Our Santa Fe River, Inc.

www.oursantaferiver.org

1-386-454-2366

oursantafe@hotmail.com
 
 
 
Mark your calendars...
 
Springs Celebration
 www.santaferiversprings.com
 
Saturday,  August 2,  11 am till 3 pm
 
Our Santa Fe River, Inc. will have a booth at this festival at
Poe Springs Park on County Road 340 (Poe Springs Road)
 
FREE admission
Music and entertainment
refreshing springs
demonstrations
 
Stop by and see our progress in stopping water bottlers from coming to the
Santa Fe River.
We met many people last year who are now leading the way with sharing information about
these businesses and urging their local representatives to stop these
unnecessary luxury extraction plants.
 
To learn more visit
www.santaferiversprings.com
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Gardening and Plastics
 
http://greenroofgrowers.blogspot.com/2008/07/i-dont-like-plastic-either.htmla
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blue Springs Properties, Inc.
 
The attachment in this e-mail is from SRWMD see this post below...
 
Good morning,

I have attached a final order relating to 2-03-00060 for Blue Springs Properties (as per Mediation Agreement), as you all have requested to receive copies of correspondence pertaining to this water use permit.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,

<<Final Order 2-03-00060.pdf>>
Linda G. Welch

Administrative Assistant

800.226.1066

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 TMDL's......
 

Springs cleaning

Sunday, July 20, 2008
 
The first stage of a state proposal to curb pollution in the Suwannee and Santa Fe rivers and their springs is drawing praise from some area environmental groups and criticism from agricultural organizations.
read more:  http://www.gainesville.com/article/20080720/NEWS/614247104/1002&title=Springs_cleaning
 
___________________________________________________________________
 
Earthjustice today filed a lawsuit in federal court in Tallahassee on behalf of the Florida Wildlife Federation, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, St. John’s Riverkeeper, and Sierra Club  seeking a court order that would require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to impose quantifiable – and enforceable – limits for fertilizer, sewage and animal waste runoff.

 http://www.earthjustice.org/library/legal_docs/complaint-and-exhibits-fwf-v-usepa-07-17-08.pdf
 
________________________________________________________________________________________

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Brinkman" <RobBrinkman@COX.NET>
To: <FL-SSJ-FORUM@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 4:33 PM
Subject: [FL-SSJ-FORUM] [Fwd: Lawsuit Filed to Limit on Nutrient Pollution
in Florida Rivers and Lakes]

>>>> *SIERRA CLUB FLORIDA NEWS*
>>
>> *Lawsuit Would Require Limits on Nutrient Pollution in Florida Rivers and
>> Lakes*
>>
>> */Weak Rules Lead to Contaminated Drinking Water, Toxic Algae Blooms and
>> Closed Beaches/*
>>
>> July 17, 2008
>>
>> The public interest law firm Earthjustice today filed a lawsuit on behalf
>> of the Sierra Club and four other environmental groups seeking a court
>> order that would require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to
>> impose quantifiable – and enforceable – limits for fertilizer, sewage and
>> animal waste runoff which contaminate Florida’s rivers and lakes.
>>
>> The lawsuit was filed in federal court for the Northern District of
>> Florida. It is available at
>> *http://www.earthjustice.org/library/legal_docs/complaint-and-exhibits-fwf-v-usepa-07-17-08.pdf*.
>>
>> Earthjustice is representing Florida Wildlife Federation, Conservancy of
>> Southwest Florida, Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, St.
>> John’s Riverkeeper, and Sierra Club in the case which challenges a
>> decade-long delay by the state and federal government in setting limits
>> on the nutrient poisoning which triggers harmful algae blooms.
>>
>> Pollution-fueled algae blooms are fouling Florida’s beaches, lakes,
>> rivers, and springs more each year, threatening public health, closing
>> swimming areas, and even shutting down a southwest Florida drinking water
>> plant serving 30,000 people.
>>
>> Every time it rains, run-off from factory farms, fertilized landscapes,
>> and agricultural operations pour fertilizer and animal waste residue into
>> Florida’s rivers and lakes. These contaminants nourish algae blooms and
>> therefore are referred to as “nutrients.”
>>
>> The lawsuit has nationwide implications. Currently, Florida and most
>> other states have only vague limits regulating nutrient pollution.
>>
>> The EPA gave Florida a 2004 deadline to set limits for nutrient
>> pollution, which the state disregarded. The EPA was then supposed to set
>> limits itself, but failed to do so. EPA recently approved a plan that
>> would have limits, at best, being “proposed” by 2011.
>>
>> Clearly, nutrient contamination is altering water bodies all over
>> Florida. As Earthjustice notes in a letter it sent to the EPA:
>>
>> “Potentially toxigenic cyanobacteria have been found statewide, including
>> river and stream systems such as the St. Johns River in the Northeast
>> Region, the Caloosahatchee River in the Southwest Region, and the Peace
>> and Kissimmee Rivers in the Central Region. In the Southeast Region,
>> toxin levels in the St. Lucie River and estuary during an algae bloom in
>> 2005 were 300 times above suggested drinking water limits and 60 times
>> above suggested recreational limits. Warning signs had to be posted by
>> local health authorities warning visitors and residents not to come into
>> contact with the water. Lake Okeechobee, which is categorized under state
>> regulations as a drinking water source, is now subject to almost
>> year-round blue-green algae blooms as a result of nutrient pollution.”
>>
>> Inland freshwater resources are also affected by pollution from
>> agricultural runoff and other sources: half of the state’s rivers and
>> more than half of its lakes were found to have poor water quality in a
>> 2006 report by the state Department of Environmental Protection. The
>> problem is compounded when nutrient-poisoned waters are used as drinking
>> water sources. Disinfectants such as chlorine and chloramine can react
>> with the dissolved organic compounds, contaminating drinking water with
>> mutagenic chemical byproducts.
>>
>> “EPA has admitted that excessive levels of nitrogen and phosphorus are a
>> direct cause of toxic blue-green algae blooms,” Earthjustice wrote to the
>> EPA. “Exposure to these blue-green algae toxins through ingestion, skin
>> contact or inhalation can cause rashes, skin and eye irritation, allergic
>> reactions, gastrointestinal upset, serious illness, and even death. Last
>> month, a water treatment plant serving 30,000 Florida residents was shut
>> down after a toxic blue-green algae bloom on the Caloosahatchee River
>> threatened the plant’s source water supply.”
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
----- Original Message -----
From: Betty Johnson
To: Joe Murphy
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: Fishing Issues and Coastal Development and Pollution - Working Together

Joe,
 
Thanks for taking a public interest and concern in working together to protect the natural resources from coastal projects that adversely impact the Gulf of Mexico.
 
Please be advised the Suwannee River Basin has more fresh water springs found in it's karst terrain than anywhere else in the world that has been targeted for natural-spring water bottling plant operation.
 
Millions of gallons of public water resources in this natural system are permitted to the bottlers private gain for use and well construction in it's natural system by Suwannee River Water Management District with no consideration of lawful protection.
 
I encourage you to include springs protection in the Suwannee River Basin to provide a healthy gulf we can all be proud of in working with other environmentalist who share the same interest and concern.
 
With best regards,
 
bettyjohnson@shareinet.net
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Murphy
To: joe@healthygulf.org
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:56 PM
Subject: Fishing Issues and Coastal Development and Pollution - Working Together

Hey Y’all,

 

I would like to get back to something that Gulf Restoration Network was working towards last year that got lost in the shuffle on our part with lots of projects and too little time.  We had started to work towards trying to organize some sort of gathering or campaign tools to share and build community around the idea of identifying specific projects and/or places where conservation and fishing groups along the Gulf Coast of Florida might join forces to protect our coasts.  This is not our idea, or a new idea, but we wanted to (and would like to now) help play a role in moving this forward as a network of organizations committed to protecting the Gulf of Mexico.

 

We were very proud earlier this year to have the Gulf Fisherman’s Association join us in opposing the Magnolia Bay/Reserve at Sweetwater Estuary proposed development in Taylor County.  We also deeply appreciated that Florida Sportsman Magazine covered the issue of the Magnolia Bay/Reserve at Sweetwater Estuary and shared with their readers events in the Tampa Bay area focusing on fertilizer pollution in the estuary of Tampa Bay.  There needs to be more of a concerted effort to join conservation and fishing groups in shared work to protect our coasts.

 

From where we sit while conservation and fishing groups may not always agree on allocation or user issues, we can find “common water” (borrowing a phrase from David White at Ocean Conservancy) when it comes to coastal pollution, coastal development, and protecting coastal resources (seagrass beds, the Nature Coast, etc.).  Great work like this is being in and along the Gulf Coast around certain issues, and is being done on the east coast of Florida regarding pollution in the St. Lucie region.   We just need to expand it and continue it.

 

Check out the article below***, and perhaps we can begin some online dialogue about ways to link the work of recreational and commercial fishing groups, and conservation groups on projects where we share the mutual goal of protecting estuaries, rivers, wetlands, and seagrass beds that are important to all of us. 

 

Whether it is potential negative coastal impacts from phosphate mining to the southwest coast of Florida (Charlotte Harbor) or threats to the seagrass beds and coastal estuaries of the Nature Coast (Sunwest Harbourtowne development in Pasco County, Tarmac Mine proposal in Levy County, Reserve at Sweetwater Estuary in Taylor County) both the conservation community and the fishing community lose if we don’t join forces to fight for the places that sustain Florida’s coastal health.  As Water Management Districts look to Florida’s rivers to continue to quench the thirst of a growing population, our coastal ecosystems are more endangered than ever.

 

Hope all are well and email back with thoughts or ideas.  Thanks and take care! – Joe Murphy

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***

July 16, 2008, 12:40PM
“Chesapeake watermen fear blue crab not coming back”

RIDGE, Md. — Chesapeake Bay crabber Paul Kellam has advice for the teenage boys who help tend his traps every summer: You better have a backup plan.

It's an anxious summer for watermen harvesting the Chesapeake's best-loved seafood, the blue crab. The way some see it, the crabbing business here isn't just dying. It's already dead.

Crabs have thrived in the bottom muck of the Chesapeake and its tributaries even as centuries of overfishing harmed oysters, fish and other species in the nation's largest estuary. Now blue crabs are in trouble, too, and when they go, a way of life is sure to go with them.

"There was a time when crabbers were only out here from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Now, it's about all we have left," says Kellam, 53, steering his 30-year-old rig "Christy" out of the Potomac River and onto the bay for a day of crabbing. The contradictory decor in the cabin sums up the outlook of today's waterman: a red wooden good-luck horseshoe dangles over a mud-splattered copy of "The Worst-Case Scenario Survival Handbook."

The bay's blue crab stock is down about 65 percent since 1990 due to overfishing and water pollution, according to Virginia and Maryland fisheries managers. The states have imposed steep cuts on this year's female crab harvest, aiming to reduce the number of crabs taken by more than a third.

For Kellam and his neighbors in southern Maryland, where the working rigs and crab picking houses that sustained these communities for generations have been replaced by yachts and vacation homes, hopes are dim that the blue crabs will ever come back.

"It's looking worse every year," says Bob McKay, who at 74 is the oldest working waterman in St. Mary's County. He still sells crabs out of a shed in his yard but doubts the industry will live much longer than he does. "I don't know what the solution could be."

Watermen have turned to real estate and automobile repair. They've opened seafood restaurants and bakeries.

The best way to make money on the Chesapeake these days is taking businessmen from Washington and Philadelphia on charter fishing trips. Those who still rely on crabbing are further hurt by a double punch of higher fuel costs and an economic downturn that's meant fewer consumers dropping up to $200 on a bushel of crabs.

"People don't have the disposable income. They're just not buying," says Kellam, who spends up to $150 a day on diesel, which costs about $5 a gallon at a nearby marina.

There was a time when Chesapeake watermen made their living off the winter oyster harvest, using hand tongs and later power dredges to supply most of the world's oysters. But disease and over-harvesting nearly wiped out Chesapeake oysters in the 1980s, and despite millions invested in restoration, they've never recovered. Scientists estimate the Chesapeake now contains about 1 percent of the oysters it once did.

After the oyster industry collapsed, watermen looked to hardy blue crabs to make up the slack. But the next generation may not have another option.

"I want to make a living on the water," says Randy Plummer, a chain-smoking 19-year-old who works on Kellam's crab rig. "But there ain't no future in it. Everybody knows that."

Plummer has wanted to crab since he was a boy, but is instead headed to community college this fall, at the urging of Kellam and his parents.

Even scientists who called for the harvest reductions say overfishing isn't entirely to blame.

The main culprit is water pollution and soil runoff from development throughout a watershed that is home to 10 million people. Excess nutrients wash into the Chesapeake, causing algae blooms and choking the native plant life that crabs rely on for food and habitat. In the summer, large swaths of the Chesapeake contain so little oxygen that scientists call them "dead zones," because few critters can live there.

Watermen call it "bad water," and they track it all summer, following crabs as they skitter to shallower water that contains more oxygen. Even when watermen luck out and pull up a pot full of crabs, long-timers say the crabs are nothing like they used to be.

"Sometimes in the summer, you pull the pots up, they've got algae and mud all over them. The bad water comes in and coats everything and the crabs can't stand it," Kellam explains.

He now spends hours hauling up the same number of crabs he could catch in a few pots a decade ago. And what he catches isn't as healthy-looking as the crabs he caught as a boy. Wholesalers are buying them anyway.

"They're buying a lot of stuff that 10 years ago they would've turned away," Kellam says.

Maryland and Virginia officials have responded to the watermen's plight by asking the federal government for a disaster declaration that would free up about $20 million to subsidize crabbers and seafood processors until blue crabs rebound.

Maryland is also working on sweeping revisions to state planning laws with an eye toward protecting its 3,000 or so miles of shoreline. Already this year, the state toughened zoning laws dealing with development closest to the water, a law that aims to reduce sediment and pollution running into the Chesapeake and its tributaries.

"It's certainly getting more difficult to make a living on the water," conceded Lynn Fegley, a biologist in charge of crabs for the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. But Fegley says the cynicism along the Chesapeake is unfounded. There will always be Chesapeake blue crabs, she says — as long as watermen lay off them when the stock dips.

"As the watershed gets more crowded, the face of the fishery may change. But people are always going to want seafood, right? It's healthy and it's delicious. What we have to do is find a way to harvest seafood that's sustainable for the future," Fegley says.

But Thomas Courtney, who sells Kellam the alewife fish he uses for bait, laughs when asked whether state efforts to revive blue crabs will bring them back.

"It ain't what we're pulling out of the water. It's what we're putting in the water," says Courtney, 62. "You've got a cornfield, 20 acres, you put 80 or 90 houses on it, hook 'em up to sewer pipes, put roads and ditches down. That's what's destroyed the bay. It ain't us. They let development take over and then, that's it, we're done."

 

 

Joe Murphy

Florida Director

Gulf Restoration Network

352-583-0870 (office)

813-468-0870 (cell)

Florida Office:

34413 Orchid Parkway

Ridge Manor, Fl. 33523

joe@healthygulf.org

www.healthygulf.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 Water Privatization
http://www.naturalnews.com/z023468.html
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Did you see the SSJ newsletter  July 2008?  http://florida.sierraclub.org/ssj/newsletters2008.htl
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

St. Johns staff favors letting bottler tap into water

LAKE COUNTY - California-based Niagara Bottling LLC should be given a five-year permit to take Florida fresh water from the ground for resale, according to a staff recommendation submitted to the governing board of the St. Johns River Water Management District. The company, which is assembling a $15 million water-bottling plant near Groveland, wants a 20-year permit. The district's governing board is not bound by its staff recommendation, released Thursday, but will likely weigh it Aug. 12 along with letters of support and objection when it considers Niagara's request to withdraw 177 million gallons a year. Lake County opposes the request. Niagara Bottling wants to draw the water from the ground and bottle it for sale to retailers. "The recommended permit is very different than that requested by [Niagara]," district official Hal Wilkening said in a written statement on the agency's Web site.

 

Related topic galleries: Niagara Bottling LLC, St. Johns River Water Management District, Water Restrictions

We encourage conversation about our stories and hope you will share your thoughts. We do have some rules of the road: no comments that are obscene, sexual in nature, racist or otherwise inappropriate. If you post such comments, we will remove them.

-- Orlando Sentinel
 
__________________________________________________________________________
 
St. John's River Petition
 
--- On Sun, 7/13/08, Steve at SaveFloridaWater.org <steve@savefloridawater.org> wrote:

Thanks for signing our Petition to Save the St. John's River, it is obvious that you care about our National Heritage River.....and you want elected officials to know it.
Now we need more help....we have had about five hundred people sign our petition, but we need thousands of signatures for it to make a real difference.
Our river needs more help to survive......
 

The "officials" in charge know that this is unpopular but now they are trying to put the approval process on the "fast track"!
 
Please help us spread the word.
Print out our petition and just walk up to people and simply say:
"Will you help us save our river?" Show the petition and almost everyone will sign it......."happily". 
Most people do not even know what is going on and the politicians will just push this through as you are well aware.....they only care about getting campaign donations from the developers and if they begin to think that they will get voted out of office for supporting this outrageous plan to destroy our river, they will think twice about allowing it.
 
Please print our Petition and ask friends to sign it,
1. Maybe set up a table at your church or outside a supermarket
2. Take it to a community event in your area.....anywhere and make the effort.
3. Take it to your workplace and ask folks there to sign it.
However you want to do it is okay...just get the word out and people will gladly sign this petition!
 
The only way to change the course of this is for us "the ordinary people" to act and work.
It is up each one of us to stand up and fight for our river......or we will lose it.
You can make a difference!
 
Sincerely,
Steve Oxier
I'm just an average guy....an activist fighting to save our river. 
http://SaveFloridaWater.org
 
I am enclosing a copy of the petition below and you can print it out as many copies as you want, or create your own copy on your computer:
 
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 

Petition

 

Subject: The proposed pumping of surface water from the St. John¢s River


Notice: We the undersigned want to make it known that we STRONGLY OPPOSE the pumping of surface water from the St. John¢s River and we promise that we will use our votes to elect public officials who also oppose this plan.

 

Name:                                                               Address:

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

______________________________       _______________________________

 

Send to:    Save the St. John¢s River      P O Box 430      Seville, FL   32190

 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

Please read the Grunwald article in this posting...

 

STATE

Valid
Signatures

Valid
Revocations

Total
Signatures

TOTAL

607,552  

13,247  

594,305  



That's the latest "official" count of valid FHD petitions from The State That Won't Count Straight.  Mind you, the revocation statute was thrown out by the First District Court of Appeal two months ago, but, being programmed to keep FHD off the ballot, the State Division of Elections just keeps the revocation tally going.

For your reading pleasure I recommend the latest indictment of how developers-gone-wild ruined Florida and simultaneously crashed the entire US (maybe global?) economy:

Time Magazine

Thursday, Jul. 10, 2008

Is Florida the Sunset State?

By Michael Grunwald/Miami

 

Water Crisis - Mortgage Fraud -Political Dysfunction- Algae- Polluted Beaches -Declining Crops- Failing Public Schools -Foreclosures.   Greetings from Florida, where the winters are great!

 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1821648,00.html


Mr. Grunwald isn't telling us anything we didn't already know, but it's nice to see it confirmed in the national press.

We should be hearing from the federal court before too long on our application for preliminary injunction.  We are not asking for a recount of the improperly rejected petitions, and it would be nice to be able to say to the court that even with the chicanery, stupidity and complete gross negligence of The State That Won't Count Straight, we have gotten to 611,009 even without a recount.  Winners don't quit and quitters don't win, so please send in a few petitions and some donations today.

Lesley

HELP SAVE WHAT'S LEFT OF  FLORIDA...
LET THE PEOPLE VOTE to control growth! 

http://www.FloridaHometownDemocracy.com

PO Box 636, New Smyrna Beach, FL 32170-0636. 

Pd.pol.adv.byFloridaHometownDemocracy,Inc,PAC

 

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Food and Water Watch
 Eateries urged to use tap water
Gainesville was chosen as a starting point due to active UF students. [ July 5, 2008 ]
 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


 
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard
To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 12:48 PM
Subject: July NewsBytes from the Polaris Institute

Hello Inside the Bottle subscribers,

 

Who’s Behind the Bottled Water Backlash in Britain? Don’t be Fooled by Strange Bedfellows

 

July 18, 2008 - The United Kingdom has been a central battleground in the bottled water backlash over the past twelve months. We regularly hear news stories in the British press of new anti-bottled water campaigns popping up with catch phrases like Turn on To Tap Water, Tap Into Water and London on Tap.

 

One would think that there is a strong grassroots movement in England actively confronting the bottled water industry. While this may be true to a certain extent, the reality is that the majority of the anti-bottled water campaigns in place in the UK are initiatives of for profit private water services companies.

 

An important grassroots effort of note was undertaken by British food and agriculture advocates called “Sustain” which has published two important reports on bottled water use in the UK. Their 2006 report - Have you bottled it? - which examined a number of issues related to bottled water, was coupled with a short report that disclosed the amount of UK government funds spent on bottled water. Sustain’s report generated a large amount of press about the issue and helped put pressure on all levels of government in the country to disclose the amount of public monies used for the purchase of bottled water. The 2006 report was followed up in 2008 with an updated version called The taps are turning. 

 

On the heels of Sustain’s 2006 report many companies in the UK private water services industry launched anti-bottled water and pro-tap water campaigns. By embarking on pro-tap water campaigns the private water industry is treading in some contradictory territory. On the one hand these companies, as do publicly owned and run water utilities in North America (95% of the water utilities in Canada are publicly run, 85% in the US), see the bottled water industry as a competitor. In places like Canada public water providers and water utility workers see the bottled water industry working to undermine the public’s confidence in tap water. By weaning people off of public tap water in order to consume more and more bottled water, the ground is laid for greater public acceptance of the privatization of water services.

 

In the UK however, where the public water delivery and treatment system was completely sold off to corporations under Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government in 1989, the relationship with the bottled water industry is different (for a detailed briefing on UK water privatization visit Public Services International Research Unit). Private water delivery companies see bottled water as a direct competitor for their product, tap water. By launching high profile pro-tap water and anti-bottled water campaigns, often in collaboration with popular daily newspapers, these initiatives can be seen as nothing more than a renewed form of market advertising for their products.

 

It is not surprising, then, that the pro tap water movement in the UK has achieved such prominence. With the PR teams from several private water companies working on the issue, and the use of the print media for promotion, it is bound to achieve some prominence.

 

In the past 6 months, almost every private water services company in the UK has mounted its own PR campaign promoting tap water. Thames Water (formerly owned by German services giant RWE), the private company in charge of all of London’s water and sewerage services, is involved with two high profile campaigns promoting tap water, ‘London on Tap’ and ‘Water on Tap’ with London newspaper The Evening Standard. Both campaigns are designed to promote London’s drinking water through restaurants and hotels. These two campaigns alone have generated a huge media response in the UK and have actually been credited with causing a drop in the sale of bottled water.

 

The UK private water services industry has been using similar tactics to confront the bottled water industry for years. As far back as 2000, Thames Water was claiming in the media to have better tasting water than bottled water. In 2001, another private water company, Yorkshire Water organized a ‘Tap-v-Cap” challenge that showed 76% of the people who participated could not tell the difference between bottled and tap water. In 2004 Yorkshire Water actually trademarked ‘their’ water under the brand Icytonic.

 

While these campaigns have been successful at raising critical concerns about the consumption of bottled water and helped to foster popular action, there is a fundamental contradiction when these initiatives have their root in private for-profit water services corporations.

 

In many respects these campaigns are simply market advertising for the product being sold by the private water company, namely, tap water, couched in the discourse of environmental activism. Hitching onto the bottled water backlash is an easy way for these companies to rebrand themselves as providers of safe water and champions of the environment.

 

In many cases, however, the opposite is true when these companies are consistently fined for environmental and financial abuses. As recently as June, 2008, Severn Trent, which serves 3.7 million customers in the Midlands and mid Wales, was fined the equivalent of $70 million for delivering poor service to its customers and for deliberately providing false information to UK water and sewerage industry regulators Ofwat. In April of this year, Thames Water, the UK’s largest private water company, was also fined $18.9 million for similar abuses.

 

These are only two in a long list of reprimands directed at the UK private water industry since privatization. Take, for instance, the recent boil water advisory for 250,000 Anglian Water customers in central England. With these problems in mind, it is no surprise that these companies will jump at any chance to paint themselves in a greener light.

 

For anti-bottled water activists in North America, where across the board water privatization has not occurred, British water services corporations and anti-bottled water campaigns seem like strange bedfellows. Given that the climate for privatization is not yet favourable, North American water services corporations focus much of their public relations initiatives lobbying legislators and searching for new markets. For the private water services industry in North America, it is not much of a stretch to believe that they welcome increased consumption of bottled water given its role in setting the stage for the privatization of water services.

 

Private water services companies in North America know that people who are convinced to buy bottled water as their main source of drinking water are likely to lose confidence in their publicly delivered water. These companies are comfortable with the bottled water industry fomenting and then capitalizing on the public’s fears of public water utilities while simultaneously cultivating consumers’ willingness to pay large amounts of money for a litre of water. In this way the bottled water industry helps grease the wheels for the acceptance of privatized water services.

 

The advocates of water service corporations can point to an increased willingness to pay for clean and safe water. This willingness to pay is demonstrated by the high consumption of bottled water. If people are prepared to pay for bottled water because they have been convinced it is safe and healthy, they will also be willing to pay for privatized water services.

 

Because the privatization of the UK’s water utilities took place before bottled water had become ubiquitous, British water service corporations can concern themselves with competing against the bottled water industry for what amounts to the same consumer market for their products. They are also using the opportunity to clean their questionable environmental records.

 

The next time we hear of a new tap water campaign coming out of the UK, let’s cheer for the profile the issue is getting, but we need to be wary that such a campaign is driven by a for profit water services company whose aim is to promote  its brand of privatized water.

 

 

Recent bottled water related articles

 

[UK] Official: London Tap Water Is The Best In Britain

July 17, 2008, The Evening Standard – London’s tap water has been rated the best in Britain by scientists.

 

[US] On the Side: Bottled water's new wave

July 17, 2008, The Philadelphia Inquirer - For a moment, just a year, maybe two ago, it seemed that a tipping point had been reached: Bottled water wasn't cool anymore; it was uncool. The plastic bottles had taken on the aspect of handheld SUVs - oil hogs to manufacture, to haul (from Fiji, for Pete's sake!), to get rid of.

 

[Japan] Real cost of bottled water
July 13, 2008, The Japan Times - Since the Group of Eight talks produced some agreement on the environment, Japanese can at least take time to reconsider their lifestyles. Recently, one of the hottest environmental issues abroad is bottled water.

 

[Canada] New campaign urges people to 'hit the taps'

July 12, 2008, CTVBC - At the Burnaby Costco store, one of the biggest sellers is bottled water.

 

[US] Lifecycle Analysis of Tap Water vs Bottled Water

July 11, 2008, Treehugger

 

[Canada] Eliminating disposable water bottles
July 10, 2008, Montreal Gazette - More than 300 families in Beaconsfield have taken the pledge to stop using disposable water bottles after the city launched a campaign asking residents to give up buying single-use plastic water bottles for a year.

 

[US] Nestlé water plant? Not in our town, Enumclaw says
July 10, 2008, The Seattle Times - Last spring, in the small town of Enumclaw, a company came calling. What it wanted was water. One hundred million gallons a year, to be precise.

 

[UK] Bottled water is just a useless fad

July 10, 2008, The Sun - Here's how much fluid your body really needs…

 

[Fiji] Water industry ready for new excise duty
July 10, 2008, Fiji Times - The water bottling industry will pay a new excise duty once matters are sorted with the interim Government, says spokesman Jay Dayal.

[US] Bottled water sales are sinking

July 8, 2008, The Associated Press - With a day's worth of bottled water — the recommended 64 ounces — costing hundreds to thousands of dollars a year depending on the brand, more people are opting to slurp water that comes straight from the sink.

 

[US] Putting a cap on the bottled water industry
July 7, 2008, The Boston Globe - Over a half-billion dollars of Massachusetts' taxpayer money will be spent this year on clean drinking water program loans to communities, yet Beacon Hill has been strangely silent about - and invested not one penny in defense of - small- and often low-income rural towns that stand alone against what many see as a threat to their drinking water supplies: Swiss-based Nestle Waters.

[US] Coca-Cola agrees to $137.5 mln settlement in case
July 7, 2008, Reuters News - Coca-Cola Co agreed to pay $137.5 million to settle a shareholder lawsuit that claimed the world's largest soft drink maker artificially inflated sales to boost its stock price, according to court documents.

[Canada] Bottled water tops green blacklist

July 6, 2008, Edmonton Journal - Want an easy way to go green? Can the bottled water.

 

[Fiji] Ports loses out in bottled water crisis
July 6, 2008, Fiji Times - The Fiji Ports Authority will lose out on thousands of dollars in income with the decision by water bottling companies to stop production. The industry stand is a result of Cabinet's decision to implement a new tax structure on bottled water.

[Fiji] Firms stop work over export duty
July 5, 2008, Fiji Times - About 720 workers will be affected after the bottled water industry ceased production because of a new tax structure. The industry yesterday said it had stopped all production.

[US] USA Springs files Ch. 11
July 2, 2008, TheDeal.com - Nottingham, N.H.-based USA Springs Inc. has just become one more company to slip into Chapter 11 in an attempt to stave off a foreclosure sale.

 

[Fiji] Firm queries State decision
July 4, 2008, Fiji Times - Cabinets decision to impose 20 cents per litre export duty on all mineral water exports and 20 cents per litre excise duty on mineral water sold for domestic consumption is not good news to bottled water companies.

 

[UK] CITY WANTS TO WEAN ITSELF FROM BOTTLED WATER, BUT ...
June 28, 2008, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Mayor Luke Ravenstahl would love to reduce the city's reliance on bottled water, but as long as the plumbing in the City-County Building remains in its current condition, city employees will quench their thirsts at the water cooler.

 

Feel free to distribute or cite this material on the condition that the Polaris Institute is appropriately credited.

 

Encourage friends and family to subscribe to NewsBytes, check out http://www.insidethebottle.org

 

Got a comment? - Let us know what's on your mind at richard@polarisinstitute.org