Angling Matters

How Did this Happen?

POLITICS, POLITICS, POLITICS

How did the state of Wisconsin allow this to occur in the first place? And where was the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the protector of the public trust?

It appears that a well-meaning—but poorly informed and obviously incompetent—organization (Forward Wisconsin), whose primary function is to attract businesses to Wisconsin, heard that Perrier was searching for sites and invited its officials to consider Wisconsin. After all, Wisconsin has an abundant supply of water, right? Forward Wisconsin even provided air travel with the apparent approval from then Governor Tommy Thompson.

In 2000, Kim Jeffery, President and CEO of The Perrier Group of America met with then Governor Tommy Thompson in unpublicized (if not secretive) meetings. In a letter dated July 7, 2000, (obtained through the Freedom of Information Act), Jeffery writes ... "Given the familiarity with the area we are looking at and the challenges in order for us to meet our own timeline, it will be important to us to have your public support. I realize that this involves investing some political capital. I will understand if you can't do this; just let me know so I can make alternative plans..."

George Meyer, then head and secretary of DNR and a political appointee, met with Perrier's representatives. It was decided that Perrier would conduct its own environmental impact statement (EIS) and monitor the impact on the environment. A paper was signed accordingly. No consultation with the people whose backyard would be affected, no concern for the outdoor enthusiasts who are attracted to this gentle area for peace and harmony. No consideration for the effects that large withdrawals of groundwater would surely have on the environment.

Once very popular, Gov. Tommy Thompson tarnished his reputation because of his association with Perrier. When Tommy Thompson resigned to take a cabinet post, Scott McCallum became governor. McCallum vetoed a provision in 2001 that would have required Perrier to undergo an environmental impact study before it could sink wells.
"He [McCallum] stood up in the Dells and promised us that Perrier would never come here," laments Dan Bailey. "He promised us one thing and then turned around and did another." So much for McCallum's record as an environmentalist and a straight shooter.

"I'm as upset with the Legislature as I am with Perrier," said Joan Byers, who believes that stronger groundwater legislation is long overdue. "They heard testimony from many groundwater experts and they didn't do anything."

Gov. McCallum was easily defeated in the next election.

Hopefully, the current governors in Wisconsin (Jim Doyle) and Michigan (Jennifer M. Granholm) will understand the importance of public trust and the value of the environment and people's wishes.

THE BIG PICTURE

What's at stake here aren't "just a few trout streams." Private ownership of groundwater eminently becomes a tremendous threat not only to outdoorsmen (by adversely impacting our streams, lakes and wetlands) but to everyone in the country.

If Nestle, a Swiss-owned corporation, can obtain permits for high-cap wells in this country, why couldn't other countries do the same? France? Germany? Italy? China? In effect, other countries could mine our groundwater for free and sell it to us and realize a huge profit. Far-fetched? Perrier is doing that today! Its market share in the U.S. is about 32 percent.

Right now, the Water Wars are about our environment, our streams, our fish and wildlife, our economy and our own access to water that is currently ours. Our peaceful, pristine landscapes.

Future? In 20 years, when it's predicted that two-thirds of the world's population will be without drinking water, those who control the spigot, will control much of the earth.

SUMMARY

It is quite apparent that the existing water laws that govern groundwater and aquifers are antiquated or inadequate and have many gaps that allow Perrier and other bottlers to establish beachheads. For example, the Wisconsin DNR cannot generally reject a permit request for a high-cap well except if it is proven that water extraction may adversely impact a municipality. But at the same time the DNR is also assigned to protect and preserve the public trust. Conflicting rules? Absolutely.

Various groundwater regulations for Wisconsin have been introduced, but so far they have been rejected. It is imperative that stringent legislation is in place immediately, closing all loopholes, or the damages to our environment would be irreversible.

If Perrier and other water bottlers win battles in Wisconsin and Michigan, why wouldn't they employ similar tactics elsewhere in the US? Perrier is already extracting huge quantities of water from Florida, Maine, Texas, Pennsylvania and other states right now (and finding citizens' opposition mounting in all these states).

The percolating water wars should be of great concern not only to the impacted states, not only to the local citizens, environmentalists and outdoorsmen, but also to everyone who cares about the future of United States.

And the world.

printer-friendly version