F. Paez, J. Romero J., A. V. Botello, F. Vazquez, L. Rosales, V. Macas, A. V. de laCerda, F. Contreras, M. Molina, I. Quintana, I. Ortiz, R. Gonzalez, I. Palomar,

N. Canales, T. Perez, C. Mendez, S. Santiago, J. Romero C., R. Bernal,

A. Gutierrez, M. Hermoso, M. Zamudio, V. Ochoa, E. Escobar, G. Salvador,

N. Schafino, A. Frausto, J. Galicia, S. Jofre).

We also would like to acknowledge the following institutions which provided part

of the information used here: CICESE, UABC, CIBNOR, CICIMAR, UABCS,

CRIP, UNISON, CETMAR, ITESM, UAS, ITLM, UdeG, FONATUR, UMAR,

UACH, CIP, ECOSUR, UNAM, INE, INEGI, UAM, IEST, SEMAR, UNE, Granja

FAUNAMAR, UV, I.deE. A.C., NE Laguna Verde, ITMAR, UJAT, EPOMEX,

UAC, SEMARNAT, UNACAR, UAY, CINVESTAV, Amigos de Sian Kaan, PN

Isla Contoy, PN Punta Nizuc-Cancun, Playacar, ITEC and the Drinking Water

Commissions around the country. Last but not least, we would like to thank all

involved citizens like lighthouse keepers, fishermen and common people living in the

MCZ who were interviewed and provided very useful information about the local

problems they face.

References

[1] INEGI. Anuario estadstico de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Mexico. Instituto Nacional de

Geografa e Informatica, 2000. 732p

[2] Merino-Ibarra M. The coastal zone of Mexico. Coastal Management 1987;15:2742.

ARTICLE IN PRESS



16/16

[3] SEDESOL-INE. Informe de la situacion general en materia de equilibrio ecologico y proteccion al

ambiente 19931994. Secretara de Desarrollo Social (SEDESOL), Mexico, 1994. 374pp.

[4] Rivera-Arriaga E, Villalobos G. The coast of Mexico: approaches for its management. Ocean &

Coastal Management 2001;44:72956.[5] Ortiz-Lozano L, Granados-Barba A, Sols-Weiss V. Towards the establishment of an integrated

management program for a coastal zone. In: Ozhan E, editor. MEDCOAST-EMECS 99 Joint

conference, Land-Ocean Interactions: Managing Coastal Ecosystems. 913 November, Antalya,

Turkey, 1999. pp. 95161.

[6] Ortiz-Lozano L, Sols-Weiss V, Granados-Barba A. Scientific research in Tamaulipas coastal zone,

Mexico: implications for its coastal management. Ocean & Coastal Management 2000;43:92736.

[7] SEMARNAP. Estrategia Ambiental para la Gestion Integrada de la Zona Costera de Mexico:

Propuesta. Instituto Nacional de Ecologa, Secretara de Medio Ambiente, Recursos Naturales y

Pesca. INE-SEMARNAP, Mexico, 2000. 40pp.

[8] Sols-Weiss V, Granados-Barba A, Garca-Salgado M, Ortiz-Lozano L, Zamudio-Resendiz ME,

Hermoso-Salazar y M, Gutierrez-Velazquez A. Diagnostico Ambiental y Desarrollo de una Base de

Datos de la Zona Costera de la Republica Mexicana. Informe Final Proyecto INE-UNAM 1997.60pp.

[9] INE. La Calidad del Agua en los Ecosistemas Costeros Mexicanos. Disco Compacto en formato pdf.

Instituto Nacional de Ecologa SEMARNAT, 2000. 407pp.

[10] Solis-Weiss V, Granados Barba A. Diagnosis of environmental impacts on the Mexican Coastal Zone

with a comprehensive ad-hoc database, vol. 188. IOC UNESCO Publication; 2004. p. 25770.

[11] Merino-Ibarra M. El manejo de la zona costera mexicana: una evaluacion preliminar. In: El manejo

de ambientes y recursos costeros en America Latina y el Caribe. Departamento de Asuntos

Cientficos y Tecnologicos de la OEA y el Honorable Senado de la Nacion Argentina, Buenos Aires,

Argentina 1990;1:13755.

[12] Contreras Espinosa F, Herzig M, Vazquez Botello A. Atlas del Golfo y Caribe de Mexico:

diagnostico ambiental. Centro de Ecodesarrollo-Secretara de Pesca. Mexico, 1988. 44pp.

[13] Contreras Espinosa F. Ecosistemas Costeros Mexicanos. CONABIO-Universidad AutonomaMetropolitana, Unidad Iztapalapa. Mexico, 1993. 415pp.

[14] De la Lanza G, Caceres C. Lagunas Costeras y Litoral Mexicano. Universidad Autonoma de Baja

California Sur, Mexico, 1994. 525pp.

[15] Vazquez F, Rangel R, Mendoza A, Fernandez J, Aguayo E, Palacio A, Sharma VK. Southern Gulf of

Mexico. In: Sheppard C, editor. Seas at the Millenium: an environmental evaluation. New York:

Elsevier Science Ltd; 2000. p. 46782.

[16] Botello V, Toledo A, de la Lanza-Espino G, Villanueva-Fragoso GS. The Pacific coast of Mexico. In:

Sheppard C, editor. Seas at the Millenium: an environmental evaluation. New York: Elsevier Science

Ltd; 2000. p. 48399.

[17] Coleman C, Williams SL. Overexploiting marine ecosystem engineers: potential consequences for

biodiversity. TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution 2002;17(1):404.

[18] Paez-Osuna F. The environmental impact of shrimp aquaculture: a global perspective. Environmental

Pollution 2001;112:22931.

[19] Mercado-Ceron MT, Rojas Bustamante IA, Calderon Sanchez C. Analisis del impacto ambiental

generado por los grandes desarrollos tursticos en Mexico. Investigaciones Geograficas numero

especial. Instituto de Geografa UNAM, Mexico, 1993. p. 2133.

[20] Yeung Y. Coastal mega-cities in Asia: transformation, sustainability and management. Ocean &

Coastal Management 2001;44:31933.

[21] Nur Y, Fazi S, Wirjoatmodjo N, Han Q. Towards wise coastal management practice in a tropical

megacity-Jakarta. Ocean & Coastal Management 2001;44:33553.

[22] Jiang Y, Kirkman H, Hua A. Megacity development: managing impacts on marine environments.

Ocean & Coastal Management 2001;44:293318.

[23] Matthiessen P, Law RL. Contaminants and their effects on estuarine and coastal organisms in theUnited Kingdom in the late twentieth century. Environmental Pollution 2002;120:73957.

ARTICLE IN PRESS


environmental_evaluation_and_development_problems_of_the_mexican_coastal_zone

Documents