The local newspaper recently ran a lengthy interview with Dave Palais - Nestle Waters of North America’s operative in McCloud. In that interview, Palais (sadly) took the low road by suggesting that opposition to Nestle’s plant is coming from non-permanent residents and San Francisco fly fishermen.

It’s an astonishingly divisive statement, especially given that Palais himself doesn’t live in McCloud, and as far as we know, Nestle’s headquarters remain in Switzerland, not McCloud.

The Mount Shasta Herald recently published an interview with CalTrout’s Curtis Knight and Debra Anderson (President of McCloud Watershed Council), and while we’ve excerpted key parts below, it’s worth a read.

The relevant passages? First, CalTrout’s Knight immediately attacks Nestle’s oft-repeated (and largely disproved) claims of exemplary environmental stewardship:

Curtis Knight: California Trout’s work on this issue started with the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Report in 2006. We had never reviewed a more deficient document and were concerned about the lack of specifics potential project impacts and the lack of baseline information. For example, there was no attempt to collect stream flow and temperature data on Squaw Valley Creek.

California Trout’s goal has always been that if this project gets sited in McCloud that its operations do not harm the health of the McCloud River watershed. The lack of information in the DEIR raised a huge concern that Nestle, despite their public statements to the contrary, were not going to be good stewards of the water.

We have said all along that a responsible contract can only be drafted once we understand how a plant might impact the watershed and what mitigation measures might be implemented to protect the region.

You can read the entire interview here, but we’ll leave you with this response to a question about why Nestle’s encountered so resistance in other towns:

DA & CK: Reasons range from Nestle operations negatively impacting area water resources to legal bullying. In Michigan, a court ordered Nestle to halt operation after damages to area water resources were found. Nestle refused to fully comply and continued litigation activities including arguing to the Supreme Court that the citizens didn’t have standing to sue them.

In Maine, Nestle operates a plant in Hollis and wanted to expand with new wells in a nearby town, including a truck loading station. When the nearby town refused Nestle sued and argued before the Maine Supreme Court that Nestle’s right to grow market share superceded the town’s right of control. These examples suggest that once Nestle gets a foot hold in a community they are not always a ‘good neighbor’ and show a history of using their considerable legal clout to punish rural towns.

• Groups trying to plug loophole in Great Lakes water compact that allows removal one bottle at time: http://tinyurl.com/6kdza8 #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

• Nestle accused of Whining, Greenwashing (yes, both). We agree: http://tinyurl.com/6pjwk5 #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

• blogwatch: Schoolchildren given Nestle water bottles at “Waste Reduction Week” & react badly. http://tinyurl.com/6rmtqt #
• Newswatch: Washington University cutting bottled water for waste, energy reasons: http://tinyurl.com/6y3vp9 #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

• Blogwatch: “Ethical” bottled water? Not according to Green Living Review blog: http://tinyurl.com/63ey4n #
• Blogwatch: City of Toronto bans bottled water sales: http://tinyurl.com/6churn #
• Is bottled water simply buying a “Message on a Bottle”? http://tinyurl.com/6khq4a #
• Newswatch: Lawsuit challenges Gilchrist County denial of water bottling plant permit: http://tinyurl.com/5rwqur #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

According to Schenectady’s Daily Gazette newspaper, Nestle just received permission to drill test wells in the Johnstown watershed in its search for yet another bottling site.

It’s odd to see their expansion plans continuing in the face of an industry-wide slowdown (Nestle laid off 78% of the workers at its Calistoga plant), yet Nestle’s clearly making a move in the area:

Nestle Waters North America, owner of Poland Spring, Deer Park and other brands of spring water, will drill wells in the Johnstown watershed as part of its exploration for a new bottling site.

The Johnstown Common Council voted unanimously this week to give the company permission to drill wells near the city reservoirs located in the Adirondack foothills northwest of the city.

Nestle Waters, which also owns Perrier, is testing water at a number of sites nationally, including on the Canajoharie watershed in Ephratah where drilling began last summer.

The Canajoharie watershed nearly abuts the Johnstown watershed.

Mayor Sarah J. Slingerland said the company will test for quality and volume. She said she expects drilling to begin in the near future.

Unfortunately, the area’s economic development entity - like so many before them - is buying into Nestle’s promises, hook, line and sinker:

Lisa McCoy, marketing director of the Fulton County Economic Development Corp., said Nestle will choose a site and set up a plant that could employ between 50 and 300 people depending on water volume.

Given Nestle’s dismal record of meeting employment promises elsewhere, does anyone want to guess which number (50 or 300) is the more realistic - especially once the non-local “management teams” are helicoptered in to dole out the sub-living-wage jobs to locals?

I left a comment beneath the newspaper story (it required a very short registration process). If you have a minute, consider leaving one too. The more the folks of Johnsontown hear from others who are dissatisfied with Nestle’s presence in their own towns, the better informed they’ll be.

nestle, nestle water, nestle waters of north america, bottled water

Powered by ScribeFire.

This comment from a StopNestleWaters.org reader is referring (I think) to the same extraction site we wrote about here on StopNestleWaters:

Nestle is currently contracting with a local rancher in a rural county in Colorado for the rights to bottle the water from a high yielding spring. This greatly affects the recharge into the Arkansas river as well as the underlying aquifer which is already being innundated with wells.

The folks at Nestle are at least being candid about job creation in the County (none) and because they are simply taking the water out they are avoiding county taxes while their trucks would tear up county roads and create a dust problem where local livestock is raised. Water is like gold in Colorado because there is a very finite supply and I could see this causing issues for many years to come.

As the reader pointed out, Nestle has got to be crossing their fingers on this one; with no promise of local economic benefit to hold over the heads of the community, a little opposition to the truck traffic, pollution, noise and related issues would probably go a long ways.

You don’t have to be a Rhodes Scholar to realize this is the worst kind of economic development for a rural area; a precious resource is extracted and leaves the area - along with any potential profits or benefits from the sale of the resource.

Thus, while the area suffers the indignity of truck traffic (noise, safety issue, pollution, unrecompensed wear & tear on roads), there is economic benefit, except to the one person selling the water (and that’s probably being sold too cheaply).

nestle, nestle waters, chaffee county, arkansas river, rural economic development

Powered by ScribeFire.

In yet another chapter of small-town Maine’s battle to retain local control of water supplies in the face of Nestle/Poland Spring’s expansion plans, voters in Wells (ME) recently passed a water extraction moratorium.

Designed to give the town breathing room to craft a local water extraction ordinance, the moratorium is temporary, and the hard work of crafting an ordinance is just beginning

In an email conservation between StopNestleWaters.org and Ms. El-Shafei of Save Our Water (an activist leading the charge for an ordinance), she said:

“We realize that this victory will be short-lived unless we can write an ordinance which will protect our groundwater from corporate exploitation, a rights-based ordinance, as opposed to a regulatory ordinance.

Simultaneously, we will be educating the community about just what a rights-based ordinance is and try to persuade them that this is the only way to go. That will not be an easy task as this is a conservative community. But people only have to look at the case of Fryeburg, Maine where citizens have been entangled in a costly legal battle for years, as the regulatory laws favor corporate rights over the rights of the citizens.”

In a less-pressured environment, a moratorium wouldn’t even be necessary, though it does reveal a certain mistrust of Nestle/Poland Spring among Mainers, who have witnessed a few too many lawsuits and “negotiated-in-secret” surprises.

Now, a process for developing that moratorium is becoming clear::

The process appears most likely to fall to a newly minted committee in Wells. Known as the Ordinance Review Committee, it was created in the fall to take a critical look at all of the town’s ordinances.

Officials indicate the committee will be charged with coming up with a draft water extraction ordinance, although the Board of Selectmen has not made a formal decision on the matter.

“We established the new committee,” said Joan Mooney, selectmen chairwoman. “They have a long list of ordinances they need to get done. (The water extraction ordinance) will be one of their priorities.”

Mooney said she expected the committee would look at samples of ordinances that other towns have already crafted as a basis for their work. “Then they’ll work with selectmen to get an ordinance written to take to the public.”

Good luck to the citizens of Wells, who clearly voted to retain control of their water and economy.

nestle, nestle waters, poland spring, bottled water, wells, maine, water extraction ordinance

Powered by ScribeFire.

• Blogwatch: What does bottled water in a hotel room say - when water is transported halfway around world? http://tinyurl.com/5rsetc #
• Blogwatch: The Myth of Water Abundance in Canada - http://tinyurl.com/5tvoo2 #
• Key Comment: Denmark public meeting limited to 2 hours, public speaking time last on agenda: http://tinyurl.com/6n5lo4 #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

This was forwarded to StopNestleWaters.org from a Fryebrug resident (city next to Denmark), and touches on a recurring theme: how do small towns write ordinances capable of protecting themselves from extractive industries like Nestle/Poland Spring.

It asks tough questions that every town should answer when they’re being courted by Nestle/Poland Spring.

*********

This is an open letter to all the citizens of Denmark who will be attending the “Open Town Meeting” on November 22nd at town hall.

The purpose of this meeting is for Poland Spring/Nestle to gain the approval for the renewal of their “Permit Application for Water Extraction” and to amend this permit to include an additional borehole and well house. There are many concerns and questions about this permit renewal and our current water ordinance. Since our ordinance is a work in progress, we feel that it would be a great opportunity to share with you some thoughts and ideas for improving our ordinance.

• We need to move the authority for this ordinance and permitting process back to, our voter elected, Planning Board where it rightfully belongs. Every other town water ordinance we reviewed squarely gives responsibility to their Planning Board. We are the only town where the selectmen have taken control of the ordinance and water permitting application process.
• We need to add language to address and protect the environmental issues and ecological systems. Our current ordinance addresses neither of these.
• We need to have a bond or other security posted prior to approval of a water extraction permit, so residents can know the amount of coverage.
• Alert and Action levels need to be clearly defined and set prior to approval of any permit. Exactly what water levels indicate an adverse effect?
• If we hit a pre-determined Action level and the applicant refuses to stop extracting water, what is our recourse? Should we be assessing a monetary penalty in our ordinance?
• Our code enforcement officer should not need to make an appointment to visit the extraction site.
• We need to know where the load out facility will be located prior to the renewal of the permit. Will it be in Denmark?
• We need to have effective, strong language in our ordinance that would govern hours of operation, noise levels, and glare from lights, increased traffic, and similar potential for nuisance. Our ordinance currently says that these nuisances are unlikely, but since we don’t know where the load out facility will be located, these may be very likely.

Our town officials have developed a great ordinance. However, in three years time, things have changed. Many towns have used Denmark’s water ordinance as a starting point. They have added stronger language to their water ordinances. Since our ordinance is a work in progress, we need to make some additional changes to our ordinance as well.

Please come to the hearing Nov,22 at 9:00 am held at the Denmark Town office.

– Natural Resource Defenders

• Bottled water sales fall, industry reacting to slowdown (via Alternet): http://tinyurl.com/6j57ht #

Powered by Twitter Tools.

In an attempt to protect its up-for-reneweal well permit in Denmark, Maine (the town next to Fryeburg and the source of the water Nestles wants to pump to a Fryeburg loading station), Nestle/Poland Spring have taken to running regular advertising, a close look at which is illuminating:

Note the use of “local” throughout the ad. It’s a recurring theme with Poland Springs: “We’re a Maine company” or “we’re a local company” messages abound, ignoring the fact that Nestle is the world’s largest food and beverage corporation.

Make no mistake; the profits from the sale of the water extracted in Denmark don’t stay local - they flow directly to corporate headquarters, and the town’s water resource is practically given away in return for… well, not even jobs in this case (it’s a well).

Defining $26,000 as “significant” tax revenue is a stretch, even by
small town standards. In truth, wells and loading stations deliver few
benefits to local economies (unless you define truck traffic, noise and
diesel pollution as “benefits”).

Our pick for “Nestle’s Most Astonishing Doublespeak of the Day?”

Given that one town away - in Fryeburg - Nestle/Poland Spring are actively trying to usurp local control through extraordinary legal means (they’ve sued/appealed the Fryeburg Planning Commission’s “no” decision five times).

At one point they argued that their right to grow market share superseded the town’s right to say “no.”

Respecting local control?

Only when it’s Nestle pulling the strings.

nestle, nestle waters, nestle water, bottled water, Poland Spring, maine, denmark, fryeburg

Powered by ScribeFire.