574 



FISHERY BULLETIN OF THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 



Mexican waters has not been developed thor- 

 oughly because of lack of markets. I^ocal beaches 

 are used extensively for bathing and, even near 

 the cities, the Gulf waters are clear and inviting. 



Except for Tampico, Veracruz, Villa Herniosa, 

 and Coatzacoalcos, domestic sewage is disposed 

 of on an individual basis. The effects of such dis- 

 posal upon the Gulf and its estuaries is negligible. 

 At Tampico untreated municipal sewage is dis- 

 charged to the Panuco River wliiih provides 

 adequate dilution to prevent nuisances. Because 

 of a peculiar combination of tides and ciu'rents 

 this sewage has contaminated parts of [>aguna 

 Vieja beyond acceptable limits for oyster harvest- 

 ing. At Veracruz a primary sewage treatment 

 plant was constructed and placed in operation in 

 1950. A few sewer outlets arc not as yet connected 

 to the treatment plant. 



Loading of crude oil into ships at Tampico, 

 Tuxpan, and Coatzacoalcos, on occasion, has re- 

 sulted in accitlental spills that have fouled l)eaches 

 near these points. The offending parties have 

 been cooperative in preventing recurrences. This 

 is the only known inihistrial waste problem on the 

 Gulf, and there are no records of injury to fish or 

 other acpiatic life. 



Silt deposition is the greatest pollution prob- 

 lem on the Mexican Gulf Coast. Silt and sand 

 carried by the Panuco and Grijalva Rivers clog 

 the harbors at Tampico and Alvaro Obregon, re- 

 spectively, and necessitate dredging to permit 

 navigation. From north to south the silt carry- 

 ing rivers of Mexico discharging along the Gulf 

 coast are: Soto la Marina, Barbarena, Panuco, 

 Tuxpan, Cazones, Naiitla, Tecolatia, Actopan, 

 Misantla, Boca del Rio, Papaloapan, Coatzacoal- 

 cos, Tonala, Nuevo San Filipe, Santana, Cux- 

 cucha, Grijalva, and San Pedro. Many of these 

 streams discharge to brackish estuaries which 

 contain oyster reefs. Undoubtedly the deposition 

 of silt will destroy the oyster reefs which are a 

 valuable natural resource. 



Because of the near nonexistence of sewage aiul 

 industrial waste pollution in the Gidf coast area 

 there is no antipollution campaign in Mexico. 

 Federal law regarding pollution is very brief and 

 consists of a paragraph or two in the Sanitary 

 Code which forbids the discharge into waters of 

 materials harmful to health and navigation. 

 Under the Sanitary Code detailed regulations 

 could be drawn up for controlling pollution, but 



this has not been necessary as yet. The Federal 

 Health Department (Salubiidad) and Federal 

 Harlxu- Police (Marina) are the agencies charged 

 with pollution control; tiieir activities along this 

 liiu^ are largely concerned with handling com- 

 plaints. Principal complaints concern the oil pol- 

 lution previously nu-ntioned. There is no routine 

 detcrniination of water quality or the amounts of 

 pollution except in the Tampico area where the 

 health department has an interest in the bacterial 

 quality of oyster-producing waters. The several 

 Mexican States could, if so inclined, promulgate 

 and enforce water pollution control laws. 



For the past several years Mexico has discussed 

 soil conservation, and some beginnings of a work- 

 ing program have developed which in time will 

 reduce the amount of silt carried to the Gulf. 



From the standpoint of organic pollution of 

 Gulf waters the program carried out in Mexico is 

 adequate to handle present conditions, although 

 from a conservation and public health view some 

 soil conservation and general sanitation practices 

 could be improved. It can be safely said that 

 when Mexico has a real need for an antipollution 

 campaign it will be forthcoming. 



LITERATURE CITED 



Ano.nymous. 



194G. Manual of recomineiided practice for .sanitary 

 control of the .shellfi.sh industry. Federal Security 

 Agency, U. S. l^iblic Health Service, Public Health 

 Bull. 295: 1-44. 



1949. Studies of pollution in streams of Alabama. 

 State of Alabama Water Improvement Advisory 

 Commission, pp. 1-298. 



1950. Joint sanitary survey of the waters of the state 

 of Florida receiving wastes from pulp and paper 

 mills for the Florida pulp and paper industry. .'Vpril 1 , 

 1949-May 1, 1950. I^repared by Bureau of Sanitary 

 Engineering, Florida State Board of Health, and the 

 National Council for Stream Improvement of the 

 Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Indu.stries, Inc. 



1 95 la. Water pollution in the United States. Federal 

 Security Agency, U. S. Public Health Service, 

 pp. 1-44. 



1951b. Esso spends two million in i)ollution fight. 

 Louisiana Conservationist 4: 12-i:?. 



1952. Annotated bibliography of pollution surveys of 

 the coastal waters of the United States with special 

 reference to sanitary quality of shellfish growing 

 areas. Federal Security Agency, U. S. Public 

 Health Service, pp. 1-79. 

 0.4LT.SOFF, Paul S. 



19:J6. Oil pollution in coastal waters. Proc. North 

 American Wildlife Conference, Feb. 15-7, 5 pp. 



