 |

Legal Loopholes
The
Perrier Group and the DEQ assert the companys water bottling
operation is no different from other food and beverage manufacturing
operations that use state water in their products. But citizens
and lawmakers are questioning that in a world where water scarcity
is driving entrepreneurs to search for places to privatize and exploit
public water resources. The objective of such businesses is not
to sell a new brand of beverage but to capitalize on the basic human
need for water.
Citizens and
lawmakers are also debating whether the typical ěriparian rights
that property owners have to use water on their land applies to
the Perrier Groups proposed transfer of water out of its natural
basin. Common law gives property owners ěreasonable use of
water that lies on or under their land and to which the state of
Michigan holds title. Common law does not, however, grant such ěriparian
landowners the right to move water out of its rightful basin. In
addition, legal ěpublic trust principles require the state
to keep the publics interest in such natural resources as
water paramount to private uses. Under public trust principles,
the Perrier Group must show that its water diversion proposal satisfies
some public interest, not simply its own business plan.
Transferring
water out of its basin, therefore, without express authorization
from the Michigan Legislature and application of public trust principles
amounts to privatization of public water resources. Privatization
puts a retail price tag on water, a vital natural resource that
democracies have sought through stewardship, tax revenues,
and common law ó to keep clean and available to all. Privatization
turns a ěpublic good, such as pure water, into a ětradable
good, or commodity, that companies can sell for a profit without
concern for the public interest.
Authorization
Required
The
Perrier Groups bottling operation will privatize the spring
water that flows from a central Michigan aquifer into the Muskegon
River system and out to Lake Michigan. It will do so because the
well drilling permit the DEQ granted the company essentially forfeits,
without full public consideration, the states broader interest
in and control of that water.
Most other
bottled water in Michigan comes from municipal water supplies. The
bottler pays a fee for water service to the municipality, which
the Legislature has specifically authorized to tap and use the states
water. In the Perrier Groups case, the DEQ has given the company
a permit to drill wells to bottle spring water as if it were a municipality.
But the Perrier Group is not a municipality, and the people of Michigan
have not given the Perrier Group express authorization to export
and sell the states water.
The Perrier
Group and the DEQ claim such authorization is not legally required
or necessary. Citizens counter that state authorization is not only
necessary legally but critical to future public control of the states
water resources. International trade agreements are already moving
in the direction of redefining pure public water as a tradable good.
Michigans water will be at the mercy of those agreements unless
state lawmakers subject it to public trust principles and establish
unbiased, uniform standards for water uses.
Executive
Summary: More >>
|
 |
|
|
Michigan
policy makers need immediately to modernize the states
water policy and laws to account for new conditions of
global water scarcity, the attractiveness of Michigans
abundant water resources, the direction of international
trade laws, and evidence that current water laws are inadequate
to protect the public from water shortages and related
environmental damage.
To modernize state water policy, the Legislature should
take steps to:
Reaffirm
the publics property interest in the states
groundwater and surface water and declare the application
of legal public trust principles to these
essential and interconnected natural resources.
In
coordination with other jurisdictions throughout the Great
Lakes basin, create clear, nondiscriminatory rules for
conserving water and for any diversions of water from
its rightful watershed. Such diversions, if allowed, must
come with a system of compensation to the public and reimbursement
for any damages.
Better
recognize the relationship between surface water and groundwater.
Apply
the term protection beyond the current policy
focus of water quality to groundwater quantity and interconnected
water resources. |
|
|