मंगलवार, 4 मार्च 2008

Battle Over Massive Nestle Water Bottling Plant to Protect Mount Shasta Headwaters in Tiny Northern California Community of McCloud

Nestle has made some important concessions in recent days regarding its proposed massive water bottling plant in McCloud, CA, indicating that the company is willing to complete more rigorous environmental review than previously promised before building the plant. But, like all large-scale projects, the devil is in the details. We are encouraged that Nestle has asked Siskiyou County to recirculate its Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to include more scientific study and cap the type and amount of water it would extract. Still, we are eager to see the specifics of what will be studied, and how the science will be conducted in the new EIR.

The proposed plant will have undetermined impacts to Squaw Valley Creek and the McCloud River. These spring-fed rivers and streams draw visitors from all over the world to fish their pristine waters for the famous Shasta rainbow trout, and to view the spectacular McCloud River Falls. These resources are an integral part of the region’s current and future economic potential.
We assume that Siskiyou County will support Nestle’s wishes and issue a notice of preparation for the new EIR, which will outline the new scope of the proposed environmental review. We believe an adequate EIR must fully address potential negative impacts on the biological and physical watershed/stream system. It must also offer a comprehensive picture of how quality of life in McCloud would be affected by the facility, including rigorous traffic and air quality studies. The development of pre-project information is necessary for the purpose of evaluating potentially significant impacts of the proposed project, refining our understanding of how the stream system works, and successfully designing mitigation measures.

In addition to the many environmental impacts this plant would have on McCloud and the surrounding area, a new Nestle plant also would affect the economic climate in the area. A November 2007 economic report analyzed the long-term impact of the proposed plant in McCloud and showed that the facility is unlikely to create a significant net gain of long-term, permanent jobs for residents. The independent report was prepared by ECONorthwest, a firm with 30 years experience specializing in economic and financial analysis of public policy.
The report states that the proposed contract between Nestle and the MCSD creates a number of risks for the people of McCloud and Siskiyou County. An analysis of similar plants in other parts of the country showed that such facilities do not appear to be strong engines for local economic growth. The plants do create some jobs, but most of these are production positions with relatively low wages. At the same time, much of what makes a place like McCloud appealing to tourists, entrepreneurs and retirees, and is likely to be lost through the location of a bottling plant in the area.

Another reality is that Nestle is planning to severely under-compensate local residents for their water. The current contract between the corporation and the MCSD states that Nestle will pay only $26.40 per acre-foot for McCloud’s spring water, while current lease rates for water in California run between $80 and $200 per acre-foot. In striking contrast, Nestle and other water bottlers in other parts of the country pay around $1,000 per acre-foot to use municipal water.
So while we are encouraged by the company’s concessions on the environmental review front, we also would like to see a more open conversation about every part of the contract – including the compensation structure, the length of the contract, the size of the proposed plant, and permanent protections against the possibility of future groundwater use. The decisions on how McCloud’s spring waters will be used in the future should be put back into the hands of local residents.
We commend Nestle for being willing to reopen the environmental review process and for acknowledging the community’s concerns. But there is still a long way to go and much work to be done. We hope Nestle follows through. Our most precious resource in the Mount Shasta region is clean, cold spring water. If we decide to allow Nestle to export our water, let's at least make sure that we’re doing it on terms that will benefit the community and protect against long-term environmental degradation.

Written by Debra Anderson, Board Member of the McCloud Watershed Council, Brian Stranko, Chief Executive Officer of California Trout, and Brian J. Johnson, Director of Trout Unlimited’s California Water Project. Together these organizations form the Protect Our Waters Coalition, which was formed to secure the ecological and hydrological integrity of Mt. Shasta’s unique headwaters area for future generations.

कोई टिप्पणी नहीं: