Tag: Blue Triton

Ontario advocates shut down BlueTriton bottling plant; score big win against water commodification

Published on January 6th, 2025 by - Blog Posts

Arlene Slocombe, Wellington Water Watchers

In a major victory for citizens opposed to the packaging and sale of water as a commodity, advocates in southwest Ontario successfully campaigned for the shutdown of a water bottling plant in the township of Puslinch owned by BlueTriton, which bought the facility from Nestle in 2021. BlueTriton announced in November that it would shut down the facility, which was estimated to bottle 56 million cases of water annually. Additional environmental benefits of the shutdown will include the conservation of hundreds of million gallons of groundwater and the elimination of millions of tons of plastics used to make bottles. But the plant closure will also mean the likely layoff of 144 workers.

A leader in the effort to stop the bottling operation was the Wellington Water Watchers, who have been fighting local water privatization since 2007. The group’s director, Arlene Slocombe, spoke with FLOW about the significance of the group’s campaign.

How does the commodification of water factor in your opposition to the bottling facility, or were you focused on direct environmental impacts?

The commodification of water was always central to our opposition, right from the early days. Of course there were concerns about environmental impacts and over time we developed a much deeper analysis that this type of water taking is a justice issue. But right from the outset, people in this community were outraged about a mutli-national company profiting off of precious and life-giving water. Our mantra became Water for Life, Not Profit!

How much resistance did you meet in trying to convince provincial authorities that the withdrawal was harmful? Does any advice to other citizens groups grow out of that?

The short answer is – lots of resistance.

In fact, we have not yet been successful in having the province phase out permits to take water for the purpose of water bottling. This is our ongoing work, and our next steps. Nestle and now BlueTriton (BT) are leaving because the grassroots advocacy here has made their ongoing viability a challenge.

There are other water bottlers in the province – and we know that BT is trying to sell their operations here – so our work is not yet done. We have more to do to ensure that permits for water bottling are phased out completely.

We started to understand that environmental regulations are primarily there to regulate environmentalists.

Our current regulatory framework that supports all sorts of resource extraction is doing exactly what it was designed for. We came to the understanding that to make meaningful change requires building overwhelming political pressure that will drive the changes needed for environmental and social justice. In essence, we started to understand that environmental regulations are primarily there to regulate environmentalists. And this is what I would share with others.

Working “inside the bubble” alone will not drive the changes needed. The bubble is the framework established by the government for pathways of interaction and influence. We grew to understand that we needed to work “outside of the bubble” to have success.

What do you tell local officials who say that the loss of jobs is more important than the protection of water?

It is a part of the corporate playbook of large water extraction companies to situate in small rural (and typically under-resourced) communities that then become dependent on the tax base and other small handouts offered by the company. Shorter-term needs then tend to outweigh real long-term impacts and needs.

In a world where we now understand that we have surpassed six of nine planetary boundaries, we have to take a mature and sober look at the viability of extractive industries.

The tax base loss that Puslinch may experience pales in comparison with the cost of having to seek new water sources to meet local drinking water needs. Money isn’t life, but water is life and needs to be prioritized as such.

Throughout our advocacy opposing the water taking for profit, we have been consistent in our call for a just transition for employees in an industry that can not be sustained indefinitely. Everyone needs to put food on their table and a roof over their heads. I’m sad to say we haven’t seen a more proactive approach from government leaders at local and provincial levels, and from the industry itself to support workers in these sunsetting industries.

Water Watchers has been in this advocacy game around bottled water for almost 18 years now and the pressure has just continued to grow. Governments of all levels have continued to ignore this, and the workers are paying the cost. We need government to be more proactive around planning for these transitions towards a more just and sustainable economy for industries where working class people will be left behind.

What does this victory mean not only to the community but to the Great Lakes and communities in general?

Fundamentally, this is a justice issue.

We understand the power of the global bottled water industry in undermining confidence in public water systems and marketing their products as more safe, reliable and convenient. I believe we need to take steps to rein in the industry by banning false advertising and greenwashing. All water extraction proposals must be subject to robust environmental impact studies; we must stop allowing firms to bottle municipal water for sale, or charge a large amount for this, or make this through public agencies as an interim measure.

We understand the power of the global bottled water industry in undermining confidence in public water systems and marketing their products as more safe, reliable and convenient.

Bottled and packaged water are central to the global process of water commodification and is a key impediment to realizing the human right to water, not to mention a major environmental threat.

It is often positioned as a needed solution in emergencies, but this is a false solution. There are real, viable alternatives like bringing in water tankers and setting up water stations.

Single-use plastic needs to be banned. Recent studies are also showing the increased health risks of drinking water stored in plastic bottles because of the “shedding” of nanoplastics. We understand that the growing market for bottled water is in lower socio-econominc communities who disproportionately tend to be communities of Black, Indigenous, or People of Colour. And if these communities are facing greater health risks because of the impacts of nano and microplastics – this is fundamentally a justice issue.

Not to mention the egregious situation where First Nations communities across what is now called Canada continue to face water insecurity and boil water advisories. This includes the community at Six Nations who are less than 1 hour south of the bottling operation – and they have never given consent to Nestle – nor to BlueTriton to extract water from treaty lands. And in many cases, these community members are forced into dependence on bottled water (because of the lack of appropriate infrastructure) and have to buy that same water from their treaty lands in order to have clean drinking water. It’s appalling.

A Remembrance: Terry Swier, A Michigan Water Warrior

Published on December 16th, 2021 by - Blog Posts, H2Olson, News

Photo: Terry Swier smiling with Jim Olson

Editor’s note: Terrill “Terry” K. Swier, age 77, passed away December 5th, 2021, in Mecosta, Michigan.

Jim Olson, FLOW’s Founder & Senior Legal Advisor

By Jim Olson

Terry Swier, this remembrance is for you, in appreciation of just a few of the things you exemplified, suffered, and found joy in as leader of Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation (MCWC) and pioneer to protect Michigan’s waters for all of us.

In late 2000, I received a call at home long after a December’s early nightfall. A well-spoken woman introduced herself as Terry Swier, and asked if I had time to talk about concerns she and citizens had about a Nestlé subsidiary’s (Perrier Group) proposed groundwater diversion from the upper reaches of the Little Muskegon River to a bottling plant in mid-Michigan. I remember the clarity and urgency in her voice. Three days later, I met with Terry, her husband Gary, MCWC’s Vice President Rhonda Huff, the Doyles, Johnsons, Sapps, and others in a lodge east of Big Rapids. Someone pointed out the window through the snow falling over a lake to a distant wooded ridge where Nestlé wanted to locate three large-volume water wells. 

Terry Swier had just retired as librarian at the University of Michigan Flint, her husband Gary from Ford Motor. They had moved to Horseshoe Lake also near the proposed area of the wells. Perrier Group had deposited a glossy report with local librarians and news outlets assuring the public that its groundwater withdrawal of more than 210 million gallons a year wouldn’t impact wetlands, streams, and lakes. Terry expressed her concern that the report left out the details—the background appendices and information needed to evaluate it. Others agreed.

Within a few weeks, the residents formed a nonprofit corporation, MCWC. Terry was elected president, and many of the others joined the board. Still others chipped in money, volunteered to hold bake sales and yard sales, and hold Texas Hold ’em, and licensed raffle fundraisers. A month after that, Terry, Gary, Rhonda, and other officers persuaded a Nestlé regional hydrologist to meet them in my law office in Traverse City. Terry and the group explained to the hydrologist that they needed copies of the scientific data behind the report, and before the hydrologist left, he promised the full report would be deposited in a library in Big Rapids and a copy sent to MCWC and its lawyers. A month later, after Bob Otwell, an engineer and expert hydrologist from Traverse City, and current FLOW Board member, perused a box full of appendices, he advised that the data showed the pumping would have significant effects on the flows and levels of the stream and lakes. Terry the librarian was right.

Perrier Group had deposited a glossy report with local librarians and news outlets assuring the public that its groundwater withdrawal of more than 210 million gallons a year wouldn’t impact wetlands, streams, and lakes.

Terry and MCWC demanded a public hearing, and the then-Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) held a hearing at the Holiday Inn near Ferris State University. Terry and Gary organized and led presentations by dozens of residents and citizens who opposed the permit to sell water. “Who owns the water?” Terry asked, something she would keep asking for the next 20 years. Not Perrier or Nestlé. It belonged to the public. But the DEQ issued the permit, Perrier started pumping, and Terry and MCWC had no choice but to file a lawsuit. A court would decide whether Nestlé’s pumping was legal. Terry and MCWC insisted on doing what was right.

Two years later, in 2003, after preparation, more bake sales and yard sales, fundraising with donations from residents, citizens, and a family foundation, and a three-month trial, Terry and the Board and I anxiously waited for Mecosta County Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Root to announce his opinion and order from the bench at the courthouse in Big Rapids. Also waiting were citizens, news media, Perrier and Nestlé’s entourage of lawyers, its regional CEO, and public relations machine. Judge Root had signed the opinion and order, then placed a stack of copies for the parties and media on the bench. He invited the parties’ lawyers and others present to pick up their copies, and without saying more retreated to his office.

“Who owns the water?” Terry asked, something she would keep asking for the next 20 years. Not Perrier or Nestlé. It belonged to the public. But the DEQ issued the permit, Perrier started pumping, and Terry and MCWC had no choice but to file a lawsuit.

I led Terry out a side door to the sidewalk, glanced at the last page, leaned speechless against a wall, and handed Terry the opinion. I’ll never forget the elated look on Terry’s face. Judge Root had concluded that the pumping would cause substantial harm at almost any rate, that it violated principles of Michigan groundwater and riparian law. He found that the flows of the stream would be reduced on average by 28 percent, that water levels would drop as much as 6 inches, and that the water resources and fishery would be impaired. Terry, her sharp eyes full of excitement, took the opinion back into the courthouse to share with her officers, members, and supporters. Judge Root had ordered Nestlé to shut down all three of its large-volume wells.

After five years of appeals, Nestlé finally settled for a final amended order that reduced its pumping from 400 gallons per minute (gpm) to an average of 125 gpm in the summer and 218 gpm the rest of the year. The final amended order has protected the water resources of the stream and lakes to this day.

I’ll never forget the elated look on Terry’s face. Judge Root had concluded that the pumping would cause substantial harm at almost any rate, that it violated principles of Michigan groundwater and riparian law.

By the time the case ended in 2009, Terry had not only led MCWC to a victory, but the organization had grown to more than 2,000 members, including Food & Water Watch from Washington, D.C., the Council of Canadians from Ottawa, and supporters and donors from all over the country. But Terry knew the fight was not over. Already, Nestlé and other influential lobbying interests ran full-court press in Lansing and other Great Lakes state capitols in the middle of negotiating a Great Lakes agreement that promised to halt water diversions and exports from the Great Lakes Basin.

New battles and hurdles had to be overcome. Nestlé and its allies were pushing hard for an exemption for “products,” including water in containers like bottled water. Terry and MCWC contacted others, and soon, author and conservation leader Dave Dempsey, Cyndi Roper, steering Clean Water Action, Maude Barlow, and Wenonah Hauter, and Munk Centre in Toronto were engaged.  Terry wrote letters and submitted comments on behalf of MCWC and Michigan’s waters. On the governor’s announcement of a deal on the Great Lakes Compact in late 2005, Terry called it like it was, and still is:

“‘These… agreements may save… [what] so many have worked hard for, but they will not save the Great Lakes,” Terry said. 

Terry knew the fight was not over. Already, Nestlé and other influential lobbying interests ran full-court press in Lansing and other Great Lakes state capitols in the middle of negotiating a Great Lakes agreement that promised to halt water diversions and exports from the Great Lakes Basin.

“There is a hole in these pacts, and over time the agreements could sink under the national and global demands for our Great Lakes water,” she said. “The negotiators and Council of Great Lakes Governors should be commended for how far they’ve come, but these agreements should not be signed in their present form… Despite what other industries and even a few environmental groups may say in favor of adopting the agreements [the Compact], we don’t think they speak for most citizens and businesses…  These groups have not addressed the product export loophole.’”

Throughout the years I worked with Terry, her husband Gary, Rhonda Huff, the board, and the Doyle and Sapp families, we all became friends, forged from the ups and downs of the long struggle. Terry, MCWC, all of those who lead the organization now, I have the highest respect for you. You have lived on principle and faith, not out of stubbornness, but out of the reality that some things by their nature cannot be compromised—like the perpetual integrity of the waters of the Little Muskegon River or the Great Lakes. If water were subjected to private control, everyone and the lakes themselves would lose. As Terry said, “It’s about who owns the water.”

If water were subjected to private control, everyone and the lakes themselves would lose. As Terry said, “It’s about who owns the water.”

Terry was asked to testify in December 2007 before a Congressional Committee in Washington, D.C., on bottled water and the future of water, sharing her experiences taking on Nestlé. She felt strongly that Congress should clarify that water itself is not a “product” under the terms of the Great Lakes Compact, and therefore is not for sale. MCWC’s lawyer prepared an analysis Terry submitted as part of her testimony in support of a U.S. House Resolution to close the bottled water export loophole and avoid a precedent in international trade law that Michigan’s water could be sold anywhere.

She led MCWC through so many challenging moments and crises during her 10-year tenure, but she was quick to credit her board and others, not herself. But as anyone who knows Terry could attest, it was her clear-sighted commitment to principle and her conviction, grounded like the roots of an oak tree deep in the soil with branches wide in the sky, that stood behind this victory. Her gentle strength was flexible in any wind or storm. (MCWC carries on these same qualities today, in its current battle against Blue Triton, the hedge-fund financed company that bought out Nestlé, over Twin and Chippewa Creeks, near Evart).  

But as anyone who knows Terry could attest, it was her clear-sighted commitment to principle and her conviction, grounded like the roots of an oak tree deep in the soil with branches wide in the sky, that stood behind this victory.

But the victory Terry and MCWC won was not enough. The question, “Who Owns the Water?” remained unanswered. When we talked on the phone after the case ended and things heated up over the “product” loophole in the Great Lakes Compact, it was clear that the work was not done. Terry talked with Rhonda Huff and the Board, and they joined and sponsored a larger grassroots effort that sponsored a premiere showing of the award-winning documentary For Love of Water at the Traverse City State Theater on Nov. 16, 2008, which featured as one of its topics the challenge by MCWC of Nestlé’s attempt to turn water into a private commodity. After the showing, the film’s director Irena Salina joined Terry and other panelists to discuss before a standing-room only audience one of the fundamental battles of the 21st century. The response was overwhelming. Terry and I talked afterward, and she, MCWC vice president Rhonda Huft, and the board agreed to help a core group I gathered to found a new organization directed at protecting water as a public trust and the paramount right to water of all citizens and life. Today, that organization is For Love of Water (FLOW).

Terry and I talked afterward, and she and MCWC agreed to help a core group I gathered to found a new organization directed at protecting water as a public trust and the paramount right to water of all citizens and life. Today, that organization is For Love of Water (FLOW).

As we and our children and grandchildren face the challenges of the world that lie ahead, Terry would say what she said in a speech on receiving one of Michigan’s highest environmental action awards. Citing Margaret Mead, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

______________________________________________________________________________________________

About the author: Jim Olson, FLOW’s founder and senior legal advisor, was a principal at the Olson, Bzdok, and Howard law firm in Traverse City when he represented Michigan Citizens for Conservation in its 2001 lawsuit, Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation vs. Nestlé Waters North America. Inc. The case resulted in a landmark November 2003 ruling by Mecosta County Circuit Court Judge Lawrence C. Root that Nestlé’s Sanctuary Springs wells caused substantial harm, were unreasonable under groundwater law, and violated the Michigan Environmental Protection Act.

Judge Root ordered Nestlé to completely stop pumping water from the Sanctuary Springs site, protecting Michigan streams, lakes, wetlands, fish, and riparian and public uses from removal of tributary groundwater for bottled water operations. After five years of appeals, Nestlé finally settled for an amended order that reduced its pumping from 400 gallons per minute (gpm) to an average of 125 gpm in the summer and 218 gpm the rest of the year. The final amended order has protected the water resources of the stream and lakes to this day.