Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Attorney General Slams Nestle's Bottled Water Aspirations

Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet at 2:32 PM on July 31, 2008.


Another big win for those hoping to keep the beverage giant out of McCloud, California.
nestle1
nestle

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

As many of you already know, we've been covering the situation in McCloud, California where food and beverage giant Nestle is trying to build a massive water bottling plant there -- much to the dismay of the majority of local residents.

Now Nestle has got even more opposition.

Earlier this week, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. warned Nestle that "California will challenge the environmental plan for a bottled water plant in Siskiyou county if the company does not revise its contract to pump water from the McCloud River."

Here's what a statement from the AG's office said:

"It takes massive quantities of oil to produce plastic water bottles and to ship them in diesel trucks across the United States," Attorney General Brown said. "Nestle will face swift legal challenge if it does not fully evaluate the environmental impact of diverting millions of gallons of spring water from the McCloud River into billions of plastic water bottles," Brown added.
Although Nestle publicly offered to reduce its annual water take to 195 million gallons of spring water per year -- enough to fill 3.1 billion 8-ounce plastic bottles -- the company has not yet agreed to change the terms of its contract with the McCloud Community Service District. The current fifty-year contract permits the company to draw 520 million gallons of spring water each year and also to pump unlimited amounts groundwater.
...Brown also said the environmental analysis fails to consider the global warming impacts of producing and transporting millions of gallons of water including: greenhouse gases from producing the plastic bottles; electrical demand for the project; and the diesel soot and greenhouse gas emissions from truck trips.
Attorney General Brown has asked the County of Siskiyou to revise its environmental impact report and circulate a new draft of the environmental impact report.
This is just the latest in a round of setbacks for Nestle, which announced recently that it would scale down the size of the plant.

The pressure groups who have been fighting Nestle on the issue had many accolades for the AG, as expected.

One of the main groups involved in the issue, Food and Water Watch, applauded Brown's announcement and added, "In the worst cases, Nestle's water grab ruins streams, ponds, wells and aquifers. And in all cases, Nestle's practices raise serious questions about who should be allowed to control water, our most essential resource, and to what end. Will corporations like Nestle or the communities that rely upon this most essential resource for their health, livelihood and well-being control water resources?"

Stay tuned as we continue to cover McCloud's fight against Nestle.

Digg!

Tagged as: water, mccloud, shasta, bottle water, nestle

Tara Lohan is a managing editor at AlterNet.


PETA Teams Up With Glenn Beck to Bash Al Gore
Apparently Beck thinks PETA is as rad as the NRA. Who knew?
Post by Tara Lohan. November 6, 2009.
Join Me for the No Impact Week Challenge
Take part in a week-long project to learn about your environmental footprint and reduce what you use and buy.
Post by Tara Lohan. October 12, 2009.
Wait, We Just Bombed the Moon?
Doesn't anyone else in the universe get a say in this?
Post by Tara Lohan. October 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
How did Nestle acquire the contract in the first place?
Posted by: artie on Jul 31, 2008 4:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It boggles the mind: in a time of depleting water resources, 'droughting' aquifers, widespread understanding that access to water is nothing less than access to Life, and rampant, transparent cases of corporate irresponsibility and disregard for the consumer... how can a giant like Nestle win a water-bottling contract in the first place??? A promise of more jobs, more prosperity, thus, more SUVs, more widescreen TVs,..? Is this, California, what makes life worth living???? Keep it up Californians and their won't be much Life left to keep up!!! Don't Americans ever learn?????
Thank you, Attorney General Brown!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Boycott Nestle parasites
Posted by: socialpsych on Aug 1, 2008 3:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good for McCloud and AG Brown!

Once the Nestle parasites get their hooks into a community, there is no way to get rid of them. I know because Nestle has gradually industrialized 3 natural springs in my rural community in eastern Pennsylvania. They withdraw 3 million gallons per week and have destroyed the native trout habitat. The water is trucked 15 miles away and bottled as Deer Park Spring Water.

The Nestle parasite is pernicious. They originally took over an existing water extraction operation on one spring, later enclosed and piped a second spring in a community park as a "bribe" to local officials, and now they are catching water in a third spring and piping it to the first spring.

They are doing this in communities throughout North and South America. Please consider boycotting all Nestle products.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Meanwhile, in Maine...
Posted by: festoonic on Aug 1, 2008 4:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the Portland Press-Herald, 7/30/08

Decision Doesn't Answer Water Questions:

A battle over a water district's deal with Poland Spring may have ended, but Maine needs statewide policies.

The Kennebunk-Kennebunkport-Wells Water District recently tabled a thirty year agreement with Nestle, parent company of Poland Spring water. This decision to turn down millions of dollars was made only after hundreds of citizens united in opposition and made their voices heard.

That may have ended this battle but the larger issue remains: "Does Maine want to increase its role as a water exporting state?"

It is not fair to have a multi-national giant like Nestle go town to town until they tie up all the water resources they can. After all, it is said, "Water is the next oil." These towns lack the resources to independently educate the public and make decisions about their most precious natural resource that will affect several generations.

Therefore we ask the State of Maine take a leadership role and form policy that will protect groundwater as it presently does surface water.

Vermont has enacted this type of legislation and a similar bill hopefully will be submitted to the next legislature. Only then will a discussion take place that will address:

1) Water Abundance: Do we have an excess or a limitless supply? To hear the Nestle engineers the answer would be "Yes." But independent research is needed to assure citizens we can safely increase our role as a water exporting state without adversely affect ground water tables in adjacent property.

2)Traffic: Where does this water get extracted and how does it travel to its bottling plant(s) and to the turnpike and the stores where it is purchased? Presently, one hundred truck trips are made daily on Route 112 between the Poland Spring Hollis plant and the Saco entrance to the turnpike. Waste water also travels in takers daily from Hollis to Old Orchard Beach along the same route. These roads were never made to handle this volume of traffic. And Nestle wants to ratchet up output of this and other plants.

3) Taxes: What is the State and Municipal revenue stream? If it were any other natural resource (oil, gas, coal, etc.) extracted from Maine land it would be taxed. Why does Nestle get a free pass? The State and municipal budgets and ultimately the state taxpayers sure could use the help!
4) Other Large Commercial Water Users: Luckily, the KKW Water District was approached by Nestle and it was fairly easy to rally people given their track record here and overseas.

But what if it had been Fred Forsley of Shipyard Beer or Stan Bennett of Oakhurst Dairy (who also sells bottled spring water) wanting a similar agreement for thirty years of water?

My guess is that because these are examples of fine Maine companies, the outcome may have been different. Therefore, we believe the State needs to enact legislation that treats all large commercial users equally and fairly.

Be careful what you ask for! We know there will be an army of Nestle and other lobbyists but it will be balanced by citizens from across this state that have already been impacted by this vacuum left by the State's inaction.

Once this discussion has taken place in Augusta, we can then move forward with policies and legislation in place that protect our most valuable resource: water.

About the author: Al Sicard is a Saco resident and executive director of DemCorps.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nestles is just marketing to stupid consummers and upping it's stockholders interests
Posted by: common intelligence on Aug 1, 2008 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As long as the people are lazy as sin and dumb about carrying their own personal water bottle around with them an filling it as needed, and paranoid about water quality, merchandising Pre bottled water is a cash cow.

Lazy ass Americans are addicted to convenience. Just reach and buy off the shelf seems to be Oh so much easier than actually taking a lid off a simple canteen and filling a bottle yourself.

Only a corporation the size of Nestles can afford to engage in such a lucrative enterprise. The size that could bring $$$$ to Siskiyou county which has a thin budget compared to more urban counties. Otherwise we could all start running water hoses and filling bottles and letting our kids sell them instead of lemonade stands on the neighborhood streets.

But too, the McCLoud river feeds into Lake Shasta., one of two of the biggest reservoirs in the State of CA. That lake this year is at 40% of it's capacity. No one knows how much rain fall will pour down in the following winter. But with such serious water concerns as the west faces, WATER is for sale to the highest bidder.
Only humans absorbed with an economic model driven by capitalism would feed on the misfortune of others with the profit motive. But it's universal. "There's a sucker born ever minute".

SO the question is, are people going to allow their selves to remain stupid suckers?
Buying bottled water is blasfamy, a sin of the highest order.

Though too, remember the corporate system, as it is, depends on a continues increase, or "growth" as they say, in order to keep people buying and holding stocks in the institution to feed the blood suckers at the top of the feeding chain. The objective is lasy ass leasure for the few while draining the populus as whole of their lifes blood.

SO I suggest anyone really concerned to "follow the money". Ask who in the McCloud Community Service District is getting the graft?

As well until people start understandinging how much fuel is used (wasted) to transport water around the world in trucks ships and planes, let alone that which is in the bottles, and is use in just bringing together the infrastructure in establishing a water bottling facility they will be trading water for oil. Now that sounds socially iresponsible in light of the concerns over conservation of energy resources.

Doesn't the word conservative have it's root in conservation?

Curious how it's an oxymoron when it comes to business isn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Way to go Jefferson!
Posted by: willymack on Aug 1, 2008 12:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some time ago the residents of Oregon and Northern California proposed the formation of the State of Jefferson because of shared interests and values. Those people opposed the greedy, heartless profiteers who were ruining the southern half of California. It's good to see the same spirit is still alive and well. I live in southern Oregon, not that far away from Mc Cloud, and want to help preserve my home from the avaricious hooks of those scumbags, too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kylie Harper
Posted by: tapitgirl on Aug 1, 2008 2:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bottled water company growth will only stop when we stop drinking bottled water. People will only stop drinking bottled water when it becomes immoral to do so. We point and laugh at those who drive hummers now that we know we went to war for oil ($4.00 a gallon gas doesn't hurt either). Until we start pointing and laughing at those who drink bottled water, Nestle, Coke and Pepsi will continue on their merry way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bottle water, bad Idea.
Posted by: osd on Aug 3, 2008 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I still remember dumb ass McCain and his " Getting bottled HOT water to third world countries so babies don't die." For the cost to the country and pollution bottled water causes, you could drill them a well and then they ain't beholden to no one. Nestle does not have a good track record in third world counties. Clean water to third world countries,is made out to be harder than it really is. They just can't resist, dictators or politicians in making poor people political pawns.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]