3
102

[–] axolotl__peyotl [S] 3 points 102 points (+105|-3) ago 

Nestle has found itself more and more frequently in the glare of the California drought-shame spotlight than it would arguably care to be — though not frequently enough, apparently, for the megacorporation to have spontaneously sprouted a conscience.

Drought-shaming worked sufficiently enough for Starbucks to stop bottling water in the now-arid state entirely, uprooting its operations all the way to Pennsylvania. But Nestle simply shrugged off public outrage and then upped the ante by increasing its draw from natural springs — most notoriously in the San Bernardino National Forest — with an absurdly expired permit.

Because profit, of course. Or, perhaps more befittingly, theft. But you get the idea.

Nestle has somehow managed the most sweetheart of deals for its Arrowhead 100% Mountain Spring Water, which is ostensibly sourced from Arrowhead Springs — and which also happens to be located on public land in a national forest.

In 2013, the company drew 27 million gallons of water from 12 springs in Strawberry Canyon for the brand — apparently by employing rather impressive legerdemain — considering the permit to do so expired in 1988.

But, as Nestle will tell you, that really isn’t cause for concern since it swears it is a good steward of the land and, after all, that expired permit’s annual fee has been diligently and faithfully paid in full — all $524 of it.

And that isn’t the only water it collects. Another 51 million gallons of groundwater were drawn from the area by Nestle that same year.

There is another site the company drains for profit while California’s historic drought rages on: Deer Canyon. Last year, Nestle drew 76 million gallons from the springs in that location, which is a sizable increase over 2013’s 56 million-gallon draw — and under circumstances just as questionable as water collection at Arrowhead.

This extensive collection of water is undoubtedly having detrimental effects on the ecosystem and its numerous endangered and threatened species, though impact studies aren’t available because they were mysteriously stopped before ever getting underway.

In fact, the review process necessary to renew Nestle’s antiquated permit met a similarly enigmatic termination: once planning stages made apparent the hefty price tag and complicated steps said review would entail, the review was simply dropped. Completely. Without any new stipulations or stricter regulations added to the expired permit that Nestle was ostensibly following anyway — though, obviously, that remains an open question.

In 2014, Nestle used roughly 705 million gallons of water in its operations in California, according to natural resource manager Larry Lawrence. That’s 2,164 acre-feet of water — enough to “irrigate 700 acres of farmland” or “fill 1,068 Olympic-sized swimming pools,” as Ian James pointed out in The Desert Sun.

Though there is no way to verify exactly how much Nestle must spend to produce a single bottle of Arrowhead spring water, the astronomical profit is undeniable fact: the most popular size of a bottle of Arrowhead 100% Mountain Spring Water (1 liter) retails for 89¢ — putting the potential profit for Nestle in the tens of billions.

Activists have called for a boycott of Nestle Waters and all Nestle products until they are held accountable for their actions in California.

There is much more to be revealed in future articles as the investigation into Nestle’s reckless profit-seeking during California’s unprecedented drought continues.

[–] [deleted] 4 points 40 points (+44|-4) ago 

[Deleted]

0
10

[–] fairdreamer 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Well, it doesn't help that 50% of a homeowner's water use goes to watering their lawns. Most of the water just runs off the lawn and goes into the stormdrain. People in other states like Arizona have climate appropriate landscaping. There's nothing wrong with California native plants or plants suited for a Mediterranean climate. Those kinds of plants can survive off of just rainfall if established. Looks waaaay better than a stupid lawn too.

0
0

[–] meowweretalking 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

its not a "now arid state," it was always an arid state

Not true. The southern part, yes but most of the state isn't even close to being "arid." We have temperate rainforests all along the northern coastline.

9
-1

[–] oktober 9 points -1 points (+8|-9) ago 

Stop deflecting for the corporations. Are you really attacking the farming industry over a corporation with an expired permit raping the land. Where's your responsibility barometer at.

6
-1

[–] CherryP 6 points -1 points (+5|-6) ago 

why should agriculture stop? California feeds the world.

Plus fuck Nestle's and stop drinking out of plastic bottles, its as filthy as cigarettes.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 13 points (+15|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

2
9

[–] RonaldRayGuns 2 points 9 points (+11|-2) ago 

No your comment is tops. They are cunts.

1
3

[–] Lodley 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

No mention of farmers excessive use of water, if they care about the drought they would talk about that. This site just wants to bash Nestle because they are an easy target.

0
1

[–] Vegemeister 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

That’s 2,164 acre-feet of water — enough to “irrigate 700 acres of farmland” or “fill 1,068 Olympic-sized swimming pools,” as Ian James pointed out in The Desert Sun.

So practically nothing? 700 acres is ~ 1 square mile. There are 9 million acres of irrigated farmland in California.

0
1

[–] tpdplsio 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It sounds like a case of people getting upset about big numbers when they have no reference point for what the big numbers mean.

1
41

[–] hyperoperation 1 points 41 points (+42|-1) ago 

We are talking about a state that has a GDP greater than India (you know, the country with over a billion people) and they can't even get their shit together regarding companies pilfering their water supply. If I lived in California and paid taxes I'd be ready to firebomb something. Luckily I do not live in California and certainly do not pay California level taxes.

0
21

[–] ximian 0 points 21 points (+21|-0) ago 

Nestle's CEO: "Water Is Not A Human Right, Should Be Privatized"

2
10

[–] Diogenes_The_Cynic 2 points 10 points (+12|-2) ago 

I gotta say, as a libertarian, if you agree to privatization, you have to take the good with the bad. You would need to develop the resources yourself, and ensure your profit by reinvesting in the land. What we have now is crony capitalism, which hurts 99% of people.

1
3

[–] magicron 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

1
1

[–] Totalbabe 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Hopefully someone "disagrees" with that absolute prick with a physical object. What a self-serving cunt. I wonder how he sleeps at night.

0
3

[–] N0tAndrew 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Don't worry, nature is firebombing us already and using even more water to fight it.

0
0

[–] hyperoperation 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Oh shit I didn't even think of that. Yeah firebombing probably isn't the best solution in a place that is bone dry.

0
0

[–] ShinyVoater 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

My understanding is that Nestle's claim goes far enough back that they can draw however the hell much they want to and the permitting fee is paid to the national park service since they're building on federal land to exploit their water rights. So to stop them, California would have to "get their shit together" and completely alter its water rights system - and others with rights of a similar vintage are already suing the state because the governor tried to get them to cut down on their usage.

0
30

[–] cwt 0 points 30 points (+30|-0) ago 

That's outrageous.

They only had to pay $229 for that much water in British Columbia.

0
11

[–] OpinionOnEverything 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago  (edited ago)

No!!!

I wanted it to be a California issue only so I could stand in Canada facing south and laugh...

0
5

[–] Firevine 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Oh, please continue laughing at California. Those of us in reasonable states sure as shit do.

0
1

[–] Balrogic 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Laugh at the wrong thing and they'll strip your citizenship. Even 'Murica doesn't go that far.

1
24

[–] Fagtardicus 1 points 24 points (+25|-1) ago  (edited ago)

0
3

[–] awshidahak 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

How is A&W owned by Kraft and Pepsico, but neither Kraft nor Pepsico are owned by each other?

0
5

[–] OM3G4UN17 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Depends on rights, Pepsi owns the rights for A&W restaurants and kraft owns the distribution rights for the soft drink.

0
1

[–] openionatedgent 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Want to be even more confused? Read this.

0
3

[–] Codyrl95 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Fucking hell.

0
1

[–] IBrokeIt 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Similarly:

http://www.nestle.com/brands/brandssearchlist?char=Ahttp://www.nestle.com/brands/brandssearchlist?char=A

It really is eye opening when you realize how many of the things we use daily are concentrated in the hands of just a few companies.

0
0

[–] xoitus 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

The illusion of choice. I love that graphic. I intentionally avoid these products when I have other choices. Craft Jam? Crap. I buy Smuckers, if I haven't made any of my own lately. I stick with Henckels Consumer products for shampoo when I can. Still big companies, but slightly better than these giants.

I've been wanting to make an Illusion of Choice app for smart phones, but I don't own or use a smart phone so I haven't bothered! The idea is it would recognize products by their package and color code the entire shelf based on who makes it. 90% of the shelf is red and blue, because they are all Kraft and Nestle products...insteresting!

0
19

[–] Chingasa 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago 

And they sell it for a dollar a liter, or more.

0
16

[–] Ina_Pickle 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago 

Apparently they were caught using slave labor in Africa and were selling food with high levels of lead in India too. This is one seriously dirty company.

0
9

[–] TheRedditExodus 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

And there's the whole shady dealings with infant formula in Africa to make more profit by stopping the mothers breastfeeding, and instead using questionable water to make formula that they can't afford in the first place.

0
0

[–] Balrogic 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

N-E-S-T-L-E-S, Nestle's is the very worst... BUSINESS!

[–] [deleted] 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
21

[–] Call_Me_Kelly 0 points 21 points (+21|-0) ago 

Well, one of the permit guys now works at nestle as a "consultant" so they are concerned with lining their own pockets.

0
11

[–] RagnarDanneskjold 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

And that is how corruption works. The guy who was in charge when everything was dropped now works for Nestle. Some are arguing that agriculture is a bigger problem, but in realty that is just to distract people from Nestle. Farmers have current and valid water rights in place. Nestle does not. Also Farmers don't bottle California water and sell it back to Californians. Nestle does.

People need to keep an eye on Nestle throughout this situation. Their shills will try to distract and derail discussions.

0
6

[–] Totalbabe 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

This revolving door stuff is so blatantly rotten, good lord.

0
10

[–] Poco 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

How much did farmers pay for a similar amount of water?

[–] [deleted] 2 points 5 points (+7|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] Poco 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Well, that is about 80 acre feet of water which, according to some web sites, might cost between $124 to $1100 per acre foot.

So some might pay as little as $9920 and some as much as $88000.

Would you be less outraged if Nestle paid $88000 for that water? They should donate that amount to something to get people off their back.

[–] [deleted] 3 points -3 points (+0|-3) ago 

[Deleted]

1
2

[–] Lodley 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Probably nothing, this is how much people charge for industrial (unfiltered or cleaned) water.

load more comments ▼ (28 remaining)