Statement: Massachusetts Needs Stronger Protections for Local Water Resources

Statement by Kristin Urquiza, Corporate Accountability International
Before the Massachusetts State Legislature Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture
Hearing on House Bill 778: “An Act Establishing A Two-Year Moratorium On New And Expanded Commercial Water Extraction, Storage and Bottling Operations In The Commonwealth Of Massachusetts.”
December 1, 2009
Hon. Anthony Petruccelli and Hon.William Straus, Co-Chairs

Thank you, Senator Petruccelli, Representative Straus and other members of the Committee for the opportunity to offer testimony on behalf of Corporate Accountability International and our members regarding the importance of House Bill 778 in establishing statewide protection of local water resources and curbing the impacts of the extraction of groundwater by the water bottling industry.

For 30 years, Corporate Accountability International has been waging and winning campaigns challenging irresponsible and dangerous corporate actions and protecting people.  Through our Think Outside the Bottle Campaign, we have worked with thousands of our members to educate millions of people about the environmental and social impacts of bottled water, the importance of strong public water systems, and the need to protect access to water and water resources for the common good.

Today, more than 1.1 billion people lack access to safe drinking water. By 2025, the World Health Organization estimates that two-thirds of the world’s population will lack access to water.  We are in the midst of a global water crisis that stands to have a tremendous impact on people here and around the world unless we act now.   

In the face of this crisis, some corporations have seen an opportunity to profit directly from supplying water – something that is essential to life.  The water industry is already a $465 billion industry, and is expected to reach a market value of over a trillion dollars in the near future.  The explosive growth of the bottled water industry is a part of this trend.  The U.S. bottled water market alone has ballooned to $15 billion business in just over a decade.  Not surprisingly, there are increasing calls from financiers and others to consider defining water’s value purely in economic terms, no matter the potential risks or costs.  

We are at a crossroads as to how this most essential public resource will be handled, by whom, and at what cost to our environment and our communities.  The concerns raised by local communities throughout Massachusetts, the U.S. and around the world about the bottled water industry are a part of this broader debate.

Nestlé and other players in the bottled water industry claim that they are responsible stewards of water resources and that they work well with the communities where they bottle and sell their water.  However, this has not been the case for a number of communities across the country; in their experience, the bottled water industry has a record of negatively impacting ecosystems and running roughshod over local, democratic control of water resources.  

Consider the community of McCloud, CA, where local residents found out in 2003 that their local water services district had, behind closed doors, all but signed and sealed a 50-year agreement to sell millions of gallons of water from local groundwater sources to Nestlé for roughly 1/64 of a cent per gallon for water they would resell at an average price of more than $1 per gallon.  Residents then discovered that the environmental impact assessments done on this proposed project were either inadequate or incomplete, and that Nestlé’s promises of increased economic benefits were overstated at best.  Community members pushed for a review of the agreement and comprehensive assessment, which Nestlé in turn resisted and attempted to divert or downplay. After six years of continued grassroots pressure and scrutiny, Nestlé recently agreed to withdraw from the community.

Or, consider community members in Mecosta County, MI, who in 2003 successfully argued before a County Circuit Court judge that a proposal by Nestlé to pump over 200 million gallons of water a year from a nearby protected natural area would likely have adverse impacts on the surrounding ecosystem.  The judge ordered Nestlé’s pumping to a halt.  However, Nestlé appealed, and the legal judgment Nestlé eventually won actually narrowed the scope of Michigan state environmental policy, such that local residents afterwards had less, not more, recourse when water resources adjacent or nearby their community faced potential threats.  After nearly a decade of legal battles, the community members at long last secured a court settlement that restricted Nestlé’s pumping levels during the drier summer months and reduced its pumping by half from initial levels.  If it weren’t for community opposition, Nestlé would still be draining water at unsustainable rates and threatening the longevity of the watershed.

And, you have heard or will hear today from community residents in and around Montague, MA, who have raised similar concerns about the impacts of ground water extraction and the conduct of the bottled water industry in their community.

No doubt you will hear a different perspective from Nestlé and its allies in the bottled water industry on their role in these community struggles.  However, the broader question that should arise from these stories of controversy and struggle is, how do we as a society make decisions about who gets water and who doesn’t?  Who is in the drivers’ seat?

Corporate Accountability International believes that the best stewards of this resource are the local communities themselves that rely upon it for their very health and wellbeing, and that water systems are best protected when decisions about how to manage these resources are made democratically, for the public good, with full and authentic public participation.

We have seen proof that communities who recognize the importance of protecting water are taking action to protect it.  For example, several communities in Maine, including Shapleigh, have enacted moratoriums or other restrictions on water withdrawals for the bottled water industry until further assessments can be made both by authorities and members of their communities at large.  The community of Barnstead, NH has enacted a local ordinance which restricts the extraction of water for various commercials uses, prioritizing the value of the water for the community itself.

However, water often crosses political boundaries, and communities often need the support and resources provided by the state government in order to realize their own goals and priorities.   And, if community residents and local decision-makers are not in the drivers’ seat when it comes to decisions about who gets water and who doesn’t, then conflicts of interest between the real needs of communities and companies like Nestlé who extract water for profit inevitably have and will ensue.

Therefore, we believe that this is an important time for the state of Massachusetts to enact stronger protections for local water resources.

We ask the committee to favorably report House Bill 778 out of committee.

We appreciate and commend the Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture for taking the time to seriously consider the issues discussed here today.  Thank you for inviting our organization to offer our comments, and we stand ready to assist you in your efforts.  Thank you.